Testing Government and Influence

Describe your experience with the latest version of FreeOrion to help us improve it.

Moderator: Oberlus

Forum rules
Always mention the exact version of FreeOrion you are testing.

When reporting an issue regarding the AI, if possible provide the relevant AI log file and a save game file that demonstrates the issue.
Message
Author
wobbly
Space Dragon
Posts: 382
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#181 Post by wobbly »

Marine recruitment looks weak. Hard to justify the slot. Maybe a small boost to defensive troops/regen to get it across the line?

User avatar
Vezzra
Release Manager, Design
Posts: 5565
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:56 pm
Location: Sol III

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#182 Post by Vezzra »

Oberlus wrote: Thu Jun 17, 2021 8:29 pm The main problem I see for playability right now is the lack of ways to increase your IP production or reduce your IP upkeep. Anyone else thinks the same or has ideas on that?
IMO at this point it would be better if we err on the side of having too much IP production/too much reduction of IP upkeep initially, and working our way down from there to achieve balanced numbers.

That breaks the game less than not being able to get IP production high enough, or not being able to reduce IP upkeep sufficiently.

Just my 2c.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 3849
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#183 Post by Oberlus »

Vezzra wrote: Sun Jun 20, 2021 9:49 am.
Noted. Better indeed.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 3849
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#184 Post by Oberlus »

Planets focused to Industry or Research get a bonus to PP or RP output based on POPULATION. Thus, a planet with 4x population gives 4x PP or RP.
On the other hand, planets focused to Influence get a bonus to IP output based on SQRT(POPULATION). In this case a planet with 4x population gives 2x IP.
This makes you prefer to focus to influence the planets with smaller populations (small planets in general, and recently colonized planets) and focus to industry or research the planets with greater populations.

Does anyone like it this way for some reason? Is there an argument to not make all three meters use the same basic formula?
I'm thinking of making all three based on sqrt(population) to reduce advantage of empires with many big planets, or making them all use population to eliminate the need to change planet focus based on age of the planet.

wobbly
Space Dragon
Posts: 382
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#185 Post by wobbly »

So in current multi-player if we ignore Industrialism and environmentalism most planets sit below 10 stability. I'd like to propose stability requirements dropping a little. My suggestion is approx 2 less on anything currently 10 or less and aprrox 5 less for anything currently over 10

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 3849
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#186 Post by Oberlus »

wobbly wrote: Fri Jul 02, 2021 7:01 am So in current multi-player if we ignore Industrialism and environmentalism most planets sit below 10 stability. I'd like to propose stability requirements dropping a little. My suggestion is approx 2 less on anything currently 10 or less and aprrox 5 less for anything currently over 10


I'd prefer to give some extra sources of stability, and we already have some (maybe enough):
- Colonies with capital species +5
- Indoctrination gives +10 after 40 turns of adoption.
- Diversity (+0.5 for each species above 4).
- Terror Suppression (+1 per warship in orbit).
- New Technocracy policy gives +2 for research focused planets (can't be with Industrialism or Balance).
- New Bureaucracy policy gives +5.


I'm testing also these modifications:

- Environment good +5, adequate +2, poor -2, hostile -5.
- Environmentalism policy +5 instead of +10.
(These two together make terraforming more interesting despite environmentalism.)

- Stability species trait (currently -5 to +15, subject to rebalance, like -3, 0, +3, +6, +10).

- Racial purity +10 stability to colonies with capital species (so up to +15 with the base +5 for capital species; this makes more interesting single-species empires, to compete with diversity empires).

- Divine Authority (+4 stability, +1 IP per planet) earlier in the tech tree.

- Balance gives a stability bonus to all planets instead of just capital (which doesn't need it anyways).


The bonus from good or adequate environment alone is enough for easier early game, and then there is (plenty of) policies to increase that above 15.

wobbly
Space Dragon
Posts: 382
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#187 Post by wobbly »

I'm leaning more towards both needing to occur. Boosters are too heavily gated. It makes stability dominate too much over other decisions. I'd rather polIcy decisions to not come down to what gives the biggest stability boost all the time.

Edit: Also keep in mind that stuff like black hole generators are still up near the 20 mark and fusion gen isn't much lower

wobbly
Space Dragon
Posts: 382
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#188 Post by wobbly »

Took a look at the changes to environmentalism in master and I'm still suspicious. Mechanically the penalty is either 0 or infinity. The bonus either 0 or infinity. Obviously I'm exaggerating a little there but the problem remains, under the right circumstances too strong. Wrong circumstances untenable.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 3849
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#189 Post by Oberlus »

wobbly wrote: Sat Jul 03, 2021 11:03 am Took a look at the changes to environmentalism in master and I'm still suspicious. Mechanically the penalty is either 0 or infinity. The bonus either 0 or infinity. Obviously I'm exaggerating a little there but the problem remains, under the right circumstances too strong. Wrong circumstances untenable.
What about making
- the research bonus require research focus,
- the policy exclusive with industrialism, and
- the PP malus -25% instead of -5 PP (same priority than industrialism, second scalling)
?

wobbly
Space Dragon
Posts: 382
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#190 Post by wobbly »

Oberlus wrote: Sat Jul 03, 2021 12:31 pm - the research bonus require research focus,
This is already already in master, or technically "not-industry", the bonus is still given to influence focus etc.

I think one thing that should change is the gas-giant exemption. This creates the best case scenario of Chato/Sly. Sly on industry, receiving no penalty. Chato on research recieving all bonus. I'm not sure about exobots on asteroids, it does make an exobot strategy interesting.

User avatar
LienRag
Large Juggernaut
Posts: 910
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Weekly Release Notes / Up-to-date Test Snap

#191 Post by LienRag »

Ophiuchus wrote: Sat Jul 03, 2021 5:15 pm [*]content: Nymnmn attract some fields, added field repellor building (geoff)
Very good idea for the first part (if it doesn't make all fields concentrate on the same spot, of course), I don't know for the second, time will tell I guess.


Ophiuchus wrote: Sat Jul 03, 2021 5:15 pm [*]content: added Technocracy policy, like Industrialism but for research, unlocked by having Bureaucracy adopted (geoff)

Well, Bureaucracy and even Technocracy are not actually good for research, so the name/fluff is a bit cringy...
Also, having the same mechanism for every focus is not a good idea imho.
Eventually, if we want to keep the Technocracy fluff, it could give a temporary boost to Research while crippling it long-term. Of course it needs good design in order to not be micro-managy.

A better idea might be to have Technocracy give a boost to research while disabling the ability to research all Theoritical Prerequisites that are not already partially unlocked (technocrats are unable to think out of the box)...
Permanent disability is a bit extreme, but re-enabling these TP immediately after clearing the policy is opening the door to adopt-and-clear-and-readopt techniques that doesn't improve the gameplay.
Make it permanently double the cost of all these TP each time Technocracy is adopted ?


Ophiuchus wrote: Sat Jul 03, 2021 5:15 pm [*]content: added exploration research policy that grants research when exploring a system. accounting tooltips are glitchy due to use of CurrentTurn comparison. (geoff)
Needs testing. What do you mean by exploring, going where alienity's hand never set foot ?
That could be interesting, indeed : a race to explore. Maybe 4 RP for the first Empire to get there, 3 for the second, 2 for the third and 1 for the fourth ?
Or more interesting, do it per metabolism (as they may not see the same things) ? That could also favor less good fuel/good engines/good production species...

If it's just where the owning Empire has not been before, that's more tedious that anything else.


Ophiuchus wrote: Sat Jul 03, 2021 5:15 pm [*]content: fix Industry Center to make sure you never lose production after researching a refinement (grummel7)
Nice to learn that it was a problem...


Ophiuchus wrote: Sat Jul 03, 2021 5:15 pm [*]content: Military Command provides a 2nd slot after killing 5 ships (geoff)
Interesting idea. Very prone to farming though (I build chaff, you build chaff, we destroy it mutually and only then we declare peace).


Ophiuchus wrote: Sat Jul 03, 2021 5:15 pm news
  • content: Fixed calculation for (dis-)liked building in other systems (#3503, grummel7)
  • content: Adjust diversity policy effects to match description (grummel7)
  • content: reduced Meteor Blizzard total research generation to depend on sqrt(#ships) within it (geoff)
  • content: Environmentalism bonus nerfs, also only apply when not using Industry focus and when there are no buildings on a planet (geoff)
  • content: lowered stability requirements of solar orbital generation effects (geoff)
  • content: fix calculation issues of research bonus in Distributed Thought Computing (geoff)
  • GUI: Combine list of identical building effects into one (#3488, grummel7)
Lot of things that needed to be done indeed. Thanks to those who implemented them.

Ophiuchus wrote: Sat Jul 03, 2021 5:15 pm [*]FOCS: added Field type condition (geoff)
Thanks !
I'll try to make good use of it.

wobbly
Space Dragon
Posts: 382
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#192 Post by wobbly »

Took a look at techocracy. Gives a bonus to industry when planet is research focused. Is that intended? Or maybe a copy/paste bug?

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 13093
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#193 Post by Geoff the Medio »

wobbly wrote: Sun Jul 04, 2021 5:54 ama copy/paste bug?
yes, nice catch.

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 13093
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: Weekly Release Notes / Up-to-date Test Snap

#194 Post by Geoff the Medio »

LienRag wrote: Sat Jul 03, 2021 8:17 pmTechnocracy [is] not actually good for research, so the name/fluff is a bit cringy...
Industry vs. Research bonus effect was a bug, but also see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocracy
LienRag wrote: Sat Jul 03, 2021 8:17 pm
Ophiuchus wrote: Sat Jul 03, 2021 5:15 pm [*]content: Military Command provides a 2nd slot after killing 5 ships (geoff)
Interesting idea. Very prone to farming though (I build chaff, you build chaff, we destroy it mutually and only then we declare peace).
If you want to go to that much effort to destroy 5 ships, then I guess you earned it? It's probably even fine in-universe: "Hey ally, wanna use eachother's old junk ship hulls for some target practice?" ... "Sure!"

User avatar
LienRag
Large Juggernaut
Posts: 910
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Weekly Release Notes / Up-to-date Test Snap

#195 Post by LienRag »

Yes. But in the same way that Theocracy is harmful both to society and religion itself, Technocracy is harmful both to society and science (though, indeed, not necessarily to technological developments, that can benefit from it).

I don't know if my second proposal is technically possible (boost research but make Theoretical Prerequisites that are not partially unlocked - unknowns unknowns rather than known unknowns - impossible to research while the policy is in place, and at double cost after that) but that would be the best¹ way to implement the fluff correctly (and also would be a quite different mechanism from what exists).

If you want to improve Research, it would be more adapted to have an OpenScience Policy (that would also bring some research boost to other Empires that adopt OpenScience at home ; for example they'd get 10% of the Research you put to each tech, and globally 1% of your RP, and maybe a supplementary +5% to their own Research).


¹ Until of course someone would come up with a more sensible one

Post Reply