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
User avatar
Krikkitone
Creative Contributor
Posts: 1550
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2003 6:52 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#211 Post by Krikkitone »

This can be fixed by having good uses for excess IP.
(spies instead of ships to weaken enemy, friendly revolts instead of conquest, etc.)

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 13157
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#212 Post by Geoff the Medio »

wobbly wrote: Tue Jul 13, 2021 5:18 am...unlike PP and RP you probably want your IP generation to sit near an equilibrium point.
The cost for adopting policies doesn't motivate saving up IP?

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 3885
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#213 Post by Oberlus »

Geoff the Medio wrote: Tue Jul 13, 2021 9:12 am
wobbly wrote: Tue Jul 13, 2021 5:18 am...unlike PP and RP you probably want your IP generation to sit near an equilibrium point.
The cost for adopting policies doesn't motivate saving up IP?
Yes, until you get the olicies you think you need.

Getting PPs and RPs ASAP is still important, so even if you know you need to save IPs, you might prefer to do that later.

Related to all this:
In current MP game, I know now I need Divine Authority (DA) for its +1 IP per planet (unfocused) to be able to control more space. However, it turns out (or at least that is what it seems to me) I need to adopt Centralization during one turn before it unlocks DA. But once I adopt Centralization my influence upkeep soars a lot next turn and gets into deficit. So, in order to save for DA what I need is to save for Centralization, DA and the extra cost from Centralization, then deadopt Centralizacion after adopting DA. Not easy to forsee the actual needs before getting into Centralization, and if you do it wrong you can't adopt DA, so in this case you better have big IP savings. Not cool, big punish for those that make a mistake here, as in "now you have to save again for the next 30 turns and you just threw into the rubbish bin the IP savings of 30 turns".
DA needs to be moved earlier in the tech (you already forsaw that), and anyone planing to use DA needs to adopt earlier in the game to avoid the huge costs that many policies have onces your empire grows.

I think costs based of number of planets or total empire population should cost less, maybe using square root.

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 13157
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#214 Post by Geoff the Medio »

I can make Divine Authority have a Conformance prereq instead of Centralization...
DA needs to be moved earlier in the tech (you already forsaw that)
I did? ... I guess I did.

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 2202
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#215 Post by Ophiuchus »

Oberlus wrote: Tue Jul 13, 2021 9:35 amNot easy to forsee the actual needs before getting into Centralization, and if you do it wrong you can't adopt DA,
The main problem is not seeing the cost here I guess. Content-wise maybe we should not have policies which affect influence income depend on each other - or only if the dependent policy is strictly better for influence.
Last edited by Ophiuchus on Tue Jul 13, 2021 11:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Look, ma... four combat bouts!

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 3885
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#216 Post by Oberlus »

Geoff the Medio wrote: Tue Jul 13, 2021 10:35 am I can make Divine Authority have a Conformance prereq instead of Centralization...
Fluff wise, I'd like it to be unlocked by Psionic and have as prerequisite Indoctrination (that in turn requires Conformance). But then all those would be unlocked by Psionics.
Maybe move something to Mind of the Void, Xeno Archeology and/or Architectural Psychology? (the latter already loaded)
Get new techs in the tech tree? Psychohistory? Xenopsychology?

User avatar
LienRag
Large Juggernaut
Posts: 929
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#217 Post by LienRag »

Oberlus wrote: Tue Jul 13, 2021 11:20 am Get new techs in the tech tree? Psychohistory? Xenopsychology?
There is certainly a need for Influence-related Techs.
And of course Psychohistory would be cool (if the fluff fits the name).

Don't know if you have read Moebius/Jodorowsky's "L'incal" but its (way less interesting) prequel had a volume with one awesome title, "Anarcho-psychotiques"...

So we could have techs like Technomarxism, Neurosymbiotism, Controlled Psychosis, Void Simonism,...

No idea what they would be, though ! But that's not always the most important...

wobbly
Space Dragon
Posts: 406
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#218 Post by wobbly »

I'd still like to see some influence/stability bonus (policy or tech) for telepathic species.

Also I notice meteor blizzards were changed, but not nanite storms. I'm not sure if that's deliberate, or if they were missed.

User avatar
LienRag
Large Juggernaut
Posts: 929
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#219 Post by LienRag »

Vezzra wrote: Sun Jun 20, 2021 9:49 am 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.
You are certainly right about that, especially with the 5.0 Release in mind, but basically that amounts to acknowledging that the new Influence, Policies and Stability mechanisms broke the game.
And that you're unbreaking the game by making them less relevant.

It's obviously better that keeping the game broken, but maybe that should warrant a deeper reflection on whether the design of these mechanism was actually done well.
I don't have enough experience since I began to play with 4.7 I believe (which was playable), but is it usual than new releases are unplayable to that extent and become usable by tweaking them time after time ?

Because my impression is that some things can be bettered by experimenting and tweaking, but that some things in the design itself need to be redone entirely.

So is it really time to make a 5.0 release, or should it be a 4.11 (without the Influence) ?

User avatar
LienRag
Large Juggernaut
Posts: 929
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#220 Post by LienRag »

wobbly wrote: Sat Jul 17, 2021 6:47 am I'd still like to see some influence/stability bonus (policy or tech) for telepathic species.
I thought that I had answered that ?

Dream Recursion would be the perfect target for that I believe...
(very good fluff BTW, kudos to the one designing it)

I had a Special doing that, Arrakis Wheat. I tested it in Single Player, it works.
No one commented on it when I presented it on the "Other Game Design" forum, though.

The difficulty of course would be to not make the Telepathic species overpowered...

wobbly
Space Dragon
Posts: 406
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#221 Post by wobbly »

LienRag wrote: Sat Jul 17, 2021 2:12 pm
wobbly wrote: Sat Jul 17, 2021 6:47 am I'd still like to see some influence/stability bonus (policy or tech) for telepathic species.
I thought that I had answered that ?
Right, right. However it is possible my request wasn't addressed specifically to you.

User avatar
LienRag
Large Juggernaut
Posts: 929
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#222 Post by LienRag »

wobbly wrote: Sat Jul 17, 2021 2:16 pm Right, right. However it is possible my request wasn't addressed specifically to you.
No, I mean that I had posted (or at least written) the exact same answer to that exact same post of yours ?
But I can't find it, that's weird.

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 13157
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#223 Post by Geoff the Medio »

LienRag wrote: Sat Jul 17, 2021 1:36 pm...is it usual than new releases are unplayable to that extent and become usable by tweaking them time after time ?
There hasn't been a gameplay mechanic change of this significance in 8+ years. Fighters is the biggest thing I can think of now, but I don't think that's as big. Nor were reworking supply mechanics or stealth / visibility mechanics, I think. Maybe adding player-customized ship designs?
Because my impression is that some things can be bettered by experimenting and tweaking, but that some things in the design itself need to be redone entirely.
Post (continue posting) about the specifics then... If something specifc is really broken and unfixable, then it can be replaced.
So is it really time to make a 5.0 release, or should it be a 4.11 (without the Influence) ?
I don't want to split dev effort maintaining a separate branch mechanics and content.

User avatar
LienRag
Large Juggernaut
Posts: 929
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#224 Post by LienRag »

If you can find a way to redesign the Influence production the way you are doing the Research one (again, I like the general line of thought you have, but find most of the implementation still lacking), why not.

But so far it's not Influence production that is the main problem, and probably Influence cost can be tweaked progressively until we find something that work.

My beef is twofolds : 1 - no real reflection about the way new mechanisms will make the game more fun to play
2 - Policies, the way they are implemented, could be more aptly called "random boni"... And the principle "I need this bonus so I take that Policy" is neither actually fun nor strategic.

If you have Capital Markets in a society, it doesn't change just one thing, it affects nearly everything in the society (read Polanyi).
That's what a Policy is, and probably what it should be in-game too.

As was discussed in the pre-implementation phase, with Policies that have big disadvantages in the early game, and more advanced Policies that have less disadvantages in the late game, but all of them having many consequences on nearly all aspects of the game, not just one bonus on one point.

User avatar
LienRag
Large Juggernaut
Posts: 929
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#225 Post by LienRag »

LienRag wrote: Tue Jul 13, 2021 5:06 pm So we could have techs like Technomarxism, Neurosymbiotism, Controlled Psychosis, Void Simonism,...

No idea what they would be, though ! But that's not always the most important...
What about having the Technomarxism tech give all Industry-focused planets a flat +1 Influence bonus ?
(a bit lame for such a powerful name, but it's a beginning)

Controlled Psychosis tech halve the Influence cost of all planets of Telepathic Species ?
(ditto)

Neurosymbiotism have all Influence-focused planets get a flat +1 bonus per different Metabolism in the Empire ?

Post Reply