Testing Reports

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
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Testing Reports

#1 Post by LienRag »

I'm on the first turn of my new test game of the latest version (plus some home made FOCS files) and I notice the Planetary Cloaking Device tech, which has a time to research of 9999 turns.

Is there a reason for it ?

It's suppose to allow for a stealth-generating building, but the description doesn't say how much stealth this would generate (just that it's "huge").

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#2 Post by LienRag »

A few turns later I have a sitrep for a Small Snowflake arriving at a planet, even though I don't have enough detection to see small snowflakes.

I had a derelict scout in the vicinity the turn before, though.
Attachments
FO small snowflake.png
FO small snowflake.png (587.15 KiB) Viewed 3326 times

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Reports

#3 Post by LienRag »

I got the information that NAI has now Stability requirements, which may be a good idea.
But from the FOCS file it requires a Stability of 20 ?
WTF ? From one of the most useful Tech it becomes mostly a wasted investment ?
I could understand 5 or maybe even 10 with all the new Stability boosts available, but 20 ? How will that fare on Galaxies with no Specials to boost stability ?

Also, there's an enemy Laenfa Capitol with Succulent Barnacles on it : isnt' it a bit too good for a starting position ?

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 13587
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: Testing Reports

#4 Post by Geoff the Medio »

LienRag wrote: Fri Apr 30, 2021 7:34 pmPlanetary Cloaking Device
It's been there since before v0.4.10 in the pedia. It unlocks a building. It is not researchable and shouldn't be appearing on the tree, though. Not sure why it is. Possibly related to work in progress Python tech parsing, or other tech tree display issues.

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 13587
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: Testing Reports

#5 Post by Geoff the Medio »

LienRag wrote: Fri Apr 30, 2021 8:33 pmI got the information that NAI has now Stability requirements, which may be a good idea.
But from the FOCS file it requires a Stability of 20 ?
WTF ?
Much of the balance of those requirements was a quick guess. If it needs changing, it can be changed.
Also, there's an enemy Laenfa Capitol with Succulent Barnacles on it : isnt' it a bit too good for a starting position ?
Disabling various specials from spawning on capital planets is on my to do list.

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Reports

#6 Post by LienRag »

Now Algorithmic Elegance is not giving a bonus anymore, just allowing a Policy that gives the old bonus.
Though I get the idea, I would say that it comes too early in the game to be interesting and should be saved for later techs.

Both because it deprives players of the only real early focus-linked Research bonus, and because there are no early Social Policy slots (that I know of) and not many competing Social Policies (though Colonization has been modified and is now more interesting).


I saw that the bonus for Deep Thought Computing was completely transformed ?
Maybe the old one was a bit unbalanced in favor of Telepathic species, but right now there are no more focus-independant Research boni (with NAI crippled by the Stability requirements) and that will be a problem for bad research species.

wobbly
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1880
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Testing Reports

#7 Post by wobbly »

How early is early? Architectural psychology is the same cost as active radar and opens a social policy. So it really depends if stuff like continuous scanning policy is enough to pick up the base symbiot or not.

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 13587
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: Testing Reports

#8 Post by Geoff the Medio »

LienRag wrote: Fri Apr 30, 2021 9:54 pm...there are no early Social Policy slots (that I know of)
I was considering adding a free social policy slot to some species. This could be an important balance lever for species. Otherwise, I'm not sure how best to make more available. There's already a chain of economic policy slots that mostly just unlock other econ policy slots at the cost of influence to adopt the slot-adding policies, so I don't want to do the same for social policy slots. There is an early producible building (Military command) that gives a military slot. Not sure what best to do for social slots, but I do want whatever it is to be a bit different than the others.

As mentioned, though, there is a social slot at Architectural Psychology.
...and not many competing Social Policies (though Colonization has been modified and is now more interesting).
Do you mean in general, or just early? I thought Algorithmic Research would be popular, perhaps Population, maybe Native Appropriation, maybe Artisan Workshops... There are others.
...right now there are no more focus-independant Research boni (with NAI crippled by the Stability requirements) and that will be a problem for bad research species.
The general idea was that the player should have to do something other than research a tech for most bonuses. That could be adopting a policy, setting a focus, or maintaining high stability via other means, and to avoid having bonuses that are too easy and thus always worth getting with top priority.

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Reports

#9 Post by LienRag »

Geoff the Medio wrote: Sat May 01, 2021 10:32 am I was considering adding a free social policy slot to some species. This could be an important balance lever for species.
Interesting idea...
Hard to balance though.

And you're right to want things to be varied rather than a clone of what exists for Economic Policies.

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Reports

#10 Post by LienRag »

After turn 100 and still at 11 Research per turn, the game is slow and tedious, all my planets have to be put to Influence (except the Capitol) and so I can't do much.

So I restarted after modifying the Stability requirement for NAI and putting it at 10.
Now it's more interesting, not all planets have that much Stability but at least a few of them do.

Also, I mentioned many times that the initial Influence bonus for the Imperial Palace is way too low, so I put it to +7.

It happened that when restarting the Galaxy I now had Barnacles on an adequate planet near my Laenfa Homeworld, so I early had a +9 bonus per turn, it's a bit overkill for this test¹.

It's much more interesting that way, I still had to manage early development carefully but at least I was able to actually do meaningful things in the game. Also the enemy AI is now able to hold its ground, I met my first enemy-gone-independant planet after turn 100, until then the AI is able to build and expand and attack (though it tends to build exobots everywhere, which is self-defeating).

I still put myself in a bad corner when I forgot the new rules and colonized too much mid-game, and after a new start Influence begins to get really tricky only after the first objectives are met and I had to develop a bit to counter enemy action - which is imho what should be happening.

The only balance problem I can see is that it was a bit too easy to get all the good Infrastructures policies with such an early IP production per turn...

¹ Note though that it's nearly equivalent to starting with two Luxury items nearby, so it's close to what is possible in an unmodified game.

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Reports

#11 Post by LienRag »

A few bugs though :
Here my Stability is said to be raising at the rate of 1 per turn until it reaches a small but positive number, yet it gets down at a rate of 1 per turn instead...
Very confusing and quite demoralizing to see things deteriorate without any way to even understand what's happening.
Attachments
FO wrong stabilitty.png
FO wrong stabilitty.png (560.29 KiB) Viewed 3180 times

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Reports

#12 Post by LienRag »

Here I have 16 troops in a Planet that is cut off (enemy fleet in the system) and a 10-troops enemy ship :
FO troops 131.png
FO troops 131.png (811.34 KiB) Viewed 3178 times
Yet the next turn after invasion I still have 11 troops instead of 6 ?
FO troops.png
FO troops.png (793.25 KiB) Viewed 3178 times

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Reports

#13 Post by LienRag »

The new way of presenting ship damage in Fleet panel is totally undecipherable, I never know what damage my or enemy ships will do in combat.
Apparently it's even buggy :
FO error AD.png
FO error AD.png (672.12 KiB) Viewed 3177 times

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Reports

#14 Post by LienRag »

The enemy (Congregation) was able to capture one of my planets that has a stealth above his Detection Strength :
capture without detection.png
capture without detection.png (843.56 KiB) Viewed 3177 times
I guess it's because he adopted a Policy (either Scanning Continuously or Border Checkpoints) that raised his actual Detection Strength, but it's confusing.
The UI shouldn't lie about what an enemy can see and not see...

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Testing Reports

#15 Post by LienRag »

The enemy had this planet that should have been invadable but is not :
FO no invasion.png
FO no invasion.png (763.02 KiB) Viewed 3177 times

Post Reply