Pretty sure geoff added that capability. Edit: yes, its called UnlockPolicy and is currently used e.g. to give policies to species (e.g. Trith, Fulver, Sly)
Centralization
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.
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.
Re: Centralization
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!
Look, ma... four combat bouts!
Re: Centralization
That is compatible with this, right?Grummel7 wrote: ↑Sun May 22, 2022 12:10 pmHm, why not unlock them by Bureaucracy? Makes a lot more sense indeed.Oberlus wrote: ↑Sun May 22, 2022 8:49 am Either IRAs are actually something specific to Centralization (and then you get no bonuses from IRAs when there is no Centralization policy adopted), or IRAs are something incompatible with Centralization, not unlocked by centralization, and not necessary for policies that depend or are very related to Centralization.
Bureaucracy could be the "upgrade" of Centralization. From "centralized around Capital" to "centralized around capital+IRAs". The stability bonus from Bureacracy (+5) and from IRAs (distance dependent) could or should be scripted in the policy Effect, if we accept that IRAs have no bonuses unless certain policies are adopted.
Re: Centralization
I like this, or something similar to this, where the policies fit around a playstyle (building up regional admins and positioning the colonies). It's better then everyone takes bureaucracy for their free +5 stability.Oberlus wrote: ↑Mon May 23, 2022 8:53 amThat is compatible with this, right?Grummel7 wrote: ↑Sun May 22, 2022 12:10 pmHm, why not unlock them by Bureaucracy? Makes a lot more sense indeed.Oberlus wrote: ↑Sun May 22, 2022 8:49 am Either IRAs are actually something specific to Centralization (and then you get no bonuses from IRAs when there is no Centralization policy adopted), or IRAs are something incompatible with Centralization, not unlocked by centralization, and not necessary for policies that depend or are very related to Centralization.Bureaucracy could be the "upgrade" of Centralization. From "centralized around Capital" to "centralized around capital+IRAs". The stability bonus from Bureacracy (+5) and from IRAs (distance dependent) could or should be scripted in the policy Effect, if we accept that IRAs have no bonuses unless certain policies are adopted.
Edit:
+1 to supply changes suggested by Oberlus and Ophi
Re: Centralization
Some time ago ThinkSome opened a thread about how the 6+ jumps between IRAs restriction was a nightmare to play with.
I've been trying to play with Bureaucracy, Conformance, Indoctrination... and trying to maximize the ratio IRAs:colonies and minimize average distance to IRA.
In 4 out of 5 starts, there was no planet at 6 jumps from capital (empty systems). So annoying to be forced to settle at 7 or 8 jumps because of that, you lose 1 or 2 stability in many planets.
In several occasions, roughly half the time, my capital was in or connected to a loop of systems with length lesser than 10 jumps, so I could not place an IRA in any of those planets (the system at 6 jumps going clockwise is the one at 5 jumps going anticlockwise). If there is a planet further away after those, then no problem, but there wasn't.
Could we base the placement restriction in uu distance between IRAs (instead of current number of jumps)? I think that would keep the minigame interesting enough but make it less of a headache.
I've been trying to play with Bureaucracy, Conformance, Indoctrination... and trying to maximize the ratio IRAs:colonies and minimize average distance to IRA.
In 4 out of 5 starts, there was no planet at 6 jumps from capital (empty systems). So annoying to be forced to settle at 7 or 8 jumps because of that, you lose 1 or 2 stability in many planets.
In several occasions, roughly half the time, my capital was in or connected to a loop of systems with length lesser than 10 jumps, so I could not place an IRA in any of those planets (the system at 6 jumps going clockwise is the one at 5 jumps going anticlockwise). If there is a planet further away after those, then no problem, but there wasn't.
Could we base the placement restriction in uu distance between IRAs (instead of current number of jumps)? I think that would keep the minigame interesting enough but make it less of a headache.
Re: Centralization
If you know France you know centralisation
Paris as capital is one of the less big cities of the country. Something like that should centralization be. So why not giving the capital +1*habitable size and reducing the same amount from all colonies. That makes it harder to colonize adequate planets but gives your capital some boost.
Of cause that should not be the only effect. I like the idea of +1 to capital supply range as well as the idea to give -0.1 PP and RP per pop to each colony to provide a bonus to the capital (maybe +0.1 per pop at capital) but the bonus should be higher than the malus to make the policy worth to be adopted.
Paris as capital is one of the less big cities of the country. Something like that should centralization be. So why not giving the capital +1*habitable size and reducing the same amount from all colonies. That makes it harder to colonize adequate planets but gives your capital some boost.
Of cause that should not be the only effect. I like the idea of +1 to capital supply range as well as the idea to give -0.1 PP and RP per pop to each colony to provide a bonus to the capital (maybe +0.1 per pop at capital) but the bonus should be higher than the malus to make the policy worth to be adopted.
Want some fresh experience? Try Kosymod
Re: Centralization
Well, it surely doesn't contradict it. Bureaucracy definitely needs IRAs and so far that was no problem, because Centralization was a prerequisite an it unlocked them. When we decouple the two, Bureaucracy should unlock them and we can them change Centralization without affecting Bureaucracy. If they get a meaning for Centralization (or maybe Metropoles), we can also unlock them there.
Centralized around regional centers sounds pretty much like Metropoles to me. Which is unlocked by Centralization, btw. In my opinion a policy that boosts planets with Regional Administrations requires way too many changes to be implemented in V0.5. At the moment you can build an IRA even at an outpost that does not produce anything at all.Oberlus wrote: ↑Mon May 23, 2022 8:53 amBureaucracy could be the "upgrade" of Centralization. From "centralized around Capital" to "centralized around capital+IRAs". The stability bonus from Bureacracy (+5) and from IRAs (distance dependent) could or should be scripted in the policy Effect, if we accept that IRAs have no bonuses unless certain policies are adopted.
Incidentally, this weekend I had a game in which I kept Centralization, with its current rules, up to turn 90-something. It wasn't a good I game (Trith still suck!) and I finally lost it. Perhaps we should not change so much, except, I think that part was generally agreed, to remove the supply penalty.
Re: Centralization
Well, the Supply penalty is what makes the Policy challenging and peculiar, so I'd rather follow Oberlus' suggestion to give a Supply bonus to the Capital and keep the penalty for other planets than remove it entirely...
Re: Centralization
I'll make a PR to tweak Centralization influence extra costs. -4 per planet is just unbearable.
If Bureaucracy is not adopted: -0.2 per jump away from capital capped at -4 (so maximum malus at 20 hops away).
With Bureaucracy: -0.2 from nearest capital or IRA-set-to-influence-focus.
Anyone against it? Or something to tweak in my proposal?
challengeproblem is its huge influence cost overrun. -1 Supply to capital is just negligible: colonize something nearby or plop an outpost.
If Bureaucracy is not adopted: -0.2 per jump away from capital capped at -4 (so maximum malus at 20 hops away).
With Bureaucracy: -0.2 from nearest capital or IRA-set-to-influence-focus.
Anyone against it? Or something to tweak in my proposal?
That is utterly false. Centralization's main
Re: Centralization
I'd consider adding the supply change suggested by multiple people, no capital malus, supply malus on colonies. Or maybe in a seperate commit if it interferes with the core change.Oberlus wrote: ↑Sun Jul 24, 2022 9:00 am I'll make a PR to tweak Centralization influence extra costs. -4 per planet is just unbearable.
If Bureaucracy is not adopted: -0.2 per jump away from capital capped at -4 (so maximum malus at 20 hops away).
With Bureaucracy: -0.2 from nearest capital or IRA-set-to-influence-focus.
Anyone against it? Or something to tweak in my proposal?
otherwise: +1
P.S. : interesting
Re: Centralization
Interesting idea, especially since B. cost is also reduced by having C. adopted. It also gives you another reason to plan IRA with influence focus, which may help you with indoctrination later.Oberlus wrote: ↑Sun Jul 24, 2022 9:00 am I'll make a PR to tweak Centralization influence extra costs. -4 per planet is just unbearable.
If Bureaucracy is not adopted: -0.2 per jump away from capital capped at -4 (so maximum malus at 20 hops away).
With Bureaucracy: -0.2 from nearest capital or IRA-set-to-influence-focus.
Anyone against it? Or something to tweak in my proposal?
Still I think in most cases, the effect of C. would be to small to be worth the costs. Don't forget that it also increases the cost of outposts.
If we want to make C. an long-term option, its bonuses should depend on the size of the empire, e.g. current bonus times sqrt(number of pop. planets). This also makes a sense fluff-wise.
The problem with the -2 is that it often disconnects your first colony, which then costs 4 IP / turn. So in many cases you have to chose between using C. or building a colony.
Re: Centralization
I had another thought here on extending the life of centralization. What if you only paid the influence penalty on colonies outside capital supply? (or the distance was reduced by capital supply). Then you could have colonies in that 1 jump radius at start. 2 after orbital construction and another 4 jumps if you build a space elevator.
Re: Centralization
Another idea is a range that increases with turns adopted.
Re: Centralization
Supply based and adoption based IP cost.
I like both ideas. It reintroduces a reason to switch capital to a more strategic place.
Second one is more of a long term commitment. First one is different for different species (George loves this).
I like both ideas. It reintroduces a reason to switch capital to a more strategic place.
Second one is more of a long term commitment. First one is different for different species (George loves this).
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!
Look, ma... four combat bouts!