Vezzra wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 12:01 pm
Ophiuchus wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 8:20 am
Is everybody supposed to research from every category, mainly deciding what you skip? Or would one usually try to advance a low number of categories to reap the high level benefits? So for example if we say one for each of the high level strategies it would be important/mainly ok to focus on two categories we would need to put these techs there.
IMO the idea should be that within certain boundaries several approaches should be viable. Either going for only a very few trunks/categories and research them completely or almost completely, or research more trunks, and only "cherry pick" certain techs from them.
What IMO should not
be viable is the extremes: going only for one trunk or trying to get into every one.
If we expect that the player needs to advance at least two categories, it will be ok if some of the categories do not contain easily reachable weapon tech.
That is what I'd strongly recommend we do. Because I think it's more fun and it will make designing and properly balancing the tech tree a lot easier if not every trunk/category needs to contain everything essential (like weapons).
IMO that's pointless anyway - if going for only one trunk is supposed to be a viable option, those trunks need to offer enough techs to suck up all your RP until at least far into midgame, and at the same time offer enough affordable techs in the same timeframe (which would inflate each trunk enormously). Otherwise you'd have to go for other trunks, and all that effort spent to make sure every trunk contains everything essential would be basically pointless.
I think the RP costs get into another issue.
Tech has a multiplicative effect, as opposed to Industry
Industry, I invest X pps and I get a fixed output boost (1 more planet or 1 extra population)
Research, I invest X rps and I get an output boost that depends on how many planets/population I already have
So for a tech that gives 0.1 pp per population unit, the value of the Tech depends on how big my empire is
So A few things to consider
1. Cost benefit ratio between different techs
You will go for the techs with the best cost benefit ratio,
-if higher level techs have the best cost benefit ratio then you try to climb to the smallest number of trees
-if low level techs have the best ratio, then you always want to go broad
-if techs all have basically the same ratio, then you can either go broad or focused or anywhere in between (This is be ideal for most strategic choice)
2. Cost benefit ratio throughout the game
Since you gain resources throughout the game, and techs benefit multiplies by that ratio, techs later in the game should have a Worse cost benefit ratio
Basically a Tech that gives you 0.1 pp/pop late in the game should cost More than a tech that gives you 0.1 pp/pop early in the game (because later in the game you have more pop)
However.... if you go broad, you could be working at the middle of trees in the late game, and if you go focused you could be working at the top of a Tree in the mid game, so the "high tier" tech =/= "late game" tech
So my suggestion is
-All techs should have about the same Base Cost;benefit ratio (basically if one tech gives 0.1 pp per pop to industrial focused worlds it should cost 2x as much as one that gives 0.05 pp per pop to industry focused worlds)
Because both of those techs could be available at the same time
-As you research techs, The cost of researching future techs increases
this way if I am at level 3 in 4 trees, I am working with the same basic costs + benefits as if I am at level 6 in 2 trees, and both are viable strategies
*** of course exact cost:benefit ratios aren't easy to calculate because how 0.1 pp/pop compares to +5 detection is a more complicated process
Vezzra wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 1:02 pm
Oberlus wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 12:41 pm
I'll only make sure that for early game one of the Bio/Energy/Mech/Robotic categories have the basics for invading another planet.
Sure, certain essentially important elements like means to capture planets need to be present in at least several trunks/categories, one of which you have
to pick in order to get those essential things.
It certainly will not be possible to make each and every possible combination of trunks viable. And it will also be impossible to make each trunk equally important. The basic requirements are that no trunk must be mandatory
(that is, you just have
to pick it in order to pursue a viable strategy), that no trunk offers all you need to pursue a viable strategy = you always need several trunks to be able to pursue a viable strategy
, and that no trunk is too worthless to be ever considered.
I think the second point is important in getting some variety. If there are 5 trunks, then there are only 5 single trunk strategies, but 10 two trunk strategies, and 10 3 trunk strategies
(not counting the "cherry picking")
So in terms of distribution of techs for a particular function, what that would tend to mean
-All functions (weapons, invasion, terraforming, ship, industry, research) should have techs in at least 2 trunks, but not all*
-Every trunk should have at least one function that it lacks
-In general trunks should not duplicate each other (if mech and bio both have terraforming, and hulls, and missiles, and industry, and etc. then likely one will be the "always take this instead of that")
*anything so important that every tree must have it (ie ability to build ANY ships), should probably be not in a trunk at all, just some 'default techs that have no prerequisites/you start with'