Influence Discussion

For what's not in 'Top Priority Game Design'. Post your ideas, visions, suggestions for the game, rules, modifications, etc.

Moderator: Oberlus

Message
Author
User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 3161
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Influence Discussion

#46 Post by Oberlus »

Krikkitone wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2019 8:52 pmIt seems if we are looking at influence, we really need to look at the main systems it will affect.
Happiness/Allegiance
Diplomacy
[...]
I'll try and put together a (hopefully) simple base proposal
That would be great!

I've been thinking about this and realising my own limits.
The only thing I know for sure is it must be simpler than most of what we and others have been talking about since 2003.

As a very simple approach, I thought of making happiness the base allegiance meter for the current owner empire and live without a meter for allegiance to foreign empires. No problem when there is only two empires competing for the allegiance of a colony (foreign allegiance rises when happiness declines). Problem is when two or more foreign empires are trying to influence-conquest the same planet, but I got this: Say empires A and B are trying to overthrow government of a colony of empire C. Happiness of C will decline due to the effects of A and B propaganda projects. Once it reaches 0 the planet does not go for A or B, but stays in revolt (happiness 0) as long as both empires keep active their propaganda projects, and once one of A or B gives up and stops its propaganda project the planet goes to the other empire and begins rising happiness. Probably there are more complex (and probably more interesting) ways of representing opposing effects, so that one could be stronger than the other and actually beat it without requiring it to give up first.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 3161
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Influence Discussion

#47 Post by Oberlus »

labgnome wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2019 8:10 pmwhen you get native planets diplomatically their happiness does not go down.
Better it goes to 0. KISSer (no need for complex allegiance meters), and also makes more sense: when you overthrow a government I don't expect it to be a 100% population happy to switch loyalties all at once with no kind of dispute whatsoever.
You actually want to get happier planets anyway. So letting the planet go native for a while might not be the worst idea.
You want planets. Better if happier, but if not, they will be happy in a few turns. Better to have the planet sooner. But this argument is irrelevant compared to the KISS point.
opinion tells the colony who, if anyone, to go to
The planet goes to the empire that successfully subverted its allegiance, the one that applied the the propaganda project. KISS.
Bad happiness just means that they want to leave their current empire. It doesn't mean they want to join yours.
Bad happiness caused by your empire means they want to leave their current empire to join yours, the one doing the propaganda.
Plus opinion will be necessary if multiple planets are running Incite Revolt on the same planet.
Unless we adopt a simpler form. See previous post.

User avatar
Krikkitone
Creative Contributor
Posts: 1540
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2003 6:52 pm

Re: Influence Discussion

#48 Post by Krikkitone »

Here's the combined model

Happiness/Allegiance Model

1. Each Colony with an Owner has a “Happiness” level that helps determine
-whether or not it will try to revolt (and also possibly espionage vulnerability/ability to build ships/colonies/troops, etc.)

2. Each Species has an Allegiance/Opinion of Each Empire in the game (as a way for a “memory” of what an empire did on a world before the last ownership change)
-Affect everything with that species on it interacting with that empire (Primarily worlds, but possibly also Ships+Troops)

3. Species have ‘Values’ ie things they like their empire doing (right now Xenophobic good example… - for other species in empire)
Ideally most empire actions (or turns without some action) could contribute to the ‘empire’s value rating’ along a few different values that were common among species… right now Xenophobic is all we got


Happiness affected by
Species-Owner Allegiance + or -
Influence ”projects” (on the whole empire..Maybe on this world individually) + (- from other empires)
Techs/Policies/Governments (that may have a cost/malus) + or –
Capital +
Unpaid Maintenance (cost based on Empire size) –
Things the empire has done since the last ownership change (military action on world/colonized world/built concentration camps on world) + or –
Diplomatic Effects + or - (this is the ‘reward’/’penalty’ for playing/losing the diplomacy game..see next part)


Species-Empire Allegiance Affected by
Things the Empire has done to that Species (military action/colonized/concentration camps, etc.) + or –
Things the Empire that match/disagree with the species “Values” (ie exterminating aliens= + Xenophobic species, - for others?) + or –
Influence “Species projects” + (- from other empires)


Diplomacy Model
Each pair of empires have
Diplomatic “State” (War/Peace/Allied)
Diplomatic “Benefits” (Research Treaties/Trade Treaties/Shared Victory ie Union)
Diplomatic Strength in the relationship (each has strength towards the other)
“Diplo IOU” (everytime an exchange is made if it is ‘imbalanced’ (according to a standard fixed price mechanism) the receiver automatically IOUs towards the giver… any exchange, even a gift must be agreed to by both parties)

Diplomatic “State”
War based on unilateral action by players
Peace based on mutual agreement of players
Alliance based on mutual agreement of Players with minimum total Diplomatic Strength

Diplomatic “Benefits”
Require a total amount of Diplomatic Strength (both added up)
Require a minimum Diplomatic “State” to be active
Require an Influence investment from one player
Give benefits to the player that invested (the other player may do the same project)

Diplomatic Strength
Requires Influence investment
More Expensive/Degrades if (at War v. Alliance, Empires have different Values/Governments/policies)
Gives Diplomatic (un)Happiness to other empire


Diplomatic Happiness: given to all the other empires planets
To Allies: Happiness=My Strength->them
To Peace: Happiness=My Strength -> them – ½ their Strength -> me(minimum 0)
To Enemies (at War): Unhappiness=My Strength -> them – Their Strength -> me (minimum 0)
Based on IOUs:
(they’ve given to me) Happiness=IOUs (My Strength -> them –Their Strength -> me) (minimum 0)
(I’ve given to them) Unhappiness=IOUs (My Strength -> them –Their Strength -> me) (minimum 0)
Allow for third party effects as well…with projects I can cause diplo Happy/Unhappiness if they are/are not at War/Peace with a third party

Should be strong enough to make it worth investing in Diplomatic Strength, but allow you do not do so much and handle the situation with defensive internal happiness.
Last edited by Krikkitone on Tue Apr 30, 2019 5:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 3161
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Influence Discussion

#49 Post by Oberlus »

Krikkitone wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2019 9:45 pm2. Each Species has an Allegiance/Opinion of Each Empire in the game (as a way for a “memory” of what an empire did on a world before the last ownership change)
World = species? I mean, is the allegiance bound to the species (in the galaxy) or to the planet (that can change species)?
3. Species have ‘Values’ [...] right now Xenophobic is all we got
We need to develop more values. Suggestions anyone?
IOU
"I owe you"?


I must say I don't understand half of your post (I blame my lack of experience with games with strong diplomatic mechanics), and for the other half I'm full of doubts.

User avatar
labgnome
Juggernaut
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 5:57 pm

Re: Influence Discussion

#50 Post by labgnome »

Oberlus wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2019 9:34 pmAs a very simple approach, I thought of making happiness the base allegiance meter for the current owner empire and live without a meter for allegiance to foreign empires. No problem when there is only two empires competing for the allegiance of a colony (foreign allegiance rises when happiness declines). Problem is when two or more foreign empires are trying to influence-conquest the same planet, but I got this: Say empires A and B are trying to overthrow government of a colony of empire C. Happiness of C will decline due to the effects of A and B propaganda projects. Once it reaches 0 the planet does not go for A or B, but stays in revolt (happiness 0) as long as both empires keep active their propaganda projects, and once one of A or B gives up and stops its propaganda project the planet goes to the other empire and begins rising happiness. Probably there are more complex (and probably more interesting) ways of representing opposing effects, so that one could be stronger than the other and actually beat it without requiring it to give up first.
So this seems to be assuming a different model for how influence projects will operate than what I have been suggesting. This would simply give the planet to whoever started the project last, as that would be the last one to finish the project. Influence projects would complete like normal production or research projects, and then apply an effect to the target. That is why you would need an opinion mechanic to tell the planet who to go to.
All of my contributions should be considered released under creative commons attribution share-alike license, CC-BY-SA 3.0 for use in, by and with the Free Orion project.

User avatar
labgnome
Juggernaut
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 5:57 pm

Re: Influence Discussion

#51 Post by labgnome »

Oberlus wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2019 9:41 pm
labgnome wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2019 8:10 pmwhen you get native planets diplomatically their happiness does not go down.
Better it goes to 0. KISSer (no need for complex allegiance meters), and also makes more sense: when you overthrow a government I don't expect it to be a 100% population happy to switch loyalties all at once with no kind of dispute whatsoever.
Part of the point of getting native planets peacefully is that you don't get the negative effects of invasion.

Also: just because you keep repeating KISS doesn't make it true.
All of my contributions should be considered released under creative commons attribution share-alike license, CC-BY-SA 3.0 for use in, by and with the Free Orion project.

User avatar
labgnome
Juggernaut
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 5:57 pm

Re: Influence Discussion

#52 Post by labgnome »

Krikkitone wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2019 9:45 pm2. Each Species has an Allegiance/Opinion of Each Empire in the game (as a way for a “memory” of what an empire did on a world before the last ownership change)
-Affect everything with that species on it interacting with that empire (Primarily worlds, but possibly also Ships+Troops)
I would put opinion/allegiance on the level of planets with a modifier for the species. That way planets that have actually been invaded bombarded will have a stronger negative opinion than those that haven't.
Diplomatic Happiness: given to all the other empires planets
To Allies: Happiness=My Strength v. them
To Peace: Happiness=My Strength v. them – ½ their Strength v. me(minimum 0)
To Enemies (at War): Unhappiness=My Strength v. them – Their Strength v. me (minimum 0)
Based on IOUs:
(they’ve given to me) Happiness=IOUs (My Strength v. them –Their Strength v. me) (minimum 0)
(I’ve given to them) Unhappiness=IOUs (My Strength v. them –Their Strength v. me) (minimum 0)
Allow for third party effects as well…with projects I can cause diplo Happy/Unhappiness if they are/are not at War/Peace with a third party

Should be strong enough to make it worth investing in Diplomatic Strength, but allow you do not do so much and handle the situation with defensive internal happiness.
I would not make happiness competitive between allies. Alliance should be for cooperation and allies should not be competing by default. I also don't know if we want to be tracking a bunch of diplomatic IOU's.

Personally I think an Opinion system would be simpler than having to do allegiance and a separate diplomatic strength, and diplomatic happiness.
All of my contributions should be considered released under creative commons attribution share-alike license, CC-BY-SA 3.0 for use in, by and with the Free Orion project.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 3161
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Influence Discussion

#53 Post by Oberlus »

labgnome wrote: Tue Apr 30, 2019 1:06 pmThis would simply give the planet to whoever started the project last, as that would be the last one to finish the project.
No. Please, reread again what I wrote:
Once it reaches 0 the planet does not go for A or B, but stays in revolt (happiness 0) as long as both empires keep active their propaganda projects, and once one of A or B gives up and stops its propaganda project the planet goes to the other empire and begins rising happiness. Probably there are more complex (and probably more interesting) ways of representing opposing effects, so that one could be stronger than the other and actually beat it without requiring it to give up first.

labgnome wrote: Tue Apr 30, 2019 1:06 pmInfluence projects would complete like normal production or research projects, and then apply an effect to the target.
Or not. I don't see a reason to enforce that. I might be wrong, but "projects" (generic, not just influence projects) can vary its cost and turn duration before they are finished (as when you finish a ship batch and the remaining unfinished ship batches increase their cost to reflect new fleet upkeep); or, like the stockpile project, they can have an effect that repeats each turn (in the case of influential conquest, decreasing happiness by 1 per turn).

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 3161
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Influence Discussion

#54 Post by Oberlus »

labgnome wrote: Tue Apr 30, 2019 1:12 pmPart of the point of getting native planets peacefully is that you don't get the negative effects of invasion.
That's right, but you are missing my point. See:
Your way (2 consecutive propaganda projects): Turn X, you finish the revolt project, the planet becomes native and has happiness=0, and you start technological uplift (unless you forget about it in a big game). Turn X+M, the uplift is finished and coincidentally the native planet has happiness=M, you start the diplomatic mission. Turn X+M+N, you finish the mission, the planet is yours with happiness min(M+N,maxHappiness).
With just one propaganda project: Turn X, you finish the overthrow government project, the planet becomes yours with happiness=0 and you forget it. Turn X+M+N, the planet is still yours and its happiness is min(M+N,maxHappiness).
Same results requiring half the effort and attention. KISS!
labgnome wrote: Tue Apr 30, 2019 1:12 pmAlso: just because you keep repeating KISS doesn't make it true.
???
You think it is false that using the current happiness meter and nothing else is not simpler than introducing multiple new meters?
Interesting.
I find this last comment unnecessarily aggressive. I will refrain from more interaction with you, since it makes not funny working on this stuff.Edit: no longer true.

User avatar
labgnome
Juggernaut
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 5:57 pm

Re: Influence Discussion

#55 Post by labgnome »

Oberlus wrote: Tue Apr 30, 2019 3:33 pm
labgnome wrote: Tue Apr 30, 2019 1:12 pmAlso: just because you keep repeating KISS doesn't make it true.
???
You think it is false that using the current happiness meter and nothing else is not simpler than introducing multiple new meters?
Interesting.
I find this last comment unnecessarily aggressive. I will refrain from more interaction with you, since it makes not funny working on this stuff.
Sorry, I took your comments as more aggressive than thy were meant to be. I found your repeated use of KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) to be rude and got more riled up than I should have. There's no reason to stop this discussion just because we aren't agreeing on this right now.
All of my contributions should be considered released under creative commons attribution share-alike license, CC-BY-SA 3.0 for use in, by and with the Free Orion project.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 3161
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Influence Discussion

#56 Post by Oberlus »

labgnome wrote: Tue Apr 30, 2019 3:43 pmSorry, I took your comments as more aggressive than thy were meant to be. I found your repeated use of KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) to be rude and got more riled up than I should have. There's no reason to stop this discussion just because we aren't agreeing on this right now.
You're right.
About "KISS", that term has been used in FreeOrion forum for some 15 years before I joined it. Its meaning is explained in some relevant pages of the FreeOrion project, it is one of its key design principles. First time I read it I found it funny, not offensive. I'm sorry if you thought I was calling you stupid. I would have never expected that anyone participating in this forum could feel aggravated by that term. Just to be clear: I found you nowhere near stupid, I think you are a capable and intelligent person.

User avatar
labgnome
Juggernaut
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 5:57 pm

Re: Influence Discussion

#57 Post by labgnome »

Oberlus wrote: Tue Apr 30, 2019 3:21 pm
labgnome wrote: Tue Apr 30, 2019 1:06 pmInfluence projects would complete like normal production or research projects, and then apply an effect to the target.
Or not. I don't see a reason to enforce that. I might be wrong, but "projects" (generic, not just influence projects) can vary its cost and turn duration before they are finished (as when you finish a ship batch and the remaining unfinished ship batches increase their cost to reflect new fleet upkeep); or, like the stockpile project, they can have an effect that repeats each turn (in the case of influential conquest, decreasing happiness by 1 per turn).
I could see that. I do have a bit of a blind spot regarding the stockpile mechanic because I still think it was a bad idea. I don't really use it in my games so I don't think about how it works. I will say that I am less keen on a "whoever gives up first" system then I am on maybe having an opinion mechanic. I do think it might turn an otherwise interesting mechanic into just a waiting game. I'm not completely opposed, but I'm not all for it either. Besides I'm not a programmer so I won't be able to implement any of this anyway.
All of my contributions should be considered released under creative commons attribution share-alike license, CC-BY-SA 3.0 for use in, by and with the Free Orion project.

User avatar
labgnome
Juggernaut
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 5:57 pm

Re: Influence Discussion

#58 Post by labgnome »

Oberlus wrote: Tue Apr 30, 2019 4:01 pm
labgnome wrote: Tue Apr 30, 2019 3:43 pmSorry, I took your comments as more aggressive than thy were meant to be. I found your repeated use of KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) to be rude and got more riled up than I should have. There's no reason to stop this discussion just because we aren't agreeing on this right now.
You're right.
About "KISS", that term has been used in FreeOrion forum for some 15 years before I joined it. Its meaning is explained in some relevant pages of the FreeOrion project, it is one of its key design principles. First time I read it I found it funny, not offensive. I'm sorry if you thought I was calling you stupid. I would have never expected that anyone participating in this forum could feel aggravated by that term. Just to be clear: I found you nowhere near stupid, I think you are a capable and intelligent person.
It's cool, I get that now.
All of my contributions should be considered released under creative commons attribution share-alike license, CC-BY-SA 3.0 for use in, by and with the Free Orion project.

User avatar
labgnome
Juggernaut
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 5:57 pm

Re: Influence Discussion

#59 Post by labgnome »

Oberlus wrote: Tue Apr 30, 2019 3:33 pm
labgnome wrote: Tue Apr 30, 2019 1:12 pmPart of the point of getting native planets peacefully is that you don't get the negative effects of invasion.
That's right, but you are missing my point. See:
Your way (2 consecutive propaganda projects): Turn X, you finish the revolt project, the planet becomes native and has happiness=0, and you start technological uplift (unless you forget about it in a big game). Turn X+M, the uplift is finished and coincidentally the native planet has happiness=M, you start the diplomatic mission. Turn X+M+N, you finish the mission, the planet is yours with happiness min(M+N,maxHappiness).
With just one propaganda project: Turn X, you finish the overthrow government project, the planet becomes yours with happiness=0 and you forget it. Turn X+M+N, the planet is still yours and its happiness is min(M+N,maxHappiness).
Same results requiring half the effort and attention. KISS!
So this is where for one I think that "liberated" planet should get the high tech special. Although I can see some benefit from making another empire loose a plant and not picking it up yourself, especially if you don't want to over-extend your own influence upkeep. Maybe split the project into two projects. A relatively cheap one that just incites a rebellion and another more costly one that flips the planet.

I do have thoughts on an opinion mechanic which I might share.
All of my contributions should be considered released under creative commons attribution share-alike license, CC-BY-SA 3.0 for use in, by and with the Free Orion project.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 3161
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Influence Discussion

#60 Post by Oberlus »

labgnome wrote: Tue Apr 30, 2019 4:03 pmI do have a bit of a blind spot regarding the stockpile mechanic because I still think it was a bad idea.
Forget about the stockpile mechanics themselves (I was also against it, but I end up embracing it).
Since you haven't tried, you may find it useful for your ideas. See:
You set up a "building" project with a single turn to finish, the number of repetitions you want, and the number of PPs required per "turns" you want. Each time the project (turn) is finished, it stores that amount of PPs in your stockpile.
Say you set up a project for 10 PPs per turn and 5 repetitions. If you have 10+ available PPs per turn, the project will put 10 PPs each turn during five turns (total 50 PPs in 5 game turns).
If you have 5 PPs per turn, it will require two game turns to fulfil each project "turn".
So a incite revolt project could have a similar operation (if it fits your ideas).
I do think it might turn an otherwise interesting mechanic into just a waiting game.
If you are right, then I absolutely support you and the opinion/allegiances meters.
I don't have a complete vision of any of these subjects, so I don't know. But my intuition tells me that the same (waiting game) could happen with an opinion system: you wait for the opinion to turn towards you, then you start he incite revolt, etc. Plus my suggestion was out of the box, without much consideration. Maybe there could be something to make more interesting the contest of two empires trying to influence a given planet using just happiness, more interesting than "you have more influence so you win".

Post Reply