Infrastructure based bonuses

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: Infrastructure based bonuses

#16 Post by Oberlus »

labgnome wrote: Tue May 12, 2020 11:44 pm The problem is that outside of gas giants, this makes outposts largely just "colonies in waiting", and not of any strategic value.
Supply.
Asteroid belts for the +5 PP.
And yes, the more important: colonies in waiting (not too much, waiting, usually 0 turns).
I've never build an outpost just to put a lighthouse or a scanning facility.
What FreeOrion you play?
Could be nice to have you in the multiplayer games.

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

Re: Infrastructure based bonuses

#17 Post by labgnome »

Oberlus wrote: Wed May 13, 2020 12:10 am
labgnome wrote: Tue May 12, 2020 11:44 pm The problem is that outside of gas giants, this makes outposts largely just "colonies in waiting", and not of any strategic value.
Supply.
Asteroid belts for the +5 PP.
And yes, the more important: colonies in waiting (not too much, waiting, usually 0 turns).
I've never build an outpost just to put a lighthouse or a scanning facility.
What FreeOrion you play?
Could be nice to have you in the multiplayer games.
I'm currently playing v0.4.9+ [build 2020-03-23.7b63adf]
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
Vezzra
Release Manager, Design
Posts: 5445
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:56 pm
Location: Sol III

Re: Infrastructure based bonuses

#18 Post by Vezzra »

Oberlus wrote: Mon May 11, 2020 9:09 am What about basing Industry and Research (and Influence) meter increase rates on Infrastructure?
Well, another detour into FO history is due here. :wink:

Once upon a time, back in the ancient days of FO, what you propose here had been the main purpose of what we now call "infrastructure". Back then that wasn't the name of this meter, originally it was called "construction" (and the techs increasing/boosting the construction meter had been the "construction" techs), according to the supposed purpose.

When the construction meter of a colony reached certain levels (IIRC that had been 10, 20, 30, etc.), the speed at which the resource meters (food, minerals, industry and research at that time) grow would be increased by 1. Meaning, a colony with construction >=10 had an additional point of growth, >=20 had two additional points of growth, etc.

A long time ago (IIRC not long after I joined the project), that scheme had been discarded, because it had been considered too complicated for not adding much of value, and increase of resource production limited to a few/one tech(s) which would grant a fixed bonus to resource meter growth. I hadn't been involved in that discussion, and don't have a strong opinion on the matter, although I do see the point and it seems reasonable to me. Making the growth rate of some meters depend on other meters makes things more complicated, and you need to ask the question if such a mechanic really adds something interesting to the game, that's worth the complexity.

After that mechanic had been thrown out, the meter had been renamed to "infrastructure" some time later, and we've been considering ideas what to do with it ever since, as after that change construction/infrastructure had been left without a real, significant purpose.

It's actually kind of funny that now, after all these years, we finally arrived at a proposal that would basically reinstate the original purpose... :wink:

Just wanted to throw that out here for you to consider when discussing this idea.

User avatar
Vezzra
Release Manager, Design
Posts: 5445
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:56 pm
Location: Sol III

Re: Infrastructure based bonuses

#19 Post by Vezzra »

Regarding shipyards/drydocks my suggestion would be to just eliminate the Orbital Drydock building and make shipyards repair ships. Having to build the drydock, which requires a shipyard anyway, only makes things more complicated/micromanagy, without adding anything of value. I've only ever experienced the need to build that extra building (that's dirt cheap anyway) as annoying.

So please, just get rid of it...

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

Re: Infrastructure based bonuses

#20 Post by labgnome »

Vezzra wrote: Wed May 13, 2020 5:49 pm Regarding shipyards/drydocks my suggestion would be to just eliminate the Orbital Drydock building and make shipyards repair ships. Having to build the drydock, which requires a shipyard anyway, only makes things more complicated/micromanagy, without adding anything of value. I've only ever experienced the need to build that extra building (that's dirt cheap anyway) as annoying.

So please, just get rid of it...
Shipyards repairing ships would certainly solve the problem of needing to build drydocks with shipyards.
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: Infrastructure based bonuses

#21 Post by Oberlus »

Vezzra wrote: Wed May 13, 2020 5:49 pm Regarding shipyards/drydocks my suggestion would be to just eliminate the Orbital Drydock building and make shipyards repair ships. Having to build the drydock, which requires a shipyard anyway, only makes things more complicated/micromanagy, without adding anything of value. I've only ever experienced the need to build that extra building (that's dirt cheap anyway) as annoying.

So please, just get rid of it...
+1

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

Re: Infrastructure based bonuses

#22 Post by labgnome »

Oberlus wrote: Wed May 13, 2020 6:11 pm
Vezzra wrote: Wed May 13, 2020 5:49 pm Regarding shipyards/drydocks my suggestion would be to just eliminate the Orbital Drydock building and make shipyards repair ships. Having to build the drydock, which requires a shipyard anyway, only makes things more complicated/micromanagy, without adding anything of value. I've only ever experienced the need to build that extra building (that's dirt cheap anyway) as annoying.

So please, just get rid of it...
+1
Should we put in influence costs for the shipyard upgrades since there will not be drydocks?
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
LienRag
Space Dragon
Posts: 300
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Infrastructure based bonuses

#23 Post by LienRag »

To solve the quite eternal discussion "buildings should cost infrastructure" (which I approve) vs "buildings costing infrastructure solves nothing" (which has good arguments the way the game is), shouldn't we just agree to have boni based on unused infrastructure ?

This way building anything somewhere would always be a decision that has consequences, reducing spamalot, and if these boni are not linear then building everything at the same place would be more costly than dispersing the buildings in the Empire.

And yes, I know about Tall Empires, but Techs and Policies could allow them even with non-linear boni for unused infrastructure.

What bonus would unused infrastructure give ?
It is my opinion that there should be two main guidelines there :
1 - The bonus amount should not be unbalancing (the main source of boni should stay planet focus and research).
2 - The nature of the bonus should be determined by Policies (basically, unused architecture is what's left for citizens to use as they please, so what they would want to do with it is determined by policies)

Possibilities (since I don't know what Policies will exist, I don't tie them to policies) would be bonus to Defense, Troops, Happiness, Population, Ship Speed in a 50 ui radius, Stability, Influence, Stealth, Detection Range, Stockpile...

User avatar
LienRag
Space Dragon
Posts: 300
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Infrastructure based bonuses

#24 Post by LienRag »

Oh, apparently that was what you were discussing ?
Apologies, I had read it but a few days ago and apparently did'nt remember everything right...

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

Re: Infrastructure based bonuses

#25 Post by Oberlus »

LienRag wrote: Thu May 14, 2020 2:14 am Oh, apparently that was what you were discussing ?
Well, sort of. In the OP that was the point (even without having in mind the buildings consuming infrastructure, but it certainly fits in well).
But devs turned down the idea of any kind of bonuses that are not "just flat, depending on nothing" or "pop-based".

In the most recent posts, I was talking only about tying meter growth to free infrastructure.

Maybe, with the infrastructure reduction thingy, devs could reconsider it. I particularly would like to tie flat bonuses to free infrastructure.

User avatar
LienRag
Space Dragon
Posts: 300
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Infrastructure based bonuses

#26 Post by LienRag »

Oberlus wrote: Thu May 14, 2020 10:18 am

Maybe, with the infrastructure reduction thingy, devs could reconsider it. I particularly would like to tie flat bonuses to free infrastructure.
That wouldn't make them that flat anymore, but I like the idea if it's balanced.
Like NAI, AA and whatever give a flat bonus to most planets (since these "most planets" do not have buildings on them) but building spamalot on any planet reduces the bonus (so it's not free) and later improvements to infrastructure give a small bump to these flat boni.

Also, going military (shipyards and drydocks everywhere) would reduce the bonus from AA and NAI, which implies hard strategic decisions.

The problem you'll need to tackle for it to not be too micro-management hell is the "build and scrap" attitude. The only thing worse than being incited to build anything everywhere is being incited to build it and then scrap it later.

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

Re: Infrastructure based bonuses

#27 Post by Oberlus »

LienRag wrote: Thu May 14, 2020 3:09 pm later improvements to infrastructure give a small bump to these flat boni.
Not so small, with the intended changes to techs providing infrastructure, it could double starting bonuses.
Also, going military (shipyards and drydocks everywhere) would reduce the bonus from AA and NAI, which implies hard strategic decisions.
That's the point, make shipyards and drydocks everywhere no longer an option.
Going military should not need those buildings everywhere. Repairing should be more strategical. At least that's the current vision.
The problem you'll need to tackle for it to not be too micro-management hell is the "build and scrap" attitude. The only thing worse than being incited to build anything everywhere is being incited to build it and then scrap it later.
Agree to the first part, disagree to the second part. Building ten times the building is five times worse than building it twice.

For the first part, since you don't want to lose time for producing ships, you would be building the replacement shipyard compound before you scrap the one you no longer need/want. For cases in which you are switching because of a better species, that (the scrap and rebuild) is inevitable, but the scrapping part is not that bad (you can do it quite fast in a single turn). The same applies if you want to move it away from approaching enemies (you certainly want to scrap the buildings to avoid the enemy from grabbing them). If you want to move the compound to move it closer to the borders, you could use a Stargate to not having to rebuild the compound anymore.
All of the above plus the future influence mechanics (which could add extra payments for the initial building process or the scrapping) could suffice to discourage frequent moving of the compound.

User avatar
LienRag
Space Dragon
Posts: 300
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Infrastructure based bonuses

#28 Post by LienRag »

Oberlus wrote: Thu May 14, 2020 3:41 pm
LienRag wrote: Thu May 14, 2020 3:09 pm later improvements to infrastructure give a small bump to these flat boni.
Not so small, with the intended changes to techs providing infrastructure, it could double
Yeah, that's probably a problem if it comes too early in the game as NAI and AA are already a no-brainer which is something we try to avoid.

Oberlus wrote: Thu May 14, 2020 3:41 pm
Also, going military (shipyards and drydocks everywhere) would reduce the bonus from AA and NAI, which implies hard strategic decisions.
That's the point, make shipyards and drydocks everywhere no longer an option.
Going military should not need those buildings everywhere. Repairing should be more strategical. At least that's the current vision.
Good to read that. Repairing gets broken late game imho.
I really think that my proposed Infrastructure Upkeep mechanism tackles a lot of the spamalot problem we have now and thus could be enough to make drydock placement really strategical.

Oberlus wrote: Thu May 14, 2020 3:41 pm
The problem you'll need to tackle for it to not be too micro-management hell is the "build and scrap" attitude. The only thing worse than being incited to build anything everywhere is being incited to build it and then scrap it later.
Agree to the first part, disagree to the second part. Building ten times the building is five times worse than building it twice.

(...)
All of the above plus the future influence mechanics (which could add extra payments for the initial building process or the scrapping) could suffice to discourage frequent moving of the compound.
Well, certainly, but I meant "building them ten times then scraping them 9 times to rebuild them 9 times is much worse than just building them ten times and not thinking about them anymore" (the later being how the game is right now, or at least the way I play it).
We shouldn't overlook the fact either that building a building somewhere is emotionally rewarding while scraping and rebuilding is just tedious (I guess that's somehow subjective, but I'm not certain that I'm the only one feeling that way).
I get the fact that indeed having constraints on building placement may make scraping some buildings sometimes necessary (as when one gets a better specie per your example) and yes Influence costs for that may tackle the problem as you say, we should just make sure that it does.

Actually, frequent scraping and rebuilding of some buildings to keep them close to the ever-moving frontline could be both emotionally rewarding to some players and interesting tactically (in a sort of "raider" mentality and strategy), it just should come with enough costs that it won't be a no-brainer but only one of many possible strategies.

Oberlus wrote: Thu May 14, 2020 3:41 pm The same applies if you want to move it away from approaching enemies (you certainly want to scrap the buildings to avoid the enemy from grabbing them).
Even though I don't like them I reckon that "scorched-earth" playstyle is something that is acceptable, but right now they're a no-brainer and that's very bad (and against core design principles if I'm not mistaken).
There should be a way to fix this, maybe having scraped buildings keeping part of their Infrastructure Upkeep cost (1/10 of it for usual buildings) but conquered buildings keeping none (until you reconquer them of course) ?
That way one would be more wary of building things he knows he can't defend, and also would balance the possibility of reconquest against the risk of letting the enemy grab them if they enemy comes close to already finished buildings.

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

Re: Infrastructure based bonuses

#29 Post by labgnome »

A semi-random line of thought I had while getting some exercise today.

What id Gas Giant Generator (possibly soon to be a build only once building), Solar Orbital Generator (usually build only once per supply group), Black Hole Power Generator (1 per supply group) and Hyperspacial Dam (1 per supply group) all added infrastructure to the planets in the system. This way you could have higher infrastructure in places off of your capitol.

Lets say something like the following:
Gas Giant Generator: +10 Infrastructure to planets in the system.
Solar Orbital Generator: +20 Infrastructure to planets in the system.
Black Hole Generator: +30 Infrastructure to planets in the system.
Hyperspacial Dam: +10 Infrastructure to planets in the system.
This gives a maximum possible infrastructure bonus, with stacking of +30 in one system, with tech bonuses bringing it to max total of 100 infrastructure per planet in the system. For the sake of keeping the numerical constraints it might be necessary to restrict these buildings from being built in the capitol system.

Also since the Transformer comes after Energy Force Structures, which will give all planets at least 40 infrastructure, I'd say it should cost 20 or 30 infrastructure.

Now if we make most buildings cost infrastructure, maybe excluding the shipyard upgrades, you should be able to still peruse a relatively centralized strategy. Lets say that most buildings each cost 5 infrastructure, with a shipyard, that's room for 18 buildings. If my count is correct there are only 17 or 18 other permanent buildings in the game, and not all of them are going to be built at the capitol, or together. For instance the Xenoresurection Lab the Collective Thought Network and the Concentration Camps are not likely to be placed at the capitol, while the functions of the Bioterror Projection Base, Planetary Starlane Drive, Spacial Distortion Generator and Stargate are all filled by the Transformer.

A likely current build for a late-game capitol ecumenopolis planet would probably be the following:
infrastructure
Base+20
Techs+40
Imperial Palace+20
Megalith+20
Shipyard+Upgrades-10
Scanning Facility-10
Interstellar Lighthouse-10
Space Elevator-10
Transformer-20
Automated History Analyzer-5
Enclave of the Void-5
Imperial Entanglement Center-5
Industrial Center-5
Species Interdesign Academy-5
Total+15
This allows for growth at a rate of 1.5 per turn. Meaning that the capitol can afford to be rather Trantor-like, with every building having an influence cost.

Edit: it also occurs to me that if we leave N-Dimensional Structures giving +10 infrastructure, and have Force Energy Structures give +10 infrastructure we could have both Asymptotic Materials and Architectural Psychology also both also give +10 infrastructure, giving us 4 bonuses of +10 each.
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: Infrastructure based bonuses

#30 Post by Oberlus »

I think numbers might be off, letting too many buildings per planet and too soon.
Buildings that increase output should not increase infrastructure, but reduce it.

Post Reply