Stuff for tall empires.

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: 5714
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Stuff for tall empires.

#16 Post by Oberlus »

Geoff the Medio wrote: Tue Jan 25, 2022 11:37 am probably a similar result can be achieved more understandably with something like a filter on what planets count... like the additional cost only comes from populated planets, not outposts, or those not set to influence or somesuch... and then keep the somewhat-simpler-to-express formula.

Aim of the policy: increase population by a fixed percentage as well as influence upkeep, with the upkeep increase being small for small empires but growing faster with empire size than standard upkeep, in a way that having many populated planets makes the policy counterproductive. The point is to make it good for tall and bad for wide.


Additional cost only comes from populated planets -> Counting or not the outposts has nothing to do with my aim. To make the additional cost grow faster with number of populated planets than N^1.5 I need to increase de exponent, but N^2 is too much. If I just add a factor to (directly or indirectly) increase or reduce N, the increase of influence will be the same for 4 than for 40 colonies. Or at least I can't see how this could work.

Additional cost only comes from (populated) planets not set to influence -> This can't work (regardless of the focus chosen), because it would make the policy brutally good for wide empires: keep expanding and setting planets to that focus, milk the focus-independent bonuses with extra populations.

Additional cost comes from buildings enabled by the policy -> A building that increases population and counts as another planet in the upkeep quation. This is not bad for wide, but it's better for tall than for wide: getting the bonus from the policy requires to invest PP on each planet (first the biggest ones for better return), so planet focusing on few but big planets will get bigger returns for the invested PP and the increased IP upkeep. But still, wide empires could find it useful to use it in the biggest of their planets for a relatively small increase in upkeep compared to just expanding to more smaller planets.

Additional cost comes from the number of buildings, not squared -> Not working as intended, as it does not consider the number of planets in the additional cost (and so building one of those pop-boosters is as good for a 4-planet than for a 40-planet).

Make the exponent of IP upkeep 0.75 when the policy is adopted -> No need for the building (so no repetitive action) and works as intended.

Anyone has other ideas?

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

Re: Stuff for tall empires.

#17 Post by Geoff the Medio »

Ophiuchus wrote: Tue Jan 25, 2022 11:25 am
wobbly wrote: Tue Jan 25, 2022 9:18 am Does it make sense to switch the limit on no. of metropoles to total population instead of no. of colonies?
a sketch:
for the first metropole 5 pop outside of metropoles (that is about the current balancing)
for the second metropole 10 pop outside of metropoles - so 15 in whole; a well populated planet/homeworld is probably possible to use after invasion as metropole
for the third metropole 15 pop outside of metropoles - so 30 in whole,
Phrased like that, it could be unstable, as the amount of population "outside of metropoles" will depend on how many metropoles there are.

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 3433
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Stuff for tall empires.

#18 Post by Ophiuchus »

Geoff the Medio wrote: Sat Feb 05, 2022 8:54 pm
Ophiuchus wrote: Tue Jan 25, 2022 11:25 am
wobbly wrote: Tue Jan 25, 2022 9:18 am Does it make sense to switch the limit on no. of metropoles to total population instead of no. of colonies?
a sketch:
for the first metropole 5 pop outside of metropoles (that is about the current balancing)
for the second metropole 10 pop outside of metropoles - so 15 in whole; a well populated planet/homeworld is probably possible to use after invasion as metropole
for the third metropole 15 pop outside of metropoles - so 30 in whole,
Phrased like that, it could be unstable, as the amount of population "outside of metropoles" will depend on how many metropoles there are.
the intentended meaning was a stable definition:
* "add" a new metropole only if the highest-pop non-metropole is eligible to be a metropole and there is sufficient population (without counting the candidate or the old metropoles)

Not sure how to do that best in FOCS. Could be made iteratively using specials. Note that the current implementation not using specials already means that metropoles are semi-stable (a metropole downgrades if a non-metropole grows more population). Actually i like that semi-stability.

My intention was to remove growth on the metropoles out of the equation.

It is certainly simpler to just count the complete population. So lets say 20 pop on a planet necessary to become a metropole.
One metropole need 30 (20+10) total pop.
Two metropoles need 65 (20 + 15 + 30) total pop
Three metropoles need 105 (20 + 20 + 65) total pop.
Four 150, Five 200,...

That formula would be (#planets*25 + increasing_per_each(5,#planets)). Not sure if that increasing_per_each is possible as I only have a recursive formala yet (5, 5+10, 5+10+15, 5+10+15+20...). Could choose another formula for that increase.

Not sure which alternative is less wide.
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!

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

Re: Stuff for tall empires.

#19 Post by Geoff the Medio »

Ophiuchus wrote: Sun Feb 06, 2022 8:52 amMy intention was to remove growth on the metropoles out of the equation.

It is certainly simpler to just count the complete population.
"complete population" would still include the metropole population in the total, though. Unless I don't understand what you mean...
That formula would be (#planets*25 + increasing_per_each(5,#planets)). Not sure if that increasing_per_each is possible as I only have a recursive formala yet (5, 5+10, 5+10+15, 5+10+15+20...). Could choose another formula for that increase.
Each step is a constant amount larger than the previous step, so a quadratic formula should work, eg. Y(n) = 2.5*n + 2.5*n^2

But regardless, if it just considers total population, then one could end up in situations with a small number of high-population planets alone add up to enough population to make all of them metropoles, with no support planets needed, eg. a single pop 35 planet.

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 3433
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Stuff for tall empires.

#20 Post by Ophiuchus »

Geoff the Medio wrote: Sun Feb 06, 2022 10:25 am
Ophiuchus wrote: Sun Feb 06, 2022 8:52 amMy intention was to remove growth on the metropoles out of the equation.

It is certainly simpler to just count the complete population.
"complete population" would still include the metropole population in the total, though. Unless I don't understand what you mean...
I think i got you confused by offering an alternative which counts the "complete population" including the metropole population. So the second example/formula etc is about this alternative.
Geoff the Medio wrote: Sun Feb 06, 2022 10:25 am if it just considers total population, then one could end up in situations with a small number of high-population planets alone add up to enough population to make all of them metropoles, with no support planets needed, eg. a single pop 35 planet.
yes, thats why i wanted to exclude those. having 35 pop and only a single planet seems unlikely though. or in another way, we are looking for a way to restrict the number of metropoles, it does not necessarily have to have supporting planets.

we could also decrease max pop on non-metropoles as a way of simulating support by other planets. that is certainly anti-wide
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!

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5714
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Stuff for tall empires.

#21 Post by Oberlus »

Ophiuchus wrote: Sun Feb 06, 2022 3:58 pm we are looking for a way to restrict the number of metropoles, it does not necessarily have to have supporting planets.
Then fluff would make no sense. Metropole (mother city) is what the fenicians in the mediterranean colonies called their city of origin (their home land).
Also Centralization currently makes little sense when allowing a bonus on a central planet that is the center of nothing.
Ophiuchus wrote: Sun Feb 06, 2022 3:58 pm we could also decrease max pop on non-metropoles as a way of simulating support by other planets. that is certainly anti-wide
That's in an old suggestion before Centralization was added: a policy to increase central population and stability and decrease it in outer planets, and I like it a lot.
Somehow, both policies are supposed to be fluffed very similarly, and probably one should be dropped or changed completely (including name).

Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 3433
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Stuff for tall empires.

#22 Post by Ophiuchus »

Oberlus wrote: Sun Feb 06, 2022 4:07 pm
Ophiuchus wrote: Sun Feb 06, 2022 3:58 pm we are looking for a way to restrict the number of metropoles, it does not necessarily have to have supporting planets.
Then fluff would make no sense. Metropole (mother city) is what the fenicians in the mediterranean colonies called their city of origin (their home land).
etymology is always fun. not sure about english, but in current german Metropole usually means a (very) large city and nothing more.

centralisation is about the capital. metropoles is about large-populated planets. there could be overlaps, but i think it is easy to distinguish.
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!

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5714
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Stuff for tall empires.

#23 Post by Oberlus »

Ophiuchus wrote: Sun Feb 06, 2022 4:57 pm etymology is always fun. not sure about english, but in current german Metropole usually means a (very) large city and nothing more.
If we go for the Metropole=HighlyUrbanized&PopulatedPlanet, then no need for support planets (maybe get bonuses from having support planets, together with maluses for those support planets; what makes a planet a Metropole is simple now: only depending on planet population and stability).
Ophiuchus wrote: Sun Feb 06, 2022 4:57 pm centralisation is about the capital. metropoles is about large-populated planets. there could be overlaps, but i think it is easy to distinguish.
It's certainly easy to distinguish the game effects of each policy (that they fail to achieve the intended influence on strategies is another topic). What's maybe only intuitive to me and not to others is that the fluff doesn't make sense with the effects.
Why Metropoles reduce stability of non-metropoles? Looks like Metropoles enact some form of deprivation or oppression over the other planets. I assume that is because metropoles take resources/workforce from colonies, as in a Colonialist empire (but we have two policies for that, Colonialism and Feudalism), or because it concentrates services, education and industry on them and don't let it develop in the colonies so people in there is actually poorer (but we have a policy for that, Centralization). If possible, I'd like to have a name+fluff for the easily distinguishable effects that is also easily likeable/relatable.

wobbly
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1875
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Stuff for tall empires.

#24 Post by wobbly »

I was thinking about this today, and it occurred to me that no real world empire is pure tall. They are all wide in terms of power projection, either military or diplomatic. I think the closest we have to power projection is supply range and there is already a few policies that use supply (Black Markets, Colonialism), maybe there is space for more? That way a tall empire could consist of a mix of tall policies (built-up mega colonies) and power projection policies (supply connections to resources, piracy, etc.) As a bonus supply based production/research suits the xenophobes who don't necessarily want a lot of colonies.

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2146
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Stuff for tall empires.

#25 Post by LienRag »

wobbly wrote: Sun May 22, 2022 1:55 pm I was thinking about this today, and it occurred to me that no real world empire is pure tall.
I'm not a specialist, but what about Venice ?

Post Reply