Make shipyards & drydock implicit (not a building)

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

Moderators: Oberlus, Oberlus

Message
Author
Ophiuchus
Programmer
Posts: 894
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:01 am
Location: Wall IV

Re: Make shipyards & drydock implicit (not a building)

#31 Post by Ophiuchus » Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:04 am

Vezzra wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 7:09 pm
...
Uhm, is influence going to work this way?
Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

Furthermore, I propse... we should default to four combat rounds instead of three ...for the good of playerkind.

User avatar
Krikkitone
Creative Contributor
Posts: 1498
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2003 6:52 pm

Re: Make shipyards & drydock implicit (not a building)

#32 Post by Krikkitone » Tue Feb 12, 2019 6:15 pm

Ophiuchus wrote:
Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:04 am
Vezzra wrote:
Sun Feb 10, 2019 7:09 pm
...
Uhm, is influence going to work this way?
That seems to be the general idea.
Each colony costs X influence, where X increases with the total number of colonies

So to maintain an stable empire
your percentage of influence focused colonies must increase as you grow
OR
your influence tech (or techs that reduce colony cost) must increase as you grow

so an empire with only influence focused colonies could still be unable to pay its influence costs, until it lost some colonies (Very unlikely situation, maybe if you were given a massive empire while you were still at low tech)

Your total Useful colonies would maximize when you are so large about 1/2 your empire was devoted to paying influence costs... any growth after that would Decrease your useful output

Atarlost
Space Floater
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2015 1:58 am

Re: Make shipyards & drydock implicit (not a building)

#33 Post by Atarlost » Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:20 am

A negative marginal value for additional worlds and a conquest victory condition don't mix well. You can wind up with games on large maps where the game stagnates because nobody can manage a galactic empire. This is probably realistic, but it's deeply unfun.

User avatar
Krikkitone
Creative Contributor
Posts: 1498
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2003 6:52 pm

Re: Make shipyards & drydock implicit (not a building)

#34 Post by Krikkitone » Tue Feb 26, 2019 4:34 am

Atarlost wrote:
Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:20 am
A negative marginal value for additional worlds and a conquest victory condition don't mix well. You can wind up with games on large maps where the game stagnates because nobody can manage a galactic empire. This is probably realistic, but it's deeply unfun.
Well Technology should improve to the point where a galactic empire is possible (probably at very high tech levels the marginal value of additional worlds is kept from going negative..to deal with all manner of galaxy sizes... or the "tipping point" depends on galaxy size)

And if you want early conquest you burn and pillage and rule a galaxy of dead rocks that don't revolt.

User avatar
Vezzra
Release Manager, Design
Posts: 4956
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:56 pm
Location: Sol III

Re: Make shipyards & drydock implicit (not a building)

#35 Post by Vezzra » Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:26 am

Atarlost wrote:
Tue Feb 26, 2019 2:20 am
A negative marginal value for additional worlds and a conquest victory condition don't mix well. You can wind up with games on large maps where the game stagnates because nobody can manage a galactic empire. This is probably realistic, but it's deeply unfun.
Which is why such a mechnic needs to be balanced very carefully, because you need to make sure to avoid this very problem.

The point is to slow down the snowballing effect of exponential growth, not to make it impossible to grow beyond some hard cap. Which means you need to put mechanics in place that help you deal with very large empires. Besides the things Krikkitone mentioned there is e.g. the idea to provide diplomatic options like making other empires your vassals. Vassals would also cost you influence to maintain, but far less than controlling all their systems directly. Downside: you don't have the same kind of control over their assests as if they were your own, vassals can try to break off from your control, etc.

A conquest victory would be achieved by either controlling the entire map directly, or make all other empires your vassals.

o01eg
Programmer
Posts: 412
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 5:46 am

Re: Make shipyards & drydock implicit (not a building)

#36 Post by o01eg » Sun Mar 10, 2019 7:29 pm

Vezzra wrote:
Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:26 am
Besides the things Krikkitone mentioned there is e.g. the idea to provide diplomatic options like making other empires your vassals. Vassals would also cost you influence to maintain, but far less than controlling all their systems directly. Downside: you don't have the same kind of control over their assests as if they were your own, vassals can try to break off from your control, etc.
Wonder how it should work in multiplayer.
Gentoo Linux x64, gcc-8.3, boost-1.65.0
Ubuntu Server 18.04 x64, gcc-7.4, boost-1.65.1
Welcome to slow multiplayer game at freeorion-lt.dedyn.io. Version 2019-07-30.587d1c0.
Donates are welcome: BTC:14XLekD9ifwqLtZX4iteepvbLQNYVG87zK

User avatar
Vezzra
Release Manager, Design
Posts: 4956
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:56 pm
Location: Sol III

Re: Make shipyards & drydock implicit (not a building)

#37 Post by Vezzra » Thu Mar 14, 2019 1:00 pm

o01eg wrote:
Sun Mar 10, 2019 7:29 pm
Wonder how it should work in multiplayer.
Will depend on how we design the "vassal" concept. Bascially two options: if a player (human or AI) becomes a "vassal", they continue playing, but have certain restriction imposed on them (no independent diplomatic relations, have to pay tribute to the overlord, have to join the overlord in all wars, etc. - meaning, they will be far less independent). The other option would be that the current player (human or AI) is replaced by a "vassal" AI.

Personally I have a strong preference for the first option.

User avatar
labgnome
Vacuum Dragon
Posts: 569
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 5:57 pm

Re: Make shipyards & drydock implicit (not a building)

#38 Post by labgnome » Wed Apr 24, 2019 5:12 pm

So one possibility, really two suggestions, that I think I have discussed before, but not in this thread.

Firstly, I would like to propose that drydocks not require shipyards. This would strategically free them up to be built where they are the most advantageous, say near your front line, or next to a drone factory, an Acirema system or tough guardian you want to take out. All of this while not having to also build shipyards in those locations.

Secondly, I would suggest that shipyards need to be a certain number of jumps away from each other. This would directly prevent them from being built everywhere and force you to be more deliberate in your choices of placement. I think that it would be a very simple solution to building them everywhere and combined with divorcing them from the drydock, means you would not need to build them in as many places.
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.

Post Reply