Sixteen game on the multiplayer slow game server

For topics that do not fit in another sub-forum.

Moderator: Oberlus

Message
Author
User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5759
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Sixteen game on the multiplayer slow game server

#256 Post by Oberlus »

danyspin97 wrote: Wed Jun 23, 2021 9:22 am Solar orbital generator isn't working for me, only the planet where it is built gets the bonus. Distributed Thought Computing isn't working either. (There is no bonus applied to research)
They are working. They just need to reach some stability minimum to apply.
For SOG is 16 in the version of 16th game. For DTC it is 10.

It's easy to have stability above 16 when you have environmentalism and industrialism policies. Some planets can have that stability even without being set to industry. Environmentalism impairs industry output but it also gives a great flat RP bonus not bound to stability or focus.

Get used to check out the FOCS files of any tech or building you plan to have, because most of them are different from what they were in 0.4.10 release, and documentation isn't finished.

wobbly
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1937
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Sixteen game on the multiplayer slow game server

#257 Post by wobbly »

There's something up with weapons upgrade and I'm not sure if the timing has changed or if the UI is not updating properly.

Edit: To clarify, I get the "all supplied ships upgraded" sitrep, but the UI displays old numbers. Next turn the right numbers are displayed whether I stay in supply or move the ship from supply to not supply. Either the subphase has changed or the UI isn't updating correctly.

Edit2: I've also noticed the same with ships replenishing fighters in supply. Something is different and I'm not sure what.

wobbly
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1937
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Sixteen game on the multiplayer slow game server

#258 Post by wobbly »

Looking at the combat log for turn 119 Demi alpha. LienRag attacked Demi alpha 1 doing 1 pt of damage and incapacitating it. Thing is there is no outpost or colony on Demi alpha 1, but there was earlier in the game. So there is still a problem with abandon outpost.

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2219
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Sixteen game on the multiplayer slow game server

#259 Post by LienRag »

So, is it time for all of us but one to concede and welcome our new overlord Oberlus (read the chat if you don't understand why) or could there be a chance if we all ally against him ?
Formidable technological advance, but I guess we can nearly match his production if we work together.

o01eg
Programmer
Posts: 2026
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 5:46 am

Re: Sixteen game on the multiplayer slow game server

#260 Post by o01eg »

LienRag wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 5:41 am So, is it time for all of us but one to concede and welcome our new overlord Oberlus (read the chat if you don't understand why) or could there be a chance if we all ally against him ?
Formidable technological advance, but I guess we can nearly match his production if we work together.
Unite against Oberlus looks interesting
Gentoo Linux x64, gcc-11.2, boost-1.78.0
Ubuntu Server 22.04 x64, gcc-12, boost-1.74.0
Welcome to the slow multiplayer game at freeorion-lt.dedyn.io.Version 2024-04-14.ad50e93.
Donations're welcome:BTC:bc1q007qldm6eppqcukewtfkfcj0naut9njj7audnm

wobbly
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1937
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Sixteen game on the multiplayer slow game server

#261 Post by wobbly »

I'm unsure. I've known the game was effectively won by the DTN bug a long time ago. On the one hand I'd like to start a new game. On the other hand I'd like to see the worst of the balance issues fixed 1st. DTN has already been fixed (but still needs testing for balance). I think the main ones I'd want to see balanced for a new game are: meteor blizzards/nanite storms and environmentalism. Also the stability requirements (or a way to get stability), but its still playable without that. I'll go with what everyone else decides.

Edit: I guess for me it also depends on how much the devs want the new stuff in master tested now, or whether they'd prefer to get more changes in first.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5759
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Sixteen game on the multiplayer slow game server

#262 Post by Oberlus »

I'd like to keep playing for a while to give more time for more fixes and balance changes to get into master.

I don't think I can win if everyone else allies against me, no matter how serious I get about it, at least if you pay attention to what I already wrote in the forums, because then most of you could focus on doing what I did (which apparently was quite successful):
- Exchange species with everyone willing to do so.
- Colonize interesting planets with species that have a good environment there.
- Adopt Diversity, Environmentalism, Industrialism and all three Infrastructure policies.
- Get Distributed Thought Computing.
- Focus to influence any planets that is growing its influence but is under 10 stability.
- For planets that reach stability 10, set them to industry if they can produce more than 5 or 10 PP despite the -5 PP from Environmentalism, and set the rest to research for a great RP income from DTC (keep in mind that best planets are those without shipyards in multiplanet systems, except if there is a GG that can make it interesting to focus on industry).
- Get all useful techs in the tree.
- Pump out brutal ships.

But it would be nice to try, I'm up for that.
I'm also up to keep one ally with me, if there is any voluntary.


LR :twisted: I was dividing my army between L29, drkosy and you, honouring my alliance with Dani and my cooperation with wobbly. Now you'll have all my attention. I'll try to uninstall you from the galaxy as fast as possible.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5759
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Sixteen game on the multiplayer slow game server

#263 Post by Oberlus »

Regarding fixes and balance, my main concern right now is influence upkeep scalability and it's intended anti-snowball effect.

For average population per planet 36, and average influence species (that's 6 IP per influence-focused planet), with the +2 IP at every planet from Environmentalism, we get that maximum number of planets an Empire can control is 400, with all of them set to influence, 0 PP output (or close to that).
Optimal number of planets to maximize PP output is around 170, with 80 planets set to industry and rest to influence. But that empire won't be able to adopt new policies from there on.
Optimal number of planets to maximize RP could be greater, I think, I didn't calculate it.

If the flat, unfocused IP bonus per planet was 3 (from whatever policies) instead of 2, maximum number of planets (0 PP) would be around 500, optimal for PP output around 225 (112 planets industry-focused).

This makes technological victory quite interesting for galaxies with more than 200 systems. And impossible to conquer a whole galaxy with a single empire if there are more than a few hundred systems.

We can work through this by setting enough flat IP bonuses, some factors to increase influence-focused IP output and/or reduce influence upkeep (a factor of 0.5 to upkeep allows 4x planets). The tricky part is giving the right amount of bonus to the tech or policy with the right RP or IP cost. It's a bit of a nightmare for me once I add the requirement of having bonuses and penalties that make sense regarding fluff.


Most worrisome for me is that I have the impression stability upkeep mechanics, as per they are now, are getting the opposite of their intended purpose: they make easier to overcome smaller empires. Influence upkeep grows slower than number of owned planets, and so it seems like it makes easier to stay ahead to empires that got the lead, while what we wanted was to slow them down (i.e. slow them more than smaller empires, because actually all empires are slowed down compared to pre-influence FO). I'm not sure of this, I have to work this out with spreadsheets and whatnot.

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 13603
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: Sixteen game on the multiplayer slow game server

#264 Post by Geoff the Medio »

wobbly wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 7:03 amI guess for me it also depends on how much the devs want the new stuff in master tested now, or whether they'd prefer to get more changes in first.
I'd prefer to run the current game as a dogpile for a while and address the high priority balance issues before starting another.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5759
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Sixteen game on the multiplayer slow game server

#265 Post by Oberlus »

Geoff the Medio wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 11:01 am dogpile
What's the meaning of that? Found a definition only on Urban Dictionary. Everyone against me?

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 13603
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: Sixteen game on the multiplayer slow game server

#266 Post by Geoff the Medio »

Oberlus wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 11:14 am
Geoff the Medio wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 11:01 am dogpile
What's the meaning of that? Found a definition only on Urban Dictionary. Everyone against me?
Yup.

danyspin97
Space Floater
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 11:22 am

Re: Sixteen game on the multiplayer slow game server

#267 Post by danyspin97 »

I volunteer to ally with oberlus (or rather, continue our alliance). It would really be interesting to have everyone against us, as I don't have any problem with species and planets.

User avatar
drkosy
Space Dragon
Posts: 390
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2020 9:41 am

Re: Sixteen game on the multiplayer slow game server

#268 Post by drkosy »

Get used to check out the FOCS files of any tech or building you plan to have, because most of them are different from what they were in 0.4.10 release, and documentation isn't finished.
It's the slow game server that means I spent something about 30 Min a day on FO, I can't afford more. That simple means I can't scan all the focs files to plan ahead :( I know that gave me a big disadvantage, but it's alpha testing...
For me the main thing to complain are starting condition. I didn't had some natives around. I only had LR to share species (L29 doesn't react on contact attempt) and nothing to conquer since all enemy colonies were just to far away. My influence wasn't large enough for spamming outpost everywhere to get somewhere.

Etty is hard to play, because they don't have any resource bonus. I would suggest to at least give them some influence bonus. They should be a species that are able to conquer but lack on influence actually made it impossible to me.

I don't see any point in playing further. Don't know what it will show. That a massive bunch of high end titans can kill everyone? I don't need to test that...
Want some fresh experience? Try Kosymod

danyspin97
Space Floater
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 11:22 am

Re: Sixteen game on the multiplayer slow game server

#269 Post by danyspin97 »

I agree about needing the pedia updated. I think it's okay to play alpha changes and unbalanced games, but at least everything should be documented, otherwise it's really hard to play and everyone who doesn't scan FOCS files will be at a huge disadvantage.

wobbly
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1937
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Sixteen game on the multiplayer slow game server

#270 Post by wobbly »

drkosy wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 2:24 pm I don't see any point in playing further. Don't know what it will show. That a massive bunch of high end titans can kill everyone? I don't need to test that...
Perhaps you can gift the remains of your empire to LR and L29Ah?

Post Reply