Seventeenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

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

Moderator: Oberlus

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

Re: Seventeenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#91 Post by Geoff the Medio »

Oberlus wrote: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 amFeudalism and Vassalization require Confederation (and so are impossible to adopt with Centralization), and I think it should be the opposite, since Confederation implies freedom to stay in the empire and the others imply domination from a central government.
Feudalism and Vassalizations are both meant to be very decentralized empire organizations.

Feudalism causes an empire-owned planet to collect industry from same-species populated but unowned planets in the same system. The imperial government has no direct control of those planets, so can't put buildings on them or change their focus or directly affect them with (most?) techs or policies. As a result, the empire doesn't pay any additional influence upkeep for them, but can still extract useful work from them.

Vassalization is similar, but for collecting influence from different-species planets from the capital or local empire-controlled planet. This is envisioned as slightly more decentralized since it's for other-species planets and collects a less tangible resource (influence vs. industry).

There is also Colonialism, which also extracts industry, but from any unowned planet with any species on it that is in the supply network and within a 3 starlane jumps of an owned planet (not just in the same system). Whether this is more or less centralized is debatable.

All these are supposed to make the unowned planets be sort-of part of the empire, while giving the empire no direct control of the planets and requiring a local empire presence (another owned planet) to collect the resources. This way one can grow an empire larger without having to go through the process of invading and depopulating and recolonizing or maintaining direct control over every planet that can be reached. Arguably they might not help much with the micromanagement as things are now, as one can colonize a bunch of planets and then decree them to be independent in order to benefit from them with these policies. Might have to think about how to make that not worth doing...
Reallocate the unlocking of some policies... there are techs that unlock too many policies
Doing this decently for tech->policy unlocks will probably require some reorganization of the tech tree. I found that there weren't a lot of good places to put many policies with the existing techs. This probably isn't surprising, since the tech categories weren't planned around having lots of econ/social policies to unlock and haven't been groomed since then with that goal.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5715
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Seventeenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#92 Post by Oberlus »

Geoff the Medio wrote: Tue Oct 26, 2021 9:52 am Feudalism and Vassalizations are both meant to be very decentralized empire organizations.
But what they do is take stuff from worlds outside-of-but-dominated-by the empire and move it to worlds withing the empire, which I see as centralizing, extractive (colonialist) and dominating. So it's good to create Confederations of free planets that dominate not-so-free planets. If I wanted to role-play e.g. an oppressive etnocratic empire that exploits other species, having to use Confederation seems wrong.


Types of empires I can think of:

- Federation of free worlds.
Government of the affairs affecting federated worlds is conducted through consensus among the worlds. The government is democratic, not authoritarian.
Customs, culture and laws of each world and species are respected (higher stability).
Worlds stay in the Federation willingly and can abandon it if they decide (planets immediately defect the empire when stability reaches -1).
Worlds must comply with Federal laws and regulations, but worlds rule their internal affairs themselves and all planets contribute the same to the empire (all planets have a moderate influence output, removes capital extra influence bonuses and forbids regional admin centers, and influence upkeep is lower).
Confederation with Diversity and/or Liberty fits well with this, but the concepts of colonialism, feudalism and vassalization imply unequal relations of power with seems contradictory. Bureaucracy should be possible in a Federation (but currently requires centralization).

- Colonial Empire.
Authoritarian system. The homeland rules over the colonies (people from homeland compose the governing body of the colonies) that are subjugated to the needs of the empire (exporting resources and workforce from the colonies to the homeland). Fluff of Metropoles, Centralization and Colonialism fit well here. It's opposed to Federation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonial_empire

- Etnocratic Empire.
Authoritarian system. The species of homeland have more rights and privileges than other species, which see their customs and culture neglected or repressed. Racial Purity fits well here. Could be colonial (metropoles, centralization) or not. Something about slavery appart from Conc. Camps would be great. It's opposed to Federation.

- Feudal Empire.
Slightly authoritarian system. Some worlds have mostly-independent governments but are vassals of the empire worlds, owing military force and taxes (resources) to the ruling worlds.
Vassal worlds should be able to revolt against the empire, denying any resource to it. Can current mechanic of getting resources from unowned worlds represent this? Do unowned worlds have a stability that can go negative affected by the dominating empire's policies, buildings, etc. to trigger rebellion? If two player empires have the corresponding policy and a planet in a system, who gets the resources from the unowned planets? Maybe it would be better to have different types of owned planets (maybe just with buildings, no need for backend changes).

Probably more, but no more time.

User avatar
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Seventeenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#93 Post by LienRag »

Interesting.
I particularly like your Federation of Free Worlds, it really works differently than other policies.

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

Re: Seventeenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#94 Post by Ophiuchus »

Oberlus wrote: Tue Oct 26, 2021 2:08 pm - Feudal Empire.
Slightly authoritarian system. Some worlds have mostly-independent governments but are vassals of the empire worlds, owing military force and taxes (resources) to the ruling worlds.
Vassal worlds should be able to revolt against the empire, denying any resource to it. Can current mechanic of getting resources from unowned worlds represent this? Do unowned worlds have a stability that can go negative affected by the dominating empire's policies, buildings, etc. to trigger rebellion? If two player empires have the corresponding policy and a planet in a system, who gets the resources from the unowned planets? Maybe it would be better to have different types of owned planets (maybe just with buildings, no need for backend changes).
i think this is too complex for its worth; using supply as a way to determine allegiance (like with colonisation) works well enough IMO.
one could add a chance to spawn unowned military ships in (or close to) disgruntled vassal systems - being able to cut off the supply network is enough to deny resources.
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!

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

Re: Seventeenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#95 Post by Ophiuchus »

Geoff the Medio wrote: Tue Oct 26, 2021 9:52 am ...Arguably they might not help much with the micromanagement as things are now, as one can colonize a bunch of planets and then decree them to be independent in order to benefit from them with these policies. Might have to think about how to make that not worth doing...
Actually I thought that was the main thing of colonisation: put your own colonies somewhere to exploit for the homeland. And give them independence as far as it is necessary - so if you lack the influence to keep the colony in your empire, you better let it go and still profit from it.

If local labour is available that is a big plus but not essential, else you just need to provide labour yourself.
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: Seventeenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#96 Post by Geoff the Medio »

I mean player management, not fluff management by hypothetical in-universe people. Having to colonize, then decree independent, a bunch of planets is potentially cumbersome vs. just colonizing or outposting, or even getting benefit for having them by just extending the supply network over them.

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

Re: Seventeenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#97 Post by Ophiuchus »

Geoff the Medio wrote: Thu Nov 04, 2021 9:15 am I mean player management, not fluff management by hypothetical in-universe people. Having to colonize, then decree independent, a bunch of planets is potentially cumbersome vs. just colonizing or outposting, or even getting benefit for having them by just extending the supply network over them.
Yes, I understand, for me it was just fitting/not much micro/a logical result of restricting the use of planets under your control.

A greater micro problem is if invading those planets later is worthwhile. E.g. you could seed planets en masse and let it grow until the population is worth it (this might be ok in early/mid game).

Probably with the square-root influence cost this is a hypothetical problem as it seems not efficient anyway - I was looking if i could find a use for it, but it never was worthwhile yet. Also most of resource bonus comes from tech/focus/policy, which independent planets do not share (yet) - so i am not convinced those policies ever pay off the used slot on their own merit. The other use besides reducing influence cost is not having to care about stability there.

I guess giving independence is best in case of defense/retreat - it stabilises the troops and lowers your cost (guess that is fine).
And of course to rectify you colonised too much (which is good).
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!

o01eg
Programmer
Posts: 2004
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 5:46 am

Re: Seventeenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#98 Post by o01eg »

Suddenly while I was away most my outposts get -6 Influence this turn (81), -9 next turn and 0 as target
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 2024-03-15.b3de094.
Donations're welcome:BTC:bc1q007qldm6eppqcukewtfkfcj0naut9njj7audnm

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

Re: Seventeenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#99 Post by Geoff the Medio »

o01eg wrote: Sat Nov 06, 2021 6:42 amSuddenly while I was away most my outposts get -6 Influence this turn (81), -9 next turn and 0 as target
It looks like a Bureaucracy effect related to changing focus. I think there's a condition missing in the scope of the focus-change penalty, so you're getting the effect due wobbly adopting Bureaucracy on turn 79. It's hitting your outposts due to some bugs / missing conditions in the relevant effectsgroup; an additional condition can be added to prevent that. This is partly because the "turns since focus change" variable returns 0 for outposts (despite them having no focus set), which can be seen in the objects list.

This: https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/ ... 6ec1c09b34 should hopefully fix that effect, though it won't fix the fact that a bunch of outposts now have -6 influence, which won't recover to 0 since there is no effect that will modify their current influence...

And this: https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/ ... a305e7ea11 should add an influence growth/decay effect for outposts.

wobbly
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1880
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Seventeenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#100 Post by wobbly »

Yeah ouch. I'm going to be plunged into negative influence, I have 4 outposts. Whats the plan? Are we upgrading? Doing something else?

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5715
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Seventeenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#101 Post by Oberlus »

I have no objection to restart with latest version.

wobbly
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1880
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Seventeenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#102 Post by wobbly »

I'd be fine with that.
Anyway I currently can't turn without either a fix or un-adopting Bureaucracy.

o01eg
Programmer
Posts: 2004
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 5:46 am

Re: Seventeenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#103 Post by o01eg »

I'm fine with restarting this game too. Will the same players ready to play this game from the start on next weekly test build?
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 2024-03-15.b3de094.
Donations're welcome:BTC:bc1q007qldm6eppqcukewtfkfcj0naut9njj7audnm

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

Re: Seventeenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#104 Post by Ophiuchus »

wobbly wrote: Sat Nov 06, 2021 5:32 pm I'd be fine with that.
Anyway I currently can't turn without either a fix or un-adopting Bureaucracy.
Can you manage without bureaucracy? Please un-adopt.
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!

o01eg
Programmer
Posts: 2004
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 5:46 am

Re: Seventeenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#105 Post by o01eg »

Ophiuchus wrote: Sat Nov 06, 2021 6:09 pm
wobbly wrote: Sat Nov 06, 2021 5:32 pm I'd be fine with that.
Anyway I currently can't turn without either a fix or un-adopting Bureaucracy.
Can you manage without bureaucracy? Please un-adopt.
We can restart the game with the next weekly test build where fixes will be applied.
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 2024-03-15.b3de094.
Donations're welcome:BTC:bc1q007qldm6eppqcukewtfkfcj0naut9njj7audnm

Post Reply