Testing Government and Influence

Describe your experience with the latest version of FreeOrion to help us improve it.

Moderator: Oberlus

Forum rules
Always mention the exact version of FreeOrion you are testing.

When reporting an issue regarding the AI, if possible provide the relevant AI log file and a save game file that demonstrates the issue.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Grummel7
Space Dragon
Posts: 335
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:44 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#76 Post by Grummel7 »

Well, this is quite a lot of ideas to comment :o
Generally I like your ideas.

Some random thoughts that occurred to me while reading:
1. So far the second factor is #colonies + #outposts, do you intend to keep it like that?
2. You better concentrate on the cost of one colony. The overall cost is not a good way to discuss it, more colonies also mean more sources of IP. It could however be interesting to compare the cost of an "average" colony with the input of a influence focused colony.
3. If distance from capital is so important, there should probably be a way to relocate the capital. Just think of a player starting at the end of a spiral arm.
4. I my games so far I always ignored bombardment. Now it suddenly gets a completely new meaning: Conquering a system with multiple colonies may totally break your IP balance, so bombing out your opponents colonies may become a sensible strategy until you can actually afford to integrate them into your empire. If this is intended, one problem with this is that except for chaos wave (plus nova bomb and black hole collapser), there is no way to hurt self sustained races.
5. At the moment, Centralization is available from the beginning. I guess you plan to change that, don't you?
6. When balancing the numbers, you should include the original formula as well. In think the intention should be that all three government types allow to handle more colonies than the initial one, provided the colonies are not too far away for Centralization.

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

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#77 Post by Oberlus »

1. I think #outposts should not influence the colonies upkeep, just have a flat IP upkeep (1 IP for starters).
2. Yes, I put in relation influence output per colony and average influence upkeep per colony (for Autarky, all colonies would have the same upkeep, for Distributed Economy and Federation mostly similar, for Centralization quite dependent on distance to capital and the ratio capital pop. over total pop., but an average can be estimated), and the idea is to provide afordable techs/policies to improve upkeep or output when the ratio is around one third of the empire's power set to influence (this is a bit tricky for Centralization, but quite straighforward for the other two).
3. Agree. That should be easy to implement: a capital buiding that upon completion destroys any other capital building finished or under construction, or maybe an influence project that consumes IP instead of a building that consumes PP.
4. Bombardment is rather broken, it needs fixes in the UI/backend (bombard button is quite buggy), and a rework to make it more interesting (IMO, the three types of bombardment weapons make little sense, why can't I just nuke them all?).
5. Centralization should be an early tech rather than unlocked from start.
6. Agree. By adopting the first relevant policy (Centralization/Autarky/Distributed Econ.), the upkeep should allow to expand 4x times (e.g. from 10 colonies to 40, with 33% set to influence in both cases), and a later refinement increase that again by x4 (up to 120 colonies). The policies to increase IP output would increase those thresholds, and the final tech would make possible infinite growth at around 25% set to focus. All numbers subject to changes.

One big doubt I have for quite a while is if those government-type and economy-distribution-type policies should be merged from start:
- Confederation uses decentralized/distributed economy (flat IP production per influence focus, IP upkeep mostly #colonies). A complementary policy to reduce the constant in the upkeep would be Catalaxy (perfect distributed economy). Federation is the upgrade (substitute) of Confederation, to could increase IP flat output.
- Imperium/Dominion uses centralized economy (high pop-based IP production only on capital, IP upkeep mostly jumps_to_capital). The refinement would be Regionalization (allows more centers to keep distance to center under control, and more colonies to set to influence focus). Some other policy, probably earlier/cheaper than Regionalization, could give some unfocused flat bonus to IP, to reduce upkeep, something about oppression/totalitarianism, like imperial detachments, soma, indoctrination (we have a policy with that name but does something different)...
- Autarky barely uses interstellar economy (low pop-based IP production anywhere, IP upkeep only #colonies, no disconnection malus). The refinement to increase IP output could be Galactic Autarchism (interstellar government by the individuals using techy stuff like a networked supermind). No idea what could be the refinement to reduce upkeep, something about self-sufficiency/autonomy.

User avatar
human2
Pupating Mass
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2020 3:22 am
Location: USA, Utah, Salt Lake City

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#78 Post by human2 »

I just started playing the weekly build and I had some questions about this. I briefly scanned this thread but I want to get back to my game so I don't to search it. I tried to understand this mechanism last night but couldn't figure it out. I don't know how to work with IP. It's pretty obvious I can add a policy and that reduces it. And I think as my empire grows that affects it. But I'm not sure exactly what affects it or what the consequences are. I think it affects supply because one of my colonies had poor supply and I couldn't see any reason, other than the -300K IP I had accumulated (by turn 300 or something).

Is there a post that explains how this works?

User avatar
human2
Pupating Mass
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2020 3:22 am
Location: USA, Utah, Salt Lake City

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#79 Post by human2 »

human2 wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 1:40 am Is there a post that explains how this works?
Nevermind, I just found the Influence Pedia entry. That's my first feedback. As a user who doesn't know what it is, there aren't enough right click links to open the Pedia entry to it. I finally found it on a Planet. I hadn't noticed it before. The top fist and the purple dialog bubble nor the Government Policies pane don't have links to the Pedia.

User avatar
human2
Pupating Mass
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2020 3:22 am
Location: USA, Utah, Salt Lake City

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#80 Post by human2 »

I'm playing 0.4.10+ (build 2021-03-23.7c1737b).

I know Influence isn't finished and all that. I just thought I'd add my experience.

I think the idea of influence is cool but it's making the games really long and uneventful. I've set all of my non-exobot species to focus on influence and I'm still -20 per turn. And I've set all of my exobots to supply and the farther reaches of my empire still all have negative stability because of weak capital supply connection. Some list no reason why they are 0 stability. Nothing is growing. I figure this is affecting AI too because the action is really slow. By comparison, when I play with the last stable build, I seem to always be under threat of losing everything to the AI (even though I almost always win).

I have 24 ships (far less than the AI players), the most buildings, 30ish colonies (twice as many as the next AI), about 325 population (2nd place AI is 175ish). I'm on turn 322. I have everything set to random except the AI is the hardest, 6 AI's, I think it's 150 systems.

I played another game last night with the same thing but didn't understand IP at all and it went -300K. The only reason anything happened was because of domesticated mega-fauna. I don't think those ships had a negative IP and they are so much more powerful than anything else now.

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

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#81 Post by Oberlus »

human2 wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 7:38 am I think the idea of influence is cool but it's making the games really long and uneventful. I've set all of my non-exobot species to focus on influence and I'm still -20 per turn.
Not only unfinished, influence is broken because of that, sources and sinks are not balanced.
With current version you should just rush centralization and industrialism policies, maybe some other policy you find useful (a detection one or whatnot), and then ignore influence for the rest of the game (no colonies set to influence).
Some list no reason why they are 0 stability
Another thing that needs work. Depending on the policies you add, some species will get stability bonuses or maluses, but the UI won't tell you what causes it.

User avatar
human2
Pupating Mass
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2020 3:22 am
Location: USA, Utah, Salt Lake City

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#82 Post by human2 »

I just noticed the AI has an exobot planet with a stability bonus of +15 for "Species Exobot" but I don't have that.

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

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#83 Post by Ophiuchus »

human2 wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 8:22 am I just noticed the AI has an exobot planet with a stability bonus of +15 for "Species Exobot" but I don't have that.
There is no inherent stability bonus for exobot i am aware of. Probably they like the planetary focus?
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: Testing Government and Influence

#84 Post by Ophiuchus »

human2 wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 7:38 am I think the idea of influence is cool but it's making the games really long and uneventful. I've set all of my non-exobot species to focus on influence and I'm still -20 per turn.
The main point currently with influence (if you try to keep it stable) is that adding a another planet or outpost to your empire can be a net loss. So there is already a building to abandon an outpost. And there is a building in the pipeline which sets a colony free (i.e. it is unowned afterwards). Currently you can use e.g. evacuation to reduce a colony to outpost status (or move the population over to a better planet). So be selective with what you colonize in the first place and be ready to give stuff up.

If pacing is too slow for you, you can decrease industry and research costs in the game start.
human2 wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 7:38 am I figure this is affecting AI too
yes, AI does not know anything about influence as well (yet)
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: 5715
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#85 Post by Oberlus »

Ophiuchus wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 10:20 am
human2 wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 7:38 am I think the idea of influence is cool but it's making the games really long and uneventful. I've set all of my non-exobot species to focus on influence and I'm still -20 per turn.
The main point currently with influence (if you try to keep it stable) is that adding a another planet or outpost to your empire can be a net loss. So there is already a building to abandon an outpost. And there is a building in the pipeline which sets a colony free (i.e. it is unowned afterwards). Currently you can use e.g. evacuation to reduce a colony to outpost status (or move the population over to a better planet). So be selective with what you colonize in the first place and be ready to give stuff up.

If pacing is too slow for you, you can decrease industry and research costs in the game start.
Ophiuchus, have you played a game until you have 30+ planets?
There is no way at all to keep influence positive. And doing what you suggest means losing the game.

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

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#86 Post by Ophiuchus »

Oberlus wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 10:23 am Ophiuchus, have you played a game until you have 30+ planets?
There is no way at all to keep influence positive. And doing what you suggest means losing the game.
I played a single-player game with positive influence and it went quite well.
Until experimentors sent their fleet, that is.
I never fought them before and was unprepared for that, not sure i could have won then - and in time of such a galactic crisis i would be ok to drop the positive influence roleplay.
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: 5715
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#87 Post by Oberlus »

Ophiuchus wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 10:28 am positive influence roleplay.
:lol:
Yes, currently it is a matter of roleplaying.

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

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#88 Post by Geoff the Medio »

Oberlus wrote: Mon Apr 05, 2021 8:00 amDepending on the policies you add, some species will get stability bonuses or maluses, but the UI won't tell you what causes it.
Yes it does... At least for species liking / disliking a policy:
effect accounting for planet stability highlighting species disliking an empire policy
effect accounting for planet stability highlighting species disliking an empire policy
Policy Stability Effect Accounting.png (73.37 KiB) Viewed 848 times

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

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#89 Post by Oberlus »

I stand corrected.
I remember (on older versions) seeing great red numbers with no explanation. If I see it again (no time for playtesting these days) I'll report it.

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

Re: Testing Government and Influence

#90 Post by Geoff the Medio »

There could be cases where policies have some other, possibly indirect, effect on stability which should be better explained, so do please look out for those.

Post Reply