Species balancing

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
Grummel7
Space Dragon
Posts: 335
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:44 pm

Species balancing

#1 Post by Grummel7 »

I already started a thread on Trith, since they are rather special, now let's look at the other player races. Here's a table of player species and how they changed since 0.4.10 (ignoring likes and dislikes):
Species In 0.4.10 New in 0.5
Abaddoni Lithic Metabolism
− Bad Research: 75%
− Bad Defensive Ground Troops: 50%
+ Broad Planet Tolerance: can tolerate more types.
Starts with Subterran Habitation
++ Great Influence: 200%
+ Good Stability: +2.50
Chato Phototrophic Metabolism
++ Great Research: 200%
− Bad Population: 75%
− Bad Defensive Ground Troops: 50%
− Bad Offensive Ground Troops: 50%
− Bad Pilots: Base damage per ship weapon reduced by one level.
+ Broad Planet Tolerance: can tolerate more types.
Nothing
Cray Robotic Metabolism
− Bad Industry: 75%
+ Good Research: 150%
+ Good Defensive Ground Troops: 150%
+ Broad Planet Tolerance: can tolerate more types.
+ Good Influence: 150%
++ Great Stability: +5.00
Artistic
Eaxaw Organic Metabolism, Xenophobic
++ Great Pilots: Base damage per ship weapon increased by two levels.
+ Good Stability: +2.50
Egassem Lithic Metabolism
++ Great Industry: 200%
− Bad Research: 75%
− Bad Population: 75%
+ Great Supply: +2
++ Great Defensive Ground Troops: 200%
++ Great Offensive Ground Troops: 200%
−− Narrow Planet Tolerance: flourishes on fewer types.
− Bad Influence: 75%
− Bad Stability: -2.50
Artistic
Etty Robotic Metabolism
− Bad Industry: 75%
+ Great Supply: +2
+ Good Defensive Ground Troops: 150%
+ Good Pilots: Base damage per ship weapon increased by one level.
− Bad Detection Range: −20 malus
+ Good Planetary Stealth: +20 bonus
Nothing
Fulver Lithic Metabolism, Telepathy
− Bad Research: 75%
+ Good Stockpile: +0.06 per Population
− Bad Defensive Ground Troops: 50%
+ Good Pilots: Base damage per ship weapon increased by one level.
++ Great Maximum Fuel: +1
−− Narrow Planet Tolerance: flourishes on fewer types.
No preferred focus
− Bad Stability: -2.50 (but like Interstellar Lighthouse, which more than makes it up once built)
+ Procognitive Detection: can sense starlane connected planets.
George Lithic Metabolism, Telepathy
+ Good Industry: 150%
− Bad Research: 75%
+ Great Supply: +2
+ Broad Planet Tolerance: can tolerate more types.
Communal Vision: shares visibility within the same species.
+ Good Stability: +2.50
Gysache Organic Metabolism
+ Good Industry: 150%
+ Good Research: 150%
− Bad Defensive Ground Troops: 50%
− Bad Offensive Ground Troops: 50%
− Bad Pilots: Base damage per ship weapon reduced by one level.
− Bad Influence: 75%
Human Organic Metabolism + Good Influence: 150%
Artistic
Laenfa Phototrophic Metabolism, Telepathy
+ Good Stockpile: +0.06 per Population
+ Good Population: 125%
− Bad Defensive Ground Troops: 50%
− Bad Offensive Ground Troops: 50%
++ Great Detection Range: +50 bonus
++ Great Planetary Stealth: +40 bonus
+ Broad Planet Tolerance: can tolerate more types.
− Bad Influence: 75%
Ignore Capital Connection
Replicon Robotic Metabolism
+ Good Industry: 150%
− Bad Research: 75%
+ Good Defensive Ground Troops: 150%
−− Very bad Influence: 50%
Scylior Organic Metabolism
++ Great Research: 200%
+ Good Population: 125%
− Bad Supply: no bonus
− Bad Maximum Fuel: -0.5
Home planet size medium
+ Good Influence: 150%
Artistic
Sly Gaseous Metabolism
++ Great Stockpile: +0.2 per Population
− Bad Research: 75%
−− Very Bad Supply: -1
++ Great Defensive Ground Troops: 200%
− Bad Offensive Ground Troops: 50%
− Bad Pilots: Base damage per ship weapon reduced by one level.
+ Good Detection Range: +25 bonus
++ Great Planetary Stealth: +40 bonus
− Narrow Planet Tolerance: flourishes on fewer types.
+ Live on Gas Giants
+ Refuel on Gas Giants 0.1
+ Good Influence: 150%
Ignore Capital Connection

Ophiuchus already noted that artistic bonus with artisan workshops may be a bit too strong. It's actually worse, since the bonus is also modified by the species influence trait and 3 of the 4 artistic player species also have good influence, so they gain +6. I think it is not really an issue with Egassem, who are having bad influence.

When you look at the right column, Cray stand out first of all, as they got three useful traits. They are almost certainly overpowered right now.

Abadoni, Human and Scylior also got two useful traits.

Scylior have some negative traits, but with great research and good population they were still quite strong. With good influence and artistic they also look overpowered to me right now.

Abadoni and Human may also be a bit on the strong side now, but not so obviously overpowered.

Replicon are definitely too weak right now. Good Defensive Ground Troops is not such a great advantage and now very bad influence really hurts. If we implement good growth, they should be the first to get it, their very name suggests they are good at replicating!

Compared to Replicon, George have the same production traits, but also telepathy, broad tolerance and great supply. And now they also got good stability. They also look a too strong.

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

Re: Species balancing

#2 Post by LienRag »

You forgot to add the Likes and Dislikes, which most of the time makes no sense.
Abaddoni dislikes Gas Giant Generators, it's a huge problem for Production.

Scylior also dislikes Imperial Palace...

I believe that playable species really need a complete pass on their Dislikes, and should keep only a few Policies dislikes, and maybe in very specific cases one or two Building dislikes (Sly disliking GGG makes some sense, even if I don't like personally). Only Natives that are quite powerful should Dislike ordinary buildings.

This may change again if we switch to a distance-based effect for stability penalty due to disliked buildings (which imho is really the way to go), of course.

wobbly
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1873
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Species balancing

#3 Post by wobbly »

Grummel7 wrote: Mon Dec 27, 2021 8:39 pm When you look at the right column, Cray stand out first of all, as they got three useful traits. They are almost certainly overpowered right now.
Cray suffered badly in the 16th multiplayer game though there has been plenty of changes since. They have one of the ugliest dislikes sets:

Code: Select all

likes = ["FOCUS_RESEARCH" "SUCCULENT_BARNACLES_SPECIAL" "SHIMMER_SILK_SPECIAL" "TEMPORAL_ANOMALY_SPECIAL" "MONOPOLE_SPECIAL" "CRYSTALS_SPECIAL" "FORTRESS_SPECIAL" "PLC_ALGORITHMIC_RESEARCH" "PLC_DIVINE_AUTHORITY" "PLC_DIVERSITY" "PLC_CONFEDERATION" "PLC_ARTISAN_WORKSHOPS" "PLC_ALLIED_REPAIR" ]
    dislikes = ["BLD_HYPER_DAM" "BLD_GAS_GIANT_GEN" "BLD_SCANNING_FACILITY" "BLD_SOL_ORB_GEN" "BLD_INDUSTRY_CENTER" "KRAKEN_NEST_SPECIAL" "WORLDTREE_SPECIAL" "HONEYCOMB_SPECIAL" "PLC_CONFORMANCE" "PLC_DESIGN_SIMPLICITY" "PLC_CENTRALIZATION" "PLC_TERROR_SUPPRESSION" ]
at least until you reach enough races for diversity (though maybe you can take it to unlock artisans and then immediately switch). They might be OP or not. Needs a test, I'll do it if you don't have the time.
Grummel7 wrote: Mon Dec 27, 2021 8:39 pm Abadoni and Human may also be a bit on the strong side now, but not so obviously overpowered.
I had human in the 17th multiplayer. They felt strong which I like, but not as strong as Eaxaw felt in the 18th. In both cases the Abadoni went down, though that doesn't necessary mean they aren't good.

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

Re: Species balancing

#4 Post by LienRag »

wobbly wrote: Tue Dec 28, 2021 2:23 pm I had human in the 17th multiplayer. They felt strong which I like, but not as strong as Eaxaw felt in the 18th. In both cases the Abadoni went down, though that doesn't necessary mean they aren't good.
Good Influence is not really useful in a Blitzkrieg, especially not when pitted against Good Pilots....

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

Re: Species balancing

#5 Post by Geoff the Medio »

LienRag wrote: Mon Dec 27, 2021 9:59 pmI believe that playable species really need a complete pass on their Dislikes...
Please do...

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

Re: Species balancing

#6 Post by LienRag »

Geoff the Medio wrote: Thu Jan 06, 2022 11:22 am
LienRag wrote: Mon Dec 27, 2021 9:59 pmI believe that playable species really need a complete pass on their Dislikes...
Please do...

I'd like to, but the first thing needed a is a n/d (n : dislike; d : distance from planet where the building is¹) formula for Dislikes of buildings.

The second thing is a decision of what the end goal is with Stability and Dislikes : what are the things we want the player to get with various levels of Stability ? What do we want the Dislikes to provoke (i.e, a mere inconvenience or an impossibility to play some combinations) and how should the player compensate from them (just luck from Specials ? A heavy-handed Policy ? Something else ?) ?

Imho no playable Species should Dislike fundamental buildings² except for very specific ones (like Sly disliking Gas Giant Generators, so to not make them a no-brainer once one has Sly to populate Gas Giants; or the same Sly disliking the Biolab necessary for my NanoValve coating; or Laenfas disliking an Ocean-only building).

Dislikes of Policies if more subtle since obviously we do want to have playable Species Like and Dislike Policies (as it's where the player has total agency, and having playable Species have no Likes/Dislikes is probably a bit dull) but AFAIK we don't want those Likes and Dislikes entirely drive the player's strategy.

¹ I guess d= square(distance from planet) could also work, but I'd rather have the more direct d=distance.
I understand the usefulness of putting constraints on Species and encouraging diverse gameplay, but I'm not sure what is achieved with forbidding the use of specific buildings by some Species².

² At least not before version 0.9 where the final balance can be constructed, since building interdictions interact with many other things and make each rebalance pass a really difficult chore.

edit : I could make a pass if we agree that save the exception mentioned above (Sly and GGG) no playable Species should Dislike any building (though Disliking Scanning Facilities and/or Lighthouses could be a way to hamper some otherwise too powerful Species, like maybe Eaxaws or Egassem).

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5713
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Species balancing

#7 Post by Oberlus »

You can do the pass and reach consensus after debate and some eventually suggested fixes.

wobbly
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1873
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Species balancing

#8 Post by wobbly »

Disliking fundamental buildings appears to be deliberate design. Not sure whether I agree or disagree with it yet.

I suspect you are making a bigger deal of it then it really is. Disliking scanning facility is a minor inconvenience. Just build a scout instead. Gas giant generator are never on a colony for non-sly, at worst its the insystem penalty and exobots are a thing.

With current balance the only way you'd ever take conformence instead of liberty is annoying dislikes existing.

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

Re: Species balancing

#9 Post by Ophiuchus »

wobbly wrote: Fri Jan 07, 2022 6:42 am Gas giant generator are never on a colony for non-sly, at worst its the insystem penalty and exobots are a thing.
They made for some speed bumps with my George, but it is not prohibitive. I did not build a big empire with influence yet but the scaling looks like it would have worked also when growing bigger. Maybe some terror suppression as antidote.
wobbly wrote: Fri Jan 07, 2022 6:42 am With current balance the only way you'd ever take conformence instead of liberty is annoying dislikes existing.
I guess if you have an Empire with many species where you can't balance likes and dislikes would give reason to conformance?
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
LienRag
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 2146
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Species balancing

#10 Post by LienRag »

wobbly wrote: Fri Jan 07, 2022 6:42 am Disliking fundamental buildings appears to be deliberate design.
For Natives, why not, the player has agency over which Natives he wants to invade.

For playable species, it may work one day (a way to force different gameplays) but imho it's just something that will wreck the balance at each modification of whatever thing it affects or it is affected by.

And for now we don't have that many different building paths, so if a Species can't use a building, it's not really making for a different gameplay, it's mostly blocking a possible path.

wobbly
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1873
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Species balancing

#11 Post by wobbly »

LienRag wrote: Thu Jan 06, 2022 9:32 pm I'd like to, but the first thing needed a is a n/d (n : dislike; d : distance from planet where the building is¹) formula for Dislikes of buildings.
A simpler option would be to make it the same range as xenophobia which I believe is 5 starlanes.

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

Re: Species balancing

#12 Post by LienRag »

wobbly wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 3:45 pm
LienRag wrote: Thu Jan 06, 2022 9:32 pm I'd like to, but the first thing needed a is a n/d (n : dislike; d : distance from planet where the building is¹) formula for Dislikes of buildings.
A simpler option would be to make it the same range as xenophobia which I believe is 5 starlanes.
Not good because then piling the buildings would have no consequences further than 5 starlanes.

With an n/d it still has consequences to build a disliked building, it's just a non-interdicting one if it's far enough (that's why I didn't propose n/d² which is the physical formula of most fields).
A hundred buildings, even a hundred starlanes away, would still mean taking a hit to Stability.

wobbly
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1873
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Species balancing

#13 Post by wobbly »

I'm going over some of the likes/dislikes, mostly focusing on species that are missing policy preferences. A draft of Gysache is over here:

https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/pull/3675

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5713
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Species balancing

#14 Post by Oberlus »

wobbly wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 7:21 am I'm going over some of the likes/dislikes, mostly focusing on species that are missing policy preferences. A draft of Gysache is over here:

https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/pull/3675
George is described as childish. I suggest George likes or ignores Centralization and The Hunt, ignores or dislikes Checkpoints, and dislikes Conformance and Moderation.

wobbly
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1873
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Species balancing

#15 Post by wobbly »

Oberlus wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 7:45 am
wobbly wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 7:21 am I'm going over some of the likes/dislikes, mostly focusing on species that are missing policy preferences. A draft of Gysache is over here:

https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/pull/3675
George is described as childish. I suggest George likes or ignores Centralization and The Hunt, ignores or dislikes Checkpoints, and dislikes Conformance and Moderation.
Updated. Thanks George was giving me trouble as how do you do social structure for an individual? Ended up basing most of them on how George might fit into another empire.

Post Reply