species effect for like/dislike of fieldtypes
Moderator: Oberlus
species effect for like/dislike of fieldtypes
the discussion came up in a recent pull request over there – what should be the effect when a species likes or dislikes a fieldtype? the example is Exobots, and what happens if they Dislike an Ion Storm.
i propose the following. when a species likes a field type (e.g. accretion disk, nebula, ion storm, etc.) their colonies will get a slight bonus to happiness when inside a field of this type. they will not get a bonus when not inside the field. nor will they get a malus. when a species Dislikes a field type, they will get that same slight bonus when Not inside that type of field. so, in the example, exobots disliking an ion storm, meens they'd get a little happier all the time when not in an ion storm, but then the storm comes and they are a little less happy. edit; i.e. they return to baseline happiness
i propose the following. when a species likes a field type (e.g. accretion disk, nebula, ion storm, etc.) their colonies will get a slight bonus to happiness when inside a field of this type. they will not get a bonus when not inside the field. nor will they get a malus. when a species Dislikes a field type, they will get that same slight bonus when Not inside that type of field. so, in the example, exobots disliking an ion storm, meens they'd get a little happier all the time when not in an ion storm, but then the storm comes and they are a little less happy. edit; i.e. they return to baseline happiness
Re: species effect for like/dislike of fieldtypes
Problem is : what does it bring to the game ?
What is the player's agency about it ?
What is the player's agency about it ?
Re: species effect for like/dislike of fieldtypes
LienRag always says this, it's like his motto.
Re: species effect for like/dislike of fieldtypes
it brings ... well it would bring, that i might keep that line of code in the exobots file where it says they dislike ion storms "cuzz it messes up their eelectronic cyberbrainses" or something like that.
and the agency part - well, field repellors, or shuffeling species with field attracting or repelling effects like the nymnmn or nightsiders around to certain systems at certain times.
edit; or maybe just the opposite would be true for exobots and ion storms, maybe they'd get a kick from it like bender did in futurama ...
and the agency part - well, field repellors, or shuffeling species with field attracting or repelling effects like the nymnmn or nightsiders around to certain systems at certain times.
edit; or maybe just the opposite would be true for exobots and ion storms, maybe they'd get a kick from it like bender did in futurama ...
Re: species effect for like/dislike of fieldtypes
I like this idea. It's interesting flavor.
- The Silent One
- Graphics
- Posts: 1129
- Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2003 8:27 pm
Re: species effect for like/dislike of fieldtypes
I kinda get LienRags point though: sounds like only a minimal gameplay effect, which is random, and not really adding much strategic choice to the game.
If I provided any images, code, scripts or other content here, it's released under GPL 2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0.
Re: species effect for like/dislike of fieldtypes
i think the basic idea is interesting and thematic. this also gives some interaction with the map and as the chances to spawn fields depends on position, we have also have some more diversity in environments.
a boost to individual thinking - some focus-independent research bonus while decreasing stability. if they would pass the threshold to being an "entity" the Trith would maybe start to hear their thoughts (dont think we should implement this though).
if talking fluff though i would guess that ion storms do not have a direct influence on population on a planet (if a planet has a magnetosphere). Psychological effects like dis-/likes are still fine though.
certainly we could apply effects to ships crewed by such a species. so how about +1RP "Ion Storm Creativity" extra research output for exobot crewed ships in an ion storm?
but back to the like/dislike idea of fields. i think likes are easy, just give a stability boost while they are there (and could also depend on the closeness to the center).
I think "normal" dislike for fields is difficult/should be used with care. Having advantages by implementing local changes (e.g. focus switch) for such a temporary effect seems prone to micromanagement. Boosting base stability in exchange for field dislike could keep the game balance, but does not address the micro issues i guess.
One could maybe design a species so that the expected effect is not so strong as to warrant temporary changes(?) - but then again from a gameplay point of view why bother with it if it has no tangible effect.
Another alternative here would be to add some macro way of getting rid of the stability malus. E.g. a "It will pass" influence project (or as a policy), so you can pay in influence/policy.
If we don't come up with something better I suggest a stability boost for a population in liked fields, and exobots liking ion storm and exobot pilots getting research boost in ion storm.
there could be also an effect outside of dis-/like. E.g.
a boost to individual thinking - some focus-independent research bonus while decreasing stability. if they would pass the threshold to being an "entity" the Trith would maybe start to hear their thoughts (dont think we should implement this though).
if talking fluff though i would guess that ion storms do not have a direct influence on population on a planet (if a planet has a magnetosphere). Psychological effects like dis-/likes are still fine though.
certainly we could apply effects to ships crewed by such a species. so how about +1RP "Ion Storm Creativity" extra research output for exobot crewed ships in an ion storm?
but back to the like/dislike idea of fields. i think likes are easy, just give a stability boost while they are there (and could also depend on the closeness to the center).
I think "normal" dislike for fields is difficult/should be used with care. Having advantages by implementing local changes (e.g. focus switch) for such a temporary effect seems prone to micromanagement. Boosting base stability in exchange for field dislike could keep the game balance, but does not address the micro issues i guess.
One could maybe design a species so that the expected effect is not so strong as to warrant temporary changes(?) - but then again from a gameplay point of view why bother with it if it has no tangible effect.
Another alternative here would be to add some macro way of getting rid of the stability malus. E.g. a "It will pass" influence project (or as a policy), so you can pay in influence/policy.
If we don't come up with something better I suggest a stability boost for a population in liked fields, and exobots liking ion storm and exobot pilots getting research boost in ion storm.
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!
Look, ma... four combat bouts!
Re: species effect for like/dislike of fieldtypes
It's a random event for which player has little agency, same player have little agency over what monster nests or specials spawn where. But it's something to do, that gives flavor, and that plays well with PP/RP/repair fields: if you have a species that like fields and build a field attractor there, you can do both milking fields and getting stability boosts.
Oh, and we should have field attractors as well as field repellents (we don't have field repellents, right?).
About like/dislike balance:
Being inside a field is something that happens much less often than being outside of it. That would make species with stability bonus from being outside of fields hard to balance (a "must-have") compared to stability bonus from being inside. So I think bonuses and maluses from like and dislike should apply to both states (outside/inside) or should apply to the same single state (only outside or only inside, and it seems to make more sense only inside).
If both states have modifiers:
- Liking a field: big bonus (+4) when inside, small malus (-1) when outside.
- Disliking a field: big malus (-4) inside, small bonus (+1) outside.
I don't like it. It's still, probably, much better to have species that dislike a field, for the semi-permanent small bonus beats down the mostly-absent big bonus. It's not only unbalanced, it's counter-intuitive: liking a policy or building is a positive trait of a species, allows empire to boost their stability if they go certain route, and disliking a policy or building is a negative trait, forces the empire to avoid certain routes; but with fields, the positive trait is disliking.
I can't seem to find a combination of values for the bonuses and maluses that solves this.
If we don't consider only being inside but also being close for disliking it (the fear and uncertainty about the incomming storm prompts people to seek shelter), probability of being inside vs being outside can be less unbalanced. However I don't like having to guesstimate distances in the UI if we can just trust the field border shown in the map.
So I bet for applying effects only when inside:
- Liking a field: big bonus (+4) when inside.
- Disliking a field: big malus (-4) when inside.
Optionally, small bonus/malus (+/-1) for planets at 2*radius distance from field center (relatively easy to figure out in map without doing actual measures).
Oh, and we should have field attractors as well as field repellents (we don't have field repellents, right?).
About like/dislike balance:
Being inside a field is something that happens much less often than being outside of it. That would make species with stability bonus from being outside of fields hard to balance (a "must-have") compared to stability bonus from being inside. So I think bonuses and maluses from like and dislike should apply to both states (outside/inside) or should apply to the same single state (only outside or only inside, and it seems to make more sense only inside).
If both states have modifiers:
- Liking a field: big bonus (+4) when inside, small malus (-1) when outside.
- Disliking a field: big malus (-4) inside, small bonus (+1) outside.
I don't like it. It's still, probably, much better to have species that dislike a field, for the semi-permanent small bonus beats down the mostly-absent big bonus. It's not only unbalanced, it's counter-intuitive: liking a policy or building is a positive trait of a species, allows empire to boost their stability if they go certain route, and disliking a policy or building is a negative trait, forces the empire to avoid certain routes; but with fields, the positive trait is disliking.
I can't seem to find a combination of values for the bonuses and maluses that solves this.
If we don't consider only being inside but also being close for disliking it (the fear and uncertainty about the incomming storm prompts people to seek shelter), probability of being inside vs being outside can be less unbalanced. However I don't like having to guesstimate distances in the UI if we can just trust the field border shown in the map.
So I bet for applying effects only when inside:
- Liking a field: big bonus (+4) when inside.
- Disliking a field: big malus (-4) when inside.
Optionally, small bonus/malus (+/-1) for planets at 2*radius distance from field center (relatively easy to figure out in map without doing actual measures).
Re: species effect for like/dislike of fieldtypes
that +4 and -1 seems way too high, i just thought some really small bonus like a tenth of that maybe. – i still have not gotten the hang of it, it being the whole governance and influence thing.
and background is: there are generic methods (by geoffthemedio i believe) to render any likes and dislikes and likedby species and disliked by species in every concievable kind of autogenerated pedia page type, so for species liking other species i was criticized when i put such likes in new species definitions because *'has no effect yet' and same for fields and there are for sure more cases yet to be implemented as effects but already showing up in pedia.
.. so. i'd go ahead and make same sort of basic planetary effect macros, keeping it simple, no dependence on distance, just plain in or out, and maybe i can come up with that It'll Pass policy too. i think there are already enough effects on ships by fields. and without having searched again just now, i can tell @Oberlus i'm quite confident i saw some field repellor building or ship part or something of that kind of general sort somewhere while browsing through the code, but can not remember ever coming across it in actual gaming. the field-attracting effect of colonies of species nymnmn has been there for some time without mention in their pedia page and i did not become aware of that effect until after having written their new fluffed out descriptive text. but no problemo, can make specialized field repelling and attracting buildings for some field types as well. not all though. maybe just the moving fields without fixed center points. or maybe not repelling but shielding from the effect of the field.
and background is: there are generic methods (by geoffthemedio i believe) to render any likes and dislikes and likedby species and disliked by species in every concievable kind of autogenerated pedia page type, so for species liking other species i was criticized when i put such likes in new species definitions because *'has no effect yet' and same for fields and there are for sure more cases yet to be implemented as effects but already showing up in pedia.
.. so. i'd go ahead and make same sort of basic planetary effect macros, keeping it simple, no dependence on distance, just plain in or out, and maybe i can come up with that It'll Pass policy too. i think there are already enough effects on ships by fields. and without having searched again just now, i can tell @Oberlus i'm quite confident i saw some field repellor building or ship part or something of that kind of general sort somewhere while browsing through the code, but can not remember ever coming across it in actual gaming. the field-attracting effect of colonies of species nymnmn has been there for some time without mention in their pedia page and i did not become aware of that effect until after having written their new fluffed out descriptive text. but no problemo, can make specialized field repelling and attracting buildings for some field types as well. not all though. maybe just the moving fields without fixed center points. or maybe not repelling but shielding from the effect of the field.
Re: species effect for like/dislike of fieldtypes
Yes, we have the Field "Repellor" (installed dictionary says it should be Repeller):
https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/ ... R.focs.txt
Having the building for the opposite effect would be good for species liking fields.
https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/ ... R.focs.txt
Having the building for the opposite effect would be good for species liking fields.
Re: species effect for like/dislike of fieldtypes
or just add another focus enabled by the same building and maybe needs the It'll Pass to be (more) effective? edit; nope not focus, that was the stargates.
Re: species effect for like/dislike of fieldtypes
If a planet had to be focused on attracting (or repelling) to boost a stability gain from fields, the trait would be less interesting, if any.
Re: species effect for like/dislike of fieldtypes
current field repellor building is way too late in the game and far too expensive, i'd rather introduce some new cheaper buildings, specialized attracter and repeller buildings for some kinds of fields to be buildable at outposts max one per system. smth like 50 PP each and 5 turns, reach as far as current empire detection range,
maybe each their own tech to research for 24 RP and all very early in the tech tree if the empire contains a species with a (dis)like to that type of field, everything twice as expensive if not.
then the It'll Pass policy adoptable for 12 IP per turn as neutralizer for all field related likes and dislikes alike, comes with Subterranean Habitation .. so they can crawl out from under when it has passed.
Code: Select all
BLD_FLD_ATR_ION_STORM,
BLD_FLD_ATR_VOID_RIFT,
BLD_FLD_ATR_MET_BLITZ,
BLD_FLD_REP_ION_STORM,
BLD_FLD_REP_VOID_RIFT,
BLD_FLD_REP_MET_BLITZ,
etc.
then the It'll Pass policy adoptable for 12 IP per turn as neutralizer for all field related likes and dislikes alike, comes with Subterranean Habitation .. so they can crawl out from under when it has passed.
Re: species effect for like/dislike of fieldtypes
Disagree with most of these I'm afraid. Moving fields being late techs is a nicer fit in my opinion. 50 PP is quite cheap compared to a lot of buildings. Not really a fan of individual attractor buildingsstpa wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 8:40 am current field repellor building is way too late in the game and far too expensive, i'd rather introduce some new cheaper buildings, specialized attracter and repeller buildings for some kinds of fields to be buildable at outposts max one per system. smth like 50 PP each and 5 turns, reach as far as current empire detection range,
maybe each their own tech to research for 24 RP and all very early in the tech tree if the empire contains a species with a (dis)like to that type of field, everything twice as expensive if not.Code: Select all
BLD_FLD_ATR_ION_STORM, BLD_FLD_ATR_VOID_RIFT, BLD_FLD_ATR_MET_BLITZ, BLD_FLD_REP_ION_STORM, BLD_FLD_REP_VOID_RIFT, BLD_FLD_REP_MET_BLITZ, etc.
then the It'll Pass policy adoptable for 12 IP per turn as neutralizer for all field related likes and dislikes alike, comes with Subterranean Habitation .. so they can crawl out from under when it has passed.
Re: species effect for like/dislike of fieldtypes
okay how bout not repel/attract - but at least a cheap building as shielding from the dis/likes-effects?