It would be useful if it makes cheaper the other seven, more expensive bombardment techs.
Xenophobic trait issues
Moderators: Oberlus, Committer
Re: Xenophobic trait issues
Looks like MP21, Turn 131 (?), Daybreak has left Ophiuchus quite a cookoo's egg!
Doesn't seem like racial purity resentment should apply to empire that conquered capital of racial purity species that recently deadopted the policy
Doesn't seem like racial purity resentment should apply to empire that conquered capital of racial purity species that recently deadopted the policy
Re: Xenophobic trait issues
Oh, really interesting. I didn't consider this scenario.
Racial Purity (RaP) empire A losses capital to non-RaP empire B.
The special that keeps the racial resentment going on after de-adopting RaP should still be there for A even after losing the capital (so I guess the special must be placed in every owned planet, not only capital), and be removed from those planets on conquest.
I'll make a PR hopefully today if no one beats me to it.
Edit: but a xenophobic population that loses its Capital RaP species should be angry for a while even if they where conquered. But they already lost the +5 from RaP and is now maybe affected by xenophobic frenzy from nearby planets. So maybe there is no need for an extra special pissing them off after being stripped from their privileged status.
Re: Xenophobic trait issues
It may be a balance problem, but fluff-wise it's fine, it actually adds flavor.
Re: Xenophobic trait issues
Not sure. Shoudl scrapping one's palace be a legit way to avoid the temporal malus from having adopted Racial Purity?
The loses from not having the palace are already bad enough, but maybe there could be situations in which this could be exploited a bit to "scape" from Racial Purity's intended toll.
Since it also makes sense fluff-wise that the "racial resentment" is carried over to the palace-less empire, I'm inclined to change this.
Re: Xenophobic trait issues
Don't know if I was clear ; I meant that fluff-wise, the way it works now (racial resentment after conquest) is fine.
Re: Xenophobic trait issues
Oh, right. I didn't notice it (it showed the Special only on the Eaxaw capital, but the malus is on every planet). So you're right, it's completely broken.
But that newly conquered planets would have the resentment when they used to be the superior race would be fitting.
But that newly conquered planets would have the resentment when they used to be the superior race would be fitting.
Re: Xenophobic trait issues
New player here, been playing 4.10 version, only solo play against AI, usually win against the AI on manical aggression.
When I first played with xenophobic species I assumed that the industry penalty of course would apply to enemy empires as well. The fact that it doesn't make xenophobic a pure draw back which seems a lot less interesting gameplay wise.
In fact I think making the effect stronger on other empires would both make sense fluff wise (ie the empire encourages/supports the xenophobic tendencies of its population against enemies but tries to suppress/ migitate it against their own) and would allow using it strategically against enemies. If you can't conquer some enemy planets settle some xenophobics next to them.
The pedia entry on xenophobics doesn't give any numbers on how this works exactly. I learned about the 5 starlane jump range from reading this thread. That seems way too far to me, 2 or 3 jumps or a comparable distance in uu range should suffice and be mentioned in the pedia. If you just leave the galaxy generation parameters in the default setting, 5 jumps means there is essentially no point free of influence. If the magnitude of the industry/ tech effect is just 0.05 per pop (possibly 0.10 per pop for enemy empires) similar to various techs that would also make it much easier to understand.
I don't know if xenophobic natives exist, I haven't encountered any but a species with xenophobic, no colonies and some significant research and industry bonus should also be interesting strategically. Whether you want to keep them or eradicate them depends on how many surrounding planets you have settled.
When I first played with xenophobic species I assumed that the industry penalty of course would apply to enemy empires as well. The fact that it doesn't make xenophobic a pure draw back which seems a lot less interesting gameplay wise.
In fact I think making the effect stronger on other empires would both make sense fluff wise (ie the empire encourages/supports the xenophobic tendencies of its population against enemies but tries to suppress/ migitate it against their own) and would allow using it strategically against enemies. If you can't conquer some enemy planets settle some xenophobics next to them.
The pedia entry on xenophobics doesn't give any numbers on how this works exactly. I learned about the 5 starlane jump range from reading this thread. That seems way too far to me, 2 or 3 jumps or a comparable distance in uu range should suffice and be mentioned in the pedia. If you just leave the galaxy generation parameters in the default setting, 5 jumps means there is essentially no point free of influence. If the magnitude of the industry/ tech effect is just 0.05 per pop (possibly 0.10 per pop for enemy empires) similar to various techs that would also make it much easier to understand.
I don't know if xenophobic natives exist, I haven't encountered any but a species with xenophobic, no colonies and some significant research and industry bonus should also be interesting strategically. Whether you want to keep them or eradicate them depends on how many surrounding planets you have settled.
Re: Xenophobic trait issues
Pull request to remove ancient guardians from all xenophobic maluses.Oberlus wrote: ↑Thu Oct 27, 2022 11:16 am Maybe create a new tag for non-sentient species: the ancient guardians if we like (or some types of ancient guardians if someone develops more than one), exobots, beige goo and anything else we like.
Then exclude species with that tag from the Trith pop malus.
https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/pull/4382
Re: Xenophobic trait issues
i somehow did not proceed with the implementation in november and thought it was actually merged.
there are two parts in that PR:
part one: a generic implementation of removing the xenophobic troubles caused by ancient guardians using a tag on the species (LOW_BRAINPOWER), which makes it easy to exclude further species (currently exobot and ancient guardians).
part two: a linear scaling of population malus (only applies to Trith).
Before, the maximum malus was reducing target population down to between 60% (with infinite number of xeno colonies) and 92% (a single xeno colony in range).
This malus was also capped at 3*habitable size (which is the sulf-sustaining bonus). So Trith population was never worse than a population without any growth special.
with the new solution accumulates malus for each planet with sentient population based on the distance
• 4 jumps: -0.2 per xenophobic habitable size per xeno planet
• 3 jumps: -0.4 per xenophobic habitable size per xeno planet
• 2 jumps: -0.6 per xenophobic habitable size per xeno planet
• 1 jumps: -0.8 per xenophobic habitable size per xeno planet
• In same system: -1.0 per xenophobic habitable size per xeno planet
The malus maxes out again at 3*habitable size. So having a xeno colony in the same system, one xeno colony two jumps away and one three jumps away means for a Trith colony that it only gets the equivalent of one growth special.
Please comment on balance and if this is for 0.5 or not. (I think part one could/should go into 0.5).
there are two parts in that PR:
part one: a generic implementation of removing the xenophobic troubles caused by ancient guardians using a tag on the species (LOW_BRAINPOWER), which makes it easy to exclude further species (currently exobot and ancient guardians).
part two: a linear scaling of population malus (only applies to Trith).
Before, the maximum malus was reducing target population down to between 60% (with infinite number of xeno colonies) and 92% (a single xeno colony in range).
This malus was also capped at 3*habitable size (which is the sulf-sustaining bonus). So Trith population was never worse than a population without any growth special.
with the new solution accumulates malus for each planet with sentient population based on the distance
• 4 jumps: -0.2 per xenophobic habitable size per xeno planet
• 3 jumps: -0.4 per xenophobic habitable size per xeno planet
• 2 jumps: -0.6 per xenophobic habitable size per xeno planet
• 1 jumps: -0.8 per xenophobic habitable size per xeno planet
• In same system: -1.0 per xenophobic habitable size per xeno planet
The malus maxes out again at 3*habitable size. So having a xeno colony in the same system, one xeno colony two jumps away and one three jumps away means for a Trith colony that it only gets the equivalent of one growth special.
Please comment on balance and if this is for 0.5 or not. (I think part one could/should go into 0.5).
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: Xenophobic trait issues
I think both parts should go into 0.5.
Re: Xenophobic trait issues
I'd also like to see both in. Anything that puts Trith in a more playable state for release seems a bonus.
Re: Xenophobic trait issues
ready for review. https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/pull/4310
can somebody jump in and playtest the PR and give feedback?
edit: i playtested a bit so ok to merge from my side
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: Xenophobic trait issues
There is some sort of bug that causes the xenophobic stability penalties to fluctuate on Trith that I'm not noticing on Eawax. Likely to do with Trith's telepathic planet vision. I haven't quite narrowed down the exact circumstances.