Xenophobic trait issues

Creation, discussion, and balancing of game content such as techs, buildings, ship parts.

Moderators: Oberlus, Committer

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

Xenophobic trait issues

#1 Post by Oberlus »

wobbly wrote: Fri Feb 11, 2022 4:38 pm Oberlus I have a trith colony queued for you if you can find a space. Ironically the ideal spot for xenophobes is allied territory. Maybe o01eg will want to swap his trith planet with someone else so it stops harassing his colonies. I can queue more for others if they let me know.
Hmmm...

So XENOPHOBIC_SELF gives a pop malus depending on nearby different-species planets (regardless of owner) but the malus to industry, research and stability is calculated only based on nearby planets of the same owner. Yikes.

And XENOPHOBIC_OTHER gives a malus of -0.1*pop PP to nearby owned, different-species planets.

So Eaxaw/Trith will only harrass nearby planets of their empire and not unwoned or enemy planets, and will not lose PP/RP/stability from having nearby, different-species enemy planets.

I vote for removing lines
https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/ ... macros#L16
and
https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/ ... macros#L86
so that all maluses apply to all planets regardless of owner.


Back to the game, in order to "exploit" this to avoid all maluses except the population ones, the Trith surrounded by other species has to be of a different empire than the one surrounding it, right?


ThinkSome, what if you have a Trith planet over here and I have one over there? I have a tiny or small radiated very close to my homeworld.
So that we both keep Trith and none has the output and stability maluses.
Or I could do that with o01eg (instead or at the same time). Let me know.

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

Re: Nineteenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#2 Post by wobbly »

Oberlus wrote: Fri Feb 11, 2022 5:02 pm
wobbly wrote: Fri Feb 11, 2022 4:38 pm Oberlus I have a trith colony queued for you if you can find a space. Ironically the ideal spot for xenophobes is allied territory. Maybe o01eg will want to swap his trith planet with someone else so it stops harassing his colonies. I can queue more for others if they let me know.
Hmmm...

So XENOPHOBIC_SELF gives a pop malus depending on nearby different-species planets (regardless of owner) but the malus to industry, research and stability is calculated only based only own nearby planets of the same owner. Yikes.

And XENOPHOBIC_OTHER gives a malus of -0.1*pop PP to nearby owned, different-species planets.

So Eaxaw/Trith will only harrass nearby planets of their empire and not unwoned or enemy planets, and will not lose PP/RP/stability from having nearby, different-species enemy planets.

I vote for removing lines
https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/ ... macros#L16
and
https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/ ... macros#L86
so that all maluses apply to all planets regardless of owner.
I remember it working that way in a version way, way back. Back when weapons weren't auto-updated and ships were stuck at mass driver-x. This was changed for a good reason. I'm not sure whats best here. If you remove the exploit xenophobes become near unworkable in an alliance. If you don't its exploitable and makes no sense.

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

Re: Nineteenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#3 Post by Oberlus »

wobbly wrote: Fri Feb 11, 2022 5:38 pm If you remove the exploit xenophobes become near unworkable in an alliance.
So good for no-alliance games. But I think it is workable, just not allowing interwinned empires, which, BTW, is the way one plays in a free-diplomacy game with only-one-gets-victory, you cannot really trust your temporal allies.
So, I don't see it as a problem. I can't recall any debate on that matter or when was that changed, I'll dig.

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

Re: Nineteenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#4 Post by wobbly »

Oberlus wrote: Fri Feb 11, 2022 5:44 pm
wobbly wrote: Fri Feb 11, 2022 5:38 pm If you remove the exploit xenophobes become near unworkable in an alliance.
So good for no-alliance games. But I think it is workable, just not allowing interwinned empires, which, BTW, is the way one plays in a free-diplomacy game with only-one-gets-victory, you cannot really trust your temporal allies.
So, I don't see it as a problem. I can't recall any debate on that matter or when was that changed, I'll dig.
The issue isn't that it doesn't allow interwinned empires, the issue is a literal buffer of 5 jumps between empires. Have a look at my space in multiplayer, there's only 3 colonies there. The distance between Tejat alpha and Centauri alpha is the minimum distance to avoid xenophobe penalties. Or the distance between Centauri alpha and Kuma beta.

So yeah I'd like to see xenophobes work in a way that makes sense too, but the reality is the necessary gap is not small, 5 jumps in every direction, by all possible paths.

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

Re: Nineteenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#5 Post by Oberlus »

wobbly wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 12:27 pm The issue isn't that it doesn't allow interwinned empires, the issue is a literal buffer of 5 jumps between empires. Have a look at my space in multiplayer, there's only 3 colonies there. The distance between Tejat alpha and Centauri alpha is the minimum distance to avoid xenophobe penalties. Or the distance between Centauri alpha and Kuma beta.

So yeah I'd like to see xenophobes work in a way that makes sense too, but the reality is the necessary gap is not small, 5 jumps in every direction, by all possible paths.
I think it is good (i.e. better than OK) to have species that are harder for diplomatic games. Players not liking it could veto those species in certain multilayer games, but not having such species at all means players interested on that won't be able to do it.
I also like that Xenophobic is a bad trait that can be turned into a good or neutral trait if the harrassment malus applies to foreign empires too.

I also think that that 5-jumps buffer is not too much in a diplomatic game. One can use Exobots in the buffer (if Exobots are overnerfed, then fix that elsewhere). If being Xenophobic in diplomatic multiplayer games is clearly underpowered and an unavoidable liability only "cool" for masochists, then I think it's a problem of balance. Many options, I think:
- For packed up galaxies with neighbours too close from start, one could tailor the buffer to 2 or 3 jumps buffer.
- The self-sustaining trait and the Trith in general are over-nerfed since we got policies and influence in master.
- The xenophobic malus to own planets is maybe too much? (this would affect also Eaxaw).
- The buffer for the malus does not differentiate between distance 0 or 5, we could change that so that harrasment and self maluses are weaker with distance, as we do with the stability bonus/malus of an IRA.

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

Re: Nineteenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#6 Post by LienRag »

Oberlus wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 12:56 pm - The buffer for the malus does not differentiate between distance 0 or 5, we could change that so that harrasment and self maluses are weaker with distance, as we do with the stability bonus/malus of an IRA.
+1

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

Re: Nineteenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#7 Post by wobbly »

The original xenophobe thread:

https://www.freeorion.org/forum/viewtop ... =15&t=7594

Looks like it was v0.4.3 Always intended as an in-empire effect though from what I can see later on there were bugs triggering the effect when it shouldn't be applied.

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

Re: Nineteenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#8 Post by Oberlus »

wobbly wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 1:43 pm The original xenophobe thread:

https://www.freeorion.org/forum/viewtop ... =15&t=7594

Looks like it was v0.4.3 Always intended as an in-empire effect though from what I can see later on there were bugs triggering the effect when it shouldn't be applied.
Haven't finishied the thread (still on page 1 of 4), but I don't mind changing what was intended 9 years ago, if the change is for good.
In the thread, the purpose of Xenophobic is to make multi-species empires harder if you start with a Xenophobic species. I like that but I don't think we must not add also "making peaceful coexistance with nearby neighbours harder".

(Edit: here "harder" means actually "less efficient".)

I acknowledge I'm not playing with Trith in this game so I'm not really on your shoes.

(Edit2: I see in the thread that the Xenophobics effects evolved to balance the overpower of Trith with Conc. Camps. That reassures me all this is a problem of balance. It also makes me think that I really dislike how Conc. Camps worked before, and I am not sure as of now with policies, still didn't use it.)

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

Re: Nineteenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#9 Post by wobbly »

Yeah for the record I'm not saying its a bad idea to change xeno to affecting other empires. Just saying that its problematic and needs some thought on how exactly it works. I have had xenophobes both this game and last (Eaxaw). The xenophobe range is quite large. There's also the question of whether you should be able to harass enemy planets that you don't even have supply to (at least for non-psychic Eaxaw).

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

Re: Nineteenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#10 Post by wobbly »

One last comment, and then maybe move the discussion to its own thread. The biggest problem with xenophobe mechanics is that it very easily end up in the situation where its optimal to have only 1 xenophobe planet. Sure your capital is Eawax, but you're not an Eawax empire, because Eawax is the 1 colony type giving you problems. All other colonies you can build are perfectly fine.

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

Re: Nineteenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#11 Post by Oberlus »

Suggestion for distance-based xenophobic maluses:
MAX_MALUS / (2^distance)
So the denominators depending on distance are:
- 0 -> 1 (100% of MAX_MALUS)
- 1 -> 2 (50%)
- 2 -> 5 (25%)
- 3 -> 10 (12.5%)
- 4 -> 17 (6.25 %)
- 5 -> 26 (3.125%)

Then, you'll need 32 different-species planets at distance 5 to get the same malus than having a single different-species planet in the same system. Letting yourself colonize at 3 distance from other 4 planets of different species you'd get 50% of whatever we put as MAX_MALUS. Do you think that would be easier to balance than current system?


Edit: Another option
MAX_MALUS / (1 + distance)
- 0 -> 1 (100% of MAX_MALUS)
- 1 -> 2 (50%)
- 2 -> 3 (33%)
- 3 -> 4 (25%)
- 4 -> 5 (20 %)
- 5 -> 6 (16.667%)



wobbly wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 2:00 pm There's also the question of whether you should be able to harass enemy planets that you don't even have supply to (at least for non-psychic Eaxaw).
I'd like to have different like/dislike and xenophobia effects depending on traits like telepathy or hive-mind (if that ever gets into the game). Is another topic.
Regarding supply, one malus for xenophobic could be to have less supply if close to other species. Could be good, maybe.
Regarding harrassment, is it OK to allow harrasment of foreign planets that are guarded by warships? How is this harrassment done when concerning foreign/not-dominated planets? Hmmm...

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

Re: Nineteenth game on the multiplayer slow game server

#12 Post by LienRag »

wobbly wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 2:00 pm There's also the question of whether you should be able to harass enemy planets that you don't even have supply to (at least for non-psychic Eaxaw).
Good question, and I guess that the answer is clearly "no".

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

Re: Xenophobic trait issues

#13 Post by Grummel7 »

Well, consider today's internet and social networks.
You do not need physical access to harass someone... :wink:

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

Re: Xenophobic trait issues

#14 Post by wobbly »

An option to consider is getting rid of the xenophobic harassment part. The stability penalty has effects that weren't there in previous versions.

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

Re: Xenophobic trait issues

#15 Post by Oberlus »

And save the harassment effect for a policy.
Seems good.

Post Reply