Monsters

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

Moderators: Oberlus, Committer

Message
Author
wobbly
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1877
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Monsters

#16 Post by wobbly »

Daybreak wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 7:25 pm
wobbly wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 7:24 am Current stealth is 25. Current minimum distance is not within 2 jumps of capital.

Suggested change: stealth = 45, not within 4 jumps.
+1 as well, although why not within 8 jumps. To me, not within 4 jumps would still be very close.
It's actually very hard to place anything at that distance as its more then half the distance between empires and their neighbours, and it can't be within 8 of your neighbours either.

Daybreak
Vacuum Dragon
Posts: 641
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2018 10:14 pm

Re: Monsters

#17 Post by Daybreak »

wobbly wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 7:36 pm
Daybreak wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 7:25 pm
wobbly wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 7:24 am Current stealth is 25. Current minimum distance is not within 2 jumps of capital.

Suggested change: stealth = 45, not within 4 jumps.
+1 as well, although why not within 8 jumps. To me, not within 4 jumps would still be very close.
It's actually very hard to place anything at that distance as its more then half the distance between empires and their neighbours, and it can't be within 8 of your neighbours either.
Would that not push it more towards the middle, making it easier for both sides to capture it?

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5714
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Monsters

#18 Post by Oberlus »

https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/ ... ocs.txt#L9

Isn't the code already trying to not place monster nests closer than 4 jumps?

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

Re: Monsters

#19 Post by LienRag »

Daybreak wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 8:21 pm Would that not push it more towards the middle, making it easier for both sides to capture it?
The code doesn't "decide to put a number of Kraken nests" and then "try to put them somewhere on the map"¹.
It goes through all systems and decide to put (or not) a Kraken nest on them.
So if you reduce the number of systems where a Kraken Nest can be, you have a good chance to not have any nest at all (if there is any system in the Galaxy that is 8 jumps from all starting positions, lest has a Gas Giant on it) .
Juggernaut Nests have a condition of 6 jumps IIRC, and they're not frequent on small maps.


¹ Maybe it should, actually. Not sure how such mechanisms would interact with each other, though.

Daybreak
Vacuum Dragon
Posts: 641
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2018 10:14 pm

Re: Monsters

#20 Post by Daybreak »

LienRag wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 10:38 pm
Daybreak wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 8:21 pm Would that not push it more towards the middle, making it easier for both sides to capture it?
The code doesn't "decide to put a number of Kraken nests" and then "try to put them somewhere on the map"¹.
It goes through all systems and decide to put (or not) a Kraken nest on them.
So if you reduce the number of systems where a Kraken Nest can be, you have a good chance to not have any nest at all (if there is any system in the Galaxy that is 8 jumps from all starting positions, lest has a Gas Giant on it) .
Juggernaut Nests have a condition of 6 jumps IIRC, and they're not frequent on small maps.


¹ Maybe it should, actually. Not sure how such mechanisms would interact with each other, though.
I was talking about the Kraken in the Ice/White Kraken. Not sure what planet that requires, or if it matters.

In regards to what you are saying, maybe the number of players, AI or human, should dictate distance of Kraken nests; ie ≥10 players: 4 distance, ≥7 players: 6 distance, <7 players: 8 distance.

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

Re: Monsters

#21 Post by LienRag »

It's not the number of players but the numbers of systems per player that matters, but you are right, the problem wasn't the Kraken in the Ice but that it was too close to o01eg's Homeworld, which occurred because we played on a cramped Galaxy;
And we played on a cramped Galaxy because Oberlus is right that endgame sucks the way the game is now.

So solving the problem needs imho to think out of the Box rather than to nerf a White Kraken that is perfectly fine in most circumstances.

Ophiuchus wrote: Wed Dec 08, 2021 10:54 pm
LienRag wrote: Wed Dec 08, 2021 7:07 pm
LienRag wrote: Sun Aug 22, 2021 7:05 pm Spawnlimit should be something like a "number of players" (or "number of players"/2 or /n) with conditions of distance from any Homeworld (again, to limit luck factor).
Is that technically possible, by the way ?
Parser does not support valuerefs there, so currently not.

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

Re: Monsters

#22 Post by Ophiuchus »

Daybreak wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 7:25 pm
wobbly wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 7:24 am Current stealth is 25. Current minimum distance is not within 2 jumps of capital.

Suggested change: stealth = 45, not within 4 jumps.
+1 as well, although why not within 8 jumps. To me, not within 4 jumps would still be very close.
8 jumps means that it basically never spawns with normal settings . E.g. count how many planets are in the current slow game which are not in 8-jump distance of any capital (e.g. the distance between capitals should be at least ~12 to allow spawning at all). Higher jump count probably has the intention of putting it in contested area, but that is mostly impossible to do right with the spawn specials mechanic.
It will also be totally wrong for an fixed-allies game, because AFAIK that does not exist at the time specials are spawn. one could try to add the special later on, like when a system gets detected by at least two enemies.

Not within 4 jumps may be reasonable, removing the special for smaller maps.

it should be detectable with the two detection techs + one of the detection policies
and i think it is ok to be detectable with one detection tech + two detection policies.

so stealth 45 is fine to me.
LienRag wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 11:30 pm So solving the problem needs imho to think out of the Box rather than to nerf a White Kraken that is perfectly fine in most circumstances.
also a good solution
Ophiuchus wrote: Wed Dec 08, 2021 10:54 pm
LienRag wrote: Wed Dec 08, 2021 7:07 pm Is that technically possible, by the way ?
Parser does not support valuerefs there, so currently not.
also not sure in what state the universe exists at time of spawning specials, so supporting valuerefs there might not help at all
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: 2148
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Monsters

#23 Post by LienRag »

wobbly wrote: Sun Oct 02, 2022 6:57 am Kraken in the Ice/White Kraken. I got the white kraken down on turn 64, as I took my time. However I had the detection strength to see it by turn 9, it was unguarded 3 jumps from my capital and it has enough fuel range that I could of basically just parked it on o01eg's capital and said "try and play now".
Edit: For reference the earliest a kraken can appear is turn 30, the earliest a great kraken can appear is turn 60.
Oberlus wrote: Sun Oct 02, 2022 7:57 am Yeah. kraken in the Ice unguarded is quite bad for balance (unless every player has one near his HW).
As I wrote above, I disagree with that.
The real problem was the White Kraken's proximity to Wobbly and o01eg's Homeworld.
Oberlus once wrote about how the game is about making bets and seeing them pay off or not, and I agree with him that as long as they are informed bets, it's the way things should be.

Wobbly is Chato, he played his research towards stealth/detection, he got rewarded by a powerful military unit that in no way is uncounterable in non-cramped Galaxies. If it wasn't so close to both Homeworlds, it would have made him able to go on the offense (so an interesting turn of events for a Chato player) but certainly not invincible.

So, again, there's nothing wrong with the Kraken in the Ice in a non-cramped Galaxy. And its stealth should stay at 25 imho, that's how it works best.
But yes, pushing it 4 jumps away from starting positions is necessary - and maybe to 5 or 6 jumps if we're okay with removing it entirely in most small/cramped Galaxies settings.

Also, it may be interesting to generate a sitrep the first time a Kraken in the Ice is detected ("Xenoarcheologists in the galaxy are excited by the rumor that remains of an unkown paleologic space monsters have been spotted") so as to both let other prepares for defense and make the unearthing of the Kraken a real race between players.


Oberlus wrote: Sun Oct 02, 2022 7:57 am The current state in which if you rush to it you can get a great advantage in combat is annoying in MP.

It's not always fair I reckon, but the idea that "if you rush you get a great advantage" is the core concept of nests. It became a no-brainer (which is bad, I agree) when the snowballing was nerfed, because now there is no real penalty to rushing them.
So finding a new balance is useful, but it should not remove the interest of settling monster nests.
BTW you were the one who changed the monster probablities because you wanted more nest, IIRC ?


Oberlus wrote: Sun Oct 02, 2022 7:57 am Kraken nests are also quite of a problem when they are not distrubuted uniformly (and they aren't).
You're right, this game was quite unfair to you. If we win it'll probably because of our luck at start with Kraken nests, that's true.
But that's the general problem of the randomness of the game (remember that last game you got Death Rays early because of Ancient Ruins that none of us could have access to - it turned out to not be entirely game-breaking, but it certainly could have been) and the answer is not to nerf all Specials into irrelevance (the way Snowflakes have been when their Detection Range was nerfed ; now by the time one has a few snowflakes, he most of the time already has better scouts).

Imho we need specific Galaxy shapes for multi-player, like "Donut" or "bulbic spiral" or whatever : shapes were there would be a space for the players (in the ring of the donut, or the arms or the spiral) and a space for monsters and Specials in the center.
So in the space for the players (let's call it userspace) there would be non-unique and non-balance-breaking Specials, and all the really powerful Specials would be in the center (since the Center is where Galaxies are formed, so act as a galaxy kernel, let's call it kernelspace).
That means that players would have a relatively equivalent chance of getting any Special, and at least an opportunity of denying other players access to these Specials. So, much more skill than luck involved in getting the right Special.

Note that's possible (and should be interesting) to have the kernelspace have different System and Starlane density than the userspace.

There could also be a "protection ring" around the kernelspace ; let's say three systems with few Starlanes between them and no planets.
Inside kernelspace here there be dragons : litteral dragons even (of the vacuum variety).


wobbly wrote: Sun Oct 02, 2022 8:10 am Certainly scriptable. 1 effect group for unowned, one for owned. Whether its cleanest, I'm unsure, but I wouldn't be bothered if it was right for balance reasons.
Daybreak wrote: Sun Oct 02, 2022 11:28 am It was not just that either - it was also how many were produced under ownership - so far the other team have at least 7 produced, and we had 1.
Daybreak wrote: Sun Oct 02, 2022 9:58 pm
Oberlus wrote: Sun Oct 02, 2022 1:06 pm
Daybreak wrote: Sun Oct 02, 2022 11:28 am I believe we need an option to turn off nests and now white kraken as well in MP games, without affecting the monster setting.
I think we need to find a good balance for nests so that there is no need to remove them from the game (that would be sad).
I think that a MP game is people vs people, and anything that detracts from that can spoil the game.
(...)
But at end of the day, are the white Kraken and normal Krakens really needed or should they interfere in a people MP game. Not saying we can't have them, but it would be good to have the option.

Agreed to all of the above : it's good to have the option, it's better to have balanced nests than to have to remove them entirely, MP game is PvP and powerful environment can spoil the game.
Note that it doesn't necessarily spoil the game, but the more random it is, the funnier it is and the more likely it is to be unbalanced. So options to tune the "fun/balance" ratio are important to allow the game to adapt to different players' preferences.



Grummel7 wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 8:52 am Maturing could be changed easily: The chance could depend on the age of the monster. E.g. it cannot mature in its first 5 turns, then the chance becomes 2% in turn 6, increased by 2% each turn. Of course maturing still requires the monster to be in a suitable location. It also makes sense that older monster have a better chance to mature.
Spawning is a bit trickier, but I guess adding an invisible special to the nest planet could give the nest some memory. So the actual spawning change would depend on the age of that special and it is replaced whenever a monster spawns.

The Special for spawning is interesting indeed.
But for maturing, the present formula already works like that.



Oberlus wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 8:08 am Another factor to consider is the huge structure these beasts have when they mature.
That's the point of Krakens/Great Krakens, what makes them distinctive and interesting even later in the game. This shouldn't change imho. It's also what people would expect of "Krakens".
I mean, now that they got better against fighters, maybe a small structure nerf would be balancing, but emphasis on "small".




Oberlus wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 8:08 am Regarding monster spawning rate from nests, the problem I see is that having a per-turn chance (0.05 IIRC) of creating one monster can produce great luck differences. I once got 3 krakens in 5 turns from the same nest (chances were 11 in a million), and I often get no krakens in 20 turns in a row (chances are 36%, or 64% of getting at least one kraken every 20 turns), and I remember once not getting a single kraken from two nests for more than 30 turns.
I think it would be easier to balance krakens (and other monsters) if their spawning rate could be more controlled. If average/expected spawning rate is around (say) one kraken every 16 turns, then nests should not spawn more than one kraken every 8 turns and no less than one kraken every 32.
Daybreak wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 7:25 pm
Oberlus wrote: Mon Oct 03, 2022 8:08 am I think it would be easier to balance krakens (and other monsters) if their spawning rate could be more controlled. If average/expected spawning rate is around (say) one kraken every 16 turns, then nests should not spawn more than one kraken every 8 turns and no less than one kraken every 32.
+1
I think this is definitely better than increasing unowned spawning and decreasing owned spawning.

However I would like to see this only applied to owned spawning, and keep current spawning rates for unowned, to still make it a little harder to capture the kraken nest.

Note that I have a full proposal about Tamed Monsters...

But apart from that, what I have always found a flaw in the system is how we have so many technologies that are related to Mega-Fauna while none of them except the first one actually have consequences on Megafauna management...
So maybe allow maturation of Larval Krakens and Small Juggernauts only if the player has MegaFauna Endocrine System ? Or better, give a very low chance of maturing without it, expand it with LifeCycle Manipulation and expand it to full strength with MegaFauna Endocrine System ?
And of Krakens and Juggernauts with MegaFauna Ecology ?

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5714
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Monsters

#24 Post by Oberlus »

LienRag wrote: Thu Oct 06, 2022 11:41 pm BTW you were the one who changed the monster probablities because you wanted more nest, IIRC ?
No, you don't RC. I changed it so that high monsters had more and medium monsters had less chances, because the difference between low and medium was too big and high wasn't really a challenge when playing SP.
BTW, I am not commenting on having too much or too little nests, but on the advantage that they can give the owner when their contraries doesn't have it. If the advantage from having a nest is even better than invading an undefended, great industry natives, huge planet close to your homeworld, then getting kraken nests nearby at start is like the BEST advantage you can have in a game.

LienRag wrote: Thu Oct 06, 2022 11:41 pm
Oberlus wrote: Sun Oct 02, 2022 7:57 am The current state in which if you rush to it you can get a great advantage in combat is annoying in MP.
I was referring to kraken nests.
If you don't see a balance problem in someone getting for free an unconstant-but-sizeable amount of slow-but-sturdy ships that can bring to their knees all early ship designs, that's interesting. Not arguing about it, I know it's a balance problem.



LienRag wrote: Thu Oct 06, 2022 11:41 pmYou're right, this game was quite unfair to you.
Who cares? I'm talking about balance for everyone's games.


LienRag wrote: Thu Oct 06, 2022 11:41 pmIf we win it'll probably because of our luck at start with Kraken nests, that's true.
Interesting.
Just to be sure "luck" is not "strategy/decisions" here, right? It's rhetorical.


LienRag wrote: Thu Oct 06, 2022 11:41 pmBut that's the general problem of the randomness of the game
Also, don't compare getting DR at turn 80 or 100 when empires can have big stacks of plasma weapons, with getting a big stack of krakens plus your share of built ships when your opponents has the corresponding share of built ships and nothing else. It's like pitching three players against one. Really flawed thinking.

Also, no one is suggesting to nerf specials into irrelevance. Gosh, LR, always the same discussion with you.
When someone suggests something new, you always say "this needs to be carefully balanced/thought/designed" plus "this needs careful thinking".
But when someone starts rebalancing something, you always have this answers as if balance is something you can't touch and unbalancing luck factors is something one must tame.

Summing up, LienRag, I disagree with every point in your post.

wobbly
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1877
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Monsters

#25 Post by wobbly »

Taking a look larval -> kraken and kraken -> great is same probability. So idea, add extra growth stage:

larval -> young -> adult -> great

Lower probabilities at older stages?

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

Re: Monsters

#26 Post by Ophiuchus »

wobbly wrote: Fri Oct 07, 2022 7:15 am Taking a look larval -> kraken and kraken -> great is same probability. So idea, add extra growth stage:

larval -> young -> adult -> great

Lower probabilities at older stages?
dont know about probabilites, but having less big leaps (e.g. via growth stage) makes certainly sense.

could also add structure growth bonus like the organic ship line has - so we could nerf the initial version of krakens and great krakens and give some benefit if one has bad luck with maturing.

also there could be some possibility a great kraken gets old and more fragile (so either another growth stage or via structure decrease when getting older) and maybe die of old age. that would also help with high number of monsters, naturally removing some instead of simply adding more.
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!

Daybreak
Vacuum Dragon
Posts: 641
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2018 10:14 pm

Re: Monsters

#27 Post by Daybreak »

LienRag wrote: Thu Oct 06, 2022 11:41 pm
Daybreak wrote: Sun Oct 02, 2022 9:58 pm
Oberlus wrote: Sun Oct 02, 2022 1:06 pm
I think we need to find a good balance for nests so that there is no need to remove them from the game (that would be sad).
I think that a MP game is people vs people, and anything that detracts from that can spoil the game.
Note that it doesn't necessarily spoil the game, but the more random it is, the funnier it is and the more likely it is to be unbalanced. So options to tune the "fun/balance" ratio are important to allow the game to adapt to different players' preferences.
Doesn't it? - Ever played n SP game and things are tight while you battle a couple of strong AI's only to find an experimentor bases starts spawning monsters, that take out your enemy = A spoiled game

The point is you want a strong or at least strong enemy to make the game interesting, and Krakens don't have to be part of that. However, if you are able to beat them down because you got Krakens early, then the game is essentially spoilt. I am not saying a side with many krakens cant lose, but definitely they have an advantage.

We could probably discuss this until the cows come home, so -


Here is another idea.

In multiplayer game have an option that native Krakens are spawned every say 16 turns or 20, or whatever number we feel like. OR I suppose just elave it as it is.

However there is an option in the game or server, that once ticked, you cant capture monster nests, EVER.

It does not totally solve all the problems, like, if a weak empire is close to a nest, but with team mates it should be ok, and
* no advantage to either side
* Krakens are still around to cause some havoc

wobbly
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1877
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Monsters

#28 Post by wobbly »

Daybreak wrote: Fri Oct 07, 2022 9:12 am snip
Not exactly clear on what you are suggesting here. A game option to not be able to outpost a nest? (perhaps you can outpost them with the nest eradicator tech no one ever uses?)
Ophiuchus wrote: Fri Oct 07, 2022 7:34 am
wobbly wrote: Fri Oct 07, 2022 7:15 am Taking a look larval -> kraken and kraken -> great is same probability. So idea, add extra growth stage:

larval -> young -> adult -> great

Lower probabilities at older stages?
dont know about probabilites, but having less big leaps (e.g. via growth stage) makes certainly sense.

could also add structure growth bonus like the organic ship line has - so we could nerf the initial version of krakens and great krakens and give some benefit if one has bad luck with maturing.

also there could be some possibility a great kraken gets old and more fragile (so either another growth stage or via structure decrease when getting older) and maybe die of old age. that would also help with high number of monsters, naturally removing some instead of simply adding more.
Yeah I'm not sure either. Thing is they take approximately 20 turns to evolve, so just adding an extra stage is likely the same problem, just 20 turns later. So either less of them have to spawn, or they have to grow slower.

Looking at it a bit there is a logic behind having a different growth rate for owned compared to unowned. Wild kraken wander around rather then sitting on a gas giant maturing, so in practice the probability of a wild kraken maturing is much lower.

Probably someone should count the number of nests that spawned in the LienRag/Ophiuchus portion of the map and then come up with a figure for how many and what size (and at what turn) is reasonable for game balance.

wobbly
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 1877
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Monsters

#29 Post by wobbly »

LienRag wrote: Thu Oct 06, 2022 11:41 pm (the way Snowflakes have been when their Detection Range was nerfed ; now by the time one has a few snowflakes, he most of the time already has better scouts).
This was likely an over nerf. I've been meaning to change them to a midway point between where they were and where they are now, and just forgetting about it.

User avatar
Oberlus
Cosmic Dragon
Posts: 5714
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Monsters

#30 Post by Oberlus »

wobbly wrote: Fri Oct 07, 2022 12:39 pm So either less of them have to spawn, or they have to grow slower.
I think best option is make them grow slower. I think of changing the maturing effect so that instead of jumping from "max health of this stage" to "max health of next stage", the new stage departs from the health of the previous stage and grows from there each turn (much like the target health of living organic ships increases over time).
That way, getting an early kraken is not that bad: it still needs lots of time to become the huge monster it can be.

wobbly wrote: Fri Oct 07, 2022 12:39 pm Looking at it a bit there is a logic behind having a different growth rate for owned compared to unowned. Wild kraken wander around rather then sitting on a gas giant maturing, so in practice the probability of a wild kraken maturing is much lower.

Probably someone should count the number of nests that spawned in the LienRag/Ophiuchus portion of the map and then come up with a figure for how many and what size (and at what turn) is reasonable for game balance.
+1

Post Reply