PBW PvK Proportions Game #2

[csebal]

Well, i havent seen the final stats, and i certainly agree, that they should be cheaper, but in my Version (preview)

the nature shrine stats look like this:
+ Nature Shrine I
2k/6k/2k resources / 1% value and conditions
+ Value Improvement plant I (100k each) + Climate Control Facility I (8k each)

--- so 108k resources vs 6k resources for the same 1% (in build time, this is say 5 turns vs 80

+ Nature Shrine II
4k/12k/4k resources / 2% value and conditions
+ Value Improvement plant II (200k each) + Climate Control Facility II (10k each)

--- 210k vs 12k resources

Nature Shrine III
10k/30k/10k resources / 3% value and conditions
+ Value Improvement Plant III (400k each) + Climate Control Facility III (12k)

--- wow, 412k vs 30k

I think you got my point, if thats not enough, we can add, that nature shrine is system wide, so you only need one for the entire system, instead of two normal facilities every planet. Well, this also means, you can only have one affecting the system at a time, but considering the build costs of the normal facilities, its unlikely, one will ever build one, not to mention multiple ones.

Should religious facilities be cheaper? definitely, are they cheaper now? Nope - they are practically free.

Would they cost half of the price of the regular one, we could argue about it being fair or not, personally i think, that the system wide ability, and that its basically a 2-in-1 structure justifies an even higher price than the normal facilities have.

Lets not forget, that is rather easy to reach research wise (at least it was Last time i checked), and that the 1500 points the trait costs you is not paid for 'free value improvement on every of your planets', but for 'access to otherwise restricted technology'.


Sorry if my post sounded a bit like ranting, but i had a hard day behind me, and had to release the steam valves somewhere if you feel insulted by my post / tone / whatever, please acceppt my apologies, its not meant to flame or insult anyone.

-- EDIT:
Reading trough the post a second time, it is half as worse as i expected. Lets just say, my built-in cooling system works like nothing else. It also had a terrible grammar and some weird typos, which im too lazy to locate and correct

[PvK]

No problem csebal.

We may have some different premises about balance. When a technology requires a unique trait, OR when a competing technology has a superior/different ability (here, is stackable), OR when a competing technology offers the best end result but at a much higher cost, then I see these as qualitative factors that can obviate the need for quantitative balance.

Additionally, when an ability seems to accomplish a task that might reasonably be imagined as nearly impossible (like increasing the value of a planet, changing its atmosphere type, or creating a ring or sphereworld, or creating a new Cultural Center i.e. civilization that can nearly double the research rate of an entire empire) then I think a designer might assign costs which in fact make the accomplishment impractical or nearly impossible. They can then serve as goals or rarely-broken boundaries.

I.e.:

* 1500 racial points is enough to give Devoutly Relgious players an advantage like cheap temples with effects that aren't matched in the other tech areas, and without being cost-balanced with them.

* The fact that Nature Shrine gives a maximum 3% bonus, while Value Plants stack up to potentially much higher rates, again means that Value Plants might want to be priced much higher, when the stacking technique is considered.

These points just say to me that a designer could feel free to set the costs quite high without creating direct imbalance. Whether they would want to or not, though, is a different question.

In Proportions 2.5, the Nature Shrine was the same, but the Value Improvement Plant cost 10k/10k/10k at all three levels.

So then, Nature Shrine at:
I - 2k/ 6k/ 2k
II - 4k/12k/ 4k
III - 10k/30k/10k

Was much more clearly comparable.

A level-III Nature Shrine will take about 4 years to build even on a fairly developed colony (~750 organic build rate), so I don't think I agree with these being considered FREE.

Players requested that Value Improvement Plant should not be so cheap, and in the 3.0 preview it was raised by TEN TIMES to:

I - 100k/100k/100k
II - 200k/200k/200k
III - 400k/400k/400k

(Of course, if you have the space, and time, you can theoretically still build multiple I's and II's, so the III is space-efficient but cost/time-inefficient.)

Now, 10k/10k/10k was probably too cheap for VIP III, because you could put several on one planet and they stack. The new VIP costs are rather high, but they shouldn't be too cheap or people will build several.

In Props 2.5, a good colony might build a VIP every 6 turns, so a 20-year plan might be:

Year 1-2, colonize a good-value large breathable planet and ferry population to it and build a planetary space yard there.

Year 3-8, build ten VIP III's there. During this, the value would go up about 6 x 3 x 10 / 2 = 90%.

Year 9-15, build other facilities while leaving the ten VIPs there, adding another approximately 7 x 3 x 10 = 210%.

Year 16-20, scrap the VIP's and replace with 10 resource extractors, cashing in on the value of the ~+300% planet.

That's a long-term project, and expensive at first, but it could pay off well, and seems a bit odd.

In 3.0, it might be worse, in that the homeworld now has many available slots. Using them for VIP's will of course cause a major sacrifice in immediate research and resources, but a few VIP's could also pay off pretty well in the long run.

NEVERTHELESS, I think my x10 costs for VIP's are perhaps too high, and yes the Nature Shrine costs could stand to be somewhat higher.

This is the result of my rushing to get 3.0 ready for these PBW games. Of course, if I weren't rushing, I might never get anything released.

At any rate, I think the VIP (or, a high VIP rate) should be restricted mainly by time. A 1% rate I am not so worried about. A 2% rate is a strong effect in the long term, especially on a homeworld or other valuable planet. A 3% should I think be something so good that it should be so difficult that the cost should be something that makes players stop to think. Especially if they are getting it all in one facility. That's why I doubled the cost of a VIP III vs. a VIP II. I'm going to say it should take approximately 10 years for a good colony to build a VIP I, and thus 20 years for two VIP I's, and I think a VIP II can simply be twice the cost of a VIP I (the advantage of a II being the space used; the advantage of two I's being you get the first 1% effect sooner, and don't have to research level II). A good colony I define as about 750 org build rate, which is about what you get with 20m people. So 100 turns x 750 orgs/turn = 75000 orgs. So I overcharged maybe 33% - I hit the right order of magnitude.

What about homeworlds? A good one might have twice as high an org build rate. So a VIP I per 5 years, a VIP II in 10 years, or a VIP III in 20 years, with 75% of the preview costs. Again, that seems like a reasonable rate for what you get (a very major cost, but a very major payoff... eventually). Ideally, I'd like to offer smaller effects, for smaller costs, but 1% is the minimum possible value.

Finally, back to Nature Shrines. The time and costs at colony worlds seem ok to me at first. But when the system-wide 3% effect is considered, and especially it's use on the homeworld, it deserves more thought. A Proportions game can easily go 100-300 turns. At 100 turns after construction, a religious home system will be up about 30%. At 200 turns after construction, 60% and at 300 turns, 90% (anyone know if it just adds 3% each year, or if it is a compound interest and how fractions are considered?). Construction time though would currently be 40 turns (plus maybe 10-15 to set up and stock a colony) on a home system colony, or 20 turns on the homeworld itself (which isn't the best choice, since then it uses a HW slot when the same effect can be had on a colony). So add 50 turns to the values shown above. From a balance standpoint, it's a strong effect but not, I think, an unreasonable one. The research investment and time to reach Religious Tech III (557,500 research points). I would add an average of say 50 turns to get that far (assuming no research rush or undue concentration).

30% increase by turn 200, 60% by turn 300, 90% by turn 400.

So it really depends on how long the game Lasts. You get a good payoff by turn 200, and then it continues getting better and better. Like in the unmodded game, this may start looking scary to non-religious players, and might make you a target. Also, your bountiful systems may look more and more tempting to capture.

So from a balance perspective I think it is ok, but could stand to be reduced. From a "realism" and "proportions" standpoint, though, that's nearly doubling the resource output of the home system in a mere 40 years. One might point out that it's religion and science fiction and therefore can do what it wants. On the other hand, that does seem pretty fast from my realism/proportions standpoint. The problem, again, is that the game doesn't let me slow it down much. Best I can do is cut the rate down to 2% or 1%, and then that leaves less room for improvement at higher investment levels.

One approach would be to drop the Nature Shrine effects to 2% or 1%, and then give them decreasing costs. This is a big nerf to the effect, so one needs to look at what they have left. Talisman is a unique combat plus, but is pretty expensive. The War Shrine III gives the equivalent of a 1225-empire-point bonus if your religious race has an aggressiveness bonus... but only in systems where you have that shrine.

All in all, I think I should probably make those changes (75% the 3.0 cost of VIP's, and Nature Shrine nerf), but the religious trait ends up seeming somewhat weak... or... only worth about what it costs, especially before the higher levels are researched. Maybe I will do that, but plan to give the Religious something new later on.

Any religious players peeved about this idea?

PvK

[Alneyan]

The Nature Shrine should add up every year, until the limit is reached (250% for planets, unless the shrine allows them to get all the way to 300%). That is, if you are playing with unlimited resources. On the other hand, the Condition increase is a multiplier, so 3% is very weak for planets with poor conditions. The values for the conditions range from 0.1 (Deadly) to 1.5 (Optimal), and so low values take a lot of time before you can recover from them.

You may also want to decrease the costs of the VI II and III facilities to avoid the "sneaky" way of building the first level facility and upgrading for a lower cost, as some players may go with this kind of trick (or loophole, as you will).

I am certainly not against weakening the Nature Shrine, or stretching its levels beyond level III (I will take Religious in the PBW game, so it isn't a fit of Religious-phobia). I must also admit I am intrigued by what you plan to add to the Religious trait.

[csebal]

Well, my point was, that you esentially nerfed the sh*t out of planet improvement facilities, by increasing their cost dramatically, it would be 'unfair' to leave easy to access, and extremely cheap system wide planet improving tech in the game for those who go with a certain racial tech area.

With the increased price, building multiple improvement buildings is most probably out of question, you'll be happy, if you manage to build just one, so the fact, that the nature shrines do not stack is not that big of a disadvantage.

Im not saying they should cost the same as regular tech facilities, but compared to the price of a simple value improvement plant I, even the nature shrine III can be considered 'free'.

FFS, the value impro plant III is more expensive than the arcology (with arcology being 350k iirc) and even the arcologies have a build time, thats beyond reasonable (see my previous post about the 100-150 turn barrier).

Then again, im not the average proportions user, in my own games, i always mod your mod to some extent, for example by increasing the pop growth rate somewhat, modifying various building stats (recently, i've completely readjusted the colonial facilities of 3.0 to fit my taste, changed the way research facilities are spread on the tech tree, etc...)

Maybe i should stop posting stuff like that. Simply because my opinion is rather alone on the thread - havent seen too many Posts arguing with what i said - , and i feel it may be influencing you in a way, other Users of the mod may not like.

Lets just say, i'll stick to bug reporting, and will try not to come up with suggestions on how to make the mod better for my taste

A question: if you destroy a planet, will it end up as an asteroid field, or will it completely disappear?

csebal

[Alneyan]

A destroyed planet gives an asteroid belt (of the same size as the planet), that could then be converted back into a planet. Only a Black Hole Creator can fully destroy planets (or anything else for this matter, wormholes notwithstanding).

[csebal]

Well, not all is lost then i guess.. one can always recover from the loss of his planets... Then again, it'll surely take a lot of time to build that cultural center again

[PvK]

csebal said:
Well, my point was, that you esentially nerfed the sh*t out of planet improvement facilities, by increasing their cost dramatically, it would be 'unfair' to leave easy to access, and extremely cheap system wide planet improving tech in the game for those who go with a certain racial tech area.

By the same kind of reasoning, any unique racial ability is 'unfair', and they all have unique abilities. The real question is whether it is unbalanced. If I turn the Nature Shrine down to 1-2% instead of max 3%, I don't think it's unbalanced at all. Even at 3%, it only looks unbalanced to me if you are in a game with peace for the first 250 turns or so, and against players who won't gang up on you to take your extra-valuable planets. In other words, even as it was, it wasn't unbalanced, it was just a pretty strong very long-term strategy that required Religious racial tech. Temporal players can also try a long-term superiority strategy with, say, temporal space yards. Psychics could try a long-term intel dominance strategy with their unique psychic intel abilities. Organics can try a long-term superiority strat with their replicant centers. Crystallines can try one by making a ringworld out of one star in a trinary system and filling it with crystalline solar generators. Anyone can try an early game blitz strategy against any of those, and will have a 1500-racial point advantage, and be able to concentrate on weapons of conquest rather than long-range investments.

With the increased price, building multiple improvement buildings is most probably out of question, you'll be happy, if you manage to build just one, so the fact, that the nature shrines do not stack is not that big of a disadvantage.

Yes, this is a good point. I needed to review the numbers. Thanks for bringing it to my attention!

Im not saying they should cost the same as regular tech facilities, but compared to the price of a simple value improvement plant I, even the nature shrine III can be considered 'free'.

If a 4-year investment by a strong colony can be considered 'free' from a certain perspective, then I suppose so.

FFS, the value impro plant III is more expensive than the arcology (with arcology being 350k iirc)

Good observation. Question is, of course, how long should it take to build a Value Improvement Plant? What is a Value Improvement Plant, really, anyway? How desirable is it for players to be able to simply ADD value to any planet in a linear fashion (since it lets them essentially change the map)? Etc.

and even the arcologies have a build time, thats beyond reasonable (see my previous post about the 100-150 turn barrier).

Then again, im not the average proportions user, in my own games, i always mod your mod to some extent, for example by increasing the pop growth rate somewhat, modifying various building stats (recently, i've completely readjusted the colonial facilities of 3.0 to fit my taste, changed the way research facilities are spread on the tech tree, etc...)

Maybe i should stop posting stuff like that. Simply because my opinion is rather alone on the thread - havent seen too many Posts arguing with what i said - , and i feel it may be influencing you in a way, other Users of the mod may not like.

Lets just say, i'll stick to bug reporting, and will try not to come up with suggestions on how to make the mod better for my taste
...

Ya it sounds like you prefer a slightly faster pace than the design parameters of Proportions, which I can certainly understand. Good to know.

Your comments and observations have been quite helpful. Thanks, and please let me know if you have any further feedback!

PvK

[csebal]

If a 4-year investment by a strong colony can be considered 'free' from a certain perspective, then I suppose so.

Compared to the regular facility, which takes 40+ years to build for a lesser effect? Well, compared to that, a system wide facility that 'only' takes 4 years to build is virtually free. Thats how i meant it.

Good observation. Question is, of course, how long should it take to build a Value Improvement Plant? What is a Value Improvement Plant, really, anyway? How desirable is it for players to be able to simply ADD value to any planet in a linear fashion (since it lets them essentially change the map)? Etc.

As the planet value adds to the effect of EVERY resource generator on that planet, i think the value improvement facilities are quite valuable.

and even the arcologies have a build time, thats beyond reasonable (see my previous post about the 100-150 turn barrier).

Then again, im not the average proportions user, in my own games, i always mod your mod to some extent, for example by increasing the pop growth rate somewhat, modifying various building stats (recently, i've completely readjusted the colonial facilities of 3.0 to fit my taste, changed the way research facilities are spread on the tech tree, etc...)

Maybe i should stop posting stuff like that. Simply because my opinion is rather alone on the thread - havent seen too many Posts arguing with what i said - , and i feel it may be influencing you in a way, other Users of the mod may not like.

Lets just say, i'll stick to bug reporting, and will try not to come up with suggestions on how to make the mod better for my taste
...

Ya it sounds like you prefer a slightly faster pace than the design parameters of Proportions, which I can certainly understand. Good to know.

Well, in singleplayer, i'm quite happy with the original pace, as i have all time of the world to play, and can run turns as fast i prefer.

In multiplayer games however, i found the proportions pace to be somewhat sluggish.. with turns only coming once a day - a year can pass by the time you build an arcology with the current constr. yard / facility stats. Even if it 'only' takes 100 turns to build, thats an average of 3 months, considering a one turn / day game speed.

This can - but again, this is rather subjective - make one feel like a snail, trying to reach the top of Everest.

Your comments and observations have been quite helpful. Thanks, and please let me know if you have any further feedback!

PvK

I'll certainly do. I may not agree with every change made, but all-in-one, i like your mod. Talking about it: any news about the final Version?

[PvK]

csebal said:

Compared to the regular facility, which takes 40+ years to build for a lesser effect? Well, compared to that, a system wide facility that 'only' takes 4 years to build is virtually free. Thats how i meant it.

I understand, and sympathize a little. I was just stating the counterpoint.

As the planet value adds to the effect of EVERY resource generator on that planet, i think the value improvement facilities are quite valuable.

Sure they're very valueable from the point of view of a player wanting to have one for themself. From the point of the mod designer, or of a player thinking about the type of game he wants to play, though, I think it can be desirable to limit the most powerful effects, particularly ones which don't make a lot of sense and/or which remove interesting limits which would otherwise need to be worked around. That's one of the main design themes of Proportions mod: find the things which are seem more powerful than they should be and that remove interesting choices from the game by offering ways around otherwise-interesting problems. If you can cheaply change the atmosphere of planets, or raise the value of all planets to maximum, then once that is done, the map is much less interesting because planets which were once uniquely valuable are now just average.

Well, in singleplayer, i'm quite happy with the original pace, as i have all time of the world to play, and can run turns as fast i prefer.

In multiplayer games however, i found the proportions pace to be somewhat sluggish.. with turns only coming once a day - a year can pass by the time you build an arcology with the current constr. yard / facility stats. Even if it 'only' takes 100 turns to build, thats an average of 3 months, considering a one turn / day game speed.

This can - but again, this is rather subjective - make one feel like a snail, trying to reach the top of Everest.

In Proportions multi-player, the goal should be something more like dominating the valley below Everest, because it will be 200 years before you have the technology to survive on top of Everest. There are still plenty of things to do that can be done on a shorter time scale. Maybe I should specify some victory conditions for these games, so people aren't stuck thinking they are supposed to turn the entire quadrant into utopias before getting down to business?

I'll certainly do. I may not agree with every change made, but all-in-one, i like your mod. Talking about it: any news about the final Version?

I'm sorry about the delay. I was supposed to get to finish it on Monday, but have had a steady stream of unexpected people wanting me to do unexpected major tasks immediately. I am now thinking Friday.

PvK

[Fyron]

anyone know if it just adds 3% each year, or if it is a compound interest and how fractions are considered?

In a normal resources game, the 3% is always added linearly to the planet value. 3% goes to 6%. 100% goes to 103%. 167% goes to 170%.