Riots?

[Fyron]

What aspect? The poorly designed troop system that has no real purpose for the various hulls beyond bigger is better? A system with a real differentiation between infantry and tanks would still inherently make infantry better for policing...

[BudgetMessiah]

Yes, I totally agree. That would be good. The ground combat system is underdeveloped, to be sure. It has been for at least a few iterations of the series (having only really seen the game since 3 and on).

But, given that there are a limited number of troop types, it's better to give some purpose to the smaller troop types later in the game, and one example of such a purpose that currently exists is policing worlds.

However, removing this purpose and modding the game so that large troops are better in addition to the other advantages they currently enjoy, which is clearly what you were describing as a deisrable change, would be undesirable for the reasons I have already given. Now, if you'd like to rework ground units and combat entirely, that sounds good to me, but it wasn't what we were talking about previously.

[Fyron]

Wtf? I never posted a desire to make large troops better at policing...

Note that it is impossible to modify exactly how troops affect happiness; all we can do is change the parameter for how much a troop affects happiness in happiness.txt. There is no way to change it to check for troop size or something other than just the number of troops.

[BudgetMessiah]

That's not how I took your post here:

This is an issue with how the stock game is set up, with bigger almost always being better. For regular (combat) usage, it doesn't make any sense to build small troops when you have larger available. For policing purposes, it doesn't make any sense to build big troops. The data setup has some diametrically opposed goals.

It seemed, by extension, you were saying that it would only be logical that bigger be better in this area so as to be consistent with the rest of the game. If you say that isn't so, then I must have been mistaken, and that isn't the case...my bad!

To which I will hasten to add that it would be wonderful if the ground combat were more...varied? That much it's clear (now at least, heh) we agree on. Maybe someday, after I get the fun of playing the actual game out of my system, I'll take a crack at it.

But seeing as how I'm just starting with 5...don't hold your breath.

[Raapys]

Couldn't the <Planet Population Happiness> ability be used as a means to give troops different ways of affecting planet happiness?

[Fyron]

You know what they say about assumptions... when you assume, you make an a** out of u and me.

(this was a tongue-in-cheek joke)

"Couldn't the <Planet Population Happiness> ability be used as a means to give troops different ways of affecting planet happiness? "

That depends on whether or not it stacks in SE5, and whether or not you can actually get troop abilities to affect the planet. Anyone want to test it?

[BudgetMessiah]

Hmm...so much for apologizing.

And, actually, that wasn't an assumption, it was a conclusion based on words you wrote. It was also a logical one; as clearly shown in the quote, anyone with more than half a wit could easily infer that from what you was said, in that context.

Of course, those with better than half a wit might also be able to communicate their thoughts unambiguously enough that such misunderstandings don't occur. And in that same light, only a half-wit would fall back to such a clicheed insult as "you know what they say about assuming" when they get their hackles up. Christ, my mom talks like that. You flame like my mom.

Next time, man up and accept the apology. It'll save me the trouble of having to school you on napalm and manners in front of a community that otherwise holds you in good esteem.

[Suicide Junkie]

Anyways:
- Some people will want higher tech troops to be more effective at pacifying populations.
- Some people will want smaller troops to be more effective.
- Some people will want to make higher tech troops BE smaller.

Does it make more sense now, from a flexibility in modding perspective?

[AgentZero]

Fyron said:
Every troop counts the same for happiness purposes, whether it is a low tech small troop or an end-game large troop. This is an issue with how the stock game is set up, with bigger almost always being better. For regular (combat) usage, it doesn't make any sense to build small troops when you have larger available. For policing purposes, it doesn't make any sense to build big troops. The data setup has some diametrically opposed goals.

Thought I'd just help BudgetMessiah out a bit and highlight the important bits. Note the winkyface.

Also,

A system with a real differentiation between infantry and tanks would still inherently make infantry better for policing...

Fyron's posts do make quite a bit of sense, providing you read the whole thing.

[BudgetMessiah]

Yes, and in the context of having read his latter explanation, it certainly is easy to understand them and quote/bold cherry-picked parts of the conversation to hilight your argument.

(See, I can make winkyfaces too!)

@SJ
I don't think I was ever unclear on the modding possibilities, but from a "what makes sense in a simulation based on how things actually work in the real world" (which, by definition, is what a simulation is) then I think the stock way of encouraging smaller troops to quell unrest is probably not a bad thing.

And I'm pretty sure that's what I've maintained since my first post here.