Experimental Game - Outofthelab

[Squirrelloid]

Something that's bugging me is there's no starting army, yet upkeep kicks in right away at turn 2 to the tune of *100* gold just for your researchers. That's a lot of money when all you have is a couple territories, much less when gold is a mere 75% standard. Don't get me wrong, it'll seem cheap by turn 11, assuming nations can even get going at that price.

I also don't have much experience with starting with more than 1 territory? Whats the variance on territory quality?

There are other problems with 75% gold/125% resources. Namely, this vastly favors some races at the expense of others. For example, Tir Na Og at 75% gold is going to feel penalized, especially since their standard army commander is also a caster and thus they don't actually get to save money not buying mages. Whats the rationale behind 75/125 gold/resources?

Edit: Is it possible to dl this mod somewhere? I don't see a link in this thread or the thread linked by rdonj.

[Squirrelloid]

So, i did some checking with test games. 3 starting provinces with the 75% gold setting can generate a starting income discrepancy of over 100 gold trivially between two powers based solely on the quality of the bonus provinces. This doesn't strike me as a good way to test anything, unless starts are going to be forced to be equal somehow (and then equal at what level?)

Also, why is Kailasa at +25% upkeep for research. IIRC, Kailasa has a bunch of sacred mages which let them research reasonably cheaply otherwise - shouldn't that reflect itself here with a -25% upkeep bonus rather than a +25% penalty? (Also, the scaling of upkeep over time strikes me as rather bizarre. For a good research nation, that last 500gp jump for an additional 80RP/turn nets out to 50 gold *upkeep* per 8RP researcher equivalent, which is insane even without sacred mages. 8RPs cost somewhere around 250 gold up front, which is in the ballpark of a 25 gold upkeep cost iirc, ie, about half as expensive, 1/4 as expensive for nations whose mages are sacred).

With the game settings the way they are (75% gold), and research hugely overcosted in upkeep, the game is effectively forcing everyone to take a pretender with great scales just to be able to actually play the game. This is rather lame. If settings and mod remain as advertised I'm no longer interested in playing.

[Illuminated One]

I will upload the mod when all nation slots are full (I don't want to add 70*x units into the game).

Hmm, you are right about the 3 provinces.
The main reason I chose that and the boosted resources is that you don't get a starting army (and no starting commanders), which hurts resource hungry nations alot. Still I think it's better to start with one province now.

The point about the income reduction and the large upkeep is that you don't have to buy researchers.
100 gold at start is higher than the upkeep that you pay, but if you account for not having to buy researchers every turn and getting labs up asap you have quite some breathing room.
I've made short tests with Mictlan (w9f6 bless, bad scales), Ulm (e9n4 bless, ok scales), Marverni (minor rainbow bless, good scales), Niefelheim (e9n8 bless, ok scales) and no nation had crippling gold problems. Niefel struggled a bit and might get boosted later.
I can't test all nations, especially not in the later stages, hence this game. If something turns out to be out of balance I'll fix that later, but I'll have to start at some point.
I'd really be glad if you still tried.

[Squirrelloid]

Ok, lets talk about the things that do get skewed by how things are currently set up.

(1) you're double-whammying everyone with reduced gold and high upkeep. Ie, not only do they pay upkeep to account for the mage they theoretically buy right away, they also get less gold per turn than they would normally (theoretically to account for mages they aren't buying?)

(2) Many nations are gold intensive rather than resource intensive - giving bonus resources only skews the game (and most importantly the start) in favor of nations which are gold efficient. Some of these nations also benefit heavily from your good/med/bad divisions and upkeep modifiers. For example, not only is arcocephale a good researcher who saves 25% on upkeep costs, they also have many gold-efficient units. I'd have to say they are overpowered with these settings because everything favors them.

(3) The mod premise takes away some element of choice in the pacing of your 'research', and then makes you pay for it. Many nations do not hire a mage round 1 and sometimes not even round 2. Many of those might rely on an awake research pretender for their early research. Those nations are not paying to buy and keep a mage in those early rounds, and can put that money to other essential things (like their army). Some of those may buy a nominal 'mage', but he's really the military leader. (One of Tir Na Og's first commanders is going to be a Sidhe Lord for leading an expansion army - a commander who also has mage capability and can provide research while not leading an army). Some of these nations really can't afford to be forced to lose money this way, since they need to buy those commanders anyway.

I know Tir Na Og felt somewhat crippled just at 75% gold even without the upkeep money for the researchers factored in when i ran some tests. That's ~300 gold/turn from the home province (before dominion effects), which will be -100 upkeep - upkeep for other units. Ow. They can't even afford to buy a Sidhe Lord in a given turn, much less a Lord and some units for him to command.

And not every nation rushes to get labs up. Certainly not in the first 5 turns, say. In fact, while i've certainly started fortresses as early as turn 5, i don't think i've built a lab before turn ~8.

(4) The low gold plus crippling upkeep forces choice of good scales for any nation that's not gold-efficient, and possibly even for those that are. I don't think the proposed conditions are even playable without Order 3, and taking any hits on cash generation at all is probably inadvisable (which means Death, Sloth, and Heat/Cold (unless favored) are all likely bad and possibly crippling decisions).

This has a ripple effect, because needing good scales means either pretenders will have little magical ability, be asleep/imprisoned, or both. That dramatically cuts the playable space for pretender gods to a rather small portion (low magic awake SCs and imprisoned bless chasses really), which dramatically favors some nations at the expense of others.

(5) The good/med/bad researcher distinction totally ignores most of the existing research advantages and disadvantages nations have. Nations with sacred researchers should be able to research cheaper than those that don't. Ie, arcocephale should have more expensive research than a nation like kailasa, who in a normal game will spend far less overall because their upkeep is dramatically lower. Instead, you seem to have reversed that particular example, and i'm sure that's not the only inconsistency.

You've also enforced a unified tempo to how research grows, something which isn't true for all nations (some nations have efficient researchers but you buy small increments so its hard to get lots of research up early, others have researchers which individually provide a lot of RP, but are less efficient per RP). I'm not convinced your good/med/bad distinction really covers these distinctions well, and of course those distinctions are part of how the game is currently balanced. Now, where the externalities are isn't as immediately apparent to me as the sacred/non-sacred researcher distinction is, but i bet there are clear winners and losers in your proposal if someone more experienced than i thought it through. So I can't tell you what the problems are here, but i'm sure they exist.

Edit:
(6) We might also consider how long do you have to pay an exorbitant price to pay off the non-payed cost of the mage who would have provided those RPs. In the hypothetical 8RP mage for 250 gold example, assuming he costs exactly 25 gold in upkeep, then it only takes 10 turns at 50 gold/8RP to pay off his initial cost as well. Except in your model you keep paying that extra 25 gold indefinitely. And heaven help you if your nation's research mages are sacred - now you're paying 4x as much in upkeep as you should be, and will have payed off the initial cost of the mage in ~7 rounds.

Further, your progression grows faster than linearly, while the cost of RPs grows linearly. (Each mage costs as much as the mage before him, assuming same mage type).

[Squirrelloid]

Originally Posted by Illuminated One

• Nation.........Research.......Upkeep
• Arco...........Good...........-25%
• Ermor..........Med............default
• Ulm............Med............-25%
• Marve..........Good...........default
• Sauro..........Med............+25%
• Tien...........Med............-25%
• Mictl..........Bad............-25%
• Abysi..........Good...........+25%
• Caelu..........Med............+25%
• Ctis...........Med............default
• Pange..........Bad............-25%
• Agart..........Med............-25%
• Tirna..........Med............default
• Fomor..........Med............+25%
• Van............Med............+25%
• Hel............Med............+25%
• Niefel.........Bad............default
• Kail...........Good...........+25%
• Yomi...........Bad............-25%
• Hinnom.........Med............+25%
• Lanka..........Med............+25%
• Atlantis.......Med............-25%
• Ozeania........Med............default
• R'lyeh.........Good...........+25%

A limited list of winners and losers based on those nations i know something about. I could speculate on some more, but I won't for now.

Winners:
Arcocephale - cheap upkeep, improved research tempo, gold-efficient units.
Marveni - good research much earlier than it would ever be able to afford it normally. Solid gold-efficient troops.

Losers:
Atlantis - primary commanders (BK/BQ) are impossible to afford. Units that actually do anything are also prohibitively expensive.
Kailasa - hideously penalized on research upkeep. Is a strong researcher in standard play because its research chasses have cheap upkeep and cheap initial costs.
Hinnom - maybe they deserve it, but can they even buy a commander, much less units for him to lead?
Caelum - Both of its two expansion strategies are prohibitively expensive, and one of them is fiscally impossible without amazing scales.
Tir Na Og - virtually impossible to get going, too gold intensive. Can't even afford what is generally used as its 'standard' commander without amazing scales.
Rlyeh - all its units that actually do anything are gold-intensive.

[Ironhawk]

Originally Posted by Squirrelloid

Ok, lets talk about the things that do get skewed by how things are currently set up...

Why do people even write posts this long? Does anyone actually read more than the first paragraph or two?

[Squirrelloid]

Originally Posted by Ironhawk

Why do people even write posts this long? Does anyone actually read more than the first paragraph or two?

I read posts that long. Not everything can be reduced to a sound bite and be intelligible.

Why bother making such a comment? If your ADD is so bad, go find something else to occupy your time.

[rdonj]

I read it. But then I read everything.

[Calahan]

I read it as well. I'd also like to think Illuminated One appreciated the feedback

[Illuminated One]

Yeah, sure, as I said this is not going to be the finish version, however I do want to get a feeling for it before going further, so I appreciate any comments.
However it would be better to have them in the mod thread http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=43679
If any of the mods can move them, I'd be grateful.

Regarding national disadvantages

I didn't intend to copy normal nation research progression.
I tried to stick to some guidelines while making the list

a) Good/Bad research depending on how progressive/traditionalistic and cultured the nations is
Arco is thematically about the rise of philosophy and science so good res
Niefel is revisionistic (awake the old giants that tyrannized us at the dawn of time) - so bad res

b) Cost of research is based on the status/accessibility of the mages
Kailasa has a caste system with the mages in the highest caste - you don't expect them to work for a peasant's wage
In Ulm mages are distrusted yet plentyful because of the widespread superstition. A shaman could just a wise man or woman brewing potions (oh god, this is RPG talk, isn't it?) or improving their tribesmens' weapons without demanding much except a place by the fire and a beer.

Of course this is subject to interpretation (and I've used that to boost or penalize some nations were I felt more free to interpret) and the list isn't set in stone. It's more a sketch with which I intended to playtest things out.
If it favors some nations, so what? Vanilla isn't excactly balanced, too, and the winners are not generally feared as uber rush nations. Some of the loosers (Atlantis, Yomi, Rlyeh, Tir, Niefel) trouble me, too, and if anything turns out to be out of balance I'll try to fix that, although I'd rather give it a try before deciding.


About upkeep issues

Well, lets suppose I took a lower upkeep (say 1000) for the late game and higher gold settings. Let's say you're getting 6000 gold = 4500 gold netto, give or take a few, so you are recruiting 10 mages and 200 troops each turn. I want to get away from mage and troop spamming and this isn't really it. I don't think it really undermines bad scale strategies, in fact I've been always thinking the opposite way - the higher the gold the more good scales pay of and vice versa.
I can see your point about early problems, though, and have updated it to 60 gp upkeep.