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
Re: PBW PvK Proportions Game #2
Linear Mode
