Balancing Factions from SMAC & SMACX

[Kaboth]

My friend and I used to spend some time balancing the original SMAC and SMACX factions. Today with greater skill we have probably realised they weren't so balanced as we thought. I was wondering if any of you posters had succeeded in balancing them well or if there is a balanced set held in high regard available for download. I realise networknode.org has some great new factions but I was hoping to find some of the original ones balanced.

[Flubber]

I always have difficulty with the idea of "balance". Who is stronger is often a matter of opinion and very dependent on the game settings.

Take the cult. . . a lousy faction to build with but on a smaller fungusy map, they can roll you with a worm army.

So to me, if you want to balance the factions, you have to specify what settings you typically play since unsuprisingly, the momentum factions play stronger on smaller maps while the builders do better on larger ones.

My PBEM experience has been that there are probably 8 or 9 factions that most people will play frequently. Usually the aliens are excluded, cult is almost never seen and the believers are played only a little. The rest get played a fair bit so I'm thinking they can't be generrally perceived as TOO weak

[Maniac]

One thing though, that isn't really balancing but compensating for the probe rollover bug ,can be for the Angels:

+2 PROBE --> +1 PROBE
And to compensate:
Immunity/Impunity/Halved Penalty/Whatever for Knowledge SE Values.

[Alinestra Covelia]

I've always wanted to put that darn pesky Consciousness down a peg with a -1 to MORALE, seeing as its manual description already says it suffers a penalty to growth and to morale (owing to difficulties with sex and war).

I mean, what kind of a faction is that to live in? No sex AND no war.

I bet they spend most of their time knitting and drinking weak tea.

[johndmuller]

Originally posted by Alinestra Covelia
I've always wanted to put that darn pesky Consciousness down a peg with a -1 to MORALE, seeing as its manual description already says it suffers a penalty to growth and to morale (owing to difficulties with sex and war)...

Does it really say that in your manual somewhere? Mine just says "-1 Growth (Unfamiliarity with sex drive)", at least on that page with the so-called "Detailed Description". Personally, I could see why that would also lead to a loss of morale, but the "unfamiliarity" explanation would suggest that they don't know what they're missing.

[#endgame]

Doesn't it say they find it awkward not unfamiliar?

[Starfarer]

I find this incredibly amusing. Read through the manual, you'll notice that included in the very back of it are such minute details as the distance of Chiron from the twin suns, what effects various things have on Chironian ecology and such... a lot of different things like that, that really don't matter to most of us, but the AC team sat down and wrote all this up... which means that they did a lot of research and a lot of work.

And as far as I can tell, these are not people who slack off with their games. If there are bugs, they are few and generally not game-shattering.

The factions are set up in such a way that any playing style can be easily represented and played successfully against any other.

For example, say I want to sit back and defend myself against aggression while simply outclassing you so severely in technology that you can't even begin to challenge me by mid game. I'll play the University or the Consciousness. Say I like a more devious playing style, I'll play the Angels. Say I prefer bribing people to leave me alone and profiting from their wars... Morgan. Say I prefer diplomacy and careful manuvering... Lal. say I just wanna kick someoen's tail... Any of about a third of the available factions.

That's why there are so many styles of play. One style per player per faction they play often.

That gets to be rather a lot... and considering everything, since anyone can be successful, and I'm sure there's a player out there who's gotten so good with the Cult that he could challenge a fairly powerful builder late-game, there's no real need to "balance" any of 'em. Trust me, I'm no great shakes, but I've learned the ins and outs of every faction except the Cult and the Believers... because I've never played either one. The Believers because they annoy me, the Cult because I'm still experimenting with the Consciousness right now.

And I've found succecssful stretegies for each. It's kind of funny... in my game right now, I'm playing the Consciousness, and I'm wholly dominating BOTH aliens, I've already killed Zakharov, I've successfully defended Lal against the Planet Cult and retaken several of their bases to give back to them, and I've been Planetary Governor the whole game once I got the Empath Guild. I'm thoroughly beating down every attack that comes my way and retaliating with extreme force.

It's a good feeling. Especially since any one unit of mine takes out two to five of theirs, and I outnumber them three ot two. Hehe.

Anyway...

Ta!

[Kaboth]

Yeh I realise that some factions are particularly powerful in the early game but I think as I believe Vel said in his guides that for real balance all factions should be able to play well at all stages of the game and on all terrain. Cult sounds like 2 much of a hit or miss sort of faction. You could become very powerful early if neighbours are close and worms plentiful but if not you have very little advantages for the later game. The hive seems to powerful to me that immune to inefficiency trait is far to powerful as the computer seems show in every game as hive. CyCon seems to be vastly superior to University also, more so as the game drags out. Spartans often seem to be touted at the lower end of the balance scale also. Anyway I might fiddle with their attributes a bit.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kaboth
as I believe Vel said in his guides that for real balance all factions should be able to play well at all stages of the game and on all terrain.

That type of balance may be unattainable unless you are playing identical factions. AS soon as you start making the factions very different, they each start getting circumstances where they are a bit easier to play. Personally I like the diversity.

[Alinestra Covelia]

I've always wanted to make a "Ralph Nader" faction where you start off play with no faction bonuses or penalties whatsoever. You have no faction powers at all. You just play the game as though you were a normal Joe.

[Starfarer]

Vel's comment about true "balance", then, I'm afraid, is simply incorrect on all counts.

Flubber hit the problem dead on... diversity by necessity involves a changing of balances.

Did youy ever notice, for example, that you can become Unsurpassed in Might rather easily, all you have to do is outclass the others in terchnology and have a few units of high-tech sitting around killing things?

This is because of the way Might is calculated. Weaker units are counted by fractions, as I undertand it, and only the units with the strongest equipment count as full units for the purposes of Might.

However, while it may well take a dozen units to take a single base, maybe even two dozen, by mid game versus a builder, it's possible. All it takes is a good knowledge of tactics.

And no, tactics doesn't mean "charge blindly and hope you get lucky".

That's another factor, by the way... luck is involved. I have, all too often, watched my "sure thing" wins dissolve as my ultra-powered unit lost to a relatively weak enemy who just managed to get lucky.

Of course, I immediately obliterate them with the next unit that rolled off the production lines, but the point is that you can win wars using weak units. You just need a whole lot of them and a little luck.

To be specific, the best tactic, as I've heard it said and agree with, using Yang, is to expend massive numbers of units in "human wave attacks". The units don't have to be incredibly strong. Every unit that dies weakens the enemy just a little... Enough for the next to have a slightly better chance of winning.

Have you noticed that even though you outclass your opponent, you still tend to take a little damage? Now, calculate what it would take to get rid of 10 life points... before Fusion power becomnes available. Approximately 12 units, I believe. So, your enemy has a choice. Mass-produce strong units (and probably lose them as soon as they roll off the lines and thus be wasting turns trying to replace stronger units), or mass produce units nearer to YOUR tech ability (crippling his defenses by cutting their strengths in half or so).

Of course, there's another thing to be considered that almost never is, I'm certain. For there to be a balance of power, there must be at least THREE, yes, THREE nations involved who understand the crucial fact that if anyy two commit to war, the third will mop up the remains with a minimum of struggle... and that allying yourself with the devil tends to get you betrayed PDQ.

Most of my AC games don't end in war... they have wars, yes, but these are invariably flare-ups that end quickly, unless I want to prolong them or the computer just hates me that day. I buy off my enemies, or scare them into truces. Sure, they mass units, but I can every now and then annoy them into a Vendetta and wipe out their units and then go back to a truce. That allows me to concentrate not on defense or attack, but on infrastructure and development.

In short, I'm the exact sort of player who THRIVES as any Builder faction. unfortunately, I'm willking to bet that a human player won't care that I'm doing everything in my power to avoid a war and try and wipe me out anyway... jsut because they want my bases.

I'm equally certain that if they had a third party watching from the wings, greedily licking their chops and WAITING for that eventual war, they'd eb a lot slower to declare it... unless they could arrange their own alliance.

Which involved diplomacy and intelligence.

Which, in all truth, is the core of Alpha Centauri and what makes it so great... not everything has to end in the total and utter destruction of everyone else.

[Mead]

Originally posted by Starfarer

***

This is because of the way Might is calculated. Weaker units are counted by fractions, as I undertand it, and only the units with the strongest equipment count as full units for the purposes of Might.

However, while it may well take a dozen units to take a single base, maybe even two dozen, by mid game versus a builder, it's possible. All it takes is a good knowledge of tactics.

And no, tactics doesn't mean "charge blindly and hope you get lucky".

***

To be specific, the best tactic, as I've heard it said and agree with, using Yang, is to expend massive numbers of units in "human wave attacks". The units don't have to be incredibly strong. Every unit that dies weakens the enemy just a little... Enough for the next to have a slightly better chance of winning.

***

Far better to have a several units that attack a base and survive, than several units that attack a base and die (with one or more survivors occupying the base).

I usually like having my strong needlejets using their full stength to take out the strongest defenders (and survive) followed up by my choppers to take out the weaker defenders in multiple attack fashion, followed by my land unit/locusts occupying the base after it is emptied. Then, I let my injured units heal for a turn or two before they help the next attack wave.

If they die they are gone. If they survive, they often get a morale upgrade (if they need it), and they are a lot closer to the front line than the bases you usually use to produce new units to replace them.

Mead

[Blake]

IMO All factions are not created equally, but nothing should be changed.. anyway here is how I would order the factions in terms of strength, so much is variable I'll use strength brackets rather than a strict order:

Strong Factions, that can thrive under nearly any circumstances:
University
CyCon
Data Angels (Here solely on the basis of starting techs)
Gaians (free worms, +2 effic, no big penalties)

Average Factions, that either always do Okay:
Peacekeepers (they are just too average... no great bonuses to exploit)
Hive (rigid SE, kinda slow tech... strength based on building a LOT of bases and free drone control)

Or thrive under some circumstances, but suck somewhat under others:
Pirates (dependent on pods, unity scan - with both fit in strongest, with neither they are weaklings)
Drones (dependent on tech trades - but with support from a research-strong ally are THE strongest faction)
Morgan (dependent on commerce income)

Weaklings (Just kidding, but they can stagment dangerously)
Spartans
Believers
Cult (econ/industry hit - massive turn-advantage penalties)

One of the things that makes the weak factions weakest, is that the strongest factions can actually beat them at their own game. Can momentum Spartans beat momentum Angels when the angels start with probe teams and both are 2 techs away from impact rovers? The Angels forces are more plentiful being 2 industry better (running planned), the spartans better morale... which is good for the spartans until the angels mind controls them.
Can the believers impact rush the University before the University impact rushes the believers? HELL NO. The believers need to rely on being so close they can scout patrol or prehaps recon rover rush the strong factions.

The thing about SMACX, in single player anyway, is that the AI are merciful enough to give any faction a chance through tech trades and not attacking weak factions. When warmonger factions can achieve tech parity through trades they do much better.

So... I'm totally happy with the faction balance in single player, some factions are simply extra-challenge under some settings, that is good. Under MP (altough I dont play it) players can simply avoid the factions likely to be weak under the map settings, or use them as a form of handicap.