Subversion costs

[dinoarms]

I've searched this forum as well as the games online help and have not been able to find what I am looking for.


What is the formula for determing the cost to subvert a base?


If no one can give me that then an estimate of subverting a Hive base pop. 1 with one 1-2-1 garrison (green) and no facilities running demo/planned?

[Ned]

I personnally don't have a clue. Generally it seems that base with less infrastructure costs less. However, the cost to subvert a particular base can change dramatically from turn to turn. I assume, but do not know, that this is due to SE changes base owner.

Ned

[Kirnwaffen]

I am also unclear on this, though I do know that the formula takes into account the base infrastructure, the probe rating of the faction, size, and the income of the base. I am not entirely sure, but I think it also takes into account the number of units within the base and surrounding squares.

[Clear Skies]

I also think it takes into account the energy reserves of the faction whose base you are trying to control. For example, though neither Morgan or Dee had negative Probe ratings, no Covert Ops Centres, etc., yet it cost a lot more to subvert Dee's base than it did to subvert an identical Morganite base. The only substantial difference between the two was that Dee had 740 energy credits and Morgan had only 20 in his energy reserves.

[johndmuller]

It could be that a part of the formula divides up the factions bankroll and divides it up by bases in proportion to their size or some such - I believe that is the type of calculation that determines how much you get when you "drain energy reserves" and when you take over a base.

I'm pretty sure that is not the whole formula, as I think I read somewhere that the infrastructure was alao involved, but it might be part of the calculation. I too, have experienced wide swings in value when probing bases for thought control (as well as individual units).

[Blarney]

Dinoarms, what ARE you planning? Anyways, your SECRET is safe with me, at least as safe as it is on the BBS. Not sure whether Gusto looks at this forum or not -- of course, I'm simply making an assumption.

One thing though, is that I recently mind controlled a Spartan base (Gusto's btw in another game), size 3 with a 1-3-1, 1-1-1, and 4-1-2 in it and a former within its radius, and also included a Permiter Defense. It cost me just over 300. Then next turn when I went after a size 2 base with only 2 units and no facilities it cost over 500, and he didn't even change his settings. It makes me think that the 1st one is always cheapest, and then the game thinks that the faction is more prepared for another probe action so it costs more. Don't know if that is true, just made me think it.

[KrazyHorse]

I've been looking over the posts here, and the more I see, the more I want to tell you guys: visit the Great Library in the Civ 2-Strategy forum. I'm not sure about this question, not having done any play-testing on it in SMAC, but the cost of subversion in Civ 2 is explained here.

[Ned]

KrazyHorse, Thanks for the link. I read the CIV notes on costs both for subversion and for tech. I believe that SMACx has the same basic elements as set forth there. However, SMACX has additional features which are not found in CIV which clearly have an influence on cost. These are in the case of subversion: relative probe ratings, and, in the case of tech costs, research rating. In addition, it appears that the "probe" rating of a base previous probed for at least a tech steal increases dramatically.

We have also noticed, as suggested by Blarney, that probe costs increase dramatically on trying to subvert a second base from the same AI faction on successive turns.

On the issue of tech cost, the Great Library discussion was good on how tech costs are calcuated. However, there was no discussion on how this is done during "end of turn." For example, assume you the faction to go first in the end-of-turn sequence with others following. Is the cost for the next tech calculated after your turn is completed, or after all the other faction's turns are completed. You can see why I ask, because the cost calculations will be different depending on order due to the fact that cost includes the position of a faction relative to other factions in the tech tree.

Guys in the Tech Cost thread, I think this last paragraph may contain the beginnings of an explanation for what you are seeing. You did not get the tech when it was your turn in the end of turn updates because you were just short of the required tech cost. However, at the end of everyone's else's turn, costs may have been recalculated for all due the updated tech tree order. This recalculation may then have reduced your tech costs, sending you over the cost limit, while simultaneously not giving you the tech.

Make sense?

Ned

[KrazyHorse]

It is almost certainly calculated at the same time everything else is; just before your turn commences, the game runs through all of your cities in order (from youngest to oldest) and gives you the number of beakers each city produces. If the beakers from a city drive you over the edge, your tech advisor pops up and asks what your next research priority will be. The beaker adding process then continues, getting you closer to the next tech. Note that additional beakers from the city which "made the discovery" will be wasted; Not a big deal in a multi-city empire, but important to a faction with very few bases.

[Ned]

Yes, but, KH, in multiplayer, there are several players. If each player's tech's affect the others, then it makes a big difference who goes first during the end of turn processing. If a player researches a tech, subsequent player's tech cost could be lower, depending on the formula.

It seems it always good to go last.

Ned

[KrazyHorse]

It is, of course, best to go last, but this is only a one turn benefit. I've never heard of anybody micromanaging to the extent that this could really make a difference.

[cbn]

The recalculation of tech cost idea is all well in good except it is not consistent with my experience. Ever since I had the instance of of not getting a tech that when I had more Labs than the tech cost, I have been tracking the Tech cost more carefully. I have watched all 6 of my PBEMs through 6 to 15 turns and have NEVER seen the F2 required tecg cost change except to START a new tech. This included instances where I traded for 3 techs, built SPs or even traded for the one I was researching. No change in the F2 value EVER except upon COMMENCING research when the tech cost is first set. I recall testing this once by trading/stealing to acquire 6 techs in one turn. Since I stole 4 of them this had to change my relative tech standing but NO-- the F2 value did not change and the next tech showed up two turns later exactly as scheduled. My tech cost skyrocketed for the next tech but thats it.


Also, when I did not get the tech as scheduled exceeding tech cost by 17 Labs I looked for "lost" Labs on the next turn but there were NONE. I got the tech a turn late BUT the 17 excess were added to my full Lab production and shown as being accumulated toward the next tech. So if there is some recalculation going on , the game somehow readjusted and gave the previous tech at its original cost. The better answer seems to be that tech cost is calculated ONCE and that the anomoly I experienced is yet another bug with the game and not indicative of anything substantive-- I will continue my monitoring though.

As for subversion costs it is influenced by probe rating and the existence of Drone riots plus the treasury of the intended victim. I recall in CIV2 it also seemed to be influenced by geographical location of the diplomat where the cost of subverting a city could vary depending on which side of the city your diplomat was on LOL

[Ned]

CBN, This is almost like getting a Secret of Alpha Centauri by cashing a pod. You do not get the extra tech. You only get it if you research it.

Krazy Horse, The Great Library post also referenced a Key Civ. The tech cost change depending on the relative number of tech as compared to this Key Civ.

What is a Key Civ?

Ned

[johndmuller]

Originally posted by cbn
....Ever since I had the instance of of not getting a tech that when I had more Labs than the tech cost, I have been tracking the Tech cost more carefully....and have NEVER seen the F2 required tecg cost change except to START a new tech. This included instances where I traded for 3 techs, built SPs or even traded for the one I was researching. No change in the F2 value EVER except upon COMMENCING research when the tech cost is first set....

cbn, I too have been closely watching the tech costs since you started that other thread, but I have seen the tech cost go up, much to my chagrin, which I attributed to pod popping a tech (pod popping wasn't one of the elements of your test, although it would be strange if that were treated differently). Adding insult to injury, it happened on the turn following the turn I had been originally scheduled to have received the tech, thus combining both of those bummers. The only other factor that I can think of which may be relevant is that I had yet to research my first tech, a factor which I think I saw mentioned in a related context.

Ned, can I infer that you believe the tech cost are calculated at the end of the entire turn as opposed to the beginning (or end) of one'e individual turn? A lot of the tech stuff is done on the fly, especially the awarding of techs which OTOH could suggest that the calculations were being done then as well - we seem to be convinced that the costs are at least evaluated when you start a new tech. However, if the recalculation is done at the end/beginning of the entire turn, I think it would be reasonably unbiased compared to recalculating at the beginning/end of the individual turn which would favor the later moving players.

[Iskandar Reza]

why do you need the formula? i'm sorry, but i don't see the benefits of knowing the formula. maybe i'm missing the point