Design: Random ideas for game balance/micromanagement

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Tamerlin


We should not forget CtP2 is a grand strategy game, something that the Civ3 designer seem to have some trouble to remember. The game is about conquest and empire building at a global level. If we want to limit the warmongers I think that the easiest way is through the amount of money available to the player and through the maintenance costs. But one of the great things about CtP2 is that one can play as he wants, the warmonger can wage war and the "Empire Builder" like me can build.

I don't see how C3 forgot that at all. I'm all for a C3-style espionage (though make it useful!) rather than moving lawyers around the map

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by Kucinich

I don't see how C3 forgot that at all. I'm all for a C3-style espionage (though make it useful!) rather than moving lawyers around the map

Though the Civ3 designers have made a good job at abstracting some concepts (espionage, bombing...) you have a ton of micromanagement to make that adds nothing to the game IMO. The worker system is the worst example, a painful micromanagement process that bores me to death. I am playing Civ like games because I like to manage a civilisation, its government and its armies not to decide on such petty matters as worker assignment, especially when these tasks constitute something like 3/4th of a turn.

I agree with you about the Lawyers though, this is typically the kind of units that could be abstracted.

[Protra3211]

Changing the scoring numbers in DiffDB file.
Found in Gamedata

Player 1 in MyMod made these changes for example
Wonder Factor 200 from 500
Opponents Conquered 250 from 500

Its seems as you reach the monden age your able to catch up to the Ai by wonders or feats of wonder(which the AI never gets) . How many times has the Ai ever conquered anther Civ or able to use the Feat of Wonder option. In some parts of the game reducing scores might help with balancing

[drulius]

I have an idea that removing piracy from unit abilities and abstracting it into the trade model would benefit the game.

In the games I've played, piracy appears to be only partially effective early in the game, if the human player sets up early routes over water and is waiting for modern naval vessels before building a navy... But basically it's just a nuisance. The human can almost inevitably go immediately to diplomacy and demand an end to the piracy, threaten war, and get an agreement which can hold for the rest of the game (but at least 15 turns unless a war cancels all agreements?)

I've seen an AI ironclad spend 50 turns camped on one of my trade routes, every turn attempting to pirate the route but getting rasberried by the no piracy agreement every time.

In this abstract model the operators of a trade route couldn't pirate it, but any other civ the trade route crosses (if the route crosses international water, any civ that can build a boat in the same body of water) would have the option of "investing" in pirating the routes. The profitability of the pirating venture would depend on the route's exposure to the pirates. If the route takes ten tiles along roads the pirate owns, then high exposure for the operator/ high profit for the pirate, If the route takes two tiles across international water 25 tiles away from the pirate's port, then low exposure for the operator/ low profitability for the pirate. The effects of piracy on each trade route would show up on the trade screen like crime in each city does on the national manager screen, and could still be dealt with diplomatically, but could also be partailly mitigated by direct anti-piracy investments (protecting ocean routes with escorts easier and more effective than arming convoys through intermediate civs)

Piracy would be an extra tab in the trade manager showing all piratable trade routes available to the prospective pirate, the initial investments required to set up each pirating operation, the per turn gross profits expected from each operation, and the number of turns before net profit (after payback of the initial investment) of each privateering operation.

Anti-Piracy would be an extra column on the existing routes tab showing percentage of expected profits devoted to anti-piracy. Spend all the profits and kill all the piracy, but infinitely extend the number of turns before payback of the initial investment of setting up the route... (the initial investment is "build time for the caravans" not the same as the anti-piracy cost which is gold)

[Solver]

That's a pretty good idea, although another alternative is to have it remain as it is, but make the AI a bit smarter in regards to pirating. I do for some reason enjoy the fact that individual units have various unconventional attacks in CtP.

If we go by abstracting the trade model, then we need to make sure that piracy is profitable enough to make worth investing in. Currently, with some of playtest values even simple trade routes aren't worth it...

[Mihai]

Diplomats has too little use - they establish embassies and hold receptions and then what? Not to mention that they aren't stealth and quite vulnerable. I end up using my diplomats to explore and blocking civs that I am not at war with.

Spies can be very well abstracted, the same way as caravans. You will build spies and have them in a pool. You can send them in missions or keep them at home for conter-intelligence. The conterintelligence ratio will rise proportional with the "concentration" of spies at home (spies/population or spies/cities). The rate of success of enemy spies will decrease with your ratio of conterintelligence. Maybe the spies orders could have an time aspect - if you want the orders to be executed faster, the chances drop, but if you give your spies more time, they will have a bigger chance of success. Also your spies can have low risk task (or no risk at all) like reporting you how big the enemy cities are or what tile improvements he builds - the kind of info that anybody can see; that would spare you of the need to have a (preferable stealthy) unit wandering into enemy teritory.

It would be interesting if you could choose where the trade routes pass thru. The income from a trade route could be at a certain value be default (as it is calculated now), and decrease if the route choosed by you is longer. But you can avoid enemy teritories and therefore the risk of pirating.

[J Bytheway]

Originally posted by Mihai
Diplomats has too little use - they establish embassies and hold receptions and then what? Not to mention that they aren't stealth and quite vulnerable. I end up using my diplomats to explore and blocking civs that I am not at war with.

They're also useful for spotting stealth units.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by _X_
abstracting unconventional units ? omg noooo why? those are one of the greatest things about CtP 1 & 2 ....
how about bringing back Space exploration and the Alien Life Proyect?

They're also the most utterly retarded.

[Solver]

Get outta here before a banning tank crushes your spearman .

[Big Dave]

I really like the idea of abstracting Spys and Diplomats. Slaver I can make a case for either way, but it's probably better to leave it as a unit. Lawyers and Corporate Branches should definately be abstracted.

But one thing that hasn't been discussed is how to pay for abstracted units. Personally I feel that most of these are small groups of people therefore they should be paid for in cash.

As for spys, how about a per turn fee for espionage and a slider that determines how much is offensive and how much is defensive? Then check boxes/sliders to determine how much is spent on which opponent?

Then perhaps some elite millitary units with stealth/stealth spotting (Navy Seals, ROK Marines, etc) could be added for millitary intelligence.

I really like the concept that the further you get from a friendly city the more your chances of success go down, tho perhaps the amount you spend on a given action could bring your chance of success back up.