Dynamic Affinity System (and considerations on Health)

thelastleonida

Chieftain
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
10
Location
Italy
I've been playing Civ games since Civ3 (plus Alpha Centauri) and quite a load of mods, but I never got involved in your forum. Guess it's about time.

I'm enjoying my time with BE and I hope we'll see some good expansions, however I can't help but feel a little underwhelmed: I expected more ambition.


To the point at hand (sorry, I felt an introduction was in order): I am not going to discuss the perks given by affinities (there's another good thread), but rather the system with which we gain affinity points.
At the moment, the system is static (i.e. it doesn't change continuosly with time):
  • points are gained through one-time events, that is unlocking a certain tech or through quests' results;
  • once you get your point, there's no going back nor going forward: you will have to actively work your way toward the next tech (or wait for a certain quest to pop up).
(On a side note: currently the xp system in place is of no-consequence: you always "level-up" when reaching a certain affinity tech - indeed the very fact that you're not told how many xp points a certain tech will grant you is a strong indication that this mechanic has not been fleshed out as it was originally designed, in my opinion.)

I suggest to move toward a dynamic system, where xp points are gained - or lost - each and every turn depending on two factors:
  1. overall empire health;
  2. buildings, terrain improvements (through their health effects) and wonders (they could have health effects or straight-up "+xp/turn AND/OR -xp/turn");
  3. each tile with forest should yield a small health bonus.
Before going into details, let me show you how the new xp system based on Health would work: [please see attachment!]
as you can see from the image attached, the idea is that of a graph with "Empire Health" as its abscissa and "Xp toward a specific affinity" as its ordinate. The more extreme you are toward one of the two ends, the more points you'll gain toward Harmony or Supremacy affinity each turn; conversely, the more balanced you are around the centre the more points you'll gain toward Purity.

Naturally, this would mean a complete overhaul of the Health mechanic as a balance against fast expansion (more on this later); right now, what is important to undestand is that, in this concept, a high/low Health represents the Empire attitude toward peaceful/aggressive coexistence with the planet. For example, if a player is striving to get more production through factories and other improvements that have a negative impact on the planet, his society should drift toward Supremacy. There is a very fundamental change here: the drive toward a certain affinity would be based on players' history (did you build factories, petrochemical plants, cut down forests, etc.?) and not anymore on arbirtrary decisions with no regard on what you've done/become so far.

With this system in place, I would severely reduce the amount of xp gained from the discovery of new technologies and from quests; the latter could provide a small amount of pluses and/or minuses per turn toward a specific affinity. Even then, I find quests a bit too arbitrary at the moment.

World map effects: incindentally, this new system would allow for a proper "pollution mechanic" to be put in place, the same as in Civ4: Overall high Health among all the empires could mean the spread of forests (and maybe Miasm), while low Health could mean their disappearance.

Aliens: their aggressivity could be based on Overall Health; I would go so far as to base also their spawn rate on Overall Health: if the planet is under threat, it fights back.

Balance-wise, quite a lot of adjustments would be needed, I know...:mischief:



Possible issues/concerns:

Purity from a lore perspective and affinity system representation: Purity wants to change the world, not preserve it... so a more coherent approach could be to swap Purity and Harmony positions on the graph and allow high Health to represent health itself but from an Earth perspective. But this apparent incoherence is the effect of the one-dimensional juxtaposition of the three affinities on the Health abscissa on the graph shown in the attachment. A more sensible approach would be to use a triangle: each vertex would be an affinity, while the center would be the "no-choice", which is a choice nonetheless.

The elephant in the room: health as balance against fast expansion
Currently, health is analogous to happiness in Civ5, except there are no luxury resources. My proposal would be to adopt a Civ4 maintenance system:
  • more cities means higher energy maintenance;
  • outposts: they should drain economy (energy) AND require a trade route to be put in place for them: no trade route = no growth;
  • puppetted cities: they cost less to maintain and have the usual benefits of no-increase for culture threshold; however they could also have a penalty to production: when puppeting a city, a player is deciding "I don't care what you produce and I don't want you to slow me down in culture, however I want your strategic position and resources".


Phew, I truly hope someone will read this wall of text...
In any case, this forum is awesome :goodjob:

Cheers

/back to work, oh shhhh...:eek:
 

Attachments

  • Immagine1.png
    Immagine1.png
    6 KB · Views: 117
Interesting idea.

Even if the changes to health are not possible to make at this point, the maintenance on cities should be put in to give an incentive to develop your cities. The way health works now is more of a local resource anyway, and doesn't do much to limit REX. Also it would be nice to shift the downside of maintenance from buildings to cities.

It basically will make it totally viable to own 10 cities as long as the 9 first make more money than they cost in maintenance. Also in war you will mostly take over cities that are allready developed, and therefore will make you money right away.
 
While I love the idea of health for supremacy vs harmony, I don't think it'll work for a third faction, namely purity. Perhaps it might be best just to create another "resource/attribute" to record how "human" you are, and then we could have bionics lab or xeno nursery or other related buildings/quests lower or raise your humanity.

Also the Alien attitude "resource" towards you should be utilized more. we need a way to support the aliens in a positive way besides passively not attacking a nest in our terrority. Such as send a trade of food towards the nest or Idk creating alien forest/alien xeno tiles
 
:goodjob: thanks for the feedback, people!

While I love the idea of health for supremacy vs harmony, I don't think it'll work for a third faction, namely purity. Perhaps it might be best just to create another "resource/attribute" to record how "human" you are, and then we could have bionics lab or xeno nursery or other related buildings/quests lower or raise your humanity.

In this regard, one could use the system I proposed at the end of the post (in "Possible Issues/Concerns"): Health as seen from an Earth point of view.
  • down below zero health = pollution, industrialization --> Supremacy
  • high above health = good environment, but for Earth standards, not those of the aliens --> the planet is being terraformed --> Purity
  • around zero health = balance with the natural alien environment --> Harmony
 
Honestly this seems unfair to Harmony because it has the toughest tightwire to walk and also because going +20 health or deep negative seem to be the two most competitive paths.
 
:goodjob: thanks for the feedback, people!



In this regard, one could use the system I proposed at the end of the post (in "Possible Issues/Concerns"): Health as seen from an Earth point of view.
  • down below zero health = pollution, industrialization --> Supremacy
  • high above health = good environment, but for Earth standards, not those of the aliens --> the planet is being terraformed --> Purity
  • around zero health = balance with the natural alien environment --> Harmony

There's still the problem of people combing purity and supremacy for harmony-like health. Actually I think the addition and subtraction would just tend towards a sum of 0 anyways. For example lets say there's three buildings(or comparable tile improvement) of Gene Garden (Purity), Xeno Nursery (Harmony), and Feedsite Hub (Supremacy). Which all decrease/increase health in their respective affinities.


Under the first plan (- :health: supremacy, 0 :health: purity, + :health: harmony)
Then I could build a xeno nursery (+1 health) and build one feedsite hub (-1 health) and go back to 0. Then I build the Gene Garden (which is just 0). Now just imagine all of these increases/decreases across all techs, buildings, and tiles.

There would be this weird canceling of building technology and xeno stuff that brings me back to purity. Additionally how would the purity player "prove" to be more pure than other civilizations later on in the game when other civs tend to drift back to 0? There isn't a real good number to place purity buildings health number besides 0.

If you switch to the second plan, you've just rearranged the numbers that harmony is now middle affinity. Now I can cancel out purity buildings and supremacy for an "harmony" affinity.

I feel that a linear scale just won't work because of how the affinities' are conceived as: Purity remaining as human, while Supremacy embracing technology and Harmony embraces aliens (okay there's a better way to word this sentence). It'll be pretty hard to represent technology embrace with -1 while alien embracing is +1, and then also show a person without change. Rearranging the scale just rearranges the problems mentioned above. I can't see the dynamic affinities idea working without 2 "health's bars".

However, I do understand why you would want implement 3 affinities into health.
Perhaps it can still work in some way that I don't recognize.
 
Thanks all for your thoughts!

There's still the problem of people combing purity and supremacy for harmony-like health. Actually I think the addition and subtraction would just tend towards a sum of 0 anyways. For example lets say there's three buildings(or comparable tile improvement) of Gene Garden (Purity), Xeno Nursery (Harmony), and Feedsite Hub (Supremacy). Which all decrease/increase health in their respective affinities.


Under the first plan (- :health: supremacy, 0 :health: purity, + :health: harmony)
Then I could build a xeno nursery (+1 health) and build one feedsite hub (-1 health) and go back to 0. Then I build the Gene Garden (which is just 0). Now just imagine all of these increases/decreases across all techs, buildings, and tiles.

There would be this weird canceling of building technology and xeno stuff that brings me back to purity. Additionally how would the purity player "prove" to be more pure than other civilizations later on in the game when other civs tend to drift back to 0? There isn't a real good number to place purity buildings health number besides 0.

If you switch to the second plan, you've just rearranged the numbers that harmony is now middle affinity. Now I can cancel out purity buildings and supremacy for an "harmony" affinity.

I feel that a linear scale just won't work because of how the affinities' are conceived as: Purity remaining as human, while Supremacy embracing technology and Harmony embraces aliens (okay there's a better way to word this sentence). It'll be pretty hard to represent technology embrace with -1 while alien embracing is +1, and then also show a person without change. Rearranging the scale just rearranges the problems mentioned above. I can't see the dynamic affinities idea working without 2 "health's bars".

However, I do understand why you would want implement 3 affinities into health.
Perhaps it can still work in some way that I don't recognize.

What you say it's true and I realize I took some things for granted instead of explaining them - my bad. :)

My whole concept lies on the idea that we would change completely the Health bonuses granted by buildings AND that we'd change also the effects on the empire due to low/high health.
That is if a player gets to very low Health, he's not punished for it (as it is now) nor he's rewarded for having high positive Health. Instead the number "Health" represents simply of how his society is behaving toward the alien life; taking the second model (harmony in the middle) we would have:
  • very negative Heath --> exploiting nature (Supremacy);
  • around zero Health --> harmony with nature (Harmony);
  • very positive Health --> bending nature toward Earth standars (Purity).
At this point, it is clear we would need to work a lot for balance: for example, if Harmony players cannot rely on bonuses for production granted by factories, then they should have other ways to remain competitive; ideas on-the-fly: tile bonuses from forests/miasma, unit produced also with food (there was a scenario/mod in Civ4 where you could do this if you took the right policy, I think it was the one based on the warring states of China).


Finally, I realize that a linear scale may not be the best solution, but I'm trying to propose something achievable by modifying mechanics already in place, without introducing new ones; I believe it could be easier to implement with mod tools.

Thanks again for your patience and feedback!
 
As long as any bugs are worked out, I definitely support this.
 
I'm going to add my thoughts about affinity gain here, rather than opening a new thread - my ideas are similar but a little different, but it's the same topic.

I think the fundamental problem with the mid to late game right now is because it's just a variable beeline of bpt and techs. Nerfing trade routes won't change this, all it'll do is force players to find other ways to get the bpt needed. The game play will still be a one dimensional search for science.

Earning Affinity experience absolutely needs to be separated from bpt. So in this I completely agree with you.

Unfortunately, I've no idea how it should be earned. I like the idea that the more you make improvements or buildings of a type you earn affinity points. And I like the idea of using health as a mechanic. Unfortunately, if you were to use health, you'd need to set up some other mechanic to limit growth.....

Personally, I think affinity and tech gain need to be set up separately, separate clocks ticking upwards, but the mechanics to earn progress on the two clocks need some kind of dynamic tension between each them. Something like "meld" in xcom.

Meld is crazy awesome and getting meld allows you to do crazy awesome stuff to your troopers. However, the RISK of getting meld, is that you rush and LOSE your troopers - a double edged sword, as it were.

I'd love to see affinity progression separated from techs and whatever mechanic is used to earn them somehow contain the possibility of negative feedback into your tech race. You might get your affinity levels up, but doing so is going to brake or hinder the tech growth. Like I've said, I've no idea how that system / mechanic should look. I'm just a hundred percent convinced that unless the separate affinity from techs the second half of the game will never reach it's full potential.
 
Earning Affinity experience absolutely needs to be separated from bpt. So in this I completely agree with you.

Unfortunately, I've no idea how it should be earned.

I'd love to see affinity progression separated from techs and whatever mechanic is used to earn them somehow contain the possibility of negative feedback into your tech race. You might get your affinity levels up, but doing so is going to brake or hinder the tech growth. .


I had an idea for this here http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=537610
 
Top Bottom