Social Engineering

[woodelf]

Here are the 10 SMAC/X SE Social Factors and what I think can be used as a CivIV substitute potentially. A primary problem is negative values and a SMAC/X like table for the total column. Our baseline may be higher so that zero is as low as you can go on some factors.

Spoiler :

Economy - A combination of +/- /base or tile, plus additional free trade routes as this value reaches maximum.

Efficiency - This is a tough one. My initial thought was maintenance, but that may not be enough. There is also which directly affects efficiency if the value goes negative and you lose productive workers.

Support - Free units.

Morale - Either xp or trying to see if WHFB got their morale system working.

Police - +/military unit and +/- % growth of military units.

Growth - Most likely just a bonus.

Planet - If we don't have xenofungus and mindworms this one will be a bit different. We can +/- /farm or have a with forests and jungle tied in somehow.

Probe - Using specialists or GPP? No idea until infiltration is figured out.

Industry - Tied to industrial trait and also +1 /tile already producing 3 or more. Sort of like Financial trait.

Research - Another easy one. Thankfully.

This leaves some good CivIV values unused:

war weariness
culture - although if tied to an Energy Grid it would become very useful
free specialists
great people

And everything that gets used in SE needs to be also included in Leader traits so we can balance things out if/when we get a table along with a total column.

 

[Rubin]

Excellent, woodelf! This looks like something we can expand upon.

War weariness could be tied to police rating; and planet rating and health might work well together (with or without native life).

I'd like to address Growth:
We could have growth becoming a +% bonus to food output (the growth bar) in bases. The scale could range from -100% to +100%.

The SMAC/X rules look like this:

Spoiler :

#SOCGROWTH
-3, NEAR-ZERO POPULATION GROWTH
-2, -20% growth rate
-1, -10% growth rate
 0, Normal growth rate
 1, +10% growth rate
 2, +20% growth rate
 3, +30% growth rate
 4, +40% growth rate
 5, +50% growth rate!
 6, POPULATION BOOM!!

I think Growth in this sense may be a very tricky issue and may be gamebreaking if not carefully balanced. The city (base) growth balancing in Civ4 is different from SMAC/X and I would prefer the Civ4 balance that helps preventing ICS. Growth in Civ4 probably plays a lesser role than growth in SMAC/X.

My main concern is what kind of impact this would have on gameplay. I can think of it being entirely insignificant or terribly powerful. I don't know.

I also think that, if using this model, we cannot have growth assigned a health factor. With +100% growth bases could grow very fast and become very big. Perhaps efficiency or planet rating should affect health, so that growth alone wouldn't be the sole factor of fast growth and huge bases.

I find it diffuclt to evaluate if this is a viable model, but I would be very interested in trying it out.

 

[woodelf]

Thanks Rubin. The table of -4 to +4 is going to be critical to a lot of the factors. Some don't need it as much, but Growth definitely does. If you could use the factor total to change the amount of food needed to increase the city size that would be a good way to have growth be important. Lowering food/tile isn't useful since there aren't enough incremental steps.

 

[Rubin]

Thanks Rubin. The table of -4 to +4 is going to be critical to a lot of the factors. Some don't need it as much, but Growth definitely does. If you could use the factor total to change the amount of food needed to increase the city size that would be a good way to have growth be important. Lowering food/tile isn't useful since there aren't enough incremental steps.

I don't know what kind of range of the values is desirable. It could be -10 to +10; -3 to +6; -4 to +4. However, we need consider end game scenarios where you may be able to tweak the values into definite maximums. If we can achieve a +13 Growth through SE, faction and leader traits, wonders, resources, etc. then I think the range should allow for that.

I agree that the value should not affect tile output. You can add a +% bonus to hammers (for example via an Ironworks) in Civ4 that does not affect tile output. Perhaps something similar could be done to food? If we can adjust the amount of food needed to grow that would probably be the best approach (to the player, at least).

 

[Rubin]

Some additional random comments:

1) It makes sense to have Economy affect trade routes. It could be the number of trade routes or a passive +% modifier to existing trade routes. In SMAC/X economy was "raw commerce" affecting both income and research.

Here are the (wrong) rules from SMAC/X:

Spoiler :

#SOCECONOMY
-3, -2 energy each base
-2, -1 energy each base
-1, -1 energy at HQ base
 0, Standard energy rates
 1, +1 energy each base
 2, +1 energy each square!
 3, +1 energy each square; +1 commerce rating!!
 4, +1 energy/sq; +2 energy/base; +2 commerce!!!
 5, +1 energy/sq; +4 energy/base; +3 commerce!!!!

Based on this, perhaps Economy could affect commerce in +% steps (10% perhaps). For higher values the +% bonus per step should probably be reduced (5%, perhaps) and instead be augmented by some trade route boost. I have a feeling that if "commerce" is boosted by more than +50% it will cause severe balancing issues.

The obvious alternative of having Economy affect gold doesn't seem too interesting because I think we have other SE parameters that could indrectly affect gold.

2) Support could be directly affecting how much you are required to spend on maintaining your military and perhaps "special units" (workers, spies, etc.). This is an indirect gold modifier.

Here are the SMAC/X rules:

Spoiler :

#SOCSUPPORT
-4, Each unit costs 2 to support; no free minerals for new base.
-3, Each unit costs 1 to support; no free minerals for new base.
-2, Support 1 unit free per base; no free minerals for new base.
-1, Support 1 unit free per base
 0, Support 2 units free per base
 1, Support 3 units free per base
 2, Support 4 units free per base!
 3, Support 4 units OR up to base size for free!!

Again, I'd like to try a +% approach. I may range from +100%/-100% to +50%/-50%. I don't know.

3) Based on my earlier comments on the need for having military units stationed "permanently" in a city I think Police may be a candidate for fixing the problems with a non-unit driven police mechanism (I am disregarding any kind of "police" buildings or immobile defenses). Police rating directly affects happiness (replacing the happiness/military unit system) but I think there should be a cost assigned to Police rating, making it a direct (or perhaps indirec if there are dependencies, e.g. specific building requirements) gold modifier. I am thinking in the line of "maintaining a huge police force costs a lot of gold".

I don't think the happiness factor can be %-driven, but the costs could be. Of course, it only makes sense to assign a cost to values above 0. (Perhaps a 1-4% cost per step.)

Here are the SMAC/X rules:

Spoiler :

#SOCPOLICE
-5, Two extra drones for each military unit away from territory
-4, Extra drone for each military unit away from territory
-3, Extra drone if more than one military unit away from territory
-2, Cannot use military units as police. No nerve stapling.
-1, One police unit allowed. No nerve stapling.
 0, Can use one military unit as police
 1, Can use up to 2 military units as police
 2, Can use up to 3 military units as police!
 3, 3 units as police. Police effect doubled!!

I think its possible to make Police rating an innovative, fun and very interesting concept.

 

[woodelf]

This is all good stuff Rubin, but it really depends on whether or not we can get a total column and create 10 new civics variables to be tabulated into that column. Since I don't program a lick I have no idea.

 

[Gerikes]

This is all good stuff Rubin, but it really depends on whether or not we can get a total column and create 10 new civics variables to be tabulated into that column. Since I don't program a lick I have no idea.

I see no reason why not.

 

[woodelf]

I see no reason why not.

Since I'm post stalking...

So you can create 10 new factors and then allow us to manipulate them with civics? From there we can combine the values with leader traits and come up with an overall SE set of values for the faction.

What do you need from us to accomplish this? Even though it might be a few versions down the road...

 

[Gerikes]

Since I'm post stalking...

So you can create 10 new factors and then allow us to manipulate them with civics? From there we can combine the values with leader traits and come up with an overall SE set of values for the faction.

What do you need from us to accomplish this? Even though it might be a few versions down the road...

Well, I would need the almost near-finalized version of how the system works. I understand that there would be multiple different factors, but how would the factors be changed? If you could change them in any way you wanted, say with a base amount and you could just add or subtract from any as you please, then this could all be done with the existing setup. Each category gets it's own Civic option. Say you have 21 different values (-10 to 10). Each Category would get 21 Civics on it. Rather than having a button for all the Civics from -10 to 10, there would be some other mechanic to set which one you use. The screen would change to fit this idea.

However, if it will be like SMAC, where the categories can only be changed by certain social engineering models, then I will probably make two new classes (and thus, two new XML files) that are similar to the Civics files, only all they do is say what values get +X and -X.

As for leaderheads or factions, it's very simple to add tags if tags are not already available to be able to describe this new system.

 

[Rubin]

Gerikes, would it work if we did all the details on 2-4 SE parameters (including the effects of values), implemented these for testing and then later add the remaining SE parameters?

 

[woodelf]

I think Rubin and I are in agreement on how we want this to work, but he's better at putting it into words than I am.

I'll pick Morale as an example to see if I can put it into words...

A few of the factions will have Morale modifiers in their traits, which we'll need to add in. If the Spartans are played they might start at +2 Morale. Depending on a few SE (civic) choices they could gain an additional +3 Morale leading to a total of +5 (duh!!!). We would then have a chart that says +5 Morale (from the total column) yields +8 xp to each new unit created in any Spartan base! A best case scenario, but that's what I'm thinking of. Of course, the total column will also have some serious negatives for them now so Research might be -3 total which would mean -30% research in all bases.

Basically I was thinking that each of the 10 bolded factors listed above would be the new factor that we would control in civics and leader traits. By adding them together we get SE. Rubin, is this about right?

 

[woodelf]

Gerikes, would it work if we did all the details on 2-4 SE parameters (including the effects of values), implemented these for testing and then later add the remaining SE parameters?

Good thinking Rubin! Keep me in check as I get carried away.

We can pick the easiest ones...

Morale
Research
and 2 others.

 

[Rubin]

woodelf, I think you are correct. The issue you perhaps is missing is the option for non-SE specific factors. That is, factors that are not considered in the SE system. Non-SE factors could be Great People modifiers, Specialist modifiers and something like U.N. vote modifiers, naval movement modifiers, etc.

The "civics" screen should present a fixed set of SE changes (perhaps 16 as seen in SMAC/X) that the player can choose from. Each option/change may affect several SE values; the exact value changes in the options are preset and cannot be changed by the player in any way.

Edit: woodelf, morale would not be an easy pick because this is one of the aspects of the mod that we are currently unable to agree upon. I would say Economy, Growth, Support and Research are the easier ones.

 

[woodelf]

woodelf, I think you are correct. The issue you perhaps is missing is the option for non-SE specific factors. That is, factors that are not considered in the SE system. Non-SE factors could be Great People modifiers, Specialist modifiers and something like U.N. vote modifiers, naval movement modifiers, etc.

How can we deal with them? Linking Probes and GPP still sounds cool to me.

The "civics" screen should present a fixed set of SE changes (perhaps 16 as seen in SMAC/X) that the player can choose from. Each option/change may affect several SE values; the exact value changes in the options are preset and cannot be changed by the player in any way.

Cool, that sounds awesome.

Edit: woodelf, morale would not be an easy pick because this is one of the aspects of the mod that we are currently unable to agree upon. I would say Economy, Growth, Support and Research are the easier ones.

Lord Olleus started a morale script with the WHFB mod that Ploep said Gerikes could take a look at if he wanted.

 

[Rubin]

woodelf, the non-SE modifiers could be added as a seperate column in the "civics" screen. Even with the SE code I think the "civics" mechanics are still there and can be added as supplement to SE settings. Planetfall's "civics" system would be "true Social Engineering with a touch of Civics".

The disagreement on morale is related to the promotion system (unless Gerikes wants to include BOTH morale AND promotions via XP).

 

[woodelf]

A non-SE column is perfect, I forgot about that.

Promotions via xp would help make morale easier, but that's not important right now I guess.

 

[Gerikes]

I can't remember everything that the morale stuff did, but I'll check that out later tonight. I would be worried about using it, however, as the WH mod seemed to have a bunch of bugs in it. Also, I'm not sure if their Warlords version has the latest in it, because if it does I wouldn't be able to test it as is.

I would be in favor of a hybrid solution, where morale and promotions both exist. The question I guess would be what is morale? Earlier, it was just a strength boost on level up, will it have new characteristics similar to WH?

 

[woodelf]

I'm all for changing some of the factors if they don't exactly fit into the CivIV engine. Straight XP gains or a free promotion based on Morale value or a new factor name works for me as well. I don't recall morale in WHFB doing much just yet and it was for Warlords, come to think of it...

 

[Gerikes]

I'm all for changing some of the factors if they don't exactly fit into the CivIV engine. Straight XP gains or a free promotion based on Morale value or a new factor name works for me as well. I don't recall morale in WHFB doing much just yet and it was for Warlords, come to think of it...

Well, if someone wants to start a new thread on it, and get together some ideas, I could do it from scratch.

 

[woodelf]

Wasn't morale in SMAC/X more of a modifier used in calculating combat odds? It didn't cause units to flee, did it? Maybe we could find a way to have a bonus calculated into the unit's pow based on their morale? So high morale get's a 1.5x pow, while a low morale get's 0.5x pow. Make sense? Of course, values between 0.5 and 1.5 also would be used.