Author Topic: Research changes planned?  (Read 2714 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline alex_brunius

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 957
  • Thanked: 31 times
Re: Research changes planned?
« Reply #15 on: January 15, 2018, 02:18:26 AM »
I don't like a global research system because first of all it is unrealistic and not fun.

To increase decision making I would instead propose that each area have dedicated labs and the more points you put into one project it will have diminishing return. You could allow labs over several planets to cooperate at some penalty.

You should then have just one page which have all your labs (with locations) so you easily could assign them, you should not do it per planet.

This could also be coupled with a system of research needing to get into society as well and not just instantly upgrade everything which just allow for the snowball effect to grow larger which is contradictory to how technology distribute through a real society.

For some things the global research makes sense, like Military technology where all the steps of distribution are pretty accurately modeled in game ( need to make racial techs + design ships + retool shipyards + build actual ships ) before the new tech is out in the field.

I also think it makes fairly decent sense in situations like Civilian liners that won't put new tech into production until it's replacing decommissioned ships ( might need a few tweaks to be perfect ).

But I do agree that it doesn't make a whole lot sense how all your mines and factories even in the fringe systems instantly upgrade overnight after completing research.


Diminishing returns I think would be a great idea to give smaller empires a better chance to be high tech too, and prevent massive empires being able to brute force research by just throwing hundreds of labs at all problems at once.

It would also be interesting to be able to pick some quality vs quantity approach to your academies ( either crank out more low quality leaders or fewer high quality leaders ) in the same spirit.
 

Offline ChildServices

  • Hegemon
  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • Posts: 140
  • Thanked: 9 times
Re: Research changes planned?
« Reply #16 on: January 15, 2018, 03:21:20 AM »
Diminishing returns and research penalties would just cause there to be a tipping point where making more labs isn't worth it. This is, admittedly, exactly the point... However, it wouldn't "increase decision making", because the decision you'd make there is a no brainer. If it's more efficient to research 10 things at once with 10 labs each, than it is to research 1 thing with 100 labs, you would research the 10 things at once instead.
It wouldn't even hurt large empires unless you added some arbitrary "size penalty" like in certain bad games like Stellaris. I'd still be spamming labs with a huge empire, I just wouldn't be power-researching a handful of things. I'd be researching 200 things at once with 10 labs each and my labs would be in more places.

Tech spread though does introduce a way in for the concept of Tall VS. Sprawl in empire building.
As @alex_brunius said, military stuff would/should work as it does now, as would civilian stuff for the most part. You'd probably still cluster most of your industry together in the core, just to make sure all of your industry improvements spread to the places actually using them quicker. The difference between tall/sprawl empires is mostly when it comes to defence and development.

A Sprawl empire's older frontier military facilities aren't going to be up-to-date as fast as a Tall empire, and so the Tall empire has more efficient border garrisons defending slightly better developed worlds. The Tall empire is also logistically easier to manage, although has less overall resources long-term than the Sprawl empire unless they start to expand more.

The developmental effects of going Sprawl over Tall, would be that all the frontier colonies building money-printers around the clock won't be "up to speed" as fast, and neither will your terraformers/miners. The Tall empire would play in the sense of their entire territory except the very edges being effectively their core worlds (or damn near it) as far as development, whereas the Sprawling empire would have a smaller core and a wider periphery with better resource availability (although lower exploitability).

If internal politics came into it, that'd also add another layer, but I don't really like the idea of internal politics in this game. It'd just make for more goddamn numbers to track. I think rebellions would feel more like they do in Distant Worlds (stupid RNG crap that is annoying) as opposed to feeling the way they do most of the time in CK2 ("damn I got out-manoeuvred")
I guess you'd have more internal unity as a smaller empire, and thus less ambitious frontier garrison commanders to keep track of.
« Last Edit: January 15, 2018, 03:23:02 AM by ChildServices »
Aurora4x Discord: https://discordapp.com/invite/Q5ryqdW

Cold as steel the darkness waits, its hour will come
A cry of fear from our children, worshipping the Sun
Mother Nature's black revenge, on those who waste her life
War babies in the Garden Of Eden, she'll turn our ashes to ice
 

Offline alex_brunius

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 957
  • Thanked: 31 times
Re: Research changes planned?
« Reply #17 on: January 15, 2018, 04:21:45 AM »
Diminishing returns and research penalties would just cause there to be a tipping point where making more labs isn't worth it. This is, admittedly, exactly the point... However, it wouldn't "increase decision making", because the decision you'd make there is a no brainer. If it's more efficient to research 10 things at once with 10 labs each, than it is to research 1 thing with 100 labs, you would research the 10 things at once instead.

I think your missing the real trade-off here though.

What your decision is all about is how quickly you can progress down a specific key field, for example engines.

Sure putting your 100 labs at 100 different things might be optimal from a making the most out of the RP standpoint, but it still means your progressing 20 times slower in the field of engines then if you put 40 labs on that ( with diminishing returns for example halving your speed ).

It also requires 100 different scientists, which you might not have available, and it also means you get less out of the higher scientist bonuses.


How important each key field will be for you ofcourse depends ( with engines most of the time being the top priority ) on a sliding scale, and that's where the diminishing returns come in. It will shift the focus so that it's a bit more worth it to spread out your labs instead of the current no brainer approach of always putting as many labs as possible and go through your list of priorities one at a time ( with a few 1 lab projects to train new scientists ). But I still have no doubt that there would be some situations where you want the max labs a scientist can handle to rush techs ( at less efficiency ), and finish them ASAP.

With diminishing returns there is a point to assign 3-5 labs to projects even if you can assign 20.
« Last Edit: January 15, 2018, 04:26:21 AM by alex_brunius »
 
The following users thanked this post: King-Salomon

Offline Tree

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • Posts: 72
  • Thanked: 14 times
Re: Research changes planned?
« Reply #18 on: January 15, 2018, 07:29:35 AM »
I don't believe empires should be punished for growing big, especially in a game with "Expand" in its name. (that's what one of the 4Xes stands for, remember?) Especially, especially in a solo game where balance doesn't matter.

Currently Aurora supports all kinds of play styles, and in regards to research too. You can put all of your labs on three-four scientists and go forward fast in a field of research (or three-four), you can spread your labs over all your scientists, you can slowly attribute your labs because the technicians need time for retraining or whatever else, you can give all your leftover scientists a lab each, you can give them zero and let them train on the cheap, you can have a civilization with superbly advanced engines but terrible industrial capacity or weapons, one that grows slowly and evenly in all fields, one that has very advanced technology but is going through a mineral crunch since they never developed jump point theory, etc. You can do anything, nothing forces you into one playstyle.
All the suggestions I've seen on the forums lately only do one thing, restrict what can be done in the game, which is very dumb since Aurora was made to support/play out Steve's fictions. The more restrictions there are, the less difference there'll be in all fiction until we're all playing the same games and desperately going against gameplay to introduce differences in our stories instead of having the stories supported by the game. Aurora needs to be open and generic so it can support all kinds of fiction, not to be a closed system that only enables one genre, one playstyle; I doubt many people would still be playing if we were locked into playing Steve's empires and unable to create new games or ship designs. We should be able to make up all kinds of scenarios, actually play them out inside Aurora and see how and where it all goes (as we can right now) instead of playing the game and later writing fiction that's completely removed from the gameplay and game's events.
 
The following users thanked this post: Father Tim

Offline alex_brunius

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 957
  • Thanked: 31 times
Re: Research changes planned?
« Reply #19 on: January 15, 2018, 08:01:41 AM »
I don't believe empires should be punished for growing big, especially in a game with "Expand" in its name. (that's what one of the 4Xes stands for, remember?) Especially, especially in a solo game where balance doesn't matter.

So, do you think that transport and logistics should be simplified to a single global pool that automatically teleports everything around as well?
Or that population restrictions on planets (infrastructure or size based) should be removed?
Or that warships should be able to teleport to all controlled colonies you got?

Because if not we are already punishing larger empires big time, right?


Punishing large empires by making spreading of knowledge and know how be just as difficult as spreading of resources, supplies and warships makes sense both logically and based on history/game balance. It's not an arbitrary restriction anymore then a larger empire needing more time for warships to patrol from one end to the other is.
 

Offline ChildServices

  • Hegemon
  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • Posts: 140
  • Thanked: 9 times
Re: Research changes planned?
« Reply #20 on: January 15, 2018, 09:05:51 AM »
I think he means more in the sense of stuff that literally is just an arbitrary game balance decision, like the flat research penalty in Stellaris.
Aurora4x Discord: https://discordapp.com/invite/Q5ryqdW

Cold as steel the darkness waits, its hour will come
A cry of fear from our children, worshipping the Sun
Mother Nature's black revenge, on those who waste her life
War babies in the Garden Of Eden, she'll turn our ashes to ice
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • J
  • Posts: 752
  • Thanked: 11 times
Re: Research changes planned?
« Reply #21 on: January 15, 2018, 09:44:04 AM »
For some things the global research makes sense, like Military technology where all the steps of distribution are pretty accurately modeled in game ( need to make racial techs + design ships + retool shipyards + build actual ships ) before the new tech is out in the field.

I also think it makes fairly decent sense in situations like Civilian liners that won't put new tech into production until it's replacing decommissioned ships ( might need a few tweaks to be perfect ).

But I do agree that it doesn't make a whole lot sense how all your mines and factories even in the fringe systems instantly upgrade overnight after completing research.


Diminishing returns I think would be a great idea to give smaller empires a better chance to be high tech too, and prevent massive empires being able to brute force research by just throwing hundreds of labs at all problems at once.

It would also be interesting to be able to pick some quality vs quantity approach to your academies ( either crank out more low quality leaders or fewer high quality leaders ) in the same spirit.

Yes, the way military technology is researched and implemented is realistic and my main concern was exactly what you also pointed to, the ones that have en immediate effect on game-play. These technologies should have a similar system to military just a bit more automated because it is not part of the core game-play.
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • J
  • Posts: 752
  • Thanked: 11 times
Re: Research changes planned?
« Reply #22 on: January 15, 2018, 09:52:20 AM »
I think he means more in the sense of stuff that literally is just an arbitrary game balance decision, like the flat research penalty in Stellaris.

You can view such mechanics as an abstracted way of penalize a bigger empire from having technologies reach out to all of their colonies everywhere.

A smaller empire will need much less effort to implement new technologies from a logistical and infrastructure standpoint. Then there is also the fact that the larger a bureaucracy become the more resources it need to support by even more bureaucracy.
« Last Edit: January 15, 2018, 09:57:18 AM by Jorgen_CAB »
 

Offline Zincat

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • Z
  • Posts: 285
  • Thanked: 27 times
Re: Research changes planned?
« Reply #23 on: January 15, 2018, 01:30:11 PM »
I think he means more in the sense of stuff that literally is just an arbitrary game balance decision, like the flat research penalty in Stellaris.

To be honest, in stellaris it is mostly justified. The rationalization is that the cost of research also include the cost of adoption throughout the empire. Keep in mind that a lot of the Tech in stellaris (most of them in fact) give immediate bonuses, or cost very little to implement.

A lot of techs give flat bonuses or unlock new possibilities instantly. Once you research better weapons, the cost to retrofit old ships is negligible. And the like. In this scenario, making tech cost more for larger empires is justified, because you're also paying the cost to spread the usage of the technology throughout the nation.

Aurora is a mixed bag. Components and weapons are hard to improve, because retrofitting is harsh in Aurora, and as such you'll most likely have to build new ships. Not a cheap option.
General tech instead is immediately available when researched, like factory production and so on. So, frankly speaking Aurora is not simulating very well this particular scenario.


And yes, the cost of adoption is actually SIGNIFICANT. It took decades or centuries for a lot of technological discoveries to be applied in the real world.
 

Offline TCD

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • T
  • Posts: 210
  • Thanked: 14 times
Re: Research changes planned?
« Reply #24 on: January 16, 2018, 09:56:12 AM »
While I would applaud the realism of having a time/cost to roll out new tech, there is a danger of horrible micro-management. I imagine we all remember the tedium in other 4x games of researching "Mining 3" and then having to click on every planet in the empire to upgrade their level 2 mines to level 3 mines. No thank you.

So any suggestions here would need to be automatic for me. I can't think of an easy to way to do that without adding a whole load of extra calculations and mechanics for Steve to have to implement.

As a simple example, if you have a time lag for implementation of a new tech is that centered on your capital, or where the tech is researched? Is implementation solely based on distance? If so is it modified by engine speed? Are new facilities automatically going to be built with the new tech or the local tech?
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • J
  • Posts: 752
  • Thanked: 11 times
Re: Research changes planned?
« Reply #25 on: January 16, 2018, 01:47:57 PM »
While I would applaud the realism of having a time/cost to roll out new tech, there is a danger of horrible micro-management. I imagine we all remember the tedium in other 4x games of researching "Mining 3" and then having to click on every planet in the empire to upgrade their level 2 mines to level 3 mines. No thank you.

So any suggestions here would need to be automatic for me. I can't think of an easy to way to do that without adding a whole load of extra calculations and mechanics for Steve to have to implement.

As a simple example, if you have a time lag for implementation of a new tech is that centered on your capital, or where the tech is researched? Is implementation solely based on distance? If so is it modified by engine speed? Are new facilities automatically going to be built with the new tech or the local tech?

Steve have commented on this before and he would not want to have something complicated or something that cause micromanagement.

Something simple would be a tech level on each category for the empire and when you increase to a new level the time for implementation would scale with some algorithm based on number of colonies and population that carry installation of that technology, or some such mechanic. Then that would decide the time it take to implement the new technology. Under this time you first start with a penalty of -15% and then end up with the +20% you get for the new tech (if that is the increase) slowly over time.

This would produce a more costly implementation for larger empires and less costly for smaller empires. It would be automatic and easy to implement since the end result is an empire wide modifier to all colonies.

You could make the modifiers time stamp individual for each colony based on an algorithm which would only add one extra parameter per colony.
 

Offline TCD

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • T
  • Posts: 210
  • Thanked: 14 times
Re: Research changes planned?
« Reply #26 on: January 16, 2018, 04:43:18 PM »
Steve have commented on this before and he would not want to have something complicated or something that cause micromanagement.

Something simple would be a tech level on each category for the empire and when you increase to a new level the time for implementation would scale with some algorithm based on number of colonies and population that carry installation of that technology, or some such mechanic. Then that would decide the time it take to implement the new technology. Under this time you first start with a penalty of -15% and then end up with the +20% you get for the new tech (if that is the increase) slowly over time.

This would produce a more costly implementation for larger empires and less costly for smaller empires. It would be automatic and easy to implement since the end result is an empire wide modifier to all colonies.

You could make the modifiers time stamp individual for each colony based on an algorithm which would only add one extra parameter per colony.
I'm not sure I see why it would take longer to upgrade mines or factories in a large but compact empire rather than a small sprawling empire? But you did inspire me to think about an alternative, that each such change has a fixed implementation time (lets say 3 months) irrespective of empire size, before the gain happens. And during that implementation time wealth is consumed based on total number of facilities being upgraded?

So the time to implement for a large empire is the same as for a small empire, but it costs a lot more wealth.
 
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • J
  • Posts: 752
  • Thanked: 11 times
Re: Research changes planned?
« Reply #27 on: January 16, 2018, 08:15:09 PM »
I'm not sure I see why it would take longer to upgrade mines or factories in a large but compact empire rather than a small sprawling empire? But you did inspire me to think about an alternative, that each such change has a fixed implementation time (lets say 3 months) irrespective of empire size, before the gain happens. And during that implementation time wealth is consumed based on total number of facilities being upgraded?

So the time to implement for a large empire is the same as for a small empire, but it costs a lot more wealth.
 

Did I say it would take longer in a more compact empire than a more spread out one. I said it would be based on some algorithm based on whatever parameter that would impact the rate it would take to upgrade.  ;)

Adding an additional Wealth cost seem pretty appropriate as well as a slightly diminished capacity during the upgrade in the beginning.
« Last Edit: January 16, 2018, 08:16:43 PM by Jorgen_CAB »
 

Offline TheDeadlyShoe

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1238
  • Thanked: 50 times
  • Dance Commander
Re: Research changes planned?
« Reply #28 on: January 18, 2018, 10:26:44 PM »
i always heavily limit my infrastructure and usage of labs, i think the game plays better without exploding research.

particularly, the direct link between economic strength and research strength is IMO problematic, creating a never ending virtuous circle that balloons power.  In terms of Aurora-as-Game, you also end up with weird incentives like turtling on Conventional Earth until you are very high tech.  Anomalies were a great step away from this, but they arn't enough to really show a benefit to doing actual expansion. 

My ideal looks something like having global research, and anomalies provide % bonuses to categories; scientists study anomalies via some mechanism to provide the bonuses, and act as subordinate staff on science vessels. Thus aggressive exploration results in better research than turtling, potentially with farflung outposts that are tough to effectively defend.



« Last Edit: January 19, 2018, 02:53:49 PM by TheDeadlyShoe »
 

Offline Iranon

  • Captain
  • **********
  • I
  • Posts: 529
  • Thanked: 39 times
Re: Research changes planned?
« Reply #29 on: January 19, 2018, 12:26:28 PM »
It would be quite interesting to have diminishing returns for throwing resources at a particular research line... but to some extent that is already taken care of by exponentially increasing research cost, in a mechanically simple and elegant way.

Currently, a minor annoyance is that keeping up with unimportant tech lines is annoying... researching 20 1000-RP tech isnĀ“t much of an investment by the midgame but still interrupts your game 20 times and requires a few clicks each time.
 

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53