Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Please read the rules before you post!


Topic Summary

Posted by: Jorgen_CAB
« on: July 21, 2024, 01:39:21 PM »

Quote from: MinuteMan on July 01, 2024, 10:42:56 AM
@steve

I like the ideas and discussions present already.

But I want to propose some new ideas. Maybe it can be a source of inspiration / other ideas.
To be honest, it's a larger change. And not fully defined.

Instead of having "general" research labs which are used for every field.
You could change it as follows:

* Introduction or research campus
** A research campus is one or more labs.
** A research campus is focused on a specific "field"
** A research campus can research techs not in it's field. But forgo's (or diminished) any research bonusses.
** A research campus can be "refocused" on another field. TN and wealth cost.
** A research campus is assigned a "research administrator", which determines upper research lab limit.
*** If the administrator is replaced with a lower cap, the research bonus is reduced and no new labs can be added.
** A research campus can be expanded with x labs.
*** Adding additional labs can have their own cost curve. Promoting the idea of possible multiple campuses.
** Ancient construct bonus applies to whole campus
* Researchers are assigned to "Research campuses"
** Multiple researchers can be assigned to a campus. If a campus has 10 labs, max 10 researchers.
** Each researcher can have an assigned tech to research.
** Research bonus is a combination of campus bonus + researcher bonus.
...

These suggestions do the following (game balance):
* A Wealth and TN minerals commitment to certain tech fields.
** So it becomes a conscious decision to go down a certain path.
** Same argument for "refocus" of campus. (Like retooling a shipyard)
* Protecting research colonies becomes even more important
* Losing a specific researcher with a large bonus is still hurtful, but possibly reduced by a good research campus admin.
* Slower to snowball in specific research fields without lacking in others. Currently you can move over all your labs between research fields / tasks.
* ...

Goal: Slowing down the research lab snowball we have assigned to a single research task. And being able to move labs to another research field in an instant.

These are some excellent ideas and sort of how i play they game. I usually don't allow changing labs from one field to another in an instant and only do some every year even if I wanted to switch many more.
Posted by: Alsadius
« on: July 21, 2024, 11:20:49 AM »

Quote from: Gram123 on July 21, 2024, 09:45:21 AM
Any recommendation for a DB editor?

DB Browser for SQLite has been very easy to work with, IMO. https://sqlitebrowser.org/dl/
Posted by: Gram123
« on: July 21, 2024, 09:45:21 AM »

Quote from: ranger044 on June 25, 2024, 05:29:58 PM
If you're comfortable with editing the DB, you can make conventional industry build able. I run my conventional games at 50% speed, limited administration, but turn on conventional industry.

NOTE: If you do this, you forego any ability to bug report and any errors or corrupted files you end up with are on you.

With that being said, it's very easy to download a DB editor and then you just need to change a couple numbers. I personally have them allowed and make them cost 15% of all their associated upgraded facilities' costs. Makes them less valuable but still useful until you research trans-newtonian tech. The upgraded facilities are 10x better and cost less around 8x as much this way. Still encourages development, but allows a long early game.

Any recommendation for a DB editor?
Posted by: Eretzu
« on: July 04, 2024, 01:50:40 AM »

Seems like this thread got quite off-topic. :P

But to original question, I like to start with conventional empire, but then give myself the TN tech immediately. Then even with slow research speed settings you get to build things and industrialize.
Posted by: Froggiest1982
« on: July 03, 2024, 05:10:18 PM »

Quote from: serger on July 02, 2024, 11:44:45 AM
That's what marked as TaxableWorkers in the DB:

Yeah, that's what I thought...

Quote from: kks on July 02, 2024, 10:47:06 AM
As far as I know, in 2.x wealth is not generated simply by pops but by installations which "produce" something. I could not find which buildings this are, the mechanics post just says "TN installations". I was under the impressions that it are mostly mines, financial centres and factories which produces wealth.
I would be quite surprised if labs large carry most of their own expenses, as research for my empires is most often the biggest wealth expenditure, taking up to 50% of wealth.

Off-Topic: show
Without delving too deeply into economic concepts, a balance sheet like Aurora hardly presents the true scale of the economy. For instance, scientists generate both income and expenses, which tend to balance out over time. This means that each time you add scientists, you're actually generating more income rather than increasing expenses, as I have already pointed out.

The same principle applies to financial centers, which represent a double benefit: tax revenues and wealth generation (though accounted for separately). I recall Steve needed to adjust the economy at the start of C#, and I wonder how much of that was due to the model's foundation not being clear (I'd say incorrect, but that wouldn't be fair).

It's a pity because all the elements are there: unemployment, trade goods shortages and surpluses, population, civilian companies, and resources. Creating an economic system should be fairly straightforward without needing to alter the code beyond adjusting values. You might just need to add a line or two to account for welfare, such as unemployment benefits.

Currently, wealth is treated as just another resource that you need to "farm" to achieve your goals. Need more wealth? Build more of this or that, regardless of whether factories are shut down producing nothing or terraforming installations have been idle for centuries.

Personally, given the highly logistical nature of the core system, it would be interesting to have the need to balance wealth along with resources.
Posted by: serger
« on: July 02, 2024, 11:44:45 AM »

Quote from: kks on July 02, 2024, 10:47:06 AM
As far as I know, in 2.x wealth is not generated simply by pops but by installations which "produce" something. I could not find which buildings this are, the mechanics post just says "TN installations". I was under the impressions that it are mostly mines, financial centres and factories which produces wealth.
I would be quite surprised if labs large carry most of their own expenses, as research for my empires is most often the biggest wealth expenditure, taking up to 50% of wealth.

That's what marked as TaxableWorkers in the DB:

Posted by: kks
« on: July 02, 2024, 10:47:06 AM »

Quote from: Froggiest1982 on July 01, 2024, 06:08:52 PM

I would also support using wealth on a larger scale in the process. To elaborate, in a recent campaign's early stages, I have 48 million scientists generating 120 wealth per year per million. My research expenses during this period were approximately 8.5k. Essentially, the cost of my research labs and efforts to taxpayers was less than 3k ((48 * 120) - 8500).

Maybe it's just me, or perhaps my equation isn't correct, but it seems too inexpensive compared to how much R&D functions in the real world. Additionally, as Wealth generation technology advances, the impact of wealth on actual research efforts may become completely irrelevant, which is likely an overlooked side effect of the current wealth balance. I'm not suggesting we break the financial model, but if some are concerned about slowing down or unintended consequences from overly ambitious research, financing could be a solution, along with the already suggested mineral usage.


As far as I know, in 2.x wealth is not generated simply by pops but by installations which "produce" something. I could not find which buildings this are, the mechanics post just says "TN installations". I was under the impressions that it are mostly mines, financial centres and factories which produces wealth.
I would be quite surprised if labs large carry most of their own expenses, as research for my empires is most often the biggest wealth expenditure, taking up to 50% of wealth.
Posted by: Froggiest1982
« on: July 01, 2024, 06:08:52 PM »

Quote from: MinuteMan on July 01, 2024, 10:42:56 AM
...

I will start by quoting Nuclear on our previous discussion:

Quote from: nuclearslurpee on June 25, 2024, 06:24:40 PM
There is a piece of wisdom about research rates: since tech costs in Aurora scale exponentially (roughly 2^x), there will always be a 'wall' you hit after which advancing in tech is a very slow process. Changing the research rate speed only changes the point in the tech tree where that wall is hit. With the default 100% that wall might come at, say, solid AM tech level, while on 20% research the wall may be at MP Drive or Magnetic Fusion tech levels. However, there will be a wall either way, all the tech slider decides is what tech level the wall is at. If you want to play 100 years at NPE tech, then you can set research to 5% as long as you are comfortable with the implications RE: NPRs and spoilers.

The research will inevitably slow down at some point if you adhere to the admin cap, as there is only a limited amount of labs and RP that can be generated per year, even by the most gifted scientists. Additionally, this is a benefit that can only be enjoyed during the later years of their lives, making it a temporary bonus.

I think we should aim to distribute research evenly or at least gradually, with some key technologies being more expensive and others slightly less so as a direct consequence of initial efforts. Unfortunately, this would require the creation of several intermediary technologies, and the Aurora tech tree would need to be rebuilt from scratch, something Steve may need to outsource the design to a forum group or panel as it cannot be redone in-game during testing. You have this partially due to components, engine/power plants connection, and some other intertwined techs and branches. Perhaps it could be expanded? I seriously doubt he would consider it anyway, as the amount of work for little to no gain would likely not be worth the trouble. Also, the changes could involve several other part of the code, making it even more difficult to implement.

Regardless, I am happy that research is getting back on topic and the usage of TN resources is on the table. Personally, I agree incorporating minerals that have had less utility into the equation adds an enjoyable twist to our challenges without causing too much micromanagement! ;D

I would also support using wealth on a larger scale in the process. To elaborate, in a recent campaign's early stages, I have 48 million scientists generating 120 wealth per year per million. My research expenses during this period were approximately 8.5k. Essentially, the cost of my research labs and efforts to taxpayers was less than 3k ((48 * 120) - 8500).

Maybe it's just me, or perhaps my equation isn't correct, but it seems too inexpensive compared to how much R&D functions in the real world. Additionally, as Wealth generation technology advances, the impact of wealth on actual research efforts may become completely irrelevant, which is likely an overlooked side effect of the current wealth balance. I'm not suggesting we break the financial model, but if some are concerned about slowing down or unintended consequences from overly ambitious research, financing could be a solution, along with the already suggested mineral usage.

Finally, I would also welcome random events that could advance or degrade the project by a random percentage from time to time. This will make the research timeline even less predictable when combined with always possible unexpected deaths.

Just on a personal note, I have seen many great ideas, but please, while formulating them, bear in mind that everything still needs to function with the NPRs' AI as well, or we may encounter larger issues than expected.

Of course, Steve knows this better than we do.
Posted by: MinuteMan
« on: July 01, 2024, 10:42:56 AM »

@steve

I like the ideas and discussions present already.

But I want to propose some new ideas. Maybe it can be a source of inspiration / other ideas.
To be honest, it's a larger change. And not fully defined.

Instead of having "general" research labs which are used for every field.
You could change it as follows:

* Introduction or research campus
** A research campus is one or more labs.
** A research campus is focused on a specific "field"
** A research campus can research techs not in it's field. But forgo's (or diminished) any research bonusses.
** A research campus can be "refocused" on another field. TN and wealth cost.
** A research campus is assigned a "research administrator", which determines upper research lab limit.
*** If the administrator is replaced with a lower cap, the research bonus is reduced and no new labs can be added.
** A research campus can be expanded with x labs.
*** Adding additional labs can have their own cost curve. Promoting the idea of possible multiple campuses.
** Ancient construct bonus applies to whole campus
* Researchers are assigned to "Research campuses"
** Multiple researchers can be assigned to a campus. If a campus has 10 labs, max 10 researchers.
** Each researcher can have an assigned tech to research.
** Research bonus is a combination of campus bonus + researcher bonus.
...

These suggestions do the following (game balance):
* A Wealth and TN minerals commitment to certain tech fields.
** So it becomes a conscious decision to go down a certain path.
** Same argument for "refocus" of campus. (Like retooling a shipyard)
* Protecting research colonies becomes even more important
* Losing a specific researcher with a large bonus is still hurtful, but possibly reduced by a good research campus admin.
* Slower to snowball in specific research fields without lacking in others. Currently you can move over all your labs between research fields / tasks.
* ...

Goal: Slowing down the research lab snowball we have assigned to a single research task. And being able to move labs to another research field in an instant.
Posted by: kks
« on: June 30, 2024, 07:18:10 AM »

Quote from: serger on June 30, 2024, 04:09:20 AM
Quote from: kks on June 29, 2024, 06:00:59 PM
I think that should belong to the suggestion thread? It kind of looks off-topic in here.

Ermm. This thread is in Suggestions subboard actually.

Yes, I just thought it might get overlooked in this particular thread and has better visibility in the pinned thread "Suggestions for 2.x". As most posts here are discussion posts.
Posted by: serger
« on: June 30, 2024, 04:09:20 AM »

Quote from: kks on June 29, 2024, 06:00:59 PM
I think that should belong to the suggestion thread? It kind of looks off-topic in here.

Ermm. This thread is in Suggestions subboard actually.
Posted by: kks
« on: June 29, 2024, 06:00:59 PM »

Quote from: serger on June 29, 2024, 06:32:11 AM
A small suggestion from inside the current real war:

Make ECM and ECCM techs affecting accuracy / fortification modifiers of the GF.

It became real, and more so - it became ubiquitous and obligatory. There's just no attack or strike any more without drone spotting and fire control here. EW in not anymore focused on air and naval operations, the ground forces became completely involved and dependent on the radio bands warfare.

I think that should belong to the suggestion thread? It kind of looks off-topic in here.
Posted by: Marski
« on: June 29, 2024, 02:02:35 PM »

Quote from: alex_brunius on June 26, 2024, 04:04:39 AM
Quote from: Kaiser on June 26, 2024, 12:57:48 AM
I also like to play slow starting always conventional but leaving all the other options as default when we speak about research speed.
Believe me, in the beginning you probably makes a lot of discovery because the low cost and that gives you the feeling of a fast game, but as long as you progress in the game, as long as you do not construct dozzillion of labs, the amount of researches slow down due to the increase cost and the need to reseach always new designs if you do not want be oblitered by aliens and keep your fleet in order.

Maybe Steve could reconsider the research cost in terms of wealth making it more expensive, thus avoiding the buildup of laboratories; in real life the tech research is a very expensive part of the budget expecially the basic one.

I'm always a proponent of using diminishing returns to automatically balance things. So I want to suggest something similar.

Research funding setting.
Basically you can set research funding (wealth cost of running labs) between for example 10% and 500% and it modifies your research speed acc to for example SQRT ([Research Funding %]/100)

This means you would get the following:



If that is too steep impact the exponent can be changed to cube root or any other value that seems appropriate, but the main purpose is to allow you to easily scale down and up research funding as your wealth budget and priorities allows. Most player would probably want to run at higher research funding levels to speed up research so the wealth cost would naturally increase.

Another potential outside the box suggestion to make researching expensive is considering if running research facilities should consume any TN minerals in addition to wealth.
Old 4x space game called "Sword of the Stars" handled research very nicely; you selected research project, you allocated funds and it presented you estimated completion time. However the actual completion time varied and if you just poured money into it, it suffered a very realistic and close to real life fate; after initial burst the progress starts to rapidly slow down until eventually it will take longer than if you'd just given 20-40% of what you allocated in the first place.
Posted by: serger
« on: June 29, 2024, 06:32:11 AM »

A small suggestion from inside the current real war:

Make ECM and ECCM techs affecting accuracy / fortification modifiers of the GF.

It became real, and more so - it became ubiquitous and obligatory. There's just no attack or strike any more without drone spotting and fire control here. EW is not anymore focused on air and naval operations, the ground forces became completely involved and dependent on the radio bands warfare.
Posted by: serger
« on: June 29, 2024, 02:09:57 AM »

Quote from: AlStar on June 28, 2024, 03:32:00 PM
You specifically called out characters dying or retiring as being disruptive to your narrative process

Nope, never did it.
Researchers dying or retiring are disruptive to managing the project, not to the narrative itself.

In Aurora, R&D projects are dissolving immediately with the death/retirement of it's admin. It's the player who needs to keep track on every project and restore them in every case of admin death or retirement. Then it's an inevitable point were you slip and it's a narrative break, indeed. Yet not because the chars are dying, but because the R&D projects in Aurora are made as if they are always in emergency mode.

There is no such awkwardness with ships or production - ship crews do not forget their tasks in case of their commander death or retirement, planetary production don't stop in case of planetary admin death or retirement. It's specific to R&D projects in Aurora.