Post reply

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: alex_brunius
« on: June 30, 2024, 02:39:59 PM »

I did go for an 18" laptop with 2560x1600 resolution, but ultimately its still a laptop :)

I see excuses where there should be possibilities  ::) Time for an upgrade next time the RV goes into drydock for overhauls?  ;D ;)



Posted by: Alsadius
« on: June 30, 2024, 10:47:30 AM »

And then I see Steve's post, from a month and a half ago, discussing basically the same idea.

I'll take that as praise for my imagination, mild criticism for my timeliness, and more firm criticism of my unwillingness to read the full thread before posting.
Posted by: Alsadius
« on: June 30, 2024, 10:43:23 AM »

The general argument most people are making here is that colony ships are over-built and under-utilized, meaning that there's huge latent capacity which can get overwhelming for an empire. I see two potential parts to a solution here.

First and simplest, civilian companies should be paying maintenance costs out of their revenues, so they don't just pile up cash. You also want to split colony ships from cargo ships, so one can't cross-subsidize the other too badly. (Doesn't need to be fully split, but there should at least be some corps that do one or the other but not both.)

Second, and this will probably be harder to code/balance, I think you could use the excess capacity with people moving back and forth. Like, you don't expect every single person moving between A and B to be going in the same direction - there's not a plane route on the planet today that carries people in one direction but not the other. Tourism and bi-directional migration would give colony ships stuff to do other than just slamming people from sources into destinations en masse.

For an example of some mechanics I just threw together, maybe each planet has a colonization appeal score that'd be used to figure out where people move.
* +100 (base, as long as supported population >0)
* -1 for each percent of planetary population capacity used
* -3 for each percent of unrest
* -5 for each percent of the planet's population that's available workers (which would go negative if the planet has a shortage)
* -10 for each percent of the planet's population that exceeds infrastructure limits
* -10 for each point of colonization cost
* -10 for each other empire on the planet
* -20 for having any forced labour facilities
* +1 for each spaceport, slipway, naval HQ, and sector command
* +5 for each point of mineral accessibility
* +20 for having ancient constructs

Each five-day production tick, a percentage of the population wants to move away equal to 0.1% * (100-appeal)%, so a planet with 100+ appeal has no emigration pressure, while a planet with zero appeal could lose 0.1% * 73 ticks per year = 7.3% of its population, if sufficient transport exists to take them away.

For an example, my current Earth is at 8.12/12 billion (68%, for -68 appeal), 9.6% unemployment (for -48 appeal), no unrest, no CC, no other empires, no slavery, 3 spaceports+21 slipways+10 naval HQs (for +34 total appeal), 4.4 mineral accessibility (for +22 appeal), and no constructs. So the total appeal would be 100-68-48+34+22 = 40 net appeal. My Earth would get 0.1*(100-40)% = 0.06% per tick who want to move away (which is 4.87 million), so 0.06*73 = 4.38% per year (or 356 million) will decide they might like to move away. This number adds up over time, maybe with some decay to represent people in that pool dying or changing their minds.

When a civilian liner decides where to go, it picks from the potential destinations, and decides between them based on appeal - just a simple random selection, weighted by their appeal. Passengers also pay based on appeal. So if my only other habitable colonies are Mars (appeal 20) and Proxima Centauri 3 (appeal 60), a liner has an 60% chance of picking Proxima and a 20% chance of picking Mars, with the remaining 20% being a chance that people don't like the current options and stay put(i.e., the ship flies empty). The liner will also make 3x more if they go to Proxima, because people like it 3x better.

The important part of this is that the other planets are also below 100% appeal, and also have emigration demand building up. Mars wants to shed 7.3%*(100-20)% = 5.84% per year, and Proxima wants to shed 7.3%*(100-60)% = 3.92% per year. These numbers also pile up, and the colony ships will also be bringing some people back to Earth from there. Any planet below 0 appeal will never get anyone, and any planet over 100% appeal will never lose anyone, but the 0-100 range is pretty wide, and should include most of your colonies at any given time. (And if you don't like it, build your own colony ships and move people yourself, because those mechanics won't change.)

If this isn't enough, you could add tourism to the mix. But I can't see how to make that work especially well, and I don't think you need it.

---

Design notes:
* A small colony can still have natural population growth exceed emigration pressure, unless the place is deeply negative on appeal.

* The "ships will fly empty if total appeal is too low" mechanic is to address the issue of there being no net movement early on in a game. In particular, if you only have two populated colonies, and both are producing a decent number of willing emigres, you can easily saturate a few colony ships and get zero net movement with the basic mechanics.

* There's a risk if the willing emigre population of a planet stacks up for too long and reaches 100% of planetary population, and then civilian capacity catches up and strips the place clean. I'd make that pool decay by something like like 5% of the total emigre pool per year, to represent people dying or changing their minds.

* The bit about pops paying more for more appealing destinations is intended to add a bit more to the economics of the game, and also to compensate for the longer trips that's likely to imply. Closer-in colonies will likely get filled up first, and filling up a colony will progressively lower its appeal, so the most appealing colonies will typically be newer ones that are further from your core.

* I'm not sure if the ships will return to Earth often enough to pick up a lot of net new emigres, using the mechanics above - shuttling back and forth between small colonies that all want people, and rarely actually adding new people to those worlds, would not be a good outcome for these mechanics. Perhaps if a ship can't get a full load, it will not actually make the trip it was considering - it'll instead go to a random planet that can fill it up(weighted by the size of the emigre pool on each planet, so it'll mostly go to your big core worlds).

* You might want to add some kind of "entertainment facility" whose primary purpose is to increase the appeal of a planet, possibly also reducing unrest. Playtest and see, I think.
Posted by: Droll
« on: May 22, 2024, 01:38:51 PM »

Honestly at that size you should just go for an integrated mousepad lol.
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: May 22, 2024, 09:45:27 AM »

I did go for an 18" laptop with 2560x1600 resolution, but ultimately its still a laptop :)
Posted by: vorpal+5
« on: May 22, 2024, 08:26:52 AM »

Laptop? Laptop!

Peace (of mind) through Superior Firepower  ;D



Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: May 21, 2024, 12:35:17 PM »

These changes are so great they broke the forums for days with their sheer awesomeness.

LoooL

Steve, I will be brutal, how about release the 2.6 so we can try the juicy shipping line thing?

It's going to be a while before any new release. We are now 10 weeks into our motorhome trip and its going really well (currently on the Isle of Skye). Instead of returning to the Isle of Man in September, we are likely heading to Spain and parking on a beach for a few months :)

I would like to be back on my PC before doing a new release, as programming on a laptop is not ideal.
Posted by: Droll
« on: May 21, 2024, 11:22:06 AM »

Right now the only way I can think of a shipping line shrinking is through very old ships being retired while there are other ships idling (or getting their ships blown up). I know in the changelogs Steve sort of shoots down the idea of explicitly modelling operating costs, but maybe that would be a good way to have civilian shipping more closely model the economic activity of the empire. The admin overhead just reduces the growth rate as the shipping line gets bigger and doesn't really do the same thing.

Also I am once again asking for mineral transport contracts (esp being able to peg it to reserve levels).
Posted by: Kaiser
« on: May 21, 2024, 10:15:32 AM »

These changes are so great they broke the forums for days with their sheer awesomeness.

LoooL

Steve, I will be brutal, how about release the 2.6 so we can try the juicy shipping line thing?
Posted by: nuclearslurpee
« on: May 21, 2024, 10:11:58 AM »

These changes are so great they broke the forums for days with their sheer awesomeness.
Posted by: Warer
« on: May 21, 2024, 09:43:55 AM »

Really love the shipping line changes!
Posted by: Lastek
« on: May 18, 2024, 08:46:51 AM »

First of all - all the changes look great!

At the topic of civilian shipping lines (hope I'm not late to the party), would it be possible to organise the civilian ships into some kind of convoys? Right now every ship is in its own fleet, which leads to tens if not hundreds of civilian fleets flying around.  This would declutter the map while still being able to see the CIVs on screen and could potentially limit the late game lag, since the civilian AI would calculate the decisions for lower number of fleets.

Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: May 17, 2024, 01:00:09 PM »

Interesting changes! Not sure if I should continue discussing here, or move to the change discussion thread, but since we're here...

Will we still be able to set colonies as source or destination or stable?

Also, would it be possible to set taxation on shipping to be negative i.e. to offer incentives to grow their fleet, particularly early on?

Lastly, the changes don't seem to address the balance between colony and cargo ships. Would it be possible to set that taxation on a per type basis? Or is there some other way that balance has/will be adjusted?

Source, destination, stable still work as before, but destination is overridden if pressure is 10+

I don't want to go down the subsidize route again, as that could make the situation worse.

I am going to also add some changes to how civs decide what to build, based more on what is needed, but haven't got around to that yet.
Posted by: nakorkren
« on: May 17, 2024, 11:52:35 AM »

Interesting changes! Not sure if I should continue discussing here, or move to the change discussion thread, but since we're here...

Will we still be able to set colonies as source or destination or stable?

Also, would it be possible to set taxation on shipping to be negative i.e. to offer incentives to grow their fleet, particularly early on?

Lastly, the changes don't seem to address the balance between colony and cargo ships. Would it be possible to set that taxation on a per type basis? Or is there some other way that balance has/will be adjusted?
Posted by: nakorkren
« on: May 17, 2024, 11:36:14 AM »

DRAT, I was too slow!

You know what though, while I liked my ideas, I'll take super-fast game updates from Steve over my specific ideas any day.