Need money to make money, need factories to make factories

This is a topic SirKid started up today under the topic header "A Must Have Change." I thought the header could benefit from clarification (1) , and would like to know if anyone else has the same beef with the present building production model (2):

(1) https://forums.galciv2.com/?ForumID=162&AID=112320#863119

(2) I understand the "inspiration behind the game mechanic."

The United States is more likely to build a "new" subway than one using older technology, even if the older technology is cheaper. People are more likely to buy new calculators than using an abacus.

I understand because I live in a big city, where we have lots of money for public works and buying a calculator for five bucks is about as expensive as getting an abacus elsewheres for 2 bucks.

The problem is not "the idea." The problem is THE MATHEMATICS.

Say you just got a Grade 10 planet. That's 9 tiles to work with, because 1 goes to the initial colony.

Alright, say you just started and researched "Xeno Factories;" You have the option of building 10pt production at 540. You can have 9 of these for... let me pull out my graphing calculator....4860 bcs? So we have 9 factories fkr 90 production points for 4860. You use factories to produce more factories, so the build time gets shorter and shorter.

Now, say you're a newbie. You think that "Industrial Sector," more advanced production technology, is going to be superior than "Xeno Factories." So you research it. Now, you've got the option of 24 pts for over 10,000 bcs. And now, that's your only, only option if you want to build a production building. So the choices are 90pts/4800bcs and 24pts/10,000. You spend all the time and resources, and get a horrible pts/bcs tradeoff. Newbies don't know that with the current game mechanic, you actually get screwed for researching what's supposed to be an "Uber" technology. For them, the game is essentially over in terms of building factories "the natural way," once they research that technology, and unless they're producing over 10,000 bcs (possible, but by that time the game should be over anyways, unless you insist on having a 4yr old click the "end turn" button for better scores), they will never build another factory in under 400yrs without having to spend 10,000 per 24pt package.

So, the mathematics is what's wrong. In the United States, cities like Podunk, Kansas, don't need a New York sized subway. For a population of only 5 billion, the residents of Podunk Kansa might not need a Galactic Stock Exchange, either. But they have no other choice, because for some reason, the knowledge and option of building "practical" pts/bcs exchange has disappeared.

So basically, the present game mechanic is that new technology obsoletes the old technology, and erases knowledge of how to build small or medium scale, cheap and cost effective building. Since better technology is out there, you must use the better technology. This is like forcing people to buy a new computer every time a newer processor or graphics card comes out. The technology is out there... and it has "better" productivity value (unless you only touch cpu's for the games)... and can run load up WinXP or MS Office 20% faster. So you spend $5,000 every time a new cpu comes out, rather than stick with the budget $1,000.

At present, I find the game mechanic somewhat elitist, hurts both the newcomer, as well as veterans trying to make sense of a sci-fi setting. Better technology... which must be paid for in research costs.... will result in a poorer, and extremely prohibitive new pts/bcs exchange rate. It might take up less space, but the newer exchange rate is so poor that it's impractical to plop in another 10,000 bcs or another 5,000 bcs for a 4pt upgrade. Once you get to Manufacturing Centers, it's iffy.. .Industrial Sectors... just....no. Veterans know that Starbases are better; only research Industrial Sector to get Oribital Replicators for the Economy Starbases, actually building or upgrading to Industrial Sectors has hideously poor cost-effectiveness. Newbies are the only ones who would be foolish enough to research Industrial Sector for the purpose of actually building industrial Sectors. For Veterans, the game is over by the time your main planets are able to "naturally" upgrade its existing factories, because by that time, they're the only ones you can count on; any planets you turn or conquer will not be able to "naturally" build it, or can only do so after 40-400turns. Who should have to wait 40-400 turns to put 24pts on their planet? The only other option is to pay 10,000 bcs, which is the equivalent of 2 Huge-hulled, fully armed, defended, thruster-enhanced capital ships.

Upgrading planet tiles is a central game concept and a determinant in the player’s overall enjoyment of the game, and the existing logic for why a broader array of building options- including previous pts/bcs exchange mediums- vanish, once new tecnology is researched, apparantly makes sense to some people, including the developers, so it's unlikely to change. To be honest, it makes sense to me, too; in the 1970’s, the slide-rule industry vanished overnight with the advent of a new gizmo called the “electronic calculator.” In six years, it fell out of production and became a museum exhibit. The problem is that we’re talking about pts/bcs exchange rates, relative to marginal profits and costs. It’s why most of us don’t buy certain $500 graphing calculators; even if we could have only one calculator, the most any of use would spend would probably be $100, because the difference for the general user is marginal. The $500 dollor calculator might even be harder to use. It’s why people aren’t rushing out to but the latest $20,000 laptop to be able to run Galactic Civilizations II.

In short, I’d affirm the original grievance and request that it’d be addressed; having more building options can be exciting, and enhance the stimulation- and they’re already in the game.
16,982 views 19 replies
Reply #1 Top
Don't have the infrastructure, then don't research it. It's that simple. There would be too many options and too many annoyances IMO. Plus the AI would have to be re-written to evaluate what it should build when.
Reply #2 Top
Why make it more complex? I don't want the mm. Leave it like it is.

IMO It's easier and much more fun to learn how to deal with the mechanics that to have to deal with tons more micro management; game balance issues that would require a complete rewrite of the aI routimes, and a much more cluttered UI. I am not the best nor the worst player - and I have figured out ways to deal with it, mainly learning over time how to optimize my economy. I want a game that makes me think - not a game that hands everything to me on a silver platter.
Reply #3 Top
Perhaps make it this way

You only build the basic structures on squares, then you upgrade them as needed (via build queue or purchasing)

You can purchase unlimited upgrades in a turn, but the 1 rushbuild/turn a limit still applies for new construction...

Reply #4 Top
I've been trying lately in my new games to only reseach a new tech that will obsolete on old tech when i have too. I usually wait till i have the majority of planets im going to for my empire then i wait till every planet builds the basics. I.e. the basic: factories, research centers, markets. And while they are building those i concentrate my Tech tree into military offense and defense. It seemedto work, im playing neutral, i have 16,000 bc per turn, (dont have stock exchanges yet), huge galaxy, with 92% happiness and about 85% taxes. when the majority of my colonies build the latest factory, research,market i start research on the next level of factories and then whoever was left w/o an old style factory, research,market i buy them a new and improved model then let everyone else build on their own till its time to upgrade the tech level. If i have a surplus in NGP, i'll start buying up old model buildings so i can speed to my next Tech upgrade.
Reply #5 Top
You can purchase unlimited upgrades in a turn, but the 1 rushbuild/turn a limit still applies for new construction..


Too many new players would bankrupt themselves, and it just isn't realistic. (Shut up about damn space battle realism, it could happen in 220 years!)

Perhaps make it this way

You only build the basic structures on squares, then you upgrade them as needed (via build queue or purchasing)


Now that, I wouldn't mind seeing. It would be more like building a house: Lay down your foundations, and then build the house. However, this would remove the biggest weakness the DL have, their infrastructure issue. Can you imagine if they had the power to become fully active in, say, 40 turns? We'd all be screwed.
Reply #6 Top
You always have the option to purchase the building....
With a good economy, you can purchase one or two buildings to increase the speed that it builds.
Also, using the mechanics of the game, you can change the sliders to increase the social production of all your planets...
Using the social production slider and purchasing of the building, you can build high end structures pretty fast...

Think of it this way,
City needs to build a highway
With normal taxes, it will take 20 to 30 years to build.
Turn it into a toll road made by a private company, they will pay for the road out of pocket so they can build it in 5 years or so.

Also, on building new tech versus old and upgrading....
You do realize why lots of people have a buggy computer.....
Why windows is unreliable.
Reply #7 Top

I think this problem here is not making the old technology obsolete, it's the fact that the new technology takes so damn long to build, factories in particular. The problem could easily be solved just by making the new tech factories not take as long to build. Why should an industrial sector take 400 turns to build? Presumably if you're constructiong the latest technology buildings then you have the latest construction technology at your disposal to build them with. Building the latest factory with the latest construction tech shouldn't take any longer than building a basic factory with basic construction technology.

It doesn't always follow that the latest technology should be more expensive either; Computers for example have gotten much cheaper over the last 20 years, while also getting much more powerful, and I would bet that they take less time to build as well.

I would propose that the system stays the way it is, however that 'factory' class buildings now ALL have the same build time no matter what level of tech you're at - although they may want to keep the more advanced ones more expensive.

Reply #8 Top
Computers for example have gotten much cheaper over the last 20 years, while also getting much more powerful, and I would bet that they take less time to build as well.


That's a different matter. That's to do with the conductivity of certain things that makes a comp faster, and the use of more advanced Silicon chips. On a whole, some of the old (We're talking 30 years) computers at Mi5 can still out-tech anything on the market. Enigma was/is more powerful at what it does with letters than a modern computer, but it's a glorified typewriter that shuffles letters.

I would propose that the system stays the way it is, however that 'factory' class buildings now ALL have the same build time no matter what level of tech you're at - although they may want to keep the more advanced ones more expensive.


What's the point in building then? You're comparing a single factory to a city sized industrial sector? It needs to be the way it is.
Reply #9 Top
That's a different matter. That's to do with the conductivity of certain things that makes a comp faster, and the use of more advanced Silicon chips. On a whole, some of the old (We're talking 30 years) computers at Mi5 can still out-tech anything on the market. Enigma was/is more powerful at what it does with letters than a modern computer, but it's a glorified typewriter that shuffles letters.


I'm not sure what you mean by out-tech, but I don't think there's any question that generally speaking computers are much cheaper and much more powerful now than back then. I don't know much about the enigma code but just doing a google search on it I found links to many enigma simulations for just about every platform, and I'll wager they'd be a damn sight faster than the machines from the 40's.

All of that is beside the point though, as computers are just one example, if you want to take the subway example it's the same principle. Building a steam engine in the 1900's was much more time consuming and labour intensive than building an electric train now. It happens in all areas, as technology improve so does production techniques.

What's the point in building then? You're comparing a single factory to a city sized industrial sector? It needs to be the way it is.


In this game, an industrial sector takes up the same space as one factory, so naming aside, one is led to believe they take up the same amount of space. If you do want to take the naming literally though, an industrial sector would comprise of many factories, and you would think that after the first one was built it would aid in the construction of the second one as well as other projects, so even a partially built industrial sector should increase social production.

Reply #10 Top
It's no official solution, simply an idea to test if it works better for you.
Open your PlanetImprovements.xml with any texteditor. You can find tags like this:
[S_UpgradeTarget]Banking Center[/S_UpgradeTarget]
Remove these tags by deleting them (make a backup of this file!) or adding behind them
[!-- [S_UpgradeTarget>Banking Center[/S_UpgradeTarget] --]
after you did this, these techs don't become obsolete.

ATTENTION: I don't know how the AI handles this.

Hum, the [ and ] have to be other braces, but the board removes them...
Reply #11 Top
Yes, it's quite ironic that the quickest way to hamstring your industry is to research industrial technology early. Want to kill your research ability? Go as far down the research path as you can, as early as you can.

You could guarantee yourself a win by giving all the AIs Discovery Spheres or the final manufacturing tech on the first turn, as long as YOU didn't have to take it...
Reply #12 Top
You could guarantee yourself a win by giving all the AIs Discovery Spheres or the final manufacturing tech on the first turn, as long as YOU didn't have to take it...


LOL. That has to be most criminallly diabolical AI exploit. And what's also rich is you don't have to simply give it to them; you can make them pay top dollar for the self-crippling techs.

I support the developers and love their hard work and encourage my friends to buy what's now my favorite game, I'm also a bit annoyed at how the recent efforts on the forums to "cover-up" exploits and "design-flaws" that buy buy the developers more time while polishing its self-image.

For instance, a couple days ago, someone had a legitimately made 203yr old 4,300,000 point game on "Huge" and "Painful" because the scoring system relies heavily on the number of years in which the game takes place. He had his 4yr old click "End Turn" for an entire afternoon to get those 203yrs.

Stardock disqualified the game, for obvious reasons. One, single game on "Huge" and "Painful" resulted in a score that was three times the combined score of 13 "Suicidal," "Gigantic" maps. However, following its disqualification, the scoring issue still hasn't been addressed. It's been covered up. People would lose interest in the Metaverse if it was widely known that the Metaverse scoring system could be exploited like that, and sales would drop. Fixing it would mean admitting that an easy exploit has existed for months, and people who've been posting- and competing- would feel cheated. So they cover it up, without fixing it.

I'm annoyed because there are so many threads bragging about the "honesty" of the AI, and how some people on the forum shamelessly put down those who contest that. Others are seeing teh PR game, set to maximize profits, coming to light, and it burns.

The issue here is that building-upgrade flaw is touted as a "design feature" to cover up the the huge advantage that the human would have if the previous options were available. Having these options would require that the AI be strong enough to assess and compare previous options with the new ones, and to find the optimal configuration; with each option, the number of possible configarations increases exponentially.

Looking at the change logs, the developers are still trying to deal with things like the computer being able to assess when or when not to attack a starbase- humans can do that quickly and easily.

The AI simply isn't strong enough at present. It's currently considered a "design feature" so that the developers won't have to address it immediately- if ever.
Reply #13 Top
"I would propose that the system stays the way it is, however that 'factory' class buildings now ALL have the same build time no matter what level of tech you're at - although they may want to keep the more advanced ones more expensive."


That's excellent. Something along those lines would be a great compromise; 400yrs is ridiculous, and having no other option except shelling 10,000 bcs for a fast-build is equally ridiculous. This ruins the end game, by making growth on conquered or minor-race-terraformed planets ridiculously slllllllooooooooooooooooowwwwwww or expensive.
Reply #14 Top
And while they are building those i concentrate my Tech tree into military offense and defense. It seemedto work, im playing neutral, i have 16,000 bc per turn, (dont have stock exchanges yet), huge galaxy, with 92% happiness and about 85% taxes.


If i have a surplus in NGP, i'll start buying up old model buildings so i can speed to my next Tech upgrade.



"Book Dragon," you dirty, dirty child.

85% taxes and 92% happiness? I'm sorry, my B.S. detector is going crazy. Because 80% is the ceiling tax rate; at 81% and higher, Approval automatically drops to 1%, irregardless of planetary improvements or trade goods.

Please don't pull the numbers out of your ass. They stink. You've obviously bought the game, since you're able to post. The next step is to sit down, unwrap the CD's, and actually play the game, while contemplating the community value of vapid, self-glorifying, B.S. writing.
Reply #15 Top
I don't have any particular stand on this issue quite yet. I can see points on both sides. Let's take a look at the hard numbers of this, though.

Your initial colony has an industry value of 12. Assuming that you don't have any bonuses to production, racial or otherwise, this means that on 100% spending, with 100% allocated to social, you get 12 points worth of building accomplished.

Costs and production for structures:
Basic Factory: 50, 5 industry
Factory: 75, 8 production
Enhanced Factory: 100, 10 production
Manufacturing Center: 300, 12 production
Industrial Sectory: 800, 16 production

Time to build 1 facility, assuming no other improvements or bonuses on planet:
Basic Factory: 5 weeks
Factory: 7 weeks
Enhanced Factory: 9 weeks
Manufacturing Center: 25 weeks
Industrial Sector: 67 weeks

Okay, but what do all these numbers mean?

Analysis:
I think it's safe to say that most of the time, you're not running at 100%/100%, except at very early stages of the game. If you ended up with 17% social production (say you had 50% spending, and 34% social production), then that initial colony is only going to be producing 2 industry. Not really all that far fetched. But at that rate, that first Industrial Sector on a just-colonized planet is going to take that 400 weeks to build mentioned previously.

I think it's also safe to say that most gamers have a fairly clear definition of what's reasonable, in terms of weeks to build something. They don't think points, they think, 'how long is this going to take.' If we say that 4 weeks is fairly short, and that over 20 weeks is pretty long, then Industrial Sectors really do take quite too long to build.

By looking at these numbers, we can deduce what the designers' intentions were. In a typical game, by the time that you're researching Industrial sectors, they expected that you already have a pretty robust economy with well developed planets.

They also expect that if you're building those, you're probably running at higher than 17% social, through production bonuses, starbases, or what have you. One of the most basic techs, for example, Planetary Improvements, gives you a 10% bonus to social production. Star Republics and Democracies also give substantial bonuses to your entire empire.

With 30% net social production and 6 Manufacturing Centers, with no bonuses, Industrial Sectors take 32 weeks to build from scratch, or about 20 weeks to upgrade to. That's still a bit much to me, personally. I would suggest that perhaps the numbers ramp up a bit too quickly. But overall, you can mitigate the time to build Industrial Sectors by making a few changes in your gameplay.

First, don't research it so quickly. Manufacturing centers are still quite spiffy, and at less than half the cost of building Industrial Sectors. If you're just about to research it, take a look at your economy. Could you afford taking a few turns at 100%/100% directed at social? I often do this to quickly upgrade all kinds of structures.

Research some other techs to give you bonsuses, like the different forms of government. You might also consider taking some racial bonuses at the start of the game.

If you're about to conquer some worlds and don't think they have enough industry built up, you might want to build a few constructors to lurk in the wings, then have them swoop in and drop down an economic starbase. A fully developed economic starbase can give you a huge boost to industry. Three or four can even overlap, stacking all their bonsuses at once.

(If you're particularly lucky to have the planet in a corner of a sector, and have plenty of Logistics, you could even overlap 16 economic starbases on one planet... but that just starts to get silly. )

Industrial Sectors will still take a while to build on virgin worlds, so you might instead contemplate simply building them halfway, and then dropping money to pay for the rest. Things start to snowball fairly quickly once you get a couple of them plopped down on a planet.

Cheers!

crickel
Reply #16 Top
I don't have any particular stand on this issue quite yet. I can see points on both sides. Let's take a look at the hard numbers of this, though.

Your initial colony has an industry value of 12. Assuming that you don't have any bonuses to production, racial or otherwise, this means that on 100% spending, with 100% allocated to social, you get 12 points worth of building accomplished.

Costs and production for structures:
Basic Factory: 50, 5 industry
Factory: 75, 8 production
Enhanced Factory: 100, 10 production
Manufacturing Center: 300, 12 production
Industrial Sectory: 800, 16 production

Time to build 1 facility, assuming no other improvements or bonuses on planet:
Basic Factory: 5 weeks
Factory: 7 weeks
Enhanced Factory: 9 weeks
Manufacturing Center: 25 weeks
Industrial Sector: 67 weeks

Okay, but what do all these numbers mean?

Analysis:
I think it's safe to say that most of the time, you're not running at 100%/100%, except at very early stages of the game. If you ended up with 17% social production (say you had 50% spending, and 34% social production), then that initial colony is only going to be producing 2 industry. Not really all that far fetched. But at that rate, that first Industrial Sector on a just-colonized planet is going to take that 400 weeks to build mentioned previously.

I think it's also safe to say that most gamers have a fairly clear definition of what's reasonable, in terms of weeks to build something. They don't think points, they think, 'how long is this going to take.' If we say that 4 weeks is fairly short, and that over 20 weeks is pretty long, then Industrial Sectors really do take quite too long to build.

By looking at these numbers, we can deduce what the designers' intentions were. In a typical game, by the time that you're researching Industrial sectors, they expected that you already have a pretty robust economy with well developed planets.

They also expect that if you're building those, you're probably running at higher than 17% social, through production bonuses, starbases, or what have you. One of the most basic techs, for example, Planetary Improvements, gives you a 10% bonus to social production. Star Republics and Democracies also give substantial bonuses to your entire empire.

With 30% net social production and 6 Manufacturing Centers, with no bonuses, Industrial Sectors take 32 weeks to build from scratch, or about 20 weeks to upgrade to. That's still a bit much to me, personally. I would suggest that perhaps the numbers ramp up a bit too quickly. But overall, you can mitigate the time to build Industrial Sectors by making a few changes in your gameplay.

First, don't research it so quickly. Manufacturing centers are still quite spiffy, and at less than half the cost of building Industrial Sectors. If you're just about to research it, take a look at your economy. Could you afford taking a few turns at 100%/100% directed at social? I often do this to quickly upgrade all kinds of structures.

Research some other techs to give you bonsuses, like the different forms of government. You might also consider taking some racial bonuses at the start of the game.

If you're about to conquer some worlds and don't think they have enough industry built up, you might want to build a few constructors to lurk in the wings, then have them swoop in and drop down an economic starbase. A fully developed economic starbase can give you a huge boost to industry. Three or four can even overlap, stacking all their bonsuses at once.

(If you're particularly lucky to have the planet in a corner of a sector, and have plenty of Logistics, you could even overlap 16 economic starbases on one planet... but that just starts to get silly. )

Industrial Sectors will still take a while to build on virgin worlds, so you might instead contemplate simply building them halfway, and then dropping money to pay for the rest. Things start to snowball fairly quickly once you get a couple of them plopped down on a planet.

Cheers!

crickel
Reply #17 Top
If you're about to conquer some worlds and don't think they have enough industry built up, you might want to build a few constructors to lurk in the wings, then have them swoop in and drop down an economic starbase. A fully developed economic starbase can give you a huge boost to industry. Three or four can even overlap, stacking all their bonsuses at once.


Thanks cricket, that's great! And it's prettymuch all people can do.

The other option, obviously, is to not research it. Or keep putting it off until all your planets look about the same. These options are probably what the developers intended.

A note, though, if you're making good use of Economy Starbases- the only way to survive once you get past the "Intelligent" skill level, when things actually start to get challenging because the computer gets massive "bonus" backdrop resources, and your starbases evens it out (particularly the military ones, they're powerful and at present a human monopoly) - then you won't need Industrial Sectors. Ever. Unless you want Orbital Replicators for your starbases, which I really wish was a seperate research item, because Industrial Sectors is absolutely useless. By the time your economy can produce these over the Economy SB/ Manufacturing Center combo, the game should be over.

Having to build a three or four starbases just to be able to start up a single production facility is a good idea; however, it shouldn't be necessary to have to do so.

Reply #18 Top
Actually I think the original post has a point. If you're upgrading existing worlds it's no big deal. But if, late in game, you have occasion to take over a world with no industrial capacity you've got a problem.

One solution might be to let people continue to build older tech items. That way they could bootstrap up by starting out with a lower tech factory they can build or buy and then upgrading. The GUI aspects would have to be worked out of course so that by end game we aren't all presented with a huge list box of older stuff that in most cases we won't be interested in. Perhaps just a checkbox to show or not show stuff which is less then current technology.
Reply #19 Top
Actually I think the original post has a point. If you're upgrading existing worlds it's no big deal. But if, late in game, you have occasion to take over a world with no industrial capacity you've got a problem.


Excellent point. In my one 1.1Beta game so far, the changes have slowed colonization to the point that I was still colonizing after getting Manufacturing Centers (from the AI, so it's not like I rushed to get there). I was already colonizing as fast as I could afford the expenses of new colonies, so buying factories was not an option. Between needing colony ships, defensive ships to keep the overbreeding Torians from washing over me, and having fewer core worlds than new colonies, I really couldn't use the econ starbase method either.

I did think of a bandaid for the problem. I don't consider it a real solution, however. We have any unspent money from social spending going into military production. What if the reverse were allowed? Lay down a few factories, then the starport. All the spending goes to social construction until the starport is finished, by which time enough factories have been produced to let the planet continue social production at a reasonable pace without dedicating the factory output. That way, I don't even have to pay attention to the planet to switch it back, the occasional use of the govenor to switch all colonies building nothing to building a defensive or interceptor ship would flip the switch.