It wouldn't be one of my updates, if there wasn't at least one error in it. Fixed.
No worries, we'll sort this out. DMF is also here now
Curious.That's the bonus originally used by the Gravity Accelerator. If I'm not mistaken, this bonus either only works for TGs/SPs/GAs or is hardcoded to only work for the Gravity Accelerator. Either way, it should indeed be safe to use. It's an interesting workaround, and removes the necessity to spell out the bonus in the building-description. The only downside is that modders might get confused as to why those buildings have two seemingly identical bonuses, but I'm not too bothered by that. If necessary, we can simple add a comment explaining the reason behind this.
If I'm not mistaken the ShipsSpeedBonus-tag was the reason why the GravAcc didn't work. I've tested this on a few improvements - not all - but that tag did never work, albeit the tooltip info did always show up. The ShipMoveBonus so far did work on all improvements I tested (so the info in Cari's guide is definitely outdated) so I guess using this combo for 1pps and <AbilityType>3</AbilityType> for TG/GA should give enough variations that things will indeed bring the bonuses.
I wonder, if we could do something similar for ResistanceBonus. It's currently not used by the CU, but I want to bring it back (more on that in another post). The only somewhat fitting bonus for this is Loyalty. However, I'm worried that people might get confused, because planetary loyalty and the Loyalty-ability would be using the same name and icon.
I once tried to do this by exchanging the Influ-penalty of the Drengin-facs to a loyalty-penalty (that way their facs wouldn't depreciate their Tourism-income, or sphere-of-influence - which is evaluated for diplomacy hits). It, however, doesn't work. (Or, at least, I don't know how to do this...) I even tested with buildings increasing a planetary resistance to over 3000 but had it go rebellious and subsequently flipped a few turns later...
Their Pop-Growth seems fine to me as it is. They get +55% from their techs, have access to Aphrodisiac, and can get Xeno Biology and Fertility Acceleration from other races for 20% more (and access to the Fertility Clinic).
ok, BTW don't you think the FC is a bit misplaced? Alot of AIP aren't particularily interested in biology (except AIP7) and the FC is sort of lackluster once planets are crowded. It's more needed during the colony rush when the game still needs to establish a positive economy.
Seems reasonable. Maybe 10% or 20%? I don't want to make this too high, because the robots used by the Iconians aren't supposed to be as efficient as the Yor (though it could be arqued that this is represented by the lack of a Military Production bonus).
I don't know. The Iconians already get a PQ-bonus from a tech, which I'm not particularily fond of, because it doesn't fit the design of their tech tree. Plus, PQ and terraforming represent ways to make the planet adapt to your needs, while Super Adapter and the extreme colonization techs are about you being good at adapting yourself and your equipment to a new environment. Those are diametrically opposed ideas. Still, maybe 5%? As you said, it would be unique. I'm a bit wary of going any higher than that though. In the campaigns, races sometimes don't have a Starport (or even the Capital) on their planets, if they start out with Soil Enhancement. It's possible that having a high PQ-bonus could cause this too.
20% SP + 5% PQ would be fitting. The PQ boost only kicks initially on +20 planets. Taking the current outlay of the distr points that would equate to 60 points, not counting in their higher than normal logistics (which perhaps equates to another 40 points - or even more). So +100 points in total. Considering their reduction in available distr points from 100 to 70, that'll then make a total of +170 in comparison to a Custom Iconian that has 150 - but the benefit of picking a stronger SA. It's hard to evaluate the strength of the Iconian SA because it's so heavily based on the ExtremePlanets-frequency. Overall I find this fair.
I'm a bit torn regarding the buildcost. Yes, some improvements were clearly too expensive, so reducing their cost is fine. However, a lot of improvements, especially high-tier ones, feel too cheap to me now. As for the maintenance imbalance, I wasn't even sure whether to bring it up in the first place, because the way I would fix it would result in some major changes. Not just to the maintenance, most likely, but to a lot of other things as well.
The way I see it is this:
- In vanilla some improvement-lines, among them factories & moral impr, were too expensive and the AI never finished them. Some AIP simply turn to increased MP during endgame. That shouldn't happen and the CU did a good job preventing it. Though I find the endtier improvements too cheap, because once facs are at tier3 etc the planetary production is raised wih it naturally so errecting the endtier impr can happen swiftly, too. Increasing those buildcost a bit should still be possible without re-causing the former "unfinished planets" AI issue, don't you think?
- Maint is too low currently. In vanilla it may have been a bit too high but the CU did increase alot of base stats (mostly incorporated by techs) to morale, econ, trade, popgrowth etc where races actually profit positively in the long run. Currently maint is a non-issue. And I especially find it awkward that Civ-wide improvements such as TG, SP & GA are maint-free - if something needs to be transmitted throughout the galaxy it surely must be accompanied by some costs.
It's tempting to give it the same purpleish colour as the Stalks (the Query Graphic would also need to be adjusted). I'm just a bit worried that players could confuse the Maintenance Grid with the VR Center, because they still share the same design. However, I guess we could give it a try. If it doesn't work out, then we try something else, and maybe use the new icon for the VR Center and move the MoraleImp2.png back to the Multimedia Center.
I'm confused now - in the latest testversion the VRC still uses the old DL icon.
Anyway, here a few icons, I've started by increasing the blue hue, then subsequently increasing contrast, last one did remove a lot of other colors. The last one is more in line with the Yors (crude) factories, while the first more with the Shiny Stalks or ElectrolyteGarden.
I personally like the #4 & #1 (although #2 is very similar to #1, just the 2 lights are a bit less shiny) most. Please give me some feedback esp. if you find something distracting.
Here's a quick sample of the querry:
I can easily accomodate that to whatever outlay is finally picked.
I have to disagree with this. Yor planets do rebel. It may take longer than it does for other races, but it does happen. The Yor also can flip other planets. I don't build any influencer starbases, but am still flipping planets once I conquer one in the area to create a beachhead. Sometimes, the beachhead isn't even necessary. The culture produced by my high population-count, combined with one or two influence resources, is enough to achieve that. Granted, it's possible that the resources play a bigger role in this than the population. That doesn't really matter, though, because the results are the same.
I still disagree with the first part, and would strongly argue against the second part. You could make your Custom Yor start out with 25% Influence. With the 10% from Biological Studies you'd end up with a higher bonus than either the stock Drengin (25%) or the stock Korath (10%) can get from their techs. Sure, you don't get the Propaganda Machine, so your influencer starbases may be weaker. You also don't get the Dark Influence improvement, so your planets may produce less influence than the Korath'. However, unlike Slave Pits, your Collectives don't have an influence-penalty, so you're still better off than the Drengin and Korath in that regard.
All in all, I really don't understand your argument. Culture is the primary weakness of the Yor tech tree. Yes. That's by design and working as intended. However, unlike the major weaknesses of other tech trees, you seem to treat this like an insurmountable problem for Custom Races. Which I just don't get. There are enough ways to address this deficit either while making your Custom Race or during the game. Yet, you seem to completely ignore this. I get the feeling that I'm missing something here, but I don't know what it is.
I take the bases from my arguments from 2 empiric sources; the first being how a player is able to use influence if he wants to actively go for Cult Victory, and the second how the AI uses this.
#1. If you're player then errecting Inluencer SB directly at alien planets and maxing them out to 360% is usually enough to flip the whole system. This is very efficient even against friend/allies and esp. if you're playing a non-war game which tries to circumvent all wars by diplomacy you can easily mount the constructor load because you don't have to build that many warships. Once this type of victory start rolling planets will flip more & more swiftly. For sure Infl-resources are going to help, but I'm not really counting them to a specific strategy or to a specific race or tree because they're freely available to anyone.
As a Yor-player you can't do this. 40% or 60% Infl per SB isn't enough to flip planets via SBs alone.
#2. I've conducted a large-number of AI testplays where Yor are fighting against a Yor-copyclone - with the only difference in that the clone had the +100 loyalty removed). I've also deleted all troop-mods from the game so I could observe the game infinitely (ie. no crash or hang once PIs are initiated). Result: The +100 loyalty basically wins the game for Yor in many instances. The effect is striking. The amount of lost/flipped planets is directly proportional to the loyalty rating.
I would disagree with you that a CustomYor-planet is better off than a Korath planet - the DI gives +200% [!!!] once errected they could build 50 Slave Canyons and still generate more influence than a CustomYor planet (IF said Yor planet uses the same buildlogic and errects 1 infl impr and the rest only facs....)
Also, the +25% infl perk is freely available to any race, so I don't see this as a special advantage of the CustomYor.
But I'm really not trying to compare the Yor or CustomYor to the Drengin or Korath. I'm compareing the CustomYor to the Yor. If I wanna mimick the current Yor racial setup I'll have to - at least - spend 130 points and I would stil be short of 80 Loyalty. The last remaining 20 points wouldn't buy me those if it were available - not even close. The only advantage is being able to pick another SA, but that has not really much to do with the influence-issue in the first place.
Thing is, even lacking base influence, or strong infl-improvements or loyalty as a player may not be a huge problem because you could choose to go for 18b-20b planets universally which may on their own thwart off foreign influence. (I always do that anyway because of economic & defensive reasons...) But the AI doesn't consider this in its general plans... So, just fire up a number of AI testgames and try to evaluate the strength of Loyalty versus Influence-ratings on your own - you'll see that one of the 2 is needed otherwise a race always falls to "friends" or "allies" in the long run.
Maybe I'm phraseing this not in the right way to the point I'm having in mind. Whenever I tried to build myself an interesting robotic custom race using the Yor tree I constantly discard any builds because the SA + 150 points seemed so inferior to what you can do with an Isolator-Yor+100 points in terms of its starting strength.
The opposite problem actually occurs with the current stock-Torian outlay where a Breeder-custom-Torian approach has better (or same - dependant how logistics are evaluated in terms of distr points...) starting stats (and, lacking Cartography in exchange for 120 starting RP to be spend elsewhere...)
Yes, but that doesn't mean that them being Evil was the reason for the penalty. If anything, I'd say that the background and general outlook of the races had more to do with it.The Drengin/Korath believe themselves to be the only truly sapient race, and treat all the other races accordingly. Would you call someone evil, just because they treat chimpanzees and dolphins like animals? Also, the Korath didn't have a diplomacy-penalty in the vanilla game, making them better diplomats than the Drengin.The Yor are isolationists. Sure, they are willing to make deals with other races, as long as it furthers their goal. Beyond that though, they don't wan't any contact. Well, maybe to carve meatbags into little pieces, but that's all really.
Again, the argument is already moot. The orig CU design had 3 of 4 evil races starting with a penalty to diplomacy. It's irrelevant how that is ultimately reasoned up or deriven from, but its sole existance simply had a negative implication on the gameplay itself and would automatically point out the conclusion that evil-alignment is generally bad in diplomacy. That boring desing is gone now, I'm quite happy how the current oulay is.
What has that to do with whether the design is that "Evil = bad diplomats and Good = good diplomats" or not? Just because the AI doesn't research a tech soon enough (or ever), doesn't mean that the tech isn't there anymore, or that the design suddenly changed.
IDK - you were the one pointing out that Iconians & Torians lacked Total Majesty to construct an argument that they're diplomatically also not well versed. That may slightly nerf a player playing a heavy-diplo game, but IF the AI doesn't research this technology in the first place then I don't see how that could be called a handicap? Or the other way round - how a tech can be considered a bonus in its unresearched state?
I've just completed a number of autoplays, all of them, at least, advanced beyond 800 [!] turns, in order to see how Total Majesty is gained by AIs:
- Korx: not even Advanced Diplomacy, nor Alliances [BTW Korx totally ignore defense-techs, thus also their unique Starbase-Victory/Supremcy techs (which shouldn't be labelled defense as they're incorporating MSB Ship-Assist mods as well...)
- Terrans & Drath were the only 2 to have Adv. Diplomacy - but not Expert
- Iconian, Torian & the rest: not even Adv. Diplomacy.
Suffice to say some of them were currently in the works to complete the toptier weapons. All them were already multiple times at war with their neighbours. At that point diplomacy isn't really much worth anyway, [because of distrust] so even if they'd get to Majesty (etc) in another 500 turns it won't matter much. And in a real competetive play involving a player many maps wouldn've been solved already (at least, that's what I do, I never have these kinds of longplays...)
Nevertheless, don't wanna get too much into an argument, so if you can't see the problem re: CustomRace let's just attribute it to the language-barrier and move on to a more constructive subject.
By the way, I've reduced the customization points of the races that didn't start with the max number in the vanilla game to an equivalent value (Torians 80, Thalan 80, Iconians 70, Krynn 90). I'm also still wondering whether we should change the scale of the points back to 10. Yes, using a scale of 100 makes balancing easier. But, as you said, that change also broke compatibility with a lot of races from the library.
It should be doable. The vanilla version wasn't 100% finebalanced either, and I believe for good reason. The current design penalizes specialization. So whenever I build a config I usually just pick the basic +10% increases to moral, econ, SP, MP, Def + Weap etc until points are drained. That way you get the biggest bang for the buck, in terms of raw number of stat-increase. But it's boring. Donno... what are you guys thinking of it?