Reactors and combat bonus

[Neil]

So I think the general consensus is that in vanilla the fusion reactors are OP and too big a jump for one advance. Basically double the strength of your units and in some cases make them cheaper. So I notice that some mods remove the hitpoints bonus of reactors and have them change cost only. However, I think that's a little boring. Perhaps a different bonus could be applied instead?

For example, for each level of superior reactor power, you get +20% combat strength. So fusion vs fission gives +20%. Quantum vs fusion gives +20%. Quantum vs fission gives +40%. Ignored for native lifeforms. This bonus is enough to be worthwhile but not enough that getting fusion is a crushing advantage.

[Alpha Centauri Bear]

That's a possibility. However, +20% of strength is about same economical effectiveness as -20% cost. Not exactly the same but roughly. From this point of view they are equally fun/boring. What extra fun you get from stronger unit?
😄

Ignoring it in psi combat reduces regular units effectiveness vs. natives even more. End game people switching to natives just because of huge risk losing super expensive regular unit in psi combat. From this point of view cost reduction actually increases unit effectiveness in both conventional and psi combat. One still lose them but individual loss is not that big economically.

You have to solve this problem somehow avoiding these scissors.
1. Enabling reactor strength bonus in psi combat renders natives highly ineffective against stronger reactor. This is especially pronounced in the case of Scout Patrol with super reactors. Very cheap but deadly to mind worms.
2. Disabling this bonus in psi combat greatly increases regular unit economical loss in psi combat. Therefore, strongly discouraging regular weaponry in late game.

I actually favor #1 as it solves many other small game mechanics problems like upgrading to cheaper unit with better reactor, etc. Probably we can find some golden point in strength increase to not render psi combat too much ineffective in late game. Say, 15% per reactor? This way singular units will be 50% stronger against everybody including natives.


Another option that I am seriously considering is to let psi combat not ignore weapon/armor completely. It may add tiny bonus thus slightly increasing high end costly end game units value.

Example.
1-20-1 regular defender costs 20 rows. Mind worm costs 6 rows. They are about same psi strength so mind worms are ~3 times more economically effective. Now let's suppose we add 5% armor value as psi combat bonus. This way regular defender psi strength will be 1 + 0.05 * 20 = 2. I.e. worms are now only 1.5 times more effective. Still better but not absolutely overwhelming. This will give players incentive building high end regular units reducing fear of losing them in psi combat.

That may be combined with reactor extra strength either directly proportionally or weapon/armor and reactor will have their own percentage increase for psi combat. Need extra fine tuning. Feel free to play with numbers.

[Neil]

However, +20% of strength is about same economical effectiveness as -20% cost.

Not really. A stronger unit still takes 1 support slot, 1 transport slot, more likely to survive and gain XP.. I think you are looking at it too simplistically. You could take the argument further and say what's the difference between stronger weapons or just making units cheaper when you research new weapons? Cost is important, but not everything. Twice as many units that are half as powerful each are not equivalent in all areas.

I already thought reactor power is ignored by native lifeforms (correct me if wrong?), so I didn't intend that part to be a departure from the current rules. The point of mindworms is to counter more advanced enemies. If your enemy is going mindworm heavy, then you will readjust your designs accordingly. Use cheaper equipment and add empath/trance. Or build a mixture of unit types for the different enemy types. It's not a given that building the very strongest units your tech allows is always the best strategy.

[Alpha Centauri Bear]

However, +20% of strength is about same economical effectiveness as -20% cost.

Not really. A stronger unit still takes 1 support slot, 1 transport slot, more likely to survive and gain XP.. I think you are looking at it too simplistically. You could take the argument further and say what's the difference between stronger weapons or just making units cheaper when you research new weapons? Cost is important, but not everything. Twice as many units that are half as powerful each are not equivalent in all areas.

Of course, you are right. That is what I said but, I guess, not pronouncedly. Yes, strength is more valuable than cost. The question is - by which proportion? I dare to say the proportion is closer to 1:1 than to 1:2. That's all.

I already thought reactor power is ignored by native lifeforms (correct me if wrong?), so I didn't intend that part to be a departure from the current rules. The point of mindworms is to counter more advanced enemies. If your enemy is going mindworm heavy, then you will readjust your designs accordingly. Use cheaper equipment and add empath/trance. Or build a mixture of unit types for the different enemy types. It's not a given that building the very strongest units your tech allows is always the best strategy.

Yet, it is ignored.

This is a big and controversial discussion everybody has own opinion at.

I see it this way. In the previous Civ games there was only one unit class: regular units. They varied in characteristics slightly but their value could be roughly estimated by strength/cost ratio (plus minus all support, promotion considerations). The higher unit value the better. It was always beneficial to upgrade and build more advanced units. They were always better. That's why military research were extremely important.
Introduction of psi combat ignoring conventional strength altogether split this picture not even on two classes but three: regular units, native units, and anti-native units. Native units once discovered never improve except of discovering different subclasses (land-sea-air). Anti-native units are all scout patrols maybe with some abilities. They almost do not require any research. And the mere presence of psi combat threat renders more advanced units progressively less effective to the level when they become completely utterly useless. The exact point floats depending on faction PLANET rating and other factors but nobody denies it exists. Players lose interest in advancing their weaponry and conducting military research long before end game. As you can see, strange consequence happens. Introducing more variety in combat types leads to less variety and not used features.
Imagine playing Civ, unlocking artillery, the strongest attack unit, and then realizing it is utterly useless. I bet the most common player reaction would be: "WTF" - why this unit even in the game? SMACX has same exactly problem and most people don't pay much attention to it because vanilla game actually won long before unlocking strongest unit. Now in many mods with enhanced balance and better AI it is possible to play longer. Therefore, we need to solve this problem at hand and not to discard it because we "don't want to alter flawed vanilla rules".

[Neil]

I never played a multiplayer game, so maybe I am underestimating the power of native units?
Did you know that reactor power increased the damage of artillery against native units? I'm not sure if this is a bug or oversight, but advanced conventional artillery can do a ton of damage to mind worms.

[Alpha Centauri Bear]

Artillery mechanics is so incredibly intricated that designer themselves leaved pile of bugs there not being able to streamline whole procedure. I have lost count of how many of them I (and others)  fixed already. No surprise some of them still out there.


Checked. Artillery damage is multiplied by its reactor regardless of which unit it shells.

hand-to-hand conventional combat: reactor multiplies hit points
hand-to-hand psi combat: reactor is ignored
native unit bombards: victim receives psi damage
regular unit bombards: reactor multiplies damage regardless of victim type (regular/native) (interesting design)
artillery duel conventional: weapon vs. weapon, reactor multiplies hit point (even more interesting design turn)
artillery duel psi (initiated if attacker has psi weapon or defender has psi armor (??)): weapon vs. weapon psi combat reactor is ignored
sea unit vs land artillery: only one round combat, land unit gets 50% bonus (I am tired to comment it)
sea units apparently have inherent artillery ability yet they can engage in H2H combat (how? boarding and fighting with hand weapons???)
sea unit in H2H combat use attacker weapon against defender armor
sea unit in artillery duel use attacker weapon against defender weapon
Last two is an open door for stupid exploit: attacker standing next to defender may chose whether to attack or bombard depending on defender weapon-armor prevalence.
I didn't list psi/conventional sea and air combat variations because I am tired.

Can you build some non-contradictory mechanics to fix this mess and tie everything together, at least on a paper?

[bvanevery]

Last two is an open door for stupid exploit: attacker standing next to defender may chose whether to attack or bombard depending on defender weapon-armor prevalence.

There's no rule for anything anywhere in the game, that says you have to be 2 squares away to bombard.  If you're standing next to something you jolly well want to bombard, you can.  Artillery in a base, someone's outside your wall, bombard all you want.

For some reason you object to ships having a choice about direct assault or bombardment.  But for battleships, it's 100% historically accurate.

It's reasonable to object about weapon vs. weapon combat systems.  A proper combat system would be simultaneous attacker weapon vs. defender armor, and defender weapon vs. attacker armor.  Probably the kind of system I'll use for my eventual commercial game.  It solves problems like AAA units magically having their armor bounce incoming fire off them, that miraculously harms planes, when they're only armed with pea shooters.  That's not an exploit, it's just a bad simulation of combat.

[Neil]

For some reason you object to ships having a choice about direct assault or bombardment.  But for battleships, it's 100% historically accurate.

I think the point they are making is: what different kinds of real combat do the two modes represent? If the enemy ship decides to bombard from a distance, the defender will counter-bombard with their weapon. But if the enemy ship decides to attack conventionally, the defender just won't bother to fire their weapons as the enemy closes distance?

A proper combat system would be simultaneous attacker weapon vs. defender armor, and defender weapon vs. attacker armor.  Probably the kind of system I'll use for my eventual commercial game.  It solves problems like AAA units magically having their armor bounce incoming fire off them, that miraculously harms planes, when they're only armed with pea shooters.  That's not an exploit, it's just a bad simulation of combat.

The weapon/armor system is an abstraction.. you have to suspend your disbelief. I like the general idea of it, although there are some edge cases that work funny. Not every game has to be a realistic simulation of combat.

I have also noticed that comm jammer gives a defense bonus when being bombarded by fast units. I don't think that makes sense.

[EmpathCrawler]

Another option that I am seriously considering is to let psi combat not ignore weapon/armor completely. It may add tiny bonus thus slightly increasing high end costly end game units value.

Example.
1-20-1 regular defender costs 20 rows. Mind worm costs 6 rows. They are about same psi strength so mind worms are ~3 times more economically effective. Now let's suppose we add 5% armor value as psi combat bonus. This way regular defender psi strength will be 1 + 0.05 * 20 = 2. I.e. worms are now only 1.5 times more effective. Still better but not absolutely overwhelming. This will give players incentive building high end regular units reducing fear of losing them in psi combat.

That may be combined with reactor extra strength either directly proportionally or weapon/armor and reactor will have their own percentage increase for psi combat. Need extra fine tuning. Feel free to play with numbers.

I haven't paid attention to how the game chooses defenders too closely. If you're suffering from a mind worm infestation and you filled your bases with 1-1-1 Trance, would those units get put on the defensive first against psi attack or would expensive 1-20-1 garrisons without Trance get tossed in there?


Or just put Trance on all your garrisons.

[bvanevery]

Another option that I am seriously considering is to let psi combat not ignore weapon/armor completely. It may add tiny bonus thus slightly increasing high end costly end game units value.

Example.
1-20-1 regular defender costs 20 rows.

A high defense unit like that doesn't have to have any problem.  In the original game, Hypnotic Trance has cost=-1, which is based on the ratio of offense to defense.  For this unit, cost=0.  The only question is whether you or the AI remembered to add the free Hypnotic Trance ability to the unit.  If the AI is not doing it, that would be the thing in the code that needs correction.

Now of course if you've modded the game so that cost=1 or some such, as I did for awhile, then you had a problem.  But recently I went back to the way the original game did it, to nerf mindworms.  I also doubled the defense bonus to +100%.

Hypnotic Trance does take up an ability slot.  I think players should make choices about what abilities they want, and not just hand out stuff for free.

[Alpha Centauri Bear]

Last two is an open door for stupid exploit: attacker standing next to defender may chose whether to attack or bombard depending on defender weapon-armor prevalence.

There's no rule for anything anywhere in the game, that says you have to be 2 squares away to bombard.  If you're standing next to something you jolly well want to bombard, you can.  Artillery in a base, someone's outside your wall, bombard all you want.

For some reason you object to ships having a choice about direct assault or bombardment.  But for battleships, it's 100% historically accurate.

It's reasonable to object about weapon vs. weapon combat systems.  A proper combat system would be simultaneous attacker weapon vs. defender armor, and defender weapon vs. attacker armor.  Probably the kind of system I'll use for my eventual commercial game.  It solves problems like AAA units magically having their armor bounce incoming fire off them, that miraculously harms planes, when they're only armed with pea shooters.  That's not an exploit, it's just a bad simulation of combat.

I do not object against anything. Rules are rules. One can always learn and master them. Yet we mod games to get rid of stupid rules as we understand them. Those adding no sense. Unit attack and defense statistics came from Civ1 and they had perfect sense there because one unit always attack while other defended. That makes perfect sense and allows player to strategize based on paradigm that if they attack some unit they are fighting against their defense strength. Simple and intuitive. Now they can choose to attack against their attack strength? One can adapt to it, sure. But what is the point to divide unit statistics to attack and defense now when they both can play as defense strength? Wouldn't it be simple to just assign ships equal attack and defense then? Oops, not possible as attack and defense strengths are now researched separately! Designers added many new interesting features but didn't bother to tie them into simple and cohesive system.

[Alpha Centauri Bear]

I haven't paid attention to how the game chooses defenders too closely. If you're suffering from a mind worm infestation and you filled your bases with 1-1-1 Trance, would those units get put on the defensive first against psi attack or would expensive 1-20-1 garrisons without Trance get tossed in there?


Or just put Trance on all your garrisons.

A high defense unit like that doesn't have to have any problem.  In the original game, Hypnotic Trance has cost=-1, which is based on the ratio of offense to defense.  For this unit, cost=0.  The only question is whether you or the AI remembered to add the free Hypnotic Trance ability to the unit.  If the AI is not doing it, that would be the thing in the code that needs correction.

Now of course if you've modded the game so that cost=1 or some such, as I did for awhile, then you had a problem.  But recently I went back to the way the original game did it, to nerf mindworms.  I also doubled the defense bonus to +100%.

Hypnotic Trance does take up an ability slot.  I think players should make choices about what abilities they want, and not just hand out stuff for free.

Guys, you are answering to minor details missing the main point here! The main point is that the mere presence of psi combat renders high end conventional units useless. They grow in cost but they don't grow in average combat power as their psi strength don't grow and at some point this becomes the prevalent combat type. Just because native units becomes the most economical defender and attackers against such costly monsters.

Game may unlock some 100 weapon and 100 armor somewhere after Locust of Chiron is unlocked - nobody would even bother to rush these research! Once somebody start building them everybody else would automatically switch to natives. End of (SMACX tech tree) story.
😞

[EmpathCrawler]

Guys, you are answering to minor details missing the main point here! The main point is that the mere presence of psi combat renders high end conventional units useless. They grow in cost but they don't grow in average combat power as their psi strength don't grow and at some point this becomes the prevalent combat type. Just because native units becomes the most economical defender and attackers against such costly monsters.

Game may unlock some 100 weapon and 100 armor somewhere after Locust of Chiron is unlocked - nobody would even bother to rush these research! Once somebody start building them everybody else would automatically switch to natives. End of (SMACX tech tree) story.
😞

Only if you and your enemy have an agreement that you will build only psi and they will not build trash 1-1-2 Empath and 1-1-1 Trance units to cost effectively wipe out your all worm army. Is this how multiplayer games are fought? The first player to Locusts wins?

Morale is way easier to come by than lifecycle, too.

[bvanevery]

Guys, you are answering to minor details missing the main point here! The main point is that the mere presence of psi combat renders high end conventional units useless.

Game mechanically, I am correct.  You do not need to tweak some kind of inherent psi defense for stronger and stronger armors.  Even in the original game, getting a better Trance defense was already free.  You can keep that.  You also jettisoned various Alien weapon and armor techs as 'stupid', but 12-Res armor actually deals with this very problem.  With the compromise that the 2 stronger armors won't be as good against psi.  Feel free to reinstate 12-Res armor, at whatever strength you want to give it.  Myself, I have 12-Res, 20 antimatter plate, and 30 inertial damper armor.

The broader point of whether mindworm psi weapons platform divergence is stupid, wasn't really under discussion.  Since you now say it is, here's the deal.  You're either doing "SMAC the game" or you're not.  It's about the freakin' mindworms.  A logical course of action could be to get rid of psi combat entirely.  But that's not SMAC.

Would I have this forked psi combat in a brand new clean slate game?  Nope!  But SMAC's narrative and play mechanics are deeply tied to mindworms.

What I did do recently in my mod, is nerf mindworm power by doubling Hypnotic Trance strength.  And now, growing your own mindworms comes rather late.  If you want 'em earlier in the game, you have to capture them.  You can't just get to a Tier 3 tech, Centauri Empathy, and have the best weapons platform in the game for cheap.  You can't just crank your enemies into mindworm submission, you have to earn that.

That's how I compromised on this broader point.  I have missed nothing.

Also worth noting that I strongly diverged conventional weapons and armors into the Conquer part of my tech tree, and psi stuff into the Explore part.  For much of the game, you really do have to pursue different techs to have the various capabilities.  There's no 'sprinkling' of capabilities in my tree.

What do you really want to do about the mindworm psi problem?  Your armor tweak isn't the right design direction to be going in.  You just create programming busywork for yourself.

[Neil]

By the late game, you produce many minerals, reactors make things cheaper and you can't produce more than 1 unit per turn at a base, so I think the problem of high tech units becoming uneconimical does not scale as severely as you suggest. Comparing mineral costs of mindworms and late game tech needs to take into account wastage when base production is in excess.

Conventional units can have other abilities as well, such as multiple attacks per turn.

I personally found Locusts not that useful when enemies have AAA and aerodrome complexes.