Changes to the Social Engineering models

[Geo]

I'd definitely consider Free Market and Planned under your definition outdated.

[Nexii]

Well the downsides of the Economic picks are a lot more too.  I suppose even with just -1 IND and -1 EFFIC for Barter you probably wouldn't want to stay with it.  I could give Barter -1 SUP instead of -1 PLANET?  Thoughts?  Maybe something like +PROBE, -INDUSTRY, -SUPPORT, -EFFIC.  With not using energy as much I could see it being harder to subvert.  Gives back subversion immunity to the early Fund rush.

[Nexii]

Only a minor tweak to Barter - had to agree with the Barter arguments on -PLANET.  -SUPPORT makes more sense.  +PROBE since the economy is less about energy (and thus harder to subvert using energy). 

Autocratic,      None,    +POLICE,-EFFIC,-GROWTH,-PROBE
Police State,    DocLoy,  ++POLICE,+SUPPORT,-GROWTH,-EFFIC
Democratic,      EthCalc, +EFFIC,++GROWTH,+ECONOMY,-----POLICE
Fundamentalist,  Brain,   ++MORALE,+++PROBE,---RESEARCH
Barter,          None,    +PROBE,-INDUSTRY,-SUPPORT,-EFFIC
Free Market,     IndEcon, +ECONOMY,++GROWTH,---PLANET,-SUPPORT
Planned,         PlaNets, ++INDUSTRY,+SUPPORT,---ECONOMY,-EFFIC
Green,           CentEmp, +++PLANET,+EFFIC,--INDUSTRY,-GROWTH
Survival,        None,    +MORALE,--RESEARCH,-PROBE
Power,           MilAlg,  ++MORALE,+SUPPORT,-EFFIC,-INDUSTRY
Knowledge,       Cyber,   ++RESEARCH,+EFFIC,--PROBE,-MORALE
Wealth,          IndAuto, +ECONOMY,+INDUSTRY,--RESEARCH
Primitive,       None,    None
Cybernetic,      DigSent, +++RESEARCH,+EFFIC,---SUPPORT
Eudaimonic,      Eudaim,  ++GROWTH,++ECONOMY,---MORALE
Thought Control, WillPow, +POLICE,++INDUSTRY,-GROWTH,-EFFIC

I feel like Planned may be a bit weak?  Though it has its (ab)uses.  Switching to it to finish a 80% finished SP is a big one.  And it's pretty good when only minerals matter (total war mode, or to just make probes and steal tech).  If your tech is way ahead of your facilities I suppose it's good then too.  Perhaps when Solar can be modded this will be a bit more balanced, as the base square currently accounts for too much of total early-game energy production.  Instead of toning down Forests I'm of the opinion Solar needs a production boost (+1E to all elevations, i.e. 2E at 0-999m elevation).  This would make +2 ECON somewhat less useful before lifting energy cap (which I put to OptComp).  But I think that's fine as generally lifting nutrients (Gene) or minerals (IA) comes earlier.

Demo+FM is definitely quite powerful.  It's possible to boom without Creches now.  But on the other hand, it's impossible to really war with Demo+FM.

PS feels like it's a bit weak at times.  Although, support I feel is underrated.  Early game even +1 SUP can be equal to +2 IND.  But it peters out...leaving PS mostly only with its drone control.  I think once SE switches cost less for small empires, it'll see a little more use.  That and more relevance for late-game SUP.

[Yitzi]

PS feels like it's a bit weak at times.  Although, support I feel is underrated.  Early game even +1 SUP can be equal to +2 IND.  But it peters out...leaving PS mostly only with its drone control.  I think once SE switches cost less for small empires, it'll see a little more use.  That and more relevance for late-game SUP.

Changing the unit cost formula to make costs keep up with production and setting the support divisor to nonzero should substantially boost the relevance of late-game SUPPORT.

[Nexii]

Yea, I've been playing with support divisor of 4, I think I'll try with just 3.  I think this is why I was trying to argue against reactors not substantially reducing unit cost, because it would also make support costs flat.  I also had the (perhaps better) idea of support instead being tied to reactor *type*.  For example 2 support for fusion, 3 for quantum, 4 for singularity.  If reactors improved combat vs native life, with native life costing about half what it is now that may balance it all.  That sort of change may make it viable to make it so higher reactors improve former time.  A personal gripe moreso but having 10+ formers per base late game isn't the most fun game play.  I'd rather play with higher Clean costs and formers amping up more late game.   But that would be a big change...especially things like allowing a former to do more than 1 improvement per turn.

Planned isn't too bad by the way...especially for Yang/Drones.  IND gets more powerful the more you get.  This caused me to discover a perhaps known exploit/flaw...SE switching to gain free minerals on crawler turnins.  Since crawler cost changes with IND, you can make crawlers in Planned, then switch to Green to increase their cost.  Turn in crawlers for an SP in Green, then go back to Planned all in the same turn.  Thus you can get +50% minerals (assuming base of 0 IND) from your crawler turnins for a cost of just 40 energy.  At higher IND this exploit is more pronounced...at most it can be 2.6x the minerals but this would typically require switching SEs on 3 tiers.

[Yitzi]

I think this is why I was trying to argue against reactors not substantially reducing unit cost, because it would also make support costs flat.

Keep in mind, though, that cheaper units means more units, which also increases support costs; it just isn't affected as much by SUPPORT rating.

I also had the (perhaps better) idea of support instead being tied to reactor *type*.  For example 2 support for fusion, 3 for quantum, 4 for singularity.  If reactors improved combat vs native life, with native life costing about half what it is now that may balance it all.  That sort of change may make it viable to make it so higher reactors improve former time.

Interesting idea, but one that would get somewhat complicated and I don't really think it's that necessary.

A personal gripe moreso but having 10+ formers per base late game isn't the most fun game play.  I'd rather play with higher Clean costs and formers amping up more late game.   But that would be a big change...especially things like allowing a former to do more than 1 improvement per turn.

Yeah, it'd be a big change.  Perhaps a better way would be to have an option where "autoimprove base" formers will only help other formers but not start any terraforming on their own; that way, you'd still have all those formers but wouldn't have to micromanage them all.

Planned isn't too bad by the way...especially for Yang/Drones.

Very true.  It does have negative effects on your energy, though, and obviously can't be done while running Green to keep ecodamage under control.

IND gets more powerful the more you get.  This caused me to discover a perhaps known exploit/flaw...SE switching to gain free minerals on crawler turnins.  Since crawler cost changes with IND, you can make crawlers in Planned, then switch to Green to increase their cost.  Turn in crawlers for an SP in Green, then go back to Planned all in the same turn.  Thus you can get +50% minerals (assuming base of 0 IND) from your crawler turnins for a cost of just 40 energy.  At higher IND this exploit is more pronounced...at most it can be 2.6x the minerals but this would typically require switching SEs on 3 tiers.

Personally, I'm not a fan of the "turn in crawlers for SP" system in the first place, as there are a lot of exploits that can be done with it.

[Nexii]

Yea I'm not a fan of crawlers into SP.  50% conversion rate that any other unit gets would be sufficient.  That reminds me to test the same exploit with disbanding.

Also if re-coding formers that way is less work I say go for it.

Planned seems fine really.  Maybe a bit too good even as I play more, because you can just steal tech with all that mineral production.  I think with Solar modded to 2E base, and some tech steal cost, it will be more balanced.  Between the more punishing SEs, ecodamages, and increasing forest former time, the game is definitely slower.  May reduce tech costs overall somewhat until Solar can be modded to compensate.  I think Demo+FM can still win out with commerce, but I was a bit surprised how competitive PS+Planned is.

[Yitzi]

Yea I'm not a fan of crawlers into SP.  50% conversion rate that any other unit gets would be sufficient.  That reminds me to test the same exploit with disbanding.

Also if re-coding formers that way is less work I say go for it.

I don't know if it would be less work in terms of coding...but it would be a lot less work when you add in the issues involved in making such a big change not break the game.

It'd still be fairly big, though, so probably not until I start taking requests.

[Nexii]

Gotcha.  And true, it's a problem with all 4x games late (massive armies) and not just SMAX.  Formers are really tough to balance around since they basically drive all growth.  Unimproved land is much less productive than say in Civ2.  Although I feel like most games are usually decided before the last 2 reactors anyways.  It would definitely be lower priority.

I wouldn't say there's too many glaring imbalances left in the early to mid game.  Some really good work with PLANET, SUPPORT, POLICE now all being very relevant.  PROBE SE being generally very weak is probably the only one left - which I know is on your list for Infiltrate.  I'd suggest when tech steal costs are added, making those also dependent on the target faction's PROBE.  Fundamentalism should be a decent choice when ahead and coveting the tech lead in addition to war?  Right now I found it was rarely picked even with Subversion immunity.  Granted versus AI, its great since they cheat to subvert for next to 0 energy...against human players, not so much.

How about making the 5 turns of no research per starting -RESEARCH SE a variable, and/or making it a toggle for default SEs not counting against?  20-25 years of no tech is pretty brutal.  Alternatively I suppose I could balance my set without Survival getting +MORALE.  Issue mostly is that Values SEs would be weak if not for -2/-3 RESEARCH on Survival Values.  And they're the hardest tier to put duplicate side-benefits into, since a lot of the primary benefits are only +1.  Another relatively minor related thing, but I always felt that while under the no research penalty, all energy allocation should go to Econ (or Econ+Psych) by default.  That or the SE screen should go to 9999 turns discoveries to warn you that Labs are being wasted?

[Yitzi]

I wouldn't say there's too many glaring imbalances left in the early to mid game.  Some really good work with PLANET, SUPPORT, POLICE now all being very relevant.  PROBE SE being generally very weak is probably the only one left - which I know is on your list for Infiltrate.  I'd suggest when tech steal costs are added, making those also dependent on the target faction's PROBE.

Definitely...and in the same way as subversion costs.

How about making the 5 turns of no research per starting -RESEARCH SE a variable

Is it -5 per -RESEARCH, or -10 for any negative RESEARCH?  Any testing done on that?

and/or making it a toggle for default SEs not counting against?

That'd take some work, but might be feasible at some point.  It's not such a high priority, though, as having effects to default SEs is not exactly normal (no offense intended).

Another relatively minor related thing, but I always felt that while under the no research penalty, all energy allocation should go to Econ (or Econ+Psych) by default.  That or the SE screen should go to 9999 turns discoveries to warn you that Labs are being wasted?

It's something that I think most people know, so it's not such a priority.  When I start taking requests, though, I could probably do it.

[Nexii]

It is 5 turns per starting -RESEARCH, with no lower limit from what I can tell by testing.  It adds faction -RESEARCH and that from default SEs.  For Believers with my custom SE set: -2 RESEARCH from Survival, and -2 RESEARCH from Believers penalty is -4 RESEARCH times 5 for 20 turns.  Similarly a -5 RESEARCH faction gets 0 tech for 25 turns with default SEs.  The no tech for X turns almost should almost be a separate penalty, I feel - perhaps it was at one point.  Believers have it listed as a separate penalty but it seems they forgot about listing it for the Free Drones (who also have 10 turns of 0 research).

Another way I could balance around this I suppose is to just give all factions Centauri Ecology (or Biogenetics) to start the game, and give Gaians (or PKs) a second tech (Ethical Calculus, perhaps). 

[Nexii]

Been doing some more tweaking.  First, eliminating the starting bonuses from frontier SEs, and got rid of a penalty here and there.  Police State & Fundamentalism now more in line with their Civ2 predecessors.  I feel probe can befit PS due to the high amount of control over the population, they can't be subverted.  Likewise the nature of spying on your own citizens leads to having highly trained spies.  Therefore, swapped the PROBE/SUPPORT on PS/Fund.  Fund just wasn't a very compelling pick vs PS (and never has been really).  This is because it had no drone control on top of expensive army support.  It was usually superior to be PS even in war prior to Power.  And even at that point usually PS/Power was just better, because of Morale modifier and facilities.

Fundamentalism also gets some GROWTH due to 'traditional family values'.  Notably this makes booming easier for Yang, who I feel hurts the most from the PS changes. 

Wealth weakened a bit, it's always been a bit too powerful in all situations.  Knowledge changed, and Cybernetic got less penalty.  Now all factions can boom before Eud, though a few (Gaia, Aki, Pirates) rely on Golden Age.

Autocratic,      None,    -EFFIC,-GROWTH
Police State,    DocLoy,  ++POLICE,+++PROBE,-GROWTH,-EFFIC
Democratic,      EthCalc, +EFFIC,++GROWTH,+ECONOMY,-----POLICE
Fundamentalist,  Brain,   +SUPPORT,++MORALE,+GROWTH,---RESEARCH
Barter,          None,    -INDUSTRY,-EFFIC
Free Market,     IndEcon, +ECONOMY,++GROWTH,---PLANET,-SUPPORT
Planned,         PlaNets, ++INDUSTRY,+SUPPORT,---ECONOMY,-EFFIC
Green,           CentEmp, +++PLANET,+EFFIC,--INDUSTRY,-GROWTH
Survival,        None,    -RESEARCH,-INDUSTRY
Power,           MilAlg,  ++MORALE,+SUPPORT,-EFFIC,-INDUSTRY
Knowledge,       Cyber,   ++RESEARCH,+EFFIC,--PROBE,-SUPPORT
Wealth,          IndAuto, +ECONOMY,+INDUSTRY,-MORALE,--RESEARCH
Primitive,       None,    None
Cybernetic,      DigSent, +++RESEARCH,+EFFIC,--SUPPORT
Eudaimonic,      Eudaim,  ++GROWTH,++ECONOMY,---MORALE
Thought Control, WillPow, +POLICE,++INDUSTRY,-GROWTH,-EFFIC

[Impaler]

If folks find it helpful these are my SE modifications,  I added across the board negatives to all the beginning SE choices (it looks brutal but is surprisingly mild in practice.  But I also add Research bonuses which helps keep Tech rate up in the early game as I play with very low tech 35% Tech Rate + Stagnation, and without some boost the early game is too slow.

Note also that Pop Booming is only possible with GA before Future SE choices due in part to that -GROWTH on none future, and Gaians are not able to immediately capture worms due to to the -PLANET from the same source.

Frontier,        None,    -POLICE,    -SUPPORT,  -MORALE,    +RESEARCH
Police State,    DocLoy,  ++POLICE,   ++SUPPORT, --EFFIC,    +PROBE
Democratic,      EthCalc, +EFFIC,     ++GROWTH,  ----POLICE, +RESEARCH
Fundamentalist,  Brain,   ++MORALE,   ++PROBE,   --RESEARCH, +POLICE
Simple,          None,    -ECONOMY,   -EFFIC,    -INDUSTRY,  +RESEARCH
Free Market,     IndEcon, ++ECONOMY,  --PLANET,  ---SUPPORT, +GROWTH
Planned,         PlaNets, ++GROWTH,   +INDUSTRY, --ECONOMY,  +SUPPORT
Green,           EnvEcon, ++PLANET,   ++EFFIC,   ---GROWTH,  +SUPPORT
Survival,        None,    -MORALE,    -GROWTH,   -PROBE,     +RESEARCH
Power,           MilAlg,  ++MORALE,   ++SUPPORT, --INDUSTRY, +PROBE
Knowledge,       Cyber,   ++RESEARCH, +EFFIC,    --PROBE,    +PLANET
Wealth,          IndExt,  +INDUSTRY,  +ECONOMY,  --MORALE,   +EFFIC
None,            None,    -PLANET,    -GROWTH,   -ECONOMY,   +RESEARCH
Cybernetic,      DigSent, ++EFFIC,    ++ECONOMY, ++RESEARCH, ---GROWTH
Eudaimonic,      Eudaim,  ++GROWTH,   ++PLANET,  +INDUSTRY,  ---MORALE
Thought Control, WillPow, ++POLICE,   ++MORALE,  ++PROBE,    ---SUPPORT

[Nexii]

Hmm wouldn't -2 POL to start be really tough for Gaian, and -4 ECON especially for Hive?  I had real troubles with both when I tried that.  -2 GROW similarly I assume you play only with the default seven (this kills Aki/Pirates), which is okay.  To me though it seems like the starting -2 ECON would outweigh the +4 RESEARCH.  At least I think it would be difficult for anyone not able to run FM+Wealth.  At least I found similar problems in my set, Gaians and Hive became quite a bit weaker - though for slightly different reasons.

Maybe another option would be to give the +RESEARCH/base to all factions for an early game boost.  May promote ICS a bit but ICS tends to fall off anyways.  Could balance that with a Police State nerf.

[Impaler]

I mod my factions a bit too, the Gaians have no Police penalty, and the Hive has just a -1 to Economy, so they start at a -3 ECON, but this causes no more energy loss then -2 Econ setting that everyone else starts with, it just takes Hive more SE to dig out of it.  Their are also 'reactors' (negative maintenance structures) and Biology labs that let them build around the deficiency.