Those working on this mod do so in their own free time and for no pay.
Show your support for them by enabling ads on this site!

Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 100 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:
Verification:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:
What is the name of the planet we live on? Type it backwards then add a 5.:
Who is taking revenge? (lowercase):

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: Megabalta
« on: October 25, 2017, 04:38:17 PM »

If you didn't find a solution yet, here's a quicky:

- if galactic population can only be increased by a type of building (I'm not sure how to do this yet, ideas are welcome)
- the building has an upkeep via above ability and a population cap increase value
- a units upkeep costs are translated into pop cap values

basically the game has to change one value to another, but the results are the same, a units upkeep needs annual money. no problems with enemy planets or hyperspace travel.
Posted by: Megabalta
« on: March 21, 2017, 07:44:48 PM »

If that behavior can't be cut from the AI, and it's a constant thing, there's always the possibility to compensate it in difficultyadjustments.xml.
<Credit_Multiplier>1.2</Credit_Multiplier>
Posted by: kucsidave
« on: March 20, 2017, 07:59:30 AM »

but that really put too much on the AI
The AI, unlike humans constantly moves it's fleet, usually back and forth troughout the galaxy.
If we would put a penalty on that, that would cripple the AI.
Posted by: Megabalta
« on: March 20, 2017, 05:14:10 AM »

Strange, I remembered that it pulled credits even on enemy planets from the player. But yeah, you're right, it seems it doesn't. That is really a problem. No maintenance costs during hyperspace routes could be compensated though, if every hyperspace jump costed a certain amount of money (depending on the ships making it and the number of jump points/distance), like the corrupt jumps in FOC.
Posted by: Corey
« on: March 19, 2017, 12:24:24 PM »

Quote
This is my solution, it'll always draw the same amount, no matter where the ships are.

      <Abilities SubObjectList="Yes">
         <Planet_Income_Bonus_Ability Name="CR90_maintenance">
            <Specific_Mod_Source_Text>TEXT_CR90_MAINTENANCE</Specific_Mod_Source_Text>
            <Absolute_Income_Modifier>-108</Absolute_Income_Modifier>
         </Planet_Income_Bonus_Ability>
      </Abilities>

We're not talking about making it pull the same amount of credits regardless of the planet it's on. That's set up the exact same way ours is. The problem is that if you move that fleet to an enemy planet, the enemy is now paying that ship's maintenance, and if you have the fleet in transit, you're no longer paying for it, even with the code you posted. This code ties it to the planet, even if it's an absolute modifier; if it's not your planet, it's still tied to it, and if it's in transit, it's not tied to a planet and therefore doesn't cost money. As Kad said, LUA's a much better solution for this.
Posted by: Helix345
« on: March 19, 2017, 11:41:40 AM »

ahh
Posted by: Megabalta
« on: March 17, 2017, 11:30:27 AM »

Because balta means axe in hungarian.
A válaszom pedig de bizony.
Posted by: Helix345
« on: March 17, 2017, 09:00:15 AM »

why do you think he's hungarian?
Posted by: kucsidave
« on: March 17, 2017, 07:07:35 AM »

megabalta, csak nem magyar vagy?
Posted by: Megabalta
« on: March 17, 2017, 04:28:37 AM »

This is my solution, it'll always draw the same amount, no matter where the ships are.

      <Abilities SubObjectList="Yes">
         <Planet_Income_Bonus_Ability Name="CR90_maintenance">
            <Specific_Mod_Source_Text>TEXT_CR90_MAINTENANCE</Specific_Mod_Source_Text>
            <Absolute_Income_Modifier>-108</Absolute_Income_Modifier>
         </Planet_Income_Bonus_Ability>
      </Abilities>

The only area where I find this lacking, is my supply system. The concept would be to simulate operational costs: if a ship is above a friendly planet with a supply station, it's cheaper to maintain, if a ship is blockading an enemy planet, it's more expensive etc.
I've added supply ships to reduce the maintenance values over planets which do not have supply stations, and as a vulnerability gameplay element to fleets. They use this ability:

      <Abilities SubObjectList="Yes">
         <Planet_Income_Bonus_Ability Name="Supply_Ship_Income_Bonus">
            <Specific_Mod_Source_Text>TEXT_ECONOMY_SUPPLY</Specific_Mod_Source_Text>
            <Percentage_Income_Modifier>0.00105</Percentage_Income_Modifier>
         </Planet_Income_Bonus_Ability>

They're supposed to reduce maintenance costs, but I didn't find a way to reduce the above maintenance modifier relative to it's value, since this value is independent from the planets income, and relative modifiers only modify planetary income values.
Posted by: Kad_Venku
« on: March 16, 2017, 05:47:47 PM »

Unit upkeep is a nice concept we're experimenting with as well.
I've found scripting it is pretty easy. You're basically running a loop timed to a fiscal time cycle which computes a sum of the unit cost for each desired faction and substracts it accordingly. Mapping a unit to its cost is more of a problem, but can be avoided by either using a unified naming convention and string operators, or maintaining a cost database, which is a tad more work.

But as Corey already said, its use is debatable, specially for the AI.
Posted by: Corey
« on: March 15, 2017, 09:09:05 AM »

That part of it we like, which we could try to keep in a scripted version. But the way it currently is, it also means if you have a fleet in transit between planets when it ticks over to the next week, you're also not paying upkeep for them.
Posted by: HobbesHurlbut
« on: March 15, 2017, 08:28:02 AM »

Quote from: Corey on February 13, 2017, 02:07:45 PM
If we ultimately decide to keep the upkeep costs, I'm going to try to do it through LUA, which will keep the costs even on enemy planets.
I dunno....having the upkeep be a drain on enemy planets invoke the concept of the fleet raiding/blockading said enemy planet which is rather fitting. In addition to preventing any production from happening.
Posted by: Megabalta
« on: March 15, 2017, 04:41:37 AM »

Do you mind sharing how you've made it? Is it the original games maintenance system revived?
Posted by: Mr.Puerto
« on: February 14, 2017, 01:32:15 AM »

Quote from: Corey on February 13, 2017, 02:07:45 PM
If we ultimately decide to keep the upkeep costs, I'm going to try to do it through LUA, which will keep the costs even on enemy planets.
I think the aspect of upkeep is really cool, so I hope you will keep,I hope it does work.
Those working on this mod do so in their own free time and for no pay.
Show your support for them by enabling ads on this site!