techn0mage

Economy Tip/Rant: Military / Social wasted allocation handled differently

Economy Tip/Rant: Military / Social wasted allocation handled differently

Why does it have to be so obscure...? :(

I am really enjoying GC2 and I'm thrilled to see that it is getting the recognition it deserves. My hope is that it will shame some of the larger development/publishing houses into not acting like sleazebags and actually making better games.

Disclaimer aside, my biggest gripe with GC2 is about the economy. For those of you interested in my "book", see post here:
https://forums.galciv2.com/?ForumID=346&AID=101763#813913

I'll sum up that rant here though, I'm disappointed at how unnecessarily difficult managing the economy is. The difficulty comes mainly from 2 things:

- Lack of transparency or explanation as to what the economy is doing and how various production values are calculated

- Poor methods of management offered to the player, that is, the way that the player actually controls the economy. Note that this does NOT refer to changing the rules of the game, i.e. setting different research% on every planet, I am talking about how the economy could be better controlled without changing the rules of the game. (i.e., today the player says "I want to use 50% of the total industrial capacity" instead of "I want to spend 300 credits on all industries")

My classic example is that in MOO2 you could click on the number of hammers to see how the computer arrives at that number. In GC2 there is no such luxury and we are forced to try to deconstruct the game in order to figure out what the economy is doing. For example, the 'spending' value on the planet screen appears to equal the production values for all 3 categories, plus the 'maintenance' value for that colony, I just noticed that. But the game never actually comes out and says it in the style of: Mil(100) + Soc(50) + Res(50) + Maint(50) = Spending(250)

I just found an interesting quirk - if your planet has no military project, the military spending value is displayed in parentheses and no money is spent. However, if you have no social project, the money seems to vanish. Whether it gets used for anything, I have no idea. So until anyone discovers where the money goes, beware moving up the social slider to 100%, make sure all your colonies are using the money!

I think the most important thing to realize about the economy is that unlike other games, i.e. Civ4, building factories/labs doesn't get you production or research, what they do is increase your capacity to CONVERT money into production or research. So when you find that precursor mine or artifact and start building/researching to the tune of 400beakers/turn, keep in mind that unlike some 'artifact' bonus in Moo2 which gave your bonus research for free, you are actually paying the same amount of money for each research point, and that precursor mine/artifact just made that one planet ten times more expensive than all the others (assuming you utilized it).
59,674 views 115 replies
Reply #76 Top
By recommendation: take out the total spending slider. Create two sets of sliders. One is the research slider, where you set the % of total RPs you are funding. The other is the IP slider, where you set the total % of IPs you are funding. Under the IP slider is a breakdown of military vs. social. The two always add up to 100%.


You're not the only one I've heard suggest this, but I really really like this idea. I just can't get my mind around why industry and research have to be tied together like they are right now.
Reply #77 Top
*dons flameretardent suit*

Brad-

Adopt the MOO3 econ system and all these problems disapear in an instant. Of course the micromanagers/power gamers will have fits, but serves them right for whining in the first place

The simple solution though is to remove the split in mil/social, and only let planets build one thing at a time.
Reply #78 Top
How about being able to "focus" individual planetary production into 2 categories at a time instead of just 1. Wouldn't that help this issue significantly without REQUIRING micromanagement or a significant interface change?
Reply #79 Top
Good ideas all... social production waste definately needs to be dealt with.

In the interim you can keep your global social allocation to be about 5-15, and when a planet is going through its social production phase you will obviously want to have it focus on social production. Another way to curb this problem is to not build any uber manufacturing complexes. In other words, limit the amount of factories you place on any one planet to be around 5. Yes, you won't crank out ships as fast, but you will produce more ships per batch if you spread your production around. I don't really like the idea of destroying factories unless you've made a manufacturing supercomplex and you need to neuter it.

Any other tips on how to work with the current system?
Reply #80 Top
Good ideas all... social production waste definately needs to be dealt with.

In the interim you can keep your global social allocation to be about 5-15, and when a planet is going through its social production phase you will obviously want to have it focus on social production. Another way to curb this problem is to not build any uber manufacturing complexes. In other words, limit the amount of factories you place on any one planet to be around 5. Yes, you won't crank out ships as fast, but you will produce more ships per batch if you spread your production around. I don't really like the idea of destroying factories unless you've made a manufacturing supercomplex and you need to neuter it.

Any other tips on how to work with the current system?
Reply #81 Top
How about being able to "focus" individual planetary production into 2 categories at a time instead of just 1. Wouldn't that help this issue significantly without REQUIRING micromanagement or a significant interface change?


Excellent idea! This is the first thing I thought of when I first tried to deal with the waste issue. This is one thing that made Civ 4 city auto management so easy to work with.

Reply #82 Top
Ok newby question here. I thought social production slider effected how fast social building projests were completd. For example at 100% they would build as fast a possible and at zero they would never be built. If this was true there would never be waisted social money. So if this is not true would this not fix the problem?
Reply #84 Top

Ok newby question here. I thought social production slider effected how fast social building projests were completd. For example at 100% they would build as fast a possible and at zero they would never be built. If this was true there would never be waisted social money. So if this is not true would this not fix the problem?

The problem is that if one planet finishes all its building then it proceed to dump all its spending down the nearest toilet. The other planets will begin flushing their spending down their toilets. Soon, all your planets will done building and they will all start flushing credits down the proverbial toilet. Nothing will be produced by your empire at all.

This could be avoided by micromanaging your colonies to focus, but the "social waste feature" introduced with the purpose of reducing micromanagement for newbies.

It appears to do the opposite for everyone else.
Reply #85 Top
@Badhusky

Ok newby question here. I thought social production slider effected how fast social building projests were completd. For example at 100% they would build as fast a possible and at zero they would never be built. If this was true there would never be waisted social money. So if this is not true would this not fix the problem?


Your logic works for the situation of just one planet. Imagine this extreme scenario. You have two planets. On one planet you want to build a galactic wonder as soon as possible. On the other all your development squares are full and you have nothing social left to build. Now, if you set your social slider high,say 75%, to build the galactic wonder quickl\y, your other planet with no social projects will be wasting bc's equivalent to 75% of its manufacturing base. Even focusing on technology or military on that planet will not eliminate the problem as you pay over the odds for the additional technology or military points converted, and all of them aren't converted any way.

If you turn the slider down to have a low social %, then the galactic wonder is built at a snail's pace.

I hope that explains it for you.

Edit: I see capsela just beat me to it!
Reply #86 Top
Your logic works for the situation of just one planet. Imagine this extreme scenario. You have two planets. On one planet you want to build a galactic wonder as soon as possible. On the other all your development squares are full and you have nothing social left to build. Now, if you set your social slider high,say 75%, to build the galactic wonder quickl\y, your other planet with no social projects will be wasting bc's equivalent to 75% of its manufacturing base. Even focusing on technology or military on that planet will not eliminate the problem as you pay over the odds for the additional technology or military points converted, and all of them aren't converted any way.

If you turn the slider down to have a low social %, then the galactic wonder is built at a snail's pace.

I hope that explains it for you.


This is where being able to single focus, AND double focus (or single de-focus) would pay off... You could set your Social to 50%, then focus on social on the wonder planet to bring it up to ~75% social, and then de-focus on social on the already built up planet to reduce social spending there to ~25%. It's not perfect and there is still a fair amount of waste, but it is better, and also in less extreme circusmtances social probably won't typically climb above 30% base which will reduce waste significantly compared to the current situation.
Reply #87 Top
Hello all.

I read all of the posts in this thread, and I have to say that I'm alarmed at Stardock's assertion that most people seem to be happy with the current economic model, and as such no fix should be attempted. The problem of established industrial worlds suffocating the newer developing worlds is the one HUGE issue that I have with this otherwise great game. Something DEFINATELY needs to be done to address it.

As I am not privy to the game's source code, I don't know which sort of solutions would be feasible to implement, so I am not going to give any suggestions. I didn't, however, want to remain silent and allow the developers to continue to believe that "the majority" are happy/content with how things are currently working.

More of the people who are unsatisfied with the current state of the economical model need to speak up.

joe


ps. You know, I said I wasn't going to offer any suggestions, but maybe I will. If things are to remain the way they are, I think it would be cool if I could build a ship with a "supply" module that I could send from an established industrial world to a developing one. Once it reached that planet, it could create a supply route that would funnel a certain number of social production from the established world to the developing one. The "cost" in this would be in creating the ship(s) and paying the maintenance costs once the route is established. Additionally, I would have to do some planning in the colonization / conquering of new worlds.

What do you think about this idea?
Reply #88 Top
Not that real world economics would make a great difference in the way SD will creat GC3 or some heavy duty patches for GC2 but read some material from the Austrian School of Economics.

at: mises.org

Learn how the economy of human civilization (societal interaction between people) really operates and attempt to make some programming changes that would allow for people to grasp the "economy" in a manner that makes some real world sense.

Read from Mises and Murray Rothbard...there is also audio of lectures on Economics and Man, that will allow you to play the game and listen, or do whatever and listen. The Austrian/Libertarian prespective is a real "eye-opener" on how man and civilization as we know it "works".

Sorry if this post is a bit "off".

Robert
Reply #89 Top

This is where being able to single focus, AND double focus (or single de-focus) would pay off... You could set your Social to 50%, then focus on social on the wonder planet to bring it up to ~75% social, and then de-focus on social on the already built up planet to reduce social spending there to ~25%. It's not perfect and there is still a fair amount of waste, but it is better, and also in less extreme circusmtances social probably won't typically climb above 30% base which will reduce waste significantly compared to the current situation.


Thanks to everyone who's been constructively contributing to this thread. There have been a number of suggestions and I have seen the following two pop up more than once:

- Add a check box to redirect social production to other things
- Add the ability to 'double-focus' production

At the risk of being presumptuous, I'd like to point out that it would PROBABLY be easier to just redirect social waste back to the treasury, than to make any changes that actually alter the UI. This is, after all, the problem we are trying to overcome in the first place. To put it another way, it's easier to change 1 element of game behavior than to change 1 or more elements of game behavior AND change the UI. Plus, if there are more possible actions for the player to take, then the Artificial Intelligence has to be updated as well. Of course these are just inferences and SD has the final say about what is easier than what.

The second thing worth noting is that for any potential change, you have to consider what it's going to be like when you have 30 planets... and are thinking of acquiring more. So if we got those check boxes or double focus options, how would you deal with turning them on/off for all your planets? Right now focusing is dangerous enough because you might forget that you focused, and there's no high level screen where you can look at all your planets and see if they're focusing on anything. (Civilization manager breaks my heart with this one...) You have to visit each planet to make sure it's focused properly.

We may not like the system, but one GOOD thing about it is that for the most part, it hurts the AIs as much as it hurts the human player. If you change the game so that you have to micromanage more to maximize your performance, it puts us at a disadvantage to the AI and makes the game less fun to play.
Reply #90 Top
Read the topics involving Division of Labor

You'll realize how important that is not only in our own world but also the world of Galactic Civilization 2
Reply #91 Top
Read the topics involving Division of Labor

You'll realize how important that is not only in our own world but also the world of Galactic Civilization 2
Reply #92 Top

This is what I do.

Select race, make sure 1 point in Morale, 5 points in Economics, 5 points where ever else you like. (I put them into Military Production though). I pick Federalist and for Techs I make sure I have the Stellar Cartography and as many Engine techs as possible.

1. I'll start out with Research 90% Social 5% Military 5%, Buy a Factory, buy 2 Ships
-Seems like I need 5% in both of those or I cant purchase ships and buildings. Also you dont want to have Military at 50% when your purchasing the ship, because it will just waste those points.
-When both are completed

2. I'll change the sliders to blast Research 25% Social 70% Military 5%
-I colonize 3 planets and build 3 initial Factories for each. I have about 1000 BC left which I can use to keep my Industry running at 100%. I also have my taxes near the 59% range. (Extra Morale from Race pick)

3. If you find a Minor Race or two right away, you can trade techs with them for cash, and build initial Factories on your new Planets. Leave some spare money to keep your Industry running at full blast for as long as possible though. Once you go below 1000 stop paying for the Initial Factories.

4. After the sprint to get to Starports, I'll place the sliders to Research 25% Social 15-25% Military 50-60%

5. After this point I'll lock out the Social and yo-yo the Research with the Military Spending slider, I'll click up and down to find out how long my research can take, you can notice the Research weeks change at the bottom. I like to have the range around 25% but if I need Research at 28% to get one turn off the Research I'll do it. I'll then give research an extra point or two like 29% just for good measure so it doesn't fall short, I then lock it out.

6. I then yo-yo either the Military or Social spending depending on what is needed. If Planet X needs another factory or something I'll look in the Civilization Manager Colony Tab to see how long they will take, I'll adjust the sliders accordingly and lock them down until that specific item is completed. If a major project is in the works I'll increase my Social close to 50% and my Military down. I'll then flip on the Social Focus for that Colony to make sure it gets done on time.

7. At this point you can see I'm well on my way to expanding, you really need good engines and Steller Cartography to make this work. So the first two techs I research are better Engines and ability to speak to other races.

8. You can look at the Civilization Manager Colony Tab for an accurate account of how long your ships and buildings are being built, you can then yo-yo your Spending Sliders to try and adjust them into a favorable way to optimize them.

9. After a certain point and you have so many Colonies building things, it become to tedius and doesn't help much to eliminate wasteful spending. At this point its time for a new strategy.

10. Try to set all your Social Spending for Base Planets to a number that is even, like 10, 20 or 25. Those are good round number that will evenly divide into alot of Buildings costs. This should reduce waste by reducing the remainders.
- You might think to use this strategy for Military, but most of your designs will not be evenly divided by 10.

11. You will only be able to set the even number to 10, 20 or 25 Social on designated Planets that I call the Base, those without any Manufacturing bonus tiles or your Capital ect ect. You will have many planets with the bonus Manufacturing tiles that wont be able to use this strategy. The rest of your planets with exactly 4 Factories will all be producing the exact same Social Spending.
-It will get confusing through upgrades, but the best thing is to place all your Factory upgrades for your 'Base' Colonies first, this way you can get through the upgrades fast and go back to trying to save on wasteful spending.
- This strategy should work until you get to a point you want to mass Economic Starbases, at this point you should be well on your way to victory and no longer need to micro to save on spending because your Population and Economy should be enough to sustain any waste that occurs.

12. Use Several Entertainment to get your Morale to 100% on your largest Planets, the faster they get full, the more money you get. Make it a priority above research on them. 3 Should work, make sure to build farms when they start getting full, and place 2 markets. After that you can build 2 Research on them and more markets and farms depending on its needs. Dont go overboard with Factories on your largest planets, use them for the Population, Food, Income hubs. Four Factories is all it takes. I like 14-15 and above as my Hubs, your mileage may vary.

13. Four and Five Factories can be easily divided by Percentages when using the sliders. For exampe, 25%, 25% and 50%, or 30%, 10% and 60%. You'll want to have your Base planets with Four or Five so when you reach the point of no micromanagment you can set them to a number that easily divides into the Max Manufacturing Points. For example if your Factory has 8, dividing it by 1/4 (25%) for Social and 1/4 (25%) for Military you end up with 2 MP for each. If you have 4 Factories, you know you will get exactly 2 points from each Factory and your total would look like 8 for social and 8 for Military.
-If your Factory has 10, you could divide it into 1/5 (20%) for Social and 1/5 (20%) for Military ends up in 2 MP for each. If you had 5 Factories you would get exactly 10 base MPs for Social and Military.

14. Use your focus on Research or Military for planets that no longer can build buildings to reduce the social spending there.


Reply #93 Top
Read from Mises and Murray Rothbard...there is also audio of lectures on Economics and Man, that will allow you to play the game and listen, or do whatever and listen. The Austrian/Libertarian prespective is a real "eye-opener" on how man and civilization as we know it "works".


I haven't read it but I'm almost positive I know what its message is... a scathing critique of debt-based fractional reserve banking? Yes, any quantitative economist with a scrap of morality will hold that position. I haven't really seen a game that implements a model anywhere near as complex as the real world, but that would very interesting if someone made one - AND it would spread awareness about the world's current ills, at least among the strategic gaming populace.

Reply #94 Top

While I agree there are simpler economic systems out there, the basic thing here is that I wanted an economic system that had some semblance of reality into it.

Specifically: That your SPENDING was not related at all to your INCOME.

The US budget, for instance, has nothing to do with income other than congress's general awareness that the public has an aversion to excessive debt/defitic spending.  We have tried to capture that here.

I can tell you right now that regardless of how vocal people become, linking your income with your spending is a non-starter. It isn't going to happen.

However, that said, there is one flaw and two non-optimal issues with the overall economics in the game:

The flaw: Social and Military Spending should be linked as one slider. Factories produce the industrial units they need.

Arguably, if I had it to do it over again, I probably would have eliminated social spending completely and instead had buildings on the planet that employed laborers to construct buildings.  But changing that would be a radical change and, in the bigger scheme of things, it's not that significant.

However, in the scope of a 1.x, it could be doable to have a "Guns" vs. "Butter" slider that determines where that factory production goes -- buildings or ships.

Secondly, the labs -- research would be de-linked and would go between 0 and 100% on them as well.

Unused social production would then be transferred to ship production. And if no ships were being built, it woudl simply go back to your treasury.

But while that would be doable in a 1.x type scenario, it wouldn't be a 1.1 version. I twould be more like a 1.5 issue since it would require consideable AI reworking to do it along with significant documentation, play balancing, etc.

But as for the tax slider and the spending slider, no, they won't be joined. Ever. 

Reply #95 Top
If you made those two changes, I don't see that I'd have much to complain about with the economic model. I'll look forward to GC2.5 or GC3, whenever you decide to do them.
Reply #96 Top
I posted this somewhere else on the forum, but this has got to be the worst forum ever so I don't know where the post ended up. Anyway, it's something that shows the stupidity of the system.

:::SCENARIO:::
I have a class 10 planet with 10 squares. Earth if you like. Assume no colony or starport for simplicity.
Build 5 xeno labs: 5*9 flasks=45 flask capacity
Build 5 factories: 5*8 hammers= 40 hammer capacity

I set sliders 100% industry, 50% res, 50% military.
I now have capacity to produce 22.5 flasks and 20 hammers.

BUT: Let's say I rather build 10 factories: 10*8=80 hammer capacity.

I set slider to 100% industry, 100% military.
I now have capacity to produce 80 hammers. I have essentially doubled my efficiency, it's like having a class 20 planet!

Now for the real crux of the argument: I set my focus to produce research. I have checked, and the convertion ratio is about 22.5%, with minimal losses to the conversion.

After the conversion i am producing around 60 hammers and 20 flasks, it's slightly less by a few units. That's allmost the same result research wise as the 50%/50% case, but my military production is about 40 units higher! talk about efficiency gain. This is a superior strategy in the early game. It can even be reversed, you can do 100% res production and focus on military or social.

What's the incentive to build xeno labs if I can get the same result with factories and focus production? Seems like a poorly thought out system that's supposed to give rise to strategic choices, but in reality it's just limiting the players.

:::SOLUTION:::
Stardock needs to remove the industrial spending slider and let you move ALL the mil/soc/res sliders to 100%, while letting the social and military be codependent since they come from the same building. Thus, you could have 100% res, 100% mil, but that means 0% social. Or you could have 100% res, 50% mil, 50% soc.
Reply #97 Top
However, in the scope of a 1.x, it could be doable to have a "Guns" vs. "Butter" slider that determines where that factory production goes -- buildings or ships.

Secondly, the labs -- research would be de-linked and would go between 0 and 100% on them as well.

Unused social production would then be transferred to ship production. And if no ships were being built, it woudl simply go back to your treasury.


I would be very happy with these changes!
Reply #99 Top
But while that would be doable in a 1.x type scenario, it wouldn't be a 1.1 version. I twould be more like a 1.5 issue since it would require consideable AI reworking to do it along with significant documentation, play balancing, etc.


The current system is largely undocumented, which is my whole problem with it. However you design the system is fine with me, but refusing to provide info on precisely how it works is unacceptable. And as I've said before, there is a lack of documentation in all areas of the game, including the tech tree, combat, ship design, economics model, and all the different categories of bonuses the game applies. Why doesn't Stardock provide this information? I just can't understand it. Maybe I'm "projecting" again, but it just doesn't make sense that SD would intentionally obfuscate this information.
Reply #100 Top
However, in the scope of a 1.x, it could be doable to have a "Guns" vs. "Butter" slider that determines where that factory production goes -- buildings or ships.
Secondly, the labs -- research would be de-linked and would go between 0 and 100% on them as well.
Unused social production would then be transferred to ship production. And if no ships were being built, it woudl simply go back to your treasury.
But while that would be doable in a 1.x type scenario, it wouldn't be a 1.1 version. I twould be more like a 1.5 issue since it would require consideable AI reworking to do it along with significant documentation, play balancing, etc.


Thanks for this Frogboy. I'm sure I'm not the only one that appreciates your continued participation in this thread and this suggestion. I'm not sure I understand exactly what you have in mind (e.g. is the "guns v butter" slider still at the empire-wide level, or are you suggesting planetary sliders), but the end result sounds great.

The only thing is that 1.5 or whatever sounds a long way off. Any chance of a short term fix, e.g. something in the option screen to enable wasted production to go straight into the treasury (and damn the consequences, for those so inclined), or at least for it to go somewhere useful - I seem to remember you mentioning it going to moral as a possibility.

Any way, thanks again for listening.

Makris