\\\-- Balance of Power (v1.2c released)--///

Balance of Power Mod; showcase and support/discussion/questions/suggestions/reviews

Moderator: thunderchero

User avatar
Martok
Rear-Admiral
Rear-Admiral
Posts: 1148
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 2:00 am

Post by Martok » Thu Apr 16, 2009 1:34 am

Ah, that was it! I was trying to install it onto BOP instead of BOPE. Works like a charm now; I'm playing a new Fed campaign on the largest map size. And oh, how sweet it is.... 8)

Many thanks for your help, buddy. Much appreciated. :D
"Evil is easy, and has infinite forms." -- Pascal

User avatar
Martok
Rear-Admiral
Rear-Admiral
Posts: 1148
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 2:00 am

Post by Martok » Thu Apr 16, 2009 5:05 pm

Now that I've had a little while to play BOP 1.1c on the new larger maps, my thoughts thus far (on both the larger map sizes and 1.1C in general):


1.) With so much more space now, the galaxy definitely feels a bit empty at the moment; there needs to be more star systems. As others have already noted this, however -- including (I believe) Gowron himself -- I shall say nothing further, as I would only be repeating everyone else.

2.) The additional upgrades on certain ships are definitely appreciated. I'm particularly glad to see the K'Tinga gets another refit at the top of the tech tree -- it really needed it IMO. So thanks! :)

3.) Would it be possible to go back to just one starting system, at least on the lower levels? Starting with an extra colony can be nice, but I'm often forgetting I have it, which means it sits around doing nothing for several turns. Also, I -- quite frankly -- just really like the idea of starting out with just one world/system, and getting to go explore the surrounding environs myself. ;)

4.) Glad to see shield generators no longer have the morale bonus. It was too easy to have good morale on your home system, plus it put the Klingons at too much of a disadvantage (morale-wise). Similarly, decreasing the ground combat bonus from the Order of the Bat'leth was probably a good move as well, as I admittedly found Klingon systems to be overly difficult to conquer before.

5.) Speaking of the Klingons, I still think they could use another morale-boosting structure. I know they get bigger morale bonuses from "war stuff" (battle victories, conquering planets, etc.), but it still doesn't feel like it's enough to offset their morale problems during peacetime. Perhaps that's just me, though? :?

6.) I like that Puppet Governments bestow a +2 morale bonus now. It feels much better balanced to me.


Overall, my experience has been very positive thus far. I've been a big fan of BOP since I first started playing it, and it only continues to get better as Gowron introduces further changes (both large and small) in every update. All hail to the Chancellor! 8)
"Evil is easy, and has infinite forms." -- Pascal

User avatar
Gowron
Code Master
Code Master
Posts: 304
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 2:00 am
Location: 50° N, 11° E

Post by Gowron » Fri May 01, 2009 7:45 am

Please note that non-Klingon shield generators *do* still include a morale bonus. The Klingons, on the other hand, can build the HoW in any native system.

Star frequency has not been changed in the beta version, but of course it will be adjusted to the size of the map in the next update.
A discovery consists in seeing something everybody has seen and at the same time thinking something nobody has thought yet.

User avatar
Martok
Rear-Admiral
Rear-Admiral
Posts: 1148
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 2:00 am

Post by Martok » Sat May 02, 2009 12:01 am

Gowron wrote:Please note that non-Klingon shield generators *do* still include a morale bonus. The Klingons, on the other hand, can build the HoW in any native system.

Gah! Once again, I've put my foot in my mouth. Can't believe I'd not noticed that -- I'd been stuck on the old mindset that the HOW was only buildable in in Qo'Nos. :oops: Sorry Gowron; thanks for pointing that out.

Gowron wrote:Star frequency has not been changed in the beta version, but of course it will be adjusted to the size of the map in the next update.

Cool. I got the impression that that's what you were planning on, but I'm glad to hear it confirmed. 8)
"Evil is easy, and has infinite forms." -- Pascal

User avatar
GeorgiaBoy
Lieutenant-Junior Grade
Lieutenant-Junior Grade
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:00 am
Location: Georgia (not the Caucasus)

Post by GeorgiaBoy » Wed May 06, 2009 11:47 pm

Gowron,

Just love the bigger maps! Thank you very much. The bigger map actually gives it a feel of an epic game. To me, the 52X39 map feels like a quadrant size map.

[Dream mode ON] Wouldn't it be nice if four of the 52X39 maps, displayed one at a time, could be used in a single game? [Dream mode OFF]

Anyway, aside from my raving, thank you very much Gowron. Bigger maps are like carbohydrates to me...always wanting more...

GB

KrazeeXXL
BORG Trouble Maker
BORG Trouble Maker
Posts: 2267
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 3:00 am
Location: the 36th Chamber

Post by KrazeeXXL » Thu May 07, 2009 11:40 am

4 x 52 x 39 isn't realizable. Imagine how big or rather how little the sectors would be @ this size. You wouldn't be able to see anything.

I remember that Gowron posted a maximum map size which is possible and everything beyond that size will let the game crash.
It wasn't much bigger than 52 x 39.

But in my mind 52 x 39 is ok. this means 2028 sectors! This is already more than 5 times bigger than the 25 x 16 we used to play for many many years.

User avatar
GeorgiaBoy
Lieutenant-Junior Grade
Lieutenant-Junior Grade
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:00 am
Location: Georgia (not the Caucasus)

Post by GeorgiaBoy » Thu May 07, 2009 11:49 am

KrazeeXXL wrote:4 x 52 x 39 isn't realizable. Imagine how big or rather how little the sectors would be @ this size. You wouldn't be able to see anything.
I was thinking about 4 52X39 maps displaying one at a time, not all four displaying at once. That would take a microscope to see...
KrazeeXXL wrote:But in my mind 52 x 39 is ok. this means 2028 sectors! This is already more than 5 times bigger than the 25 x 16 we used to play for many many years.
Point well taken and thankful for the new size we have :D

GB

KrazeeXXL
BORG Trouble Maker
BORG Trouble Maker
Posts: 2267
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 3:00 am
Location: the 36th Chamber

Post by KrazeeXXL » Thu May 07, 2009 12:14 pm

GeorgiaBoy wrote: I was thinking about 4 52X39 maps displaying one at a time, not all four displaying at once. That would take a microscope to see...
I asked something similiar to Gowron in the week he made his brilliant breakthrough and he answered that it would be easier to create a new game. ;)

User avatar
thunderchero
Site Administrator aka Fleet Admiral
Site  Administrator aka Fleet Admiral
Posts: 6380
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 2:00 am
Location: On a three month training mission, in command of the USS Valiant.
Contact:

Post by thunderchero » Thu May 14, 2009 12:53 am

I just wanted to let a few BOP members know signup is almost complete already for next tournament and BOP is mod. :wink: 2 slots left.

med map normal size, irregular, hard to start many minors

I hope to see some new faces.

thunderchero

goodone
Lieutenant-Junior Grade
Lieutenant-Junior Grade
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri May 29, 2009 2:00 am
Location: Novi Sad, Vojvodina, Serbia, Europe
Contact:

Post by goodone » Fri May 29, 2009 12:47 pm

this one is gonna b long, so reader, prepare urself. 8)

1st of all, let me say that my m8s and i have been playing this mod since it come out. in our opinion, it is widely the best mod for botf there is, for both sp and mp.

2nd, we have some questions regarding 1.1c in regards to 1.1a version:
1. what was the intention behind limiting the natural number of possible trade routes to 1? it is our opinion that it was more diverse [read: better] having systems with various trade route numbers, according to pops ofc. maybe increasing the required pop for a trade route [if possible], according to a race psychology, instead this general limit, would be a better choice, if the intentions were just to reduce its financial impact, or tweaking trade route income a bit more. in addition, clan hall and franchise office shouldn't be affected.
2. is it possible to keep the benefits of higher number of planets per a star, and still have gas giants randomly appear to some percent? we guess it isn't possible, as stated in docs, but we would like to express our opinion that this affects diversity in negative way [read: a bit worse].
3. limiting diversity again by making starting systems of major empires look the same [number, type and pop on planets] - read: bad.
4. the number of additional starting systems for various starting levels seems ok, except for 1st level, since most of the players [upon our assumption] like having only a single starting system on that level. maybe the formula should b something like starting_systems=starting_level-1. however, we guess ppl will adapt to this change if it can't be avoided, so we r neutral on this topic, generally, and just asking.
5. federation morale modifiers: should they be affected towards neutrality so much [50% on some points]? this decreases diversity of gameplay federation player must take comparing to other empires - read: a bit bad.

3rd, there r some good points in 1.1c towards 1.1a:
1. higher scrapping and trade goods revenue.
2. small number of starting farms for new systems of ai romulans and fegengy bug is fixed, it seems.
3. smaller-empires-preferred free ship support formula offers more challenge!
4. more stars, more planets, more ppl!
5. all minors moving their ships, yeah!
6. tweaked hall of warriors, fixing decimated klingon issues; also given shield generator.
7. new bunker network type building!
8. a bit less money from federation trade center.
9. exquisite puppet government!
10. new ships, and some interesting changes in old ones!
11. romulan colony ship with a cloak!!!!! yes!

4th, a solution for upgrading industry buildings between races bug:
it is our opinion that cause of this problem is in structure costs between levels of different majors. example: if klingon lvl 4 is to replace ferengy lvl 3 industry structure, ferengy lvl 3 must be cheaper that klingon lvl 4 industry structure, or it won't work. [please, credit Prometheus for this fix in docs, if it proves solid & true, he would appreciate that much, since he spent quite a time rechecking where the error could be.]

5th, some unusual minors-diplomacy behavior in 1.1c in regards to 1.0a [yes, 1.0a] version:
1. it seems that ai has little idea about be-membering minors: in a test mp in which the federation ai has the most planets and respectfully minors around those planets, it be-membered only those far-a-way minors they bribed into breaking affiliation with the romulan empire [a human player]; and this only after a long-term diplomacy struggle in which both sides gave large amounts of gifts - eventually federation economy won the battle, causing turn down on existing romulan affiliation and in a turn taking on federation membership [with no affiliation in between]; the same happened to klingons [a human player] from cardassians [an ai]; no ai player be-membered any minors at all throughout the game [except those stolen ex-human-affiliated ones].
2. it seems that the only thing one can do after a minor has become a member of an enemy empire, is to subjugate them; seems that 4000credits is simply too small bribe amount to make any reply from an already worshipful minor other than: we won't break our treaty and we wouldn't do it on u too;
3. bribing affiliated [not membered] minors works quite well, and is easily done; ai uses this quite well as stated in 1.
4. overall: it's a bit unusual and not vanilla alike, but this diplomacy has it's heart - human player should do good never to affiliate minors other empires [especially ai] are interested in, cause they may easily lose them in following diplomacy/bribe battle; instead go straight to membership [which seems unbreakable]; but maybe a bit more tuning minor diplomacy is in need.

6th, some proporsals:
1. romulan and klingon troop transports III with a cloak might be a good addition [we would like to see even romulan starbases with a cloak, but this is not rly possible unfortunately]. :)
2. cloak classes 5 & 6: why discounting those classes completely? maybe it would be better to put them on one or two high lvl ships of romulans & klingons? it doesn't rly matter if we know or not if they are any good, since we could be missing something this way anyways, and if not, they are all the same as class 4, which u generally use on all cloak-capable ships.
3. a trade center for each race, with different bonuses ofc. it seems a bit unnatural that other empires do not have any idea about trading and its benefits.

7th: unknown [maybe a match dependant] behavior:
yridians w/ zero industry buildings after be-membering them.

lastly, we love new beta large maps [be sure not to forget revisit tweaking of stars:anomalies ratio, money, research and other galaxy-size dependant bonuses when things get finished; boy, that's gonna take some major tuning :D].

many thanks for this mod! :)

User avatar
Karstedt
Cadet 4th Year
Cadet 4th Year
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 2:00 am

Post by Karstedt » Sat May 30, 2009 8:18 pm

I'm on my first try of this mod and so far I like it a lot. My favorite part is probably the not needing to upgrade buildings all the time. Where is the tech bonus located for editing? I couldn't find it anywhere with the UE, but it's a great idea. It would be even better if you could specify it for each thing individually.

I did find a bug though. After an earthquake that destroyed all my power plants in a minor world, the power plants that I built after that were level 5.

User avatar
Gowron
Code Master
Code Master
Posts: 304
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 2:00 am
Location: 50° N, 11° E

Post by Gowron » Sun May 31, 2009 4:04 pm

goodone wrote:we have some questions regarding 1.1c in regards to 1.1a version:
1. what was the intention behind limiting the natural number of possible trade routes to 1? it is our opinion that it was more diverse [read: better] having systems with various trade route numbers, according to pops ofc. maybe increasing the required pop for a trade route [if possible], according to a race psychology, instead this general limit, would be a better choice, if the intentions were just to reduce its financial impact, or tweaking trade route income a bit more. in addition, clan hall and franchise office shouldn't be affected.
After fixing the scrapping revenue, it turned out that trade routes would become too much of a decisive factor. To avoid this, both the effect and the numbers of trade routes had to be limited.
goodone wrote:2. is it possible to keep the benefits of higher number of planets per a star, and still have gas giants randomly appear to some percent? we guess it isn't possible, as stated in docs, but we would like to express our opinion that this affects diversity in negative way [read: a bit worse].
I'm afraid it's not possible to have both. Gas Giants have very large animations, and there would not be enough space on the planet display for 9 planets with some Gas Giants among them. As a result, some planets would not be displayed at all, and they could not be selected for terraforming, either.
goodone wrote:3. limiting diversity again by making starting systems of major empires look the same [number, type and pop on planets] - read: bad.
I don't like them to look the same either, but this was the only way to make them equal in size.

Unequally-sized additional starting systems had been one of the biggest balance problems in BotF multipleyer games, and if I have to choose between more diversity and better gameplay, then please understand that gameplay is more important in my opinion.
goodone wrote:4. the number of additional starting systems for various starting levels seems ok, except for 1st level, since most of the players [upon our assumption] like having only a single starting system on that level.
I'll keep it in my head for the next version :)
goodone wrote:5. federation morale modifiers: should they be affected towards neutrality so much [50% on some points]? this decreases diversity of gameplay federation player must take comparing to other empires - read: a bit bad.
This again is a conflict between diversity and gameplay.
goodone wrote:3rd, there r some good points in 1.1c towards 1.1a:
1. higher scrapping and trade goods revenue.
2. small number of starting farms for new systems of ai romulans and fegengy bug is fixed, it seems.
3. smaller-empires-preferred free ship support formula offers more challenge!
4. more stars, more planets, more ppl!
5. all minors moving their ships, yeah!
6. tweaked hall of warriors, fixing decimated klingon issues; also given shield generator.
7. new bunker network type building!
8. a bit less money from federation trade center.
9. exquisite puppet government!
10. new ships, and some interesting changes in old ones!
11. romulan colony ship with a cloak!!!!! yes!
Thanks :)

I'm not sure if the Romulan/Ferengi AI problem has been fixed completely, though.
goodone wrote:4th, a solution for upgrading industry buildings between races bug:
it is our opinion that cause of this problem is in structure costs between levels of different majors. example: if klingon lvl 4 is to replace ferengy lvl 3 industry structure, ferengy lvl 3 must be cheaper that klingon lvl 4 industry structure, or it won't work. [please, credit Prometheus for this fix in docs, if it proves solid & true, he would appreciate that much, since he spent quite a time rechecking where the error could be.]
Thanks for looking into this, but it's not the cost that is causing the bug.
The reason for the cross-upgrading bug has already been found:
http://armadafleetcommand.com/onscreen/ ... 0343#10343
goodone wrote:5th, some unusual minors-diplomacy behavior in 1.1c in regards to 1.0a [yes, 1.0a] version
Yep, the AI is not especially smart when it comes to diplomacy, but I'm not sure if we'll ever be able to change this.
goodone wrote:6th, some proporsals:
1. romulan and klingon troop transports III with a cloak might be a good addition [we would like to see even romulan starbases with a cloak, but this is not rly possible unfortunately]. :)
2. cloak classes 5 & 6: why discounting those classes completely? maybe it would be better to put them on one or two high lvl ships of romulans & klingons? it doesn't rly matter if we know or not if they are any good, since we could be missing something this way anyways, and if not, they are all the same as class 4, which u generally use on all cloak-capable ships.
3. a trade center for each race, with different bonuses ofc. it seems a bit unnatural that other empires do not have any idea about trading and its benefits.
I've already considered giving the cloak ability to Romulan transports, but that would be a big strategical advantage, as well as a possible bug source.

It is not known (yet) whta the higher cloak classes are good for (or if they're even good for anything), so I've decided not to use them.
At best, they'd be just as good or bad as the "basic" cloak. At worst, they'd be a difficult-to-trace balance problem because of hidden bonuses.

I'll think about the Trade Centers, although I think I've already abandoned the idea (of giving them to all empires) twice or so ^^
goodone wrote:7th: unknown [maybe a match dependant] behavior:
yridians w/ zero industry buildings after be-membering them.
That's a common bug/feature in BotF, not unique to this mod.
And it could be worse, they could be lacking food structures as well ;)
goodone wrote:lastly, we love new beta large maps [be sure not to forget revisit tweaking of stars:anomalies ratio, money, research and other galaxy-size dependant bonuses when things get finished; boy, that's gonna take some major tuning :D].

many thanks for this mod! :)
You're welcome, and thanks for all your comments :)


Karstedt wrote:I'm on my first try of this mod and so far I like it a lot. My favorite part is probably the not needing to upgrade buildings all the time. Where is the tech bonus located for editing? I couldn't find it anywhere with the UE, but it's a great idea. It would be even better if you could specify it for each thing individually.
Please look here:
http://armadafleetcommand.com/onscreen/ ... opic&t=238

You can set different bonus values for food, energy and industry.
However, there are no bonuses for intel and research.
Karstedt wrote:I did find a bug though. After an earthquake that destroyed all my power plants in a minor world, the power plants that I built after that were level 5.
It those were Cardassian power plants, then it could be [URL=http://armadafleetcommand.com/onscreen/ ... 0669#10669]this bug.
A discovery consists in seeing something everybody has seen and at the same time thinking something nobody has thought yet.

User avatar
vergol
Cadet 3rd Year
Cadet 3rd Year
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun May 31, 2009 2:00 am

Post by vergol » Sun May 31, 2009 6:45 pm

Hey, I'm new to the forum. I reinstalled BotF after years of neglect and discovered BoP only a few weeks ago. This mod makes an already great game even better. Great work, and thank you!

Back in the day, most of my botf games were singleplayer, so when I got into it again I was reminded how unconvincing diplomacy is. Every faction in the game is a blackmailing syndicate. Aside from rare requests for contested territories which have no real value, AI factions constantly extort money from you to "keep you in [their] favor". What's worse, you could be the best of friends with them and they STILL ask for rather obscene sums (granted they're a bit easier to afford with BoP's economic changes). The Federation asks you to compensate them for 'overlooking your recent actions' -- like corrupt cops that take bribes to let criminals slide. It's absurd.

I can turn a blind eye on meaningless AI fleet movements, but the galaxy can do without blackmail diplomacy.
Gowron wrote: Yep, the AI is not especially smart when it comes to diplomacy, but I'm not sure if we'll ever be able to change this.
Do you know if anyone has anyone attempted to mod the diplomatic AI?

User avatar
ketteringdave
Lieutenant-Junior Grade
Lieutenant-Junior Grade
Posts: 99
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 2:00 am

Post by ketteringdave » Sun May 31, 2009 11:43 pm

Gowron wrote:
goodone wrote:4. the number of additional starting systems for various starting levels seems ok, except for 1st level, since most of the players [upon our assumption] like having only a single starting system on that level.
I'll keep it in my head for the next version :)
Nearly every single game I play is T1, in any mod. In fact, one of the reasons I avoided higher tech levels in vanilla was the extra starting systems - i wanted to build things up my way, not try to re-purpose a provided system. When Gowron introduced extra starting systems, all the way down to T1, I wasn't quite sure if I liked it.

After several games with each empire, I think that the extra system is a necessity in BoP. Founding a new colony is so time-consuming and expensive that I believe a T1 start with just the home system would be beyond tedious. With just that second system available, it feels like you're still accomplishing something over those first 30-40 turns, while ships and contact with other races are so limited.

I think it would be a mistake to remove the extra starting system at T1.

goodone
Lieutenant-Junior Grade
Lieutenant-Junior Grade
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri May 29, 2009 2:00 am
Location: Novi Sad, Vojvodina, Serbia, Europe
Contact:

Post by goodone » Mon Jun 01, 2009 5:28 am

Gowron wrote:
goodone wrote:we have some questions regarding 1.1c in regards to 1.1a version:
1. what was the intention behind limiting the natural number of possible trade routes to 1?
After fixing the scrapping revenue, it turned out that trade routes would become too much of a decisive factor. To avoid this, both the effect and the numbers of trade routes had to be limited.
can't it be done some other way? like higher pop requirements per route?
Gowron wrote:
goodone wrote:3. limiting diversity again by making starting systems of major empires look the same [number, type and pop on planets] - read: bad.
I don't like them to look the same either, but this was the only way to make them equal in size.
Unequally-sized additional starting systems had been one of the biggest balance problems in BotF multipleyer games, and if I have to choose between more diversity and better gameplay, then please understand that gameplay is more important in my opinion.
maybe making them diverse in small steps, like 5pop, 10pop... just so it doesn't appear overly generic?
Gowron wrote:
goodone wrote:3rd, there r some good points in 1.1c towards 1.1a:
2. small number of starting farms for new systems of ai romulans and fegengy bug is fixed, it seems.
I'm not sure if the Romulan/Ferengi AI problem has been fixed completely, though.
just rechecked. well, it seems sometimes it works ok, and sometimes it doesn't, but in-general, this ratio is pushed towards the 1st.
Gowron wrote:
goodone wrote:5th, some unusual minors-diplomacy behavior in 1.1c in regards to 1.0a [yes, 1.0a] version
Yep, the AI is not especially smart when it comes to diplomacy, but I'm not sure if we'll ever be able to change this.
well, we liked it better in 1.0a, at least for a bit it was more functional.
Gowron wrote:
goodone wrote:6th, some proporsals:
1. romulan and klingon troop transports III with a cloak might be a good addition [we would like to see even romulan starbases with a cloak, but this is not rly possible unfortunately]. :)
I've already considered giving the cloak ability to Romulan transports, but that would be a big strategical advantage, as well as a possible bug source.
yep, true.

Post Reply

Return to “Balance of Power Mod”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users