"Very Difficult Choice" Mod, irc channel: irc.quakenet.org/vdc

Information, How-to's, and discussion about mod'ing Master of Orion II.
Dontoh
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 6:29 am

Re: "Very Difficult Choice" Mod

Postby Dontoh » Thu Nov 12, 2015 6:32 am

I don't know if it was already mentioned but + research is broken. It states +1, +2 and +3 and in truth in game it is -1, +1 and +2
It makes it unplayable with res picks

Additionally it is not possbile to pick Low-G manually because the game claims max allowed is -11

User avatar
Overlord2
Posts: 654
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 5:25 pm

Re: "Very Difficult Choice" Mod

Postby Overlord2 » Thu Nov 12, 2015 12:26 pm

Hi,

The problem you've mentioned means you have installed the game/mod in a wrong way and launch something else, not the mod . Instructions how to install the game are available here: http://masteroforion2.blogspot.com/2006 ... guide.html
Also check the VDC readme file.

User avatar
Overlord2
Posts: 654
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 5:25 pm

Re: "Very Difficult Choice" Mod

Postby Overlord2 » Thu Nov 12, 2015 1:48 pm

Relative to the comparison of missiles and beams above I want to add that the fundamental mistake Dukinson makes is that he completely misses the time factor in his logical constructions. There can't be abstract situation, i.e. you can't compare abstract missiles with beams, because situation in combat is always concrete and is result of concrete situation of the game, which depends on the factors I have mentioned before. Example with entering code and getting 115 attack for a ship with only 40 defense was completely irrelevant, since you can;t get such situation in game. Ignoring such clear argument about conditions, which reflect real game situation and desire to discuss some absract and unreal situations, were considered as "trolling" and received respective response. Sorry for emotional reaction.

Dontoh
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 6:29 am

Re: "Very Difficult Choice" Mod

Postby Dontoh » Mon Nov 16, 2015 1:17 pm

@Overlord

OK, it was not a problem of wrong install. I used VDC before. I as always copied VDC to old vdc folder and in dosbox conf i had VDCGM2 instead of 3

Pawlys
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 3:33 am

Re: "Very Difficult Choice" Mod

Postby Pawlys » Wed Jan 20, 2016 6:45 pm

Quick question: when the new MOO comes out will you be checking it's modibility? :P

User avatar
Overlord2
Posts: 654
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 5:25 pm

Re: "Very Difficult Choice" Mod

Postby Overlord2 » Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:37 pm

Pawlys wrote:Quick question: when the new MOO comes out will you be checking it's modibility? :P

Sorry, I don't asnwer offtopic in this thread. If you are interested in personal opinion, you may use private message for it.

Ethan
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 7:51 am

Re: "Very Difficult Choice" Mod

Postby Ethan » Wed Feb 03, 2016 10:46 pm

I have tried a few times to make a race with no +pop growth work, and can't seem to find a way to make it competitive. (I focus on tech races, so that is part of the problem.) My understanding is that even a production race has a hard time without a pop growth modifier.

However, I find the cheapest option, +60% growth, to be more than I need, and while more is helpful, I'd like to spend the points elsewhere. I think the balance for the three bonuses is generally good, but electing no bonus is too large a gap.

As such, I'd propose changing the pop growth constant 2000 to become 2500, which because of the square root will be between an 11-12% increase. At the same time, lower the bonuses to be +45%, +60%, +80%, decrease their cost by 1 (5,7,10), and decrease total picks by 1. This will amount to baking into the "no bonus" an effective +1 growth pick, allowing races that use it to be more competitive.

The strengths under current values would then become equivalent to:
+11.8% for 1 pick
+62.1% for 6 picks
+78.9% for 8 picks (Alternative: +90.0% for 9 picks)
+101.2% for 11 picks (Increase by 5%?)


Perhaps at the same time housing should be lowered back to 40, or maybe even as low as 38, so that it remains slightly stronger, but not another 10% stronger. (38 * 1.11 = 42, so still stronger)

As a neat little note, no pop mod except large hw should give precisely +100 pop per turn, instead of +89 or +90, thus saving 1 turn for the 9th pop to show up. While sub, large hw gets +115 pop if I calc right, up from 104, getting it's 9th pop 1 turn faster as well.


I think this would help non-growth races to stay competitive without majorly upending the balance.

User avatar
Overlord2
Posts: 654
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 5:25 pm

Re: "Very Difficult Choice" Mod

Postby Overlord2 » Fri Feb 05, 2016 8:22 am

I'll be offline for quite a while, will get back to it when I am back.

User avatar
Overlord2
Posts: 654
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 5:25 pm

Re: "Very Difficult Choice" Mod, irc channel: irc.quakenet.org/vdc

Postby Overlord2 » Tue Mar 08, 2016 6:31 am

Back to the question I didn't answer.
I have tried a few times to make a race with no +pop growth work, and can't seem to find a way to make it competitive. (I focus on tech races, so that is part of the problem.) My understanding is that even a production race has a hard time without a pop growth modifier.

Well, races without pop growth should focus on housing as a main pop growth factor. Hence it's clear that tech races won't be able to produce much pop with housing, since they have less colonies and housing bonus is weaker too because they lack prod bonuses. The only races which can play without pop growth bonuses are prod races and preferably unification based ones.
After I increased no pollution production of planets in VDC 59, housing became better and uni races received considerable buff.

However, I find the cheapest option, +60% growth, to be more than I need, and while more is helpful, I'd like to spend the points elsewhere. I think the balance for the three bonuses is generally good, but electing no bonus is too large a gap.

This gap springs from the game mechanics: unification receives its production bonuses from the beginning, while other races need moral techs to increase their production. Consequently for other races to be competitive they need additional pop growth bonus. Basically any non- uni race should include growth to be on par with uni. Otherwise they get too much behind in pop and impossible to compensate later.

As such, I'd propose changing the pop growth constant 2000 to become 2500, which because of the square root will be between an 11-12% increase. At the same time, lower the bonuses to be +45%, +60%, +80%, decrease their cost by 1 (5,7,10), and decrease total picks by 1. This will amount to baking into the "no bonus" an effective +1 growth pick, allowing races that use it to be more competitive.

I was considering this idea, but gave it up because growth formula will get badly hit. Percentages are applied to the base (100%), while changing the base e.g. to 111% or other will make other bonuses to show incorrectly. The new 45% will be from 111% and will be confusing. Same for pop growth techs and leader bonuses.

Perhaps at the same time housing should be lowered back to 40, or maybe even as low as 38, so that it remains slightly stronger, but not another 10% stronger. (38 * 1.11 = 42, so still stronger)

Decreasing housing coefficient may produce unpredicted results. While base growth will be increased for all races, unification still keeps its production bonuses and housing growth may be even stronger than before.

In whole this change may produce more problems than gain.

Ethan
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 7:51 am

Re: "Very Difficult Choice" Mod, irc channel: irc.quakenet.org/vdc

Postby Ethan » Thu Mar 10, 2016 8:00 pm

All fair concerns. Honestly, I think a tech race still couldn't be viable with no housing mod (as you've said) even after the buff I was proposing, but I know uni type races have a shot at it. My skewed subset of races would have argued that a 20% buff is the minimum, but I knew my experience was skewed.

I had tried to keep almost everything as equal to current as possible for this proposal, specifically to avoid the problem of having to rework many different rebalanced systems. The new % bonus values were chosen to mimic the old bonuses, and a revision downward to housing was intended to balance the revision upward in the base.

Another route would be to give no pick a +10% inherently, but I don't think that is technically feasible. Just general guessing on that part, no experience modding.

If you judge the 0% to 60% gap to be good balance, then you should certainly keep it. If you judge 10% to 60% to be a better balance overall, then I think we can rework the rest of the values to make than change without materially impacting any of the other balance points. (Note I say we - while I have a proposal for it, as posted before, others would need to vet and review it to insure it does achieve the goal and only that goal.) I hoped for an informal sounding on if the intended change was even beneficial, and would get fully technical if it proved promising. (I can make the math dance and sign if you want - got a degree in it even. Degree doesn't do squat for determining what song it should be playing though.)

I think the "voting" on it stands at 1 for, 1 against, and the against has a much more highly valued vote (rightly - you know this game better than I). If no one else cares, that kills the proposal. (As in, unless you change your mind or someone else feels moved to comment, this subtopic can die.)

User avatar
Overlord2
Posts: 654
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 5:25 pm

Re: "Very Difficult Choice" Mod, irc channel: irc.quakenet.org/vdc

Postby Overlord2 » Fri Mar 11, 2016 12:50 am

I suppose I will keep current system because as I said new system doesn't provide any significant gain while shortcomings of the new system are quite tangible.
On a side note, I could give couple of examples of the tech races without pop growth bonuses, which are quite playable: Sub, lith, demo or Sub, lith, +3 sci with -12 negative. Actually recent practice showed that I overdid uni and new imba race appeared, namely uni aqua +3 prod (noteworthy it is the race without pop growth bonuses). In this connection something should be revised - either change with map generation procedure (oceans % was highly increased) or changes connected with unification itself.

clembo
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2015 12:10 am

Question about 1.50.2.1 and VDC

Postby clembo » Sun Jun 12, 2016 2:25 pm

I hope this isn't considered off-topic. With the new 1.50.2.1 mod that is out (based on 1.40) would you consider updating VDC to be compatible with it? Based on the notes for the new mod, VDC is only compatible with 1.40.

I really appreciate all of the work you, Rocco, and others have put into MOO2. Thank you for making the game even more fun!

User avatar
Overlord2
Posts: 654
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 5:25 pm

Re: "Very Difficult Choice" Mod, irc channel: irc.quakenet.org/vdc

Postby Overlord2 » Sun Jun 12, 2016 5:33 pm

Hi,

Yes, VDC mod is going to move to 1.50 patch in near future. Working out details of this transition now.

clembo
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2015 12:10 am

Re: "Very Difficult Choice" Mod, irc channel: irc.quakenet.org/vdc

Postby clembo » Mon Jun 13, 2016 12:46 pm

Awesome! Thanks for the quick response.

oliver
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:08 am

Re: "Very Difficult Choice" Mod, irc channel: irc.quakenet.org/vdc

Postby oliver » Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:11 am

Hi,



I have the same problem as described by someone else where I cannot refit a ship on v60 of VDC. The error is "you do not have the technology to refit"
I downgraded to v59h and it works as intended.

Thanks for the great mod! I can't play MoO anymore without using it.


Return to “Game Modifications”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest