CPs and why their current implementation isn't ok

[True_poser]

Well, the CP mechanics introduced in the latest major patch certainly changed the game.

I believe, the intent behind them was to get rid of excessive number of fleets.
However, in my personal opinion which may be completely wrong, the baby was thrown out with the water.


Current CP mechanics are pretty simple:

• +5 CP for free
  +1 CP per logistics level
  +1 CP per starbase

Starbases are pretty expensive and logistics research up from 5-6 level is steep too.
In the midgame that leaves us with probably 5 (free) + 6 (5lvl logistics) + 3 (3 starbases on 8-10 colonies) = 14 CP.

Yep, that gives us 14 scouts or 7 transports or 4 cruisers or 3 motherships.
With the recent torpedoes size nerf scouts aren't a viable fighting force, so you're down to one fleet.
In your best interests is to make it a dreaded stack of doom as you don't have anything else to fight with.

Sure, you can have an invasion-only force, as weaponless ships cost 0 CP, but it's a corner case.


What if you're out of CPs?

You're up for a harsh fine.
You'll have to pay 10BC for each CP over the limit.

As if you're out of money, you're dead (you automatically lose the game), that makes early rush scenarios pretty unfeasible.
You'll have to make do with 3 armed transports.


So, is there anything I'd like to share with the class?

1) The main problem is the scarcity of CP points. There are no leaps as in MOO2, for example (there were techs that allowed you to jump from +3 per colony to +6 and +9 and there were different types of starbases).
2) Instead of autoscrapping the fleets you can't afford, the game kills you.
3) The system, while limits the total number of ships severely, does not encourage any changes to ship design and fleet formation.


What do I propose?

Let's go the simplest way.
Let's repurpose supply bays:

• on a scout a supply bay adds +2 CP
  on a transport a supply bay adds +1 CP
  on a cruiser a supply bay adds +0,5 CP
  on a mothership a supply bay adds +0,25 CP

And then we calculate CPs needed to supply a fleet simply by summing CPs from supply bays and distracting CPs from hull costs.
If a sum is positive or zero, the fleet does no impact on total CPs. If it's negative, it goes by current rules.
Oh, and it's very important that each supply bay adds one turn before the ship can retreat from a battle.


Yeah, you can kinda do self-sufficient ships (except for motherships).
However, they'll be mediocre fighters, as much of free space and specials slots will go into supply bays.

Why won't you exploit the system by creating a fleet of support scouts? Let's say 2 motherships and 8 +1 scouts?
Good luck and try to not to get any of these supply ships killed.

Yep, you can achieve (or make an enemy to achieve) a Pyrrhic victory.
You can't retreat supply-heavy ships fast enough, so if your feeble scouts or bulky transports are killed, your fleet begins to guzzle your money like there's no tomorrow.
You'll have to let go of some fighter ships, as the treasury deficit will kill you soon enough and you're unlikely to have a spare supply fleet nearby (if you have, gg).

Essentially, you'll have to balance.

I can make quick estimations in a spreadsheet for probably optimal patterns for AI to use if anyone's interested.

[Anguille]

I like the idea of the CPs but agree that's it's too harsh at this point.

You're suggestions are interesting. I had the the idea that the penalty should not be as expensive. 10 BC is way too much....maybe it should be more progressive, starting with 100 of the lower currency and moving up slowly. In my last game, because of CPs, i have not been able to resist a fleet from a race with more CPs...the more starbases i lost, the less i was able to resist only because of CPs.

[Wenla]

I like current CP-system. It makes beginning/middle game much harder, but there is still turning point after what winning gets easier and easier, only that turning point comes later on. Of course it may be that difficulty level influences more than before, I (usually) play normal.

[Zaimat]

Thanks for starting this thread. The feedback is very helpful.

I've been testing different scenarios to find the optimal balance for CPs. And we've also added more tooltips and ways to find out CP usage on different screens to make it easier to track it. As well as notifications when you go over it.

In the current live version CPs are not affected by difficulty level but this is changing with the upcoming patch.

Things we want to keep:
- We want CPs to continue to be effective in limiting fleet sizes so most fights involve half a dozen ships to a dozen at most on each side. (players who prefer to play with larger fleets beyond that I think will prefer to disable the command points option)

Things we want to change:
- Reduce the costs for going over the limit on normal/easy/very easy but leave it high at hard and very hard difficulty settings. We want players to go over for short periods of time but not be able to sustain negative CPs for long (except when they are already winning the game in late stages and will naturally be able to afford a lot of starbases)

True_poser: The idea to tie it to ship design isn't bad in itself except the AI isn't very good compared to players at coming up with clever ship designs and will be handicapped. It's also harder to effectively balance at different stages of the games and new vs. more experienced players. If we want to increase CPs, we can scale up the technology or how much starbases provide.

[Zaimat]

I like the idea of the CPs but agree that's it's too harsh at this point.

You're suggestions are interesting. I had the the idea that the penalty should not be as expensive. 10 BC is way too much....maybe it should be more progressive, starting with 100 of the lower currency and moving up slowly.

Making it progressive has a lot of merit but it's just harder from a UI perspective so we would prefer to keep it a constant value.

I like current CP-system. It makes beginning/middle game much harder, but there is still turning point after what winning gets easier and easier, only that turning point comes later on. Of course it may be that difficulty level influences more than before, I (usually) play normal.

And this is perfectly fine at some point when you (or the AI) are winning the game, having bigger fleets and things becoming easier is perfectly normal.

[null]

I'll second the positive view of the current CP model. I really like how it puts a hard limit on fleet micromanagement. (but I'm pretty biased since I have a strong preference for small maps and "roleplaying" on lower difficulty settings)

That said, I can understand the objection. The CP limits are very tight so it's hard to support mobile defense forces that provide adequate coverage on multiple frontiers. I've also noticed the tendency of empires to put all of their forces into one of the aforementioned 'stacks of doom'. Not that there's necessarily anything wrong with that, but it definitely changes the tenor of the game. (Reminds me of Master of Magic: "Champions of Death, DESTROY THEM!" )

Maybe as a compromise increase the base number of points? That way even a beginning empire could support non-wimpy frontier fleets but a big empire could still overwhelm with tech advances and (especially) starbases.

Or maybe add a second logistics tech that can be researched (like how waste disposal and ecological cleansing stack)? The idea would be to give a little boost to supply levels without going too far in the swarms of fleets direction.

I also liked the idea of making CP growth non-linear:

The main problem is the scarcity of CP points. There are no leaps as in MOO2, for example (there were techs that allowed you to jump from +3 per colony to +6 and +9 and there were different types of starbases).

...but that doesn't do as much for the early game where I think most people really feel the CP bite.

Alternately, maybe static defenses could be tweaked to take more burden from mobile forces. If ground weapons were cheaper, more/less powerful, faster to build, or easier to discover (I'm chagrined to admit I've never seen beam defenses) people would be more comfortable with smaller mobile fleets. For example, if missile defenses were cheaper and faster to build but less powerful they could serve as a kind of stopgap for new colonies. The el cheapo missiles wouldn't be a total 'NO GO' sign for invaders but would be enough of a road block that you wouldn't feel like an idiot for colonizing outside your main fleets' 1 or 2 turn range.

Of course if the main concern is:

We want CPs to continue to be effective in limiting fleet sizes so most fights involve half a dozen ships to a dozen at most on each side.

Then maybe only let one or two allied fleets participate in a battle at a time? Then you could be a little more generous with CPs so players could build enough ships to have strategic depth without permitting huge tactical pile ons. Of course this might be annoying because it would be harder for big empires to force the enemy to feel the weight of their numbers...

P.S. It can't be said enough: Thanks for continuing to support the game!

[Anguille]

Ok Zaimat, i understand...i would make it cheaper nonetheless. When you compare to what you can buy for 10BC in the game, such overcost seems way too expensive...why not 1 to 2 BC? It's already a lot imho.

Maybe as a compromise increase the base number of points? That way even a beginning empire could support non-wimpy frontier fleets but a big empire could still overwhelm with tech advances and (especially) starbases.

Yeah...that's another thing that came into my mind...starting with some more CPs is a nice idea.

Or maybe add a second logistics tech that can be researched (like how waste disposal and ecological cleansing stack)? The idea would be to give a little boost to supply levels without going too far in the swarms of fleets direction.

Good idea, and/or make bonuses from new logistics level higher.

P.S. It can't be said enough: Thanks for continuing to support the game!

Fully agree

[keller]

I love to have large fleets so I do not care for CP at all. In my opinion, it limits gameplay. Sure you have more ships in battles but that it what makes it fun to play.

[Anguille]

That's the great thing about it being an option...makes very different gaming experiences...

[True_poser]

- We want CPs to continue to be effective in limiting fleet sizes so most fights involve half a dozen ships to a dozen at most on each side.

Well, that's a complex problem.

1) As each colony adds only +1 CP (after spending 40BC or 10BC and ~70 turns), your total fleet starts to be stretched thin really fast.
2) And you'll have to stretch it thin, as there is:
2.1) no analog of MOO2 jump gates which are fairly early tech,
2.2) and stargates are randomly achieved and their cost pushes them to end-game anyway,
2.3) and ship speed increase is not significant enough,
so the distance between colonies in turns remains quite big, your rescue fleet will probably be late.
3) The fun part is that non-armed transports full of ground troop pods are free in terms of CP, so making huge invasion fleets roaming for an easy prey is pretty much the way to go.
3.1) So you'll need to stretch your fleet thin, for instance, in case of Kuntari (who love to send invasion transports even if they're in normal relations with you; then they get offended that the transport was blown up, it's all your fault apparently).

So, limiting the total size of fleet indeed does guarantee that there will be not too much ships in battles to keep them interesting, but does not guarantee that a player will have enough ships in most of the battles for them to be interesting in the first place.

Possible mechanisms are:
- early-mid jumpgates guaranteeing a fixed number of turns between colonies
- much bigger ship speed, so that "home fleet" will have a chance to respond in time
- some transparent mechanism for:
-- cheap keeping a certain fixed amount of ships at bay (maybe tied to the colony development)
-- expensive fleets moving

(players who prefer to play with larger fleets beyond that I think will prefer to disable the command points option)

I do not like fleet spam too, so I'll stick to CP.

- Reduce the costs for going over the limit on normal/easy/very easy but leave it high at hard and very hard difficulty settings. We want players to go over for short periods of time but not be able to sustain negative CPs for long (except when they are already winning the game in late stages and will naturally be able to afford a lot of starbases)

Great to hear it.

True_poser: The idea to tie it to ship design isn't bad in itself except the AI isn't very good compared to players at coming up with clever ship designs and will be handicapped.

Well, noone said that AI should adhere to player's rules, as total CP number available to an AI empire is not visible to the player.
However, I do not hold to that idea, as it requires from a player to shift from ships as entities to operate to fleets midgame.

It's also harder to effectively balance at different stages of the games and new vs. more experienced players. If we want to increase CPs, we can scale up the technology or how much starbases provide.

The problem is with linearity of the tech and with fixed bonus from starbases.
There are no leaps, so it's awfully hard to make all game stages comfortable.

P.S. It can't be said enough: Thanks for continuing to support the game!

Definitely.

[Dialtone]

I think one solution would be to allow the player to garrison ships at a starbase, by grouping up to nine ships with a starbase. When ships are garrisoned have them not count towards your command point limit. This would allow players to have a bigger fleet than just their command point limit, and defend important systems. If it was done this way players and AIs wouldn't be able to bring out their whole fleet at once, avoiding the issue of having extremely large battles. Ships garrisoned at a starbase would still be able to defend a planet or system, allowing large empires to be fully defended. If a players offensive fleet was lost then reinforcements could be lauched immediately, instead of having wait while new ships are built.

[True_poser]

Looks elegant to me.
So if you ctrl+click on a ship while having a starbase selected, they don't count in total CP, but are immobile.

This way starbases which are astoundingly useless now will work not as a fortress in space, but as a supply hub and it all comes together.

tl;dr: I second this.

[Anguille]

Looks elegant to me.
So if you ctrl+click on a ship while having a starbase selected, they don't count in total CP, but are immobile.

This way starbases which are astoundingly useless now will work not as a fortress in space, but as a supply hub and it all comes together.

tl;dr: I second this.

I like the idea too.

Imho, it should be enough if the fleet is in orbit...having to select each ship is too much micromanagement...

This was done in Spartan/Legion/Charriots of War too by Slitherine...armies on the field were more expensive than the ones based in the cities.

[Wenla]

But...

If you have CP enabled and you have a defense like starbase plus nine (relative good) ships, are there any power to conquer planet any more?

[Dialtone]

But...

If you have CP enabled and you have a defense like starbase plus nine (relative good) ships, are there any power to conquer planet any more?

You'd still have to build and pay the regular maintenance for the ships, just like without CP enabled. So it wouldn't be like you could have a starbase and nine ships at every planet.

@Anguille - Having them not cost CP when they're in orbit works also, but I just think it's a bit too easy, because why would putting ships in orbit of some new world with no infrastructure make ships not need to be commanded or supplied(CPs - logistics). I think using starbases for garrisons gives alot of purpose to them, compaired to starbases only having a single CP, and limited defensive capabilities. Since starbases are your main source/hub for command and logistics, it makes sense that when your ships are garrisoned at a starbase, that your command and logistics infrastructure wouldn't be used up to maintain said ships, at least not at the same rate.

Also I don't think you'd have to select ships anymore than you would to group them now. Just group them with a starbase, then to take them out of garrison just right click the starbase out of the group. You could group a fleet with a starbase with about the same amount of clicks needed to put the same fleet in orbit.

Edit: @Anguille again, I just had an afterthought, maby you meant ships would just have to be in orbit of a planet with a starbase, or even just in a system with a starbase, I could be wrong. But either of those methods could also work.

[Anguille]

Edit: @Anguille again, I just had an afterthought, maby you meant ships would just have to be in orbit of a planet with a starbase, or even just in a system with a starbase, I could be wrong. But either of those methods could also work.

Yes...this what i wanted to say

[null]

Wow, that's a pretty neat solution. It even uses the same UI logic as grouping regular fleets. You could quibble that replacing mobile units would be much easier for the defender, but that's exactly what you would expect to happen as the defender exploits their interior lines.

The only possible problem I see is players trying to stockpile huge fleets. This could create a "sandbagging" problem where punching through defenses become tedious - maybe to the point of things grinding to a stalemate (you would see this a lot in the old board game Risk). Granted, as Dialtone pointed out, players would still have to build and pay for the ships.

All in all, I think it sounds like a really good idea.

[True_poser]

Imho, it should be enough if the fleet is in orbit...having to select each ship is too much micromanagement...

Grouping a ship with a starbase is an already implemented mechanics and places a natural limit of 9 ships per base.

This was done in Spartan/Legion/Charriots of War too by Slitherine...armies on the field were more expensive than the ones based in the cities.

Endless Legend is the latest example.

This could create a "sandbagging" problem where punching through defenses become tedious - maybe to the point of things grinding to a stalemate (you would see this a lot in the old board game Risk).

Ships are pretty fragile as they are and mechanics do prevent dogpiling fleets and endless retreat as in Endless Space.

With the current CP limit you can keep a formidable fleet at one colony, two tops.
All other will have to make do with a standing garrison, as you can't transfer fleets quickly enough.

It will make the exterminate policy much more useful for raiding, too.
And if the enemy has a stargate, you can destroy it first, either cutting a colony from the grid, either trapping an enemy fleet there, so you can strike somewhere else.

[Wenla]

You'd still have to build and pay the regular maintenance for the ships, just like without CP enabled. So it wouldn't be like you could have a starbase and nine ships at every planet.

Yes, I can understand that, but...

Before current patch I buildt only rare starbases, but after latest patch a lot of them (I don't to have tell you why...). Of course it moves turning point further (=longer games, I like that) and if your solution will be implemented, it only moves turning point further, but doesn't change final result (=my victory). Most propably I should change my current winning strategy, but I can see allready how I could make it. Again, it would mean longer games and I still like that, but it wouldn't change anything else. If your mention is to get beginning/middle game harder, then it's find. IMHO, of course.

[Zaimat]

Just wanted to note that, the garrison idea is very interesting to me and I see a lot of merit to it and even beyond just for CP management.

It would involve changing other parts though to make it really work, which would also require quite a bit of testing. Like how the AI would handle it and also making the mechanic very transparent to new players (perhaps even requiring a tutorial step to explain it).

Definitely something we can consider for the future. I do hope with today's update you find the CP management easier and providing a better balance between limiting ships and how they scale up.