AGEOD Forums

Just to introduce players to a MP game balancing mechanisms that we have introduced for games with 15 or less players. The idea is that we know the engine has inflationary tendencies and that nations in the lead seems to get more and more in the lead as time passes, while it's harder and harder for the late ones to catch up.

The mecanisms triggers every 2 years, based on some nations reaching a certain VP threshold. First treshold is the 10,000 VP mark for 2+ nations, the next will be the 20,000 mark for 3+ nations, etc... (10,000 and one nation extra each time). Each time such a threshold is reached, a balancing mecanisms triggers, as follows:

Nations over the mark (i.e 10,000 first time): lose 10% VP, gain amount of VP lost in state funds
Nations not over the mark but more than half of it: lose 5% VP, gain amount of VP lost in state funds
Nations below half the mark and above 20% (i.e. less than 5,000 and more than 2,000 in first step): gain 5% VP and same amount of state funds
Nations below 20% of the mark: gain 10% VP and double the same amount of state funds (but capped at 300£)
Nations less than 10% of the mark: gain 50% VP (or 200, whichever is biggest), flat 200£

In such a way, the nations in the lead are a bit slowed down without being penalized, the ones in the trails get a little catch up, the ones really lagging a better catchup. Overall, we tried it and this is good because it does not alter much the rankings but really gives a chance to the late nations and makes the game both interesing and challenging.

Here is a simulation of the mecanism in the world in conflict game, November 1881 [showing nation tag (rank), VP]

Before Mecanism trigger
GER (1) : 12,085
GBR (2) : 11,427
FRA (3) : 7,634
USA (4) : 7,070
RUS (5) : 5,717
AUS (6) : 5,319
JAP (7) : 3,077
ITA (8) : 2,443
HOL (9) : 1,995
SPA (10) : 1,734
BEL (11): 1,595
TUR (12): 1,522
CHI (13): 1,383
POR (14): 901
SWE (15): 408

After Mecanism trigger
GER (1) : 10,877 + 1,208£ [color="#FF0000"](VP = -1,208)[/color]
GBR (2) : 10,285 + 1,142£ [color="#FF0000"](VP = -1,1142)[/color]
FRA (3) : 7,252 + 382£ [color="#FF0000"](VP = -382)[/color]
USA (4) : 6,717 + 353£ [color="#FF0000"](VP = -353)[/color]
RUS (5) : 5,432 + 285£ [color="#FF0000"](VP = -285)[/color]
AUS (6) : 5,054 + 265£ [color="#FF0000"](VP = -265)[/color]
JAP (7) : 3,227 + 150£ (VP = +150)
ITA (8) : 2,565 + 122£ (VP = +122)
HOL (9) : 2,095 + 100£ (VP = +100)
SPA (10) : 1,907 + 173£ (VP = +173)
BEL (11): 1,754 + 300£ (VP = +159)
TUR (12): 1,674 + 300£ (VP = +152)
CHI (13): 1,659 + 283£ (VP = +138)
POR (14): 1,352 + 200£ (VP = +451)
SWE (15): 612 + 200£ (VP = +204)

This is of course not 'decisive', but it's a way to help smaller nations that were not intended to be playable initially and thus give a sense of challenge in the game, although it is obvious that the game design was made initially only for the 8 major playable nations.

You did that by scripting? I'm discovering unknown possibilities to the scripting engine!

So in our game, when would this fire, and is it dynamic (meaning, will the amount lost be the above, or whatever the scores are at the time of the change)?

Dynamic, at the moment it fires, it will adjust to the current VP. I shall make a test of the mecanism at the end of the current hosting.

Really good that.

But for me because the PV are only use in the end of the game for the rank I prefere play rp or with my personel objectif, is more fun for me .
Maybe not win, but I play for fun, and I have much fun ^^.

PhilThib wrote:Just to introduce players to a MP game balancing mechanisms that we have introduced for games with 15 or less players. The idea is that we know the engine has inflationary tendencies and that nations in the lead seems to get more and more in the lead as time passes, while it's harder and harder for the late ones to catch up.

The mecanisms triggers every 2 years, based on some nations reaching a certain VP threshold. First treshold is the 10,000 VP mark for 2+ nations, the next will be the 20,000 mark for 3+ nations, etc... (10,000 and one nation extra each time). Each time such a threshold is reached, a balancing mecanisms triggers, as follows:

Nations over the mark (i.e 10,000 first time): lose 10% VP, gain amount of VP lost in state funds
Nations not over the mark but more than half of it: lose 5% VP, gain amount of VP lost in state funds
Nations below half the mark and above 20% (i.e. less than 5,000 and more than 2,000 in first step): gain 5% VP and same amount of state funds
Nations below 20% of the mark: gain 10% VP and double the same amount of state funds (but capped at 300£)
Nations less than 10% of the mark: gain 50% VP (or 200, whichever is biggest), flat 200£

In such a way, the nations in the lead are a bit slowed down without being penalized, the ones in the trails get a little catch up, the ones really lagging a better catchup. Overall, we tried it and this is good because it does not alter much the rankings but really gives a chance to the late nations and makes the game both interesing and challenging.

Here is a simulation of the mecanism in the world in conflict game, November 1881 [showing nation tag (rank), VP]

Before Mecanism trigger
GER (1) : 12,085
GBR (2) : 11,427
FRA (3) : 7,634
USA (4) : 7,070
RUS (5) : 5,717
AUS (6) : 5,319
JAP (7) : 3,077
ITA (8) : 2,443
HOL (9) : 1,995
SPA (10) : 1,734
BEL (11): 1,595
TUR (12): 1,522
CHI (13): 1,383
POR (14): 901
SWE (15): 408

After Mecanism trigger
GER (1) : 10,877 + 1,208£ [color="#FF0000"](VP = -1,208)[/color]
GBR (2) : 10,285 + 1,142£ [color="#FF0000"](VP = -1,1142)[/color]
FRA (3) : 7,252 + 382£ [color="#FF0000"](VP = -382)[/color]
USA (4) : 6,717 + 353£ [color="#FF0000"](VP = -353)[/color]
RUS (5) : 5,432 + 285£ [color="#FF0000"](VP = -285)[/color]
AUS (6) : 5,054 + 265£ [color="#FF0000"](VP = -265)[/color]
JAP (7) : 3,227 + 150£ (VP = +150)
ITA (8) : 2,565 + 122£ (VP = +122)
HOL (9) : 2,095 + 100£ (VP = +100)
SPA (10) : 1,907 + 173£ (VP = +173)
BEL (11): 1,754 + 300£ (VP = +159)
TUR (12): 1,674 + 300£ (VP = +152)
CHI (13): 1,659 + 283£ (VP = +138)
POR (14): 1,352 + 200£ (VP = +451)
SWE (15): 612 + 200£ (VP = +204)

This is of course not 'decisive', but it's a way to help smaller nations that were not intended to be playable initially and thus give a sense of challenge in the game, although it is obvious that the game design was made initially only for the 8 major playable nations.

Second step will be processed tonight as we have now three nations over the 20,000 threshold.

Lindi wrote:Really good that.

But for me because the PV are only use in the end of the game for the rank I prefere play rp or with my personel objectif, is more fun for me .
Maybe not win, but I play for fun, and I have much fun ^^.

Similarly, I play for fun and enjoy playing smaller nations.....with a lesser eye on the VP.....in the larger MP previously it was fun to join up diplomatically ...find nations with grudges against who my nation wanted to fight or defend against etc.

With Belgium I am enjoying the colonialization aspects and keeping my nation afloat......I'll let you all know if I get tired of it. We've only had a little conflict in World in Conflict thus far. Good? Bad? Cooments on the game anyone?

It seems like a reasonable approach. In the role-playing aspect, prestige was more important to some countries than others in terms of international relations and domestic politics.

Maybe the game should be rechristened World in Harmony, which wil virtually ensure a quick descent into global war.

IMHO wars will start erupting sooner or later, because some players are getting "bored" of being nice.... this said, at the time being, we jsut concluded a Japan-China war, we have a German-Portugal war, a Turkey-Italy war and just started a Russia-Rumania war...so that's not so quiet I would say

Now, I feel the atmosphere of this game is quite good, because there is some diplomatic activity behind (and before) the scene, people are committed and play with the spirit of the time, and I really enjoy hosting it at night as it is a refreshing jump back in time... I like the trip

PhilThib wrote:JThis is of course not 'decisive', but it's a way to help smaller nations that were not intended to be playable initially and thus give a sense of challenge in the game, although it is obvious that the game design was made initially only for the 8 major playable nations.

The Heart of Africa 5 unique card limit itself has a strong leveling effect - it appears to be a slower-paced scramble.

Sir Garnet wrote:The Heart of Africa 5 unique card limit itself has a strong leveling effect - it appears to be a slower-paced scramble.

I had the impression it was still going very fast. Countries (well only the big ones) are crowding the map with so many cards being dropped everywhere. I still believe the pace is way too fast, even for Britain and France.

Agreed, it's probably 10 times too fast...A s Germany, I have in 1884 the empire they had in 1914 (and more)... I wonder what mechanisms should be found to severly restrict the race here...

PhilThib wrote:Agreed, it's probably 10 times too fast...A s Germany, I have in 1884 the empire they had in 1914 (and more)... I wonder what mechanisms should be found to severely restrict the race here...

1 possibility. Have the cards reappear more slowly after being used.

Well, this does not work that easily: cards re-appear either immediately after use, or never (gone for good). So your suggestion would need that for each nation and each card an event is scripted that once a card is removed (for good, all cards), then it reappears after some time via a script..one by one...it's possible but it's a hell of a lot of events to scripts...the alternative would be Pocus to script a bit more code and that cards have additional parameter like "percent chance to reappear after use"

Another option is to lengthen the time that a card needs to work, or slow down what they can do. For example, merchants only give 0.5% CP per turn, or are limited at say 15%. You could make bribing take twice as long as it currently does. That would only entail database work, not a new script or major re-programing.

It does have the drawback of forcing a database change, and then it has to be play tested.

Micro cards would be exceedingly tedious using the current hunt-on-the-map interface, which, however, has a more suitably adventuresome feel than a master control interface for colonization. (Though on the economic side an integrated econ/trade interface combining F4, B, and Trade info would be very nice).

It is said the civilization is a constant battle to fight back the encroachment of the jungle. Even more so in the actual jungle. It takes maintenance, so if there was a natural erosion down to a lower level if ongoing efforts were not made, that would make it more efficient to focus on getting one colony over a hurdle rather than diffusing efforts. It could also be that an explorer character, police, or something else needs to be sent to a region to focus on development. This would add more value to the Colonial window if relevant info was added.

Sir Garnet wrote:Micro cards would be exceedingly tedious using the current hunt-on-the-map interface, which, however, has a more suitably adventuresome feel than a master control interface for colonization. (Though on the economic side an integrated econ/trade interface combining F4, B, and Trade info would be very nice).

It is said the civilization is a constant battle to fight back the encroachment of the jungle. Even more so in the actual jungle. It takes maintenance, so if there was a natural erosion down to a lower level if ongoing efforts were not made, that would make it more efficient to focus on getting one colony over a hurdle rather than diffusing efforts. It could also be that an explorer character, police, or something else needs to be sent to a region to focus on development. This would add more value to the Colonial window if relevant info was added.

Interesting ideas.....the Very Harsh Weather could have an impact on a regions growth somehow.... as well as Harsh Terrain.....At present:Trains cannot be built in Difficult Terrain without much higher resources. Development of Undeveloped areas could take more resources.....and need less resources as they become more developed. (Easy to say, tough to implement, I suspect.)

Sir Garnet wrote:Micro cards would be exceedingly tedious using the current hunt-on-the-map interface, which, however, has a more suitably adventuresome feel than a master control interface for colonization. (Though on the economic side an integrated econ/trade interface combining F4, B, and Trade info would be very nice).

It is said the civilization is a constant battle to fight back the encroachment of the jungle. Even more so in the actual jungle. It takes maintenance, so if there was a natural erosion down to a lower level if ongoing efforts were not made, that would make it more efficient to focus on getting one colony over a hurdle rather than diffusing efforts. It could also be that an explorer character, police, or something else needs to be sent to a region to focus on development. This would add more value to the Colonial window if relevant info was added.

Also increasing penalties could be given for the same kind of card.
or
Maintenance could be the higher, the larger the colonial empire groes.
or
Penalties could be significantly higher for countries when they fish outside their (historical or else) defined waters.
or
Countries without any colonies could get some kind of reward.

I imagine that in later versions of the game the implementation of colonial policies could be done, like coexistence or exploitation, with their respective plus' and minus'. Or other colonial decisions like 'worldwide' or 'concentrate on region'.

My suggestion focused on the historical pattern of colonization in a series of strong impulses/focuses more than a blanket approach, which would be more difficult.

There already is a Worldwide vs. Hemispheric vs. Regional vs. Isolationst power faction setting in F1. Greater investment in colonies would mean some of the best and brightest head out to colonial hellholes, so research etc. might be a little slower, for example, and the officer pool in particular lessened by the needs of colonial administration.

Right now you can rush CP up fast but then you don't pick up the loyalty and development gains along the way that prove valuable in the long run - there is a balancing at work between haste and thoroughtness.