30-06-2001 11:56									#1
	Subversion costs Got spare money?

I've searched this forum as well as the games online help and have not been able to find what I am looking for.


What is the formula for determing the cost to subvert a base?


If no one can give me that then an estimate of subverting a Hive base pop. 1 with one 1-2-1 garrison (green) and no facilities running demo/planned?

	30-06-2001 16:58									#2
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I personnally don't have a clue. Generally it seems that base with less infrastructure costs less. However, the cost to subvert a particular base can change dramatically from turn to turn. I assume, but do not know, that this is due to SE changes base owner.

Ned

	30-06-2001 18:39									#3
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

I am also unclear on this, though I do know that the formula takes into account the base infrastructure, the probe rating of the faction, size, and the income of the base. I am not entirely sure, but I think it also takes into account the number of units within the base and surrounding squares.

	30-06-2001 21:24									#4
	Get a bigger avatar today!

I also think it takes into account the energy reserves of the faction whose base you are trying to control. For example, though neither Morgan or Dee had negative Probe ratings, no Covert Ops Centres, etc., yet it cost a lot more to subvert Dee's base than it did to subvert an identical Morganite base. The only substantial difference between the two was that Dee had 740 energy credits and Morgan had only 20 in his energy reserves.

	30-06-2001 23:08									#5
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

It could be that a part of the formula divides up the factions bankroll and divides it up by bases in proportion to their size or some such - I believe that is the type of calculation that determines how much you get when you "drain energy reserves" and when you take over a base.

I'm pretty sure that is not the whole formula, as I think I read somewhere that the infrastructure was alao involved, but it might be part of the calculation. I too, have experienced wide swings in value when probing bases for thought control (as well as individual units).

	01-07-2001 01:02									#6
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Dinoarms, what ARE you planning? Anyways, your SECRET is safe with me, at least as safe as it is on the BBS. Not sure whether Gusto looks at this forum or not -- of course, I'm simply making an assumption.

One thing though, is that I recently mind controlled a Spartan base (Gusto's btw in another game), size 3 with a 1-3-1, 1-1-1, and 4-1-2 in it and a former within its radius, and also included a Permiter Defense. It cost me just over 300. Then next turn when I went after a size 2 base with only 2 units and no facilities it cost over 500, and he didn't even change his settings. It makes me think that the 1st one is always cheapest, and then the game thinks that the faction is more prepared for another probe action so it costs more. Don't know if that is true, just made me think it.

	01-07-2001 06:25									#7
	Got spare money?

I've been looking over the posts here, and the more I see, the more I want to tell you guys: visit the Great Library in the Civ 2-Strategy forum. I'm not sure about this question, not having done any play-testing on it in SMAC, but the cost of subversion in Civ 2 is explained here.

	01-07-2001 22:48									#8
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

KrazyHorse, Thanks for the link. I read the CIV notes on costs both for subversion and for tech. I believe that SMACx has the same basic elements as set forth there. However, SMACX has additional features which are not found in CIV which clearly have an influence on cost. These are in the case of subversion: relative probe ratings, and, in the case of tech costs, research rating. In addition, it appears that the "probe" rating of a base previous probed for at least a tech steal increases dramatically.

We have also noticed, as suggested by Blarney, that probe costs increase dramatically on trying to subvert a second base from the same AI faction on successive turns.

On the issue of tech cost, the Great Library discussion was good on how tech costs are calcuated. However, there was no discussion on how this is done during "end of turn." For example, assume you the faction to go first in the end-of-turn sequence with others following. Is the cost for the next tech calculated after your turn is completed, or after all the other faction's turns are completed. You can see why I ask, because the cost calculations will be different depending on order due to the fact that cost includes the position of a faction relative to other factions in the tech tree.

Guys in the Tech Cost thread, I think this last paragraph may contain the beginnings of an explanation for what you are seeing. You did not get the tech when it was your turn in the end of turn updates because you were just short of the required tech cost. However, at the end of everyone's else's turn, costs may have been recalculated for all due the updated tech tree order. This recalculation may then have reduced your tech costs, sending you over the cost limit, while simultaneously not giving you the tech.

Make sense?

Ned

	02-07-2001 05:57									#9
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

It is almost certainly calculated at the same time everything else is; just before your turn commences, the game runs through all of your cities in order (from youngest to oldest) and gives you the number of beakers each city produces. If the beakers from a city drive you over the edge, your tech advisor pops up and asks what your next research priority will be. The beaker adding process then continues, getting you closer to the next tech. Note that additional beakers from the city which "made the discovery" will be wasted; Not a big deal in a multi-city empire, but important to a faction with very few bases.

	02-07-2001 13:58									#10
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Yes, but, KH, in multiplayer, there are several players. If each player's tech's affect the others, then it makes a big difference who goes first during the end of turn processing. If a player researches a tech, subsequent player's tech cost could be lower, depending on the formula.

It seems it always good to go last.

Ned

	02-07-2001 14:52									#11
	Got spare money?

It is, of course, best to go last, but this is only a one turn benefit. I've never heard of anybody micromanaging to the extent that this could really make a difference.

	02-07-2001 19:00									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

The recalculation of tech cost idea is all well in good except it is not consistent with my experience. Ever since I had the instance of of not getting a tech that when I had more Labs than the tech cost, I have been tracking the Tech cost more carefully. I have watched all 6 of my PBEMs through 6 to 15 turns and have NEVER seen the F2 required tecg cost change except to START a new tech. This included instances where I traded for 3 techs, built SPs or even traded for the one I was researching. No change in the F2 value EVER except upon COMMENCING research when the tech cost is first set. I recall testing this once by trading/stealing to acquire 6 techs in one turn. Since I stole 4 of them this had to change my relative tech standing but NO-- the F2 value did not change and the next tech showed up two turns later exactly as scheduled. My tech cost skyrocketed for the next tech but thats it.


Also, when I did not get the tech as scheduled exceeding tech cost by 17 Labs I looked for "lost" Labs on the next turn but there were NONE. I got the tech a turn late BUT the 17 excess were added to my full Lab production and shown as being accumulated toward the next tech. So if there is some recalculation going on , the game somehow readjusted and gave the previous tech at its original cost. The better answer seems to be that tech cost is calculated ONCE and that the anomoly I experienced is yet another bug with the game and not indicative of anything substantive-- I will continue my monitoring though.

As for subversion costs it is influenced by probe rating and the existence of Drone riots plus the treasury of the intended victim. I recall in CIV2 it also seemed to be influenced by geographical location of the diplomat where the cost of subverting a city could vary depending on which side of the city your diplomat was on LOL

	02-07-2001 19:53									#13
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

CBN, This is almost like getting a Secret of Alpha Centauri by cashing a pod. You do not get the extra tech. You only get it if you research it.

Krazy Horse, The Great Library post also referenced a Key Civ. The tech cost change depending on the relative number of tech as compared to this Key Civ.

What is a Key Civ?

Ned

	02-07-2001 21:26									#14
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by cbn ....Ever since I had the instance of of not getting a tech that when I had more Labs than the tech cost, I have been tracking the Tech cost more carefully....and have NEVER seen the F2 required tecg cost change except to START a new tech. This included instances where I traded for 3 techs, built SPs or even traded for the one I was researching. No change in the F2 value EVER except upon COMMENCING research when the tech cost is first set....

cbn, I too have been closely watching the tech costs since you started that other thread, but I have seen the tech cost go up, much to my chagrin, which I attributed to pod popping a tech (pod popping wasn't one of the elements of your test, although it would be strange if that were treated differently). Adding insult to injury, it happened on the turn following the turn I had been originally scheduled to have received the tech, thus combining both of those bummers. The only other factor that I can think of which may be relevant is that I had yet to research my first tech, a factor which I think I saw mentioned in a related context.

Ned, can I infer that you believe the tech cost are calculated at the end of the entire turn as opposed to the beginning (or end) of one'e individual turn? A lot of the tech stuff is done on the fly, especially the awarding of techs which OTOH could suggest that the calculations were being done then as well - we seem to be convinced that the costs are at least evaluated when you start a new tech. However, if the recalculation is done at the end/beginning of the entire turn, I think it would be reasonably unbiased compared to recalculating at the beginning/end of the individual turn which would favor the later moving players.

	02-07-2001 22:03									#15
	Put an end to popups!

why do you need the formula? i'm sorry, but i don't see the benefits of knowing the formula. maybe i'm missing the point

	03-07-2001 06:47									#16
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Ishkandar, Over in the Civ forum, they discuss reducing tech costs by strategic giving of tech to so-called key civs. Apparently, for every three techs you are ahead of the key civ, you get a one tech penalty. So if you give the key civ just the right number of techs just before you research one, apparently your tech costs are lowered (e.g., the penalty is reduced.)

We just do not know what a key civ is - is this the last place civ?

But the other reason is the multiplayer problem. What is causing it? Once we find out, we can, theorectically, avoid it.

Johnd, It is quite clear that the end of turn is divided in several unique phases. In one of the phases, each faction updates, base by base, unit builds, labs, energy, riots etc. During this phase, if the labs accumulated exceed a predermined number, a faction gets a new tech. At this point, its own tech costs are recalculated, as well as, it appears, the penalties and bonuses that are used for other factions. The proceeds, faction-by-faction, until all factions are heard from.

Then, at the end of all this, the control is returned to the player and the faction-wide display updated with current information. It is at this point the where I believe the reported costs can be less than the actual costs that were present when your faction's calculation were made due to a change in the penalties or bunuses caused by research breakthroughs of other factions.

	03-07-2001 08:06									#17
	Just a thought Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

As far as the not getting the tech goes, has anyone noticed if the rp's generated by the LAST base evaluated in the upkeep phase of the turn is the one generating the rp's that would give you the tech?

I know that this would be a hard one to simulate, but perhaps there's a bug that if your last base would put you at the limit, not over it, but just at the required rp's for that tech, that it doesn't give it to you?

There is some evidence for this: if the upkeep phase looks for rp totals = required amount before adding in the "next base's rp's" at the first part of the upkeep phase, then this would explain cbn's "missing" 17 rp's showing up the next turn, along with the "missing" tech.

Then again, I could just be twisiting in the wind

I'll see if I can reproduce this, but don't hold your breath

	03-07-2001 10:02									#18
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Ned Krazy Horse, The Great Library post also referenced a Key Civ. The tech cost change depending on the relative number of tech as compared to this Key Civ. What is a Key Civ?

If you remember Civ2, you'll remember your foreign advisor telling you things like how your power was, say, "Inadequate". There were seven ratings, from Supreme to Pathetic, IIRC. Your key civ is determined in the following way: You are told you have a power of "x" where x runs from 1 (supreme) to 7 (pathetic). If you are given a 7, then your key civ is the white civ. If you're given a 6, then your key civ is the green civ, 5 = Dark Blue, 4 = Yellow, 3 = Light Blue, 2 = Orange, 1 = Indians. Note that as your power increases, your key civ changes to a civ which gets its moves later; the white civ moves first, the purple civ moves last. The bonus or penalty you get for being behind/ahead in the tech race is determined solely by a comparison between your key civ's tech level and your own. Everyone out there note: I didn't come up with this stuff myself; I am merely distributing information arrived at by other (more dedicated) players. I hate to see good research go to waste, so I'm providing this information in the conviction that there are numerous parallels between the Civ2 game engine and the SMAC game engine. Also; I just thought up something; in SMAC, was there some sort of penalty to switching your SE settings other than just the one-time cost (such a radical change will blah blah...)?

	03-07-2001 20:58									#19
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

johndmuller

Other than that one instance have you ever seen the F2 tsch cost go up during the research of a single tech I have never seen the F2 change even if I trade for the tech I am researching and substitute another. Could it be that there is a quirk relatedto tech cost before the first one gets researched and your experience related only to that. Has anyone else seen adjustments to their F2 tech cost? I have not but that is based on far less tracking than would be needed to state conclusively that it NEVER changes (with the first tech exception)

Overall I have seen two theories put forth

1. F2 is incorrect if you obtain additional techs and does not reflect a recalculated cost.

This does not fit my general experience since techs come in as expected even if I track them 6 or 8 turns from discovery. If it comes faster there is an explanation ( facilities, an SP or some other way to increase RP's. Ditto if its slower (changes in an allocation, Drone riots or losing a base). Also it fits neither of my "lost tech " examples since in both cases the "excess RP's went toward the next tech. If tech cost were recalculated somewhere, the game still applied the original tech cost when calculating RPs accumulated for the next tech.

I have spot checked the F2 Labs against the base by base displays and they have remained accurate through my admittedly limited testing.



2. Some quirk of game upkeep involving rounding, RPs from the last base or that determines when tech cost is set. This could be it although if tech is accumulated by founding order, each of my newest bases were contributing far less than 17 RPs so it would have probably taken the contribution of the last 5 bases to result in a 17 point excess. For clarity it would have been my 9th or 10th base (of 14) that would put me over the top.

Rounding or a last base effect could explain the circumstance where I did not get the tech when I had exactly the tech cost but neither can explain a 17 point excess in a 14 base empire.



I welcome you to continue to search for a reason for what happened and I will continue to look myself. But for now I am stumped. There have been some plausible rationales raised but they do not seem to quite fit. Perhaps this is just one of those inexplicable things that this game does sometimes.