Social Engineering - Alpha Centauri Forums

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  Strategies and Tactics
  Social Engineering

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   Social Engineering

Glak posted 03-26-99 12:17 AM ET
I admit that I am fairly new to the game but I'm starting to notice that some social engineerin choices are just much better than others. Perhaps someone could help me see the redeeming features of those choices that I see as useless. I haven't ever gotten future society so I am talking earlier in the game. I play fairly agressively
Ok here are my opinions:
Police State: The Holy Grail of society. You need the support for your military and formers. The police can help but it is secondary. The efficiency is bad but you can counteract it with other choices.
Democratic: Worthless. Anything that drops you into negative support is worthless. Growth is also low on my list of good things because I can get all the people I want through conquest.
Fundamentalist: Not to appealing. Probe doesn't seem to help (my probe teams work fine without it) and the morale bonus is nice but I don't think it is worth the drop in tech. It also has to compete with the mighty Police State.
Free Market: Horrible, this one ruins you. Economy is great but is it worth destroying your empire? No way. This thing ought to be: +1 econ, +1 indus, +1 tech, -2 planet, -3 police or something like that. It is not acceptable the way it is. How often do you see morgan on top? His faction is good but his choice of economies isn't.
Planned: bland. The growth is nothing, the industry is a nice little bonus but the efficiency is the death blow. I would consider using this if I wasn't using police state for some crazy reason.
Green: Good. The efficiency is great. It counteracts the only bad thing about police state. The +2 planet helps in battle and the -2 growth is actually sort of a bonus because you have more time to prepare for the drones.
Power: Ok. I don't need the support (Police state shines through) and the industry hurts. The morale almost makes up for it. If I was in some heavy fighting I would consider using it.
Knowledge: Great, no downside really.
Wealth: Acceptable. I usually choose knowledge instead though.
Well I was just wondering what everyone thinks. Keep in mind no future societies. I need an early/mid game solution. Currently I always go Police/Green/Knowledge, making my total adjustment:
+2 support, +2 police, +2 planet, -2 growth, +2 research, +1 efficiency, -2 probe
I'm sure that I will get a lot of disagreement so tell me why you think otherwise
Fiannaidh posted 03-26-99 12:48 AM ET
Actually, a Democratic/Green/Knowledge Society is excellent for its efficiency, as well as its pacifying of Lal and Diedre (the only 2 peaceful factions). Your efficiency shoots thru the roof! For yang, Police State/Planned/Power is the best, in my opinion, because yang is immune to negetive efficiency modifiers. Freemarket is wonderful for morgan in the late game trying for economic victory, but you are correct that it cannot well support a war machine. There are no *bad* social engineering choices, but you must consider the natural advantages of each faction, and how they compliment and counter the various advantages and disadvantages of the social engineering choices, and don't forget that you are much more likely to stay friends with Lal and Diedre than anyone else, so might be wise to use the models they prefer to keep your relationship with them stable.
GaryD posted 03-26-99 08:02 AM ET

I think that any Social Engineering choice can be considered bad if it isn't doing what you want it to.
Combinations that give you more minuses that pluses need to be treated with real caution.
Fiannaidh posted 03-26-99 09:04 AM ET
Yes, there are certain combinations that should just not be used with certain factions, but there is no single bad choice.
JT2 posted 03-26-99 12:01 PM ET
Actually, democracy/freemarket/knowledge can be one of the best combos in the game.
I also tweaked the Alpha.txt files to make Free Market +2 Econ., -2 Planet, -2 Police. Morgan seems to do a lot better.
Spartan Frank posted 03-26-99 01:04 PM ET
Even if you are not Morgan, if you are not in a major war, Free Market/Democracy is a great way to build and outstrip your neighbors.
Spartan Free Market/Democracy? Absolutely, sir!
Maugan posted 03-26-99 01:35 PM ET
Erm, I heard someone say growth is nothing? You could not be more wrong. Growth is everything. (nearly) The speed of your start in A.C. is more important than anything. All the tricky long term stratagies in the world wont help you if by year 2300 your enemies have twice the cities, and they are twice the size of yours on average. The power of your cities is their income of energy/minerals, correct? What is the 1 factor in the game that allows you to harvest these things? Why population of course. What gets you more population quicker? Why growth ofcourse. Growth will turn your cities powerfull fast, and allow new frontier cities to grow quick enough to bring out colony pods without waiting for farmers to squeeze 1 nutrient a turn out of some crapy land. So Morgan gets +1 energy per square? You are harvesting 3 times as many squares so who cares. A good growth rate combined with good land will freak you out. I suggest using condensers often as they are arguably the best land improvement (when placed right) and will freak your growth even more.
(p.s, this as well as all my posts deal mainly with multiplay, as my dog's fleas could beat the computer on trancend)
sandworm posted 03-26-99 07:46 PM ET
The trick to free market is raising your luxury/psych to 20-30% With the increase in energy output from the higher econ., you'll still be rolling in dough.
It's nearly impossible to for me to conduct a ground war in free market, though, despite the increased psych expenditures. You'll probably prefer mind controlling enemy cities with some of that extra energy.
Try Free Market as Morgan, it rocks. One of the moreinteresting factions to master, I think. I'm still learning.
Drago Sinio posted 03-26-99 07:57 PM ET
I think the key thing to remember is that you can change the settings at will. I change back and forth all the time depending on what my immediate goal in the game is. Even when fighting a war, it is easy enough to switch to a high economy level to get some quick cash to build more troops, or to increase research to get a tech or two to give you an edge, then switch right back to a military stance.
Spig posted 03-27-99 05:05 AM ET
JT2: Don't tell us that you're doing well wih the Free Market se choice, because you've changed it! The Free Market is dificult to learn to use, but actually pays dividends once you've mastered it!
Glak posted 03-27-99 03:13 PM ET
Democracy? Doesn't that give you negative support? Hmm... you guys must play differently or something. I tend to have around five units per city. Maybe one defense, two formers and two units at war. With a +2 support I still have to spend minerals to keep my army going. With a negative supply.... Oh my that would be very bad.
Maugan: I'll keep your point about growth in multiplayer in mind now that I'm starting an email game with friends. I guess I won't just be able to walk in and conquer all of their cities like I do to the computer, I might have to make some cities of my own.
I still am convinced that growth is useless in single player. Just last game I was Morgan and I only built about four cities the whole game. However I conquered continent after continent and with the help of five enslaved factions I voted myself supreme leader by a large margin. I got all of the population I needed from my victims.
Hmm I might just try free market someday. Maybe the hive with police state would help counteract the -5 police thing.
Oleg Leschoff posted 03-27-99 03:35 PM ET
Glak: hmm... Interesting. By the way, on what level are you playing?
Glak posted 03-27-99 03:56 PM ET
I still just play on librarian because I am kind of a newbie. I play all of the factions except PK (not my style, I like hardcore violence and police state). Actually I think it might only be on my second full game (I started a lot of hotseat games but never finished any) so that is why I have no experience with the future societies.
Oleg Leschoff posted 03-27-99 04:33 PM ET
Ahh, this explains it... Well, as for me, on librarian level I can play anyhow I want, with any reasonable or unreasonable strategy (not enough resistance.. so I don't play it [librarian] anymore). Actually, I really don't like those short games when you just rush everything (this reminds me Starcraft, and for this kind of game I found it more fun), I am usually playing on HUGE maps, so it is where to use those models, when you need to grow fast to match rivals.
Zeratul posted 03-28-99 12:30 AM ET
In my current game as the Hive, I use police state/green/knowledge/cybernetic. The social effects are: econ -2, effic +3, supp +4, morale 0, police +3, growth -1, planet +4, probe -2, industry +1, research +4. Since I don't use probes much and I have the hunter-seeker algorithm, the negative probe rating is irrelavant. Since I have Cloning Vats, the negative growth is irrelavant. The +4 for planet and research are awesome. Hope this helps someone.
Ronbo posted 03-28-99 12:53 AM ET
My favorite faction is the Gaians, and my preferred combination is the effective Democracy/Green/Wealth combo. Coupled with the Gaian's inherent numbers the result is EFF +6(!) MOR -3 PLA +3 PRO 0 GRO 0 POL -1 IND +1 RES 0 SUP -2. This is not a combination conducive to the militaristic types out there, but it is a superb defensive type strategy. I don't start wars, but by God, I have the economy to end them. ALso, due to the high planet rating, I suffer less from the native life forms attacking me (because my eco-damage totals are lower than those of other factions). The only severe negatives, IMNSHO, are the morale hit, which can be countered by Children's Creche/Bioenhancement Center and the command center appropriate to the unit in question (land/sea/air), and the support hit, which can be negated by building "clean" units. My favorite future modifier is Eudaimonic, unless I build the Cloning Vats or Network Backbone SPs, in which case I use the modifier that has no drawback.
Cakrapani posted 03-28-99 02:39 AM ET
I personally like Planned Economy and Democracy. Add a Children's Creche to any city and I have +6 Growth. That means the cities can grow in size every turn. I suppose it would also be possible with the Morgans using Free Market, Wealth, Democracy and Golden Ages, but that's more difficult and makes it hard to use military units. I don't care about Support or Morale. With many large cities I can produce enough to wipe out anyone I want to.
Pyramider posted 03-28-99 03:51 PM ET
Pause for a moment, ladies and gentlemen, to consider just how many different strategies have been offered in this thread. No one path to victory stands out over the others. Compared to other aspects of the game (such as unit development), there are relatively few choices in social engineering, and yet the game is so well-balanced that even experienced players rarely claim to have found that killer combination that wins the game every time.
Isn't it great?
GaryD posted 03-29-99 06:47 AM ET
If it is of any use to anyone, Captain COMAL has kindly put an Excel spreadsheet I created onto his web page at http://members.tripod.com/ACHeaven/captcomal.htm.
No guarantee it is bug free (the Capt found one or two bugs himself !) but it might be useful for anyone who just wants to browse the info and make comments like "I don't believe it..." and "Wow !"
Zero posted 03-30-99 11:59 AM ET
I haven't had a chance to do much multiplayer yet. Does anyone know if some kind of consensus is emerging?
Two notes: first, those of you who are scared off by the support hit from Democracy should just build Clean units. The cost isn't prohibitive, particularly since the extra growth will give you stronger cities. (Personally, I don't usually go for a big army in SP - some people love massive wars, but I find them tedious. A small, elite force, technical superiority, and a quick charge at the enemy HQ. Then peaceful development until the next crisis. Makes for a fast game - in hours, if not turns)
Second, nobody's mentioned using the simple forms of government. Sometimes it's best to just pick none of the above - such as when you're fighting a war, but you still want a good growth rate and don't want the Planned efficiency hit becasue of drone problems.
googlie posted 07-09-99 02:32 PM ET
bumping.....
To close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).


Hop to:

Contact Us | Alpha Centauri Home

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.

Author	Topic: Social Engineering
Glak	posted 03-26-99 12:17 AM ET I admit that I am fairly new to the game but I'm starting to notice that some social engineerin choices are just much better than others. Perhaps someone could help me see the redeeming features of those choices that I see as useless. I haven't ever gotten future society so I am talking earlier in the game. I play fairly agressively Ok here are my opinions: Police State: The Holy Grail of society. You need the support for your military and formers. The police can help but it is secondary. The efficiency is bad but you can counteract it with other choices. Democratic: Worthless. Anything that drops you into negative support is worthless. Growth is also low on my list of good things because I can get all the people I want through conquest. Fundamentalist: Not to appealing. Probe doesn't seem to help (my probe teams work fine without it) and the morale bonus is nice but I don't think it is worth the drop in tech. It also has to compete with the mighty Police State. Free Market: Horrible, this one ruins you. Economy is great but is it worth destroying your empire? No way. This thing ought to be: +1 econ, +1 indus, +1 tech, -2 planet, -3 police or something like that. It is not acceptable the way it is. How often do you see morgan on top? His faction is good but his choice of economies isn't. Planned: bland. The growth is nothing, the industry is a nice little bonus but the efficiency is the death blow. I would consider using this if I wasn't using police state for some crazy reason. Green: Good. The efficiency is great. It counteracts the only bad thing about police state. The +2 planet helps in battle and the -2 growth is actually sort of a bonus because you have more time to prepare for the drones. Power: Ok. I don't need the support (Police state shines through) and the industry hurts. The morale almost makes up for it. If I was in some heavy fighting I would consider using it. Knowledge: Great, no downside really. Wealth: Acceptable. I usually choose knowledge instead though. Well I was just wondering what everyone thinks. Keep in mind no future societies. I need an early/mid game solution. Currently I always go Police/Green/Knowledge, making my total adjustment: +2 support, +2 police, +2 planet, -2 growth, +2 research, +1 efficiency, -2 probe I'm sure that I will get a lot of disagreement so tell me why you think otherwise
Fiannaidh	posted 03-26-99 12:48 AM ET Actually, a Democratic/Green/Knowledge Society is excellent for its efficiency, as well as its pacifying of Lal and Diedre (the only 2 peaceful factions). Your efficiency shoots thru the roof! For yang, Police State/Planned/Power is the best, in my opinion, because yang is immune to negetive efficiency modifiers. Freemarket is wonderful for morgan in the late game trying for economic victory, but you are correct that it cannot well support a war machine. There are no bad social engineering choices, but you must consider the natural advantages of each faction, and how they compliment and counter the various advantages and disadvantages of the social engineering choices, and don't forget that you are much more likely to stay friends with Lal and Diedre than anyone else, so might be wise to use the models they prefer to keep your relationship with them stable.
GaryD	posted 03-26-99 08:02 AM ET I think that any Social Engineering choice can be considered bad if it isn't doing what you want it to. Combinations that give you more minuses that pluses need to be treated with real caution.
Fiannaidh	posted 03-26-99 09:04 AM ET Yes, there are certain combinations that should just not be used with certain factions, but there is no single bad choice.
JT2	posted 03-26-99 12:01 PM ET Actually, democracy/freemarket/knowledge can be one of the best combos in the game. I also tweaked the Alpha.txt files to make Free Market +2 Econ., -2 Planet, -2 Police. Morgan seems to do a lot better.
Spartan Frank	posted 03-26-99 01:04 PM ET Even if you are not Morgan, if you are not in a major war, Free Market/Democracy is a great way to build and outstrip your neighbors. Spartan Free Market/Democracy? Absolutely, sir!
Maugan	posted 03-26-99 01:35 PM ET Erm, I heard someone say growth is nothing? You could not be more wrong. Growth is everything. (nearly) The speed of your start in A.C. is more important than anything. All the tricky long term stratagies in the world wont help you if by year 2300 your enemies have twice the cities, and they are twice the size of yours on average. The power of your cities is their income of energy/minerals, correct? What is the 1 factor in the game that allows you to harvest these things? Why population of course. What gets you more population quicker? Why growth ofcourse. Growth will turn your cities powerfull fast, and allow new frontier cities to grow quick enough to bring out colony pods without waiting for farmers to squeeze 1 nutrient a turn out of some crapy land. So Morgan gets +1 energy per square? You are harvesting 3 times as many squares so who cares. A good growth rate combined with good land will freak you out. I suggest using condensers often as they are arguably the best land improvement (when placed right) and will freak your growth even more. (p.s, this as well as all my posts deal mainly with multiplay, as my dog's fleas could beat the computer on trancend)
sandworm	posted 03-26-99 07:46 PM ET The trick to free market is raising your luxury/psych to 20-30% With the increase in energy output from the higher econ., you'll still be rolling in dough. It's nearly impossible to for me to conduct a ground war in free market, though, despite the increased psych expenditures. You'll probably prefer mind controlling enemy cities with some of that extra energy. Try Free Market as Morgan, it rocks. One of the moreinteresting factions to master, I think. I'm still learning.
Drago Sinio	posted 03-26-99 07:57 PM ET I think the key thing to remember is that you can change the settings at will. I change back and forth all the time depending on what my immediate goal in the game is. Even when fighting a war, it is easy enough to switch to a high economy level to get some quick cash to build more troops, or to increase research to get a tech or two to give you an edge, then switch right back to a military stance.
Spig	posted 03-27-99 05:05 AM ET JT2: Don't tell us that you're doing well wih the Free Market se choice, because you've changed it! The Free Market is dificult to learn to use, but actually pays dividends once you've mastered it!
Glak	posted 03-27-99 03:13 PM ET Democracy? Doesn't that give you negative support? Hmm... you guys must play differently or something. I tend to have around five units per city. Maybe one defense, two formers and two units at war. With a +2 support I still have to spend minerals to keep my army going. With a negative supply.... Oh my that would be very bad. Maugan: I'll keep your point about growth in multiplayer in mind now that I'm starting an email game with friends. I guess I won't just be able to walk in and conquer all of their cities like I do to the computer, I might have to make some cities of my own. I still am convinced that growth is useless in single player. Just last game I was Morgan and I only built about four cities the whole game. However I conquered continent after continent and with the help of five enslaved factions I voted myself supreme leader by a large margin. I got all of the population I needed from my victims. Hmm I might just try free market someday. Maybe the hive with police state would help counteract the -5 police thing.
Oleg Leschoff	posted 03-27-99 03:35 PM ET Glak: hmm... Interesting. By the way, on what level are you playing?
Glak	posted 03-27-99 03:56 PM ET I still just play on librarian because I am kind of a newbie. I play all of the factions except PK (not my style, I like hardcore violence and police state). Actually I think it might only be on my second full game (I started a lot of hotseat games but never finished any) so that is why I have no experience with the future societies.
Oleg Leschoff	posted 03-27-99 04:33 PM ET Ahh, this explains it... Well, as for me, on librarian level I can play anyhow I want, with any reasonable or unreasonable strategy (not enough resistance.. so I don't play it [librarian] anymore). Actually, I really don't like those short games when you just rush everything (this reminds me Starcraft, and for this kind of game I found it more fun), I am usually playing on HUGE maps, so it is where to use those models, when you need to grow fast to match rivals.
Zeratul	posted 03-28-99 12:30 AM ET In my current game as the Hive, I use police state/green/knowledge/cybernetic. The social effects are: econ -2, effic +3, supp +4, morale 0, police +3, growth -1, planet +4, probe -2, industry +1, research +4. Since I don't use probes much and I have the hunter-seeker algorithm, the negative probe rating is irrelavant. Since I have Cloning Vats, the negative growth is irrelavant. The +4 for planet and research are awesome. Hope this helps someone.
Ronbo	posted 03-28-99 12:53 AM ET My favorite faction is the Gaians, and my preferred combination is the effective Democracy/Green/Wealth combo. Coupled with the Gaian's inherent numbers the result is EFF +6(!) MOR -3 PLA +3 PRO 0 GRO 0 POL -1 IND +1 RES 0 SUP -2. This is not a combination conducive to the militaristic types out there, but it is a superb defensive type strategy. I don't start wars, but by God, I have the economy to end them. ALso, due to the high planet rating, I suffer less from the native life forms attacking me (because my eco-damage totals are lower than those of other factions). The only severe negatives, IMNSHO, are the morale hit, which can be countered by Children's Creche/Bioenhancement Center and the command center appropriate to the unit in question (land/sea/air), and the support hit, which can be negated by building "clean" units. My favorite future modifier is Eudaimonic, unless I build the Cloning Vats or Network Backbone SPs, in which case I use the modifier that has no drawback.
Cakrapani	posted 03-28-99 02:39 AM ET I personally like Planned Economy and Democracy. Add a Children's Creche to any city and I have +6 Growth. That means the cities can grow in size every turn. I suppose it would also be possible with the Morgans using Free Market, Wealth, Democracy and Golden Ages, but that's more difficult and makes it hard to use military units. I don't care about Support or Morale. With many large cities I can produce enough to wipe out anyone I want to.
Pyramider	posted 03-28-99 03:51 PM ET Pause for a moment, ladies and gentlemen, to consider just how many different strategies have been offered in this thread. No one path to victory stands out over the others. Compared to other aspects of the game (such as unit development), there are relatively few choices in social engineering, and yet the game is so well-balanced that even experienced players rarely claim to have found that killer combination that wins the game every time. Isn't it great?
GaryD	posted 03-29-99 06:47 AM ET If it is of any use to anyone, Captain COMAL has kindly put an Excel spreadsheet I created onto his web page at http://members.tripod.com/ACHeaven/captcomal.htm. No guarantee it is bug free (the Capt found one or two bugs himself !) but it might be useful for anyone who just wants to browse the info and make comments like "I don't believe it..." and "Wow !"
Zero	posted 03-30-99 11:59 AM ET I haven't had a chance to do much multiplayer yet. Does anyone know if some kind of consensus is emerging? Two notes: first, those of you who are scared off by the support hit from Democracy should just build Clean units. The cost isn't prohibitive, particularly since the extra growth will give you stronger cities. (Personally, I don't usually go for a big army in SP - some people love massive wars, but I find them tedious. A small, elite force, technical superiority, and a quick charge at the enemy HQ. Then peaceful development until the next crisis. Makes for a fast game - in hours, if not turns) Second, nobody's mentioned using the simple forms of government. Sometimes it's best to just pick none of the above - such as when you're fighting a war, but you still want a good growth rate and don't want the Planned efficiency hit becasue of drone problems.
googlie	posted 07-09-99 02:32 PM ET bumping.....