Alpha Centauri Forums
  The Factions
  Is Morgan better or worse when I change him with this?

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   Is Morgan better or worse when I change him with this?
JT 3 posted 05-01-99 10:46 PM ET   Click Here to See the Profile for JT 3   Click Here to Email JT 3  
I'm thinking of adding this to Morgan:

+1 Industry(It's called Morgan INDUSTRIES for a reason)
-1 Planet(All the polution from the industry ticks Planet off)

Do you think this would make him better or worse?

Smeagol posted 05-01-99 10:49 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Smeagol  Click Here to Email Smeagol     
Better, but he still blows. I got rid of the faction entirely.
JT 3 posted 05-01-99 10:54 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for JT 3  Click Here to Email JT 3     
With what?
Smeagol posted 05-01-99 10:55 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Smeagol  Click Here to Email Smeagol     
The faction I posted in this forum-- The "genetically enhanced intellectuals".
Koshko posted 05-02-99 01:03 AM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Koshko  Click Here to Email Koshko     
Sounds OK to me.
Koshko posted 05-02-99 01:04 AM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Koshko  Click Here to Email Koshko     
Actually, play-test it a bit.
Smeagol posted 05-02-99 02:05 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Smeagol  Click Here to Email Smeagol     
Get rid of its hab limits and then this faction starts to look as if it actually compares to the rest.
Schoop posted 05-02-99 02:11 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Schoop  Click Here to Email Schoop     
I find Morgan is OK as is, IF you can get everyone else's comm-link frequencies fairly early. You need the extra energy Morgan gets from trade to counteract the pop limit.
If you're still having troubles with the pop limit, try changning it to be slightly less restrictive, like max 5 without hab complex, before getting rid of it entirely. The Pop cap was intended to be Morgan's major bugaboo, so getting rid of it unbalanced the faction, in my opinion.
Smeagol posted 05-02-99 02:28 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Smeagol  Click Here to Email Smeagol     
I've been arguing for awhile in the game forum (thread = most popular faction). The points I make there express why I think Morgan should not have the population cap-- +1 economy (even if it means you can get to +4) is highly overrated.
Smeagol posted 05-02-99 02:31 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Smeagol  Click Here to Email Smeagol     
Schoop-- That's kinda my point-- Morgan's only bonus is that he can make more money than others, but since he has this population cap he needs that extra trade just to stay even with other factions that have a higher population and might also choose Free Market economics. So in the end, Morgan has no advantages really, and just ends up with either the same or a worse economy while also suffering from having less minerals. Of course you won't see this much in a single player game, but since 5 of the 7 factions can use Free Market to get +2 economy early, it does make Morgan worthless.
HolyWarrior posted 05-02-99 10:32 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for HolyWarrior  Click Here to Email HolyWarrior     
Morgan would be okay if not for that stupid -5 police for Free Market. With Free Market setting, it is virtually impossible to wage war.
Since I happen to live in a Free Market society known to wage war very well, this is absolutely ridiculous.
Smeagol posted 05-02-99 11:05 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Smeagol  Click Here to Email Smeagol     
Holy-- You keep saying that, and I keep trying to tell you how you can actually wage war with Free Market! Look at the same thread twice, man!

I think the reason why free market is as it is has to be looked at as an issue of game balance. There's a definite trend in this game for all things that promote peacetime building to hinder military actions, and vice versa. It balances the game well, because both are obviously critical and you can win using either method or any combination of the two.

Al Gore Rythm posted 05-03-99 12:21 AM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Al Gore Rythm    
Gonna butt in here...

Smeagol:

I have played Morgan quite a few times, and I find him a very well balanced faction. If you use FME with Morgan often, you are just shooting yourself in the foot. As I see it, Morgan's greatest strength is that he does NOT need to use FME to get that vital +2 Econ. He can instead take Wealth and get the same effect.

Without his pop limit, Morgan would be insanely powerful. Just because you do not know how to use a faction does not mean it is underpowered.

JT:

Do you mean under the control of a player, or under the AI? If you think Morgan needs tweaking player-wise, just try harder. I found it hard to get used to playing as Believers. But now I find them one of my favorites.

Under AI I tend to do this to Morgan:

Set his goals to Wealth and Growth.
(Large map only) Give him +1 Efficency to compensate for the excess 'rabbiting' he has to do to maintain decent population.

He tends to do a heck of alot better with this, although he does good anyway in my games. But I play with modified settings (very slow tech, longer game time, pop limits are 10/20 now respectively.)

Smeagol posted 05-03-99 01:35 AM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Smeagol  Click Here to Email Smeagol     
Al-- I love how diplomatic your opinions are... I do know how to use Morgan, in more ways than one. Believe me, I've tried them all. What can you possibly hope to gain by not choosing Free Market? You can't use planned, so green I guess? A decent choice, with the efficiency bonus, but you really are killing your growth and population boom with golden ages. I really don't feel like getting into this again-- I've put forth what I consider to be conclusive evidence that Morgan (as is) is an awful, unbalanced faction. I know you've seen my earlier posts back when I used to just use wealth with Morgan-- this was the same argument I used to make for him, but it was only because I thought free market was unplayable. I've discovered otherwise, and... well, as I said I don't feel like getting into this.

Oh, and by the way, your population limits may be skewing your opinion just a bit... that turns the tides a bit more in Morgan's favor.

If you want to see some of my arguments against Morgan, I refer you to the game forum thread "most popular faction." If you still want to argue with me after reading that don't bother because you'll just make me waste more of my time in these forums!

It seems you have something against Free Market... have you really given it a shot especially considering the strategies that get around its penalties?

MORGAN BLOWS!!!!! (I love saying that... you should try it some time)

Smeagol posted 05-03-99 01:51 AM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Smeagol  Click Here to Email Smeagol     
And though I've shunned wealth for its huge morale hit, it is the right choice if you plan to go all out peace with lots of treaties and pacts.
JT 3 posted 05-03-99 07:32 AM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for JT 3  Click Here to Email JT 3     
Ummmmm...... getting back to the point of the thread, I meant for both me and the AI. I think that he needed _something_ to help him out, so I gave him +1 industry for -1 planet, which is a bigger plus than minus.

Oh, yeah, I also made FM +2 Econ, -2 Police, and -2 Planet.

Al Gore Rythm posted 05-03-99 09:03 AM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Al Gore Rythm    
Smeagol:

Why NOT use Green, Smeagol? Morgan has low pop limits, so he won't be growing much anyway.

The Morale hit for Wealth, in my opinion, is alot better than the massive planet hit and tremendous police hit with FME. With Wealth on it is still possible to wage war, not so with FME.

JT:

You made FME way too powerful. If I (or heck, even the AI) just goes Police State/FME they instantly have gotten rid of the biggest glaring weakness of FME. Too strong. I think FME works how it is, -5 Police makes it impossible to wage war, -3 Planet makes sure you'll have to wage war.

As I said, I find Morgan to play alot better as the AI by just changing his agenda, not tweaking his stats. Set him to Wealth/Growth, and make his political agenda Wealth. He won't be a super-power, but he will stand up for himself.

If you want to make Morgan real powerful you can always give him a nice wad of Planet hits and send his Economy to +2 (say -3 Planet, +2 Econ.)

Schoop posted 05-03-99 09:39 AM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Schoop  Click Here to Email Schoop     
Okay, if we're all in agreement that Morgan should have some penalty to his population size, as was intended to be his major problem, let me propose this:

IF you opt to remove Morgan's population caps, REPLACE them with a -1 or even -2 Growth.

Oh yeah, and Smeagol, EVERY faction is helped tremendously by getting everyone else's comm frequencies early, especially since that means you probably don't have to research every friggin' level 1 Tech yourself. Morgan just gets the benefit more heavily than anyone else.

Smeagol posted 05-03-99 04:17 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Smeagol  Click Here to Email Smeagol     
My messages must be a lot more vague than I can see, because nobody seems to get what I'm saying.

First off, there is no need to lower the penalties of Free Market, because that benefits all factions anyway. I use it every time I play a peaceful faction, and the -5 police and -3 planet are easy to manage if you know what you are doing. In fact, by midgame you can have an army as big as anyone else, and I've explained this again and again but it doesn't seem to matter, so I'm going to save my breath... er, fingers. The penalty from wealth is actually much more detrimental with regard to your army, and it will prevent you from ever making advanced morale troops.

Al-- I told you not to respond to me unless you took the time to understand what I'm saying. I don't feel like arguing with you because you are saying exactly the same things I used to say about Morgan. There are just some nice tricks in this game that allow a peaceful faction to annihilate a warlike one, and as far as peaceful factions go, Morgan doesn't cut it. Do me a favor and try the PKs with this strategy:

Switch to Free Market and Democracy as soon as you can. Obviously expand as much as you can early. Give all of your base defenders a probe ability so they will have no support (wasn't it you that came up with that?), and also give them hypnotic trance so that low planet rating isn't as much of a factor. As soon as you have creches up and some drone facilities, switch to planned to get the population boom. Rush your way to tree farms and hybrid forests and put up forests (all standard procedures so far). Keep up with those population booms as often as you can, and boost psych to suit your needs. Soon you'll make your way to punishment spheres and clean reactors-- put a sphere in a base with your best mineral output and build your army there with clean reactors. Even if you don't want to build your whole army this way, you can just build the Ascetic Virtues so that your police is -4 (1 drone per military unit away), and if your psych is only 20% you can still build an army and use it however you want without drones being a problem.

Morgan can't do this nearly as effectively because of those population limits. So why play him? Sure there are other winning strategies but nothing can beat this one, providing you can survive long enough to get that army up. Against the computer I've never had a problem getting there, so I don't think it is difficult at all. (just frustrating paying the Spartans off to leave you alone).

I should add that there a heck of a lot of subtle things besides what I've said that help you along, but I've written enough already. My general feeling is that you guys should all do what you think makes the game most balanced, and I'll do the same. It isn't likely our decisions will be the same, but I'd appreciate not being chastised for mine. So JT-- if changing Free Market to that suits your game best, then I can't argue with you.

JT 3 posted 05-03-99 04:30 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for JT 3  Click Here to Email JT 3     
Well, Morgan is still wimpy when I do this. I'm not sure why. It would seem he could skyrocket, but he doesn't.
Smeagol posted 05-03-99 04:39 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Smeagol  Click Here to Email Smeagol     
Umm... he still has the population cap, does he not? Also, Al Gore had some good ideas about fixing Morgan when he is controlled by the AI.
JT 3 posted 05-03-99 04:51 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for JT 3  Click Here to Email JT 3     
Yes, he still has the population cap.
Al Gore Rythm posted 05-03-99 10:05 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Al Gore Rythm    
Well, I find that even under my games, which usually give the AI a big boost, Morgan is still pretty wimpy and is usually in 6th or 7th place, merely a slightly more powerful 6th or 7th place this time around.

Smeagol:

I try to stray away from the "power stack city" style because if the central city is destroyed or captured that whole army is instantly destroyed (or, worse yet, if it's subverted it changes hands!)

But, as you said, my strategies differ from yours because I have the settings on different levels. Since I set tech to 40-30% normal I usually can't expect to get Punishment Spheres for up to 150-200 turns. And Morgan plays much better when his pop cap is set at 7 before complexes instead of 4.

So, you can hate 'em, I think he's alright.

JT:
I just do for Morgan what I do to UoP's AI, make them agressive.

Agenda:
Growth
Political Agenda:
Wealth
Willing to Use Force:
Indifferent.

With these settings Morgan isn't dumb enough to pick fights with the superpowers like he normally is, and if you set his agenda to only growth he actually does expand a decent amount. But the political agenda will make sure he stays true to his capitalist roots. The reason for indifferent instead of "no" is I find that the force setting translates into the AI's priority of setting up a war machine and defenses.

I find that the benefiets/penalties of a faction is not nearly as important to its strength as its actual AI settings are.

I think one of Morgan's major weaknesses is that EVERYONE hates his SE choices. UoP and Sparta both hate Wealth. While the Gaians despise FME. Add in Yang and Miriam against Democracy and you're left with the PKs as Morgan's only real friend. So if you really want him to succeed you may want to change those things around.

Smeagol posted 05-03-99 11:13 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Smeagol  Click Here to Email Smeagol     
I was just thinking about this (for some sad reason), and I came up with a different approach for "enhancing" Morgan. This won't make the AI play him any better, I don't think, but I think it would actually give value to his +1 economy while using Free Market and Wealth. Rather than altering the faction itself, alter the effects of economy, so that it is harder to get that magic +2 per square. So what I'm suggesting is make it so your economy has to be +3 or even +4 to get there-- something like this:

ECONOMY

+1: +1 energy/base
+2: +2 energy/base
+3: +3 energy/base, +1 commerce
+4: +2 energy/square, +3/base, +2 commerce
+5: +2 energy/square, +4/base, +3 commerce

This would make a PK size 16 base about equal to a Morgan size 11 in terms of energy/turn, though the PKs would still have many more minerals. And only Morgan would be the energy guy, but with those hab limits still in place others will have comparable energy still from having a higher population. I won't bore you with numbers, but if you do the math I think you will see that this balances a few things pretty well, and makes playing Morgan more worthwhile. But since I haven't tried this yet, I'd appreciate any input on it.

Smeagol posted 05-03-99 11:21 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Smeagol  Click Here to Email Smeagol     
SORRY! I mean +1 energy/square for both of those. I don't know what I was thinking there.
Smeagol posted 05-03-99 11:24 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Smeagol  Click Here to Email Smeagol     
So it's really:

ECONOMY:

+1: +1 energy/base
+2: +2 energy/base
+3: +3 energy/base, +1 commerce
+4: +1 energy/square, +3 energy/base, +2 commerce

+5: +1 energy/square, +4 energy/base, +3 commerce

Smeagol posted 05-03-99 11:39 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Smeagol  Click Here to Email Smeagol     
Or how about:

ECONOMY:

+1: +1 energy/base
+2: +3 energy/base
+3: +4 energy/base, +1 commerce
+4: +1 energy/square, +2/base, +2 commerce
+5: +1 en/square, +4/base, +3 commerce

Dowdc posted 05-04-99 03:11 AM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Dowdc  Click Here to Email Dowdc     
Ok Smeagol, I finally came over to read this thread...

It seems like a good idea, but maybe a little drastic. This will change a lot of things about peace, and not just for the Morganites. I'm scared that this will push things in favor of the Warmongers and that black, blue, and orange will dominate the map.

How about two minor changes like:
1) increase Morgan's hab limits to five and 12 (-3 pop/city is a little much, isn't it?).
2) change economy slightly:
+1 through +3: same
+4: same but +4/base not +2/base
+5: same but +8/base not +4/base

This will ease Morgan's pop limits a bit (hey, with Aestetic Virtues he'll be even with everybody now!!!) and give him a little bonus when he goes FM/Wealth.

I think this will make him at least an average faction now, but of course I don't really think he's too bad as is. But I do agree that he should be helped a little.

Al Gore Rythm posted 05-04-99 10:11 AM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Al Gore Rythm    
Too severe, Smeagol, if you really want to make Morgan's economy 'worth something' in your eyes than set the limits to 3 Econ. Because with your current set up Morgan is the ONLY faction in the game who can get that +4 Econ and the +1 Energy/Square before Eudaimonia. Which is a long, long way away.

Smeagol, why not just make Morgan impune to FME/Wealth? Than he could wage war reasonably while still raking in the credits.

Smeagol posted 05-04-99 10:51 AM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Smeagol  Click Here to Email Smeagol     
Al Gore-- Well, I am considering this because I don't have to change Morgan at all, and it makes him worth playing. If I only change the +1/square to +3 economy, then I can still get there with Lal and I'll just play him. But if Morgan is the only one who can do it, then I would consider him over Lal, because Morgan at size 11 would have a base of 40 energy/turn, while Lal at size 16 would have a base of 35 (without any economy bonuses). Since this is the state both factions (if played by me) would be in most of the game, I think it balances pretty well, with Morgan finally having an actual advantage with energy, but still losing out on about 10 minerals per base.

However, my attempts so far at changing the economy settings have done nothing. It seems that even if I do change them and start a new game, the old effects are still in place. This did make me notice something, however, and this is that the listed effects of economy are not correct. Here is what actually happens (without any modifications from me):

ECONOMY:

+1: +1 en/base
+2: +1 en/sq
+3: +1 en/sq, +2 en/base, +1 commerce
+4: +1 en/sq, +4 en/base, +2 commerce
+5: +1 en/sq, +4 en/base, +3 commerce

Note that the +3 econ and +4 econ do not behave as listed, and +5 isn't any different from +4 other than the commerce. Odd.

Dowdc-- So I just can't justify only changing the requirements for +1 en/sq to +3 economy, since it still doesn't make Morgan worth playing.

Al-- I think it would be even more drastic for me to make him impune to those. Maybe make him impune to wealth, but I'm not sure this helps him too much anyway.

Any ideas how I could change those economy settings so that it actually functions differently in the game?

Smeagol posted 05-04-99 07:50 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Smeagol  Click Here to Email Smeagol     
Well, I guess I just can't change those settings, but I don't need to anyway. I was thinking about what I really want to fix with Morgan, and in retrospect, he's not really a bad faction. The problem is that the PKs are too good of a faction with Free Market, so I think I'll either prohibit them from being able to use it or just not use it myself when I play them. I think that being able to have that +1 energy/square should make a faction limited to only 11 before hab domes, because although that faction will inevitably be the leader in tech, it will not have the mineral output of the others and will at least suffer from that penalty (when I play them they will be ahead, of course-- not when the computer does).

I'd like to just prohibit all factions but Morgan from choosing Free Market, but I guess if I just decide not to use it myself when I play anyone but Morgan that is good enough, considering how poorly the computer plays as it is. And I guess it would be a huge mistake anyway, because all the other factions would hate me with an aversion to free market! (I just realized that last point)

googlie posted 06-23-99 08:23 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for googlie    
reactivating
mcv posted 06-24-99 01:45 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for mcv    
Why is everybody complaining about Morgan's population limit? When I played Morgan (first time I did), I had no problem.
It might have helped that I was playing on a huge map, so I had plenty of room to expand until I was finally able to build hab complexes. In any case, once you've got hab complexes, your troubles are over. Build one soon. Buy it, if necessary. You've got plenty of money anyway.
Smeagol posted 06-24-99 01:51 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Smeagol  Click Here to Email Smeagol     
It's not that you can't win with Morgan-- you can win this game vs the computer with any faction. However, because of Morgan's Hab limits and inability to population boom, you can do much better with other factions at the very things Morgan does well (research and make money). That isn't to say Morgan is without advantages, but his faction is the weakest in the game, and in MP games anyone using Morgan will be wiped out unless playing on huge maps with small islands.
Resource Consumer posted 06-29-99 05:57 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Resource Consumer  Click Here to Email Resource Consumer     
Smeagol,

I'm a fraction off topic and I'm not looking for an argument (as you might guess I'm a big Morgan fan). Anyway, my question is linguistic.

I take it you don't like to play Morgan so you say, in your beloved phrase, that he "blows". Over here (UK), I would think that would (on balance, it's not concrete) mean that he was kicking butt. Do I take it then that you mean that Morgan "sucks" and that, somewhat breathlessly is the same as "blows"?

Resource Consumer
- coming up for air -
- apologies to Orwell -

Smeagol posted 07-01-99 02:26 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Smeagol  Click Here to Email Smeagol     
Resource-- As you guessed, I meant that in a negative way. Just like sucks, but I think it sounds a bit stronger, and just an expression, so don't look too deeply into it.

I love hearing arguments from people who still think Morgan is one of the better factions. His was the first faction I played, and believe it or not I actually liked playing as them. As I've said in later posts, I don't believe them to be a bad faction, but after analyzing this game in every which way I've come to the conclusion that though good, Morgan is greatly disadvantaged in comparison to other factions. I'd rank him 6/7.

However, in single player games there is no challenge anyway, so Morgan is quite fun to play. I love being a capitalist bastard and using Free Market early is a huge boost for Morgan especially (+1 energy/square, +2 en/base as well with +3 economy).

Koshko posted 07-03-99 01:38 AM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Koshko  Click Here to Email Koshko     
This is how much things change. When this post first came, I barely considered Morgan. Now he's my fav faction. EcoFriendly +1 energy per square with Wealth.
Penny Foh Yu Thot posted 07-07-99 09:23 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Penny Foh Yu Thot  Click Here to Email Penny Foh Yu Thot     
ROFL
MUAHAHAHA!!
Smeagol, no offense, but I havn't laugh that much reading a thread for quite some time.
You say you don't have too much time to give to those obtuse guys, yet you're by far the most proficient writer/reader of this thread ...
Bad habit are hard to change huh !? I quite understand you ...

Allright now to matter at hand... Morgan is just fine the way he is. U guys should listen to Smeagol, his plan for Morgan is a good one.
1 - Expand like crazy
2- Build some supply trans to get those early S.P. (WP and VW)
3- Go to FM as soon as you can
4- Station 1 military unit at every base and then
5- Built probe team to explore. Since you'll be insanely rich you can buy off any attacker and turn his own troop/bases against him
6- Once you 've built creche and hab complex you go 40 20 40 in your SE choices and you get pop boom from Golden Age and also U get back the energy and lab research loss because of the +1 bonus of G.A. (which transfer to a +3 bonus with Morgan)

If by then you didn't left everybody in the dust research wise then you're either doing something very wrong or you got the best opponents I have ever seen...

just my two cents worth

Penny Foh Yu Thot posted 07-17-99 04:50 PM ET     Click Here to See the Profile for Penny Foh Yu Thot  Click Here to Email Penny Foh Yu Thot     
The only problem with Morgan is that he lives off his relationship with other faction. If they all hate him then he's doomed. And as a player there's little you can do to make a faction favorable to a treaty or a pact. It will mostly depends on the current political balance. What's even worst is that you can't be too strong or too weak if you wanna make friends, if you become too strong they ally against you while if you're too weak they'll just stomp on you. Plus Lal is the politically enclined one so it doesn't make sense that Morgan should lived off treaties...

So I decided to change him to this :

TECH, Indust, SOCIAL, +ECONOMY, SOCIAL, -SUPPORT, HURRY, 75, POPULATION, 3
#DATALINKS2
^+1 ECONOMY: {Industrial conglomerate}
^-1 SUPPORT: {Followers have expensive tastes}
^HURRY BONUS 25%: {Industrial power}

Tell me what you think (I've play test it a bit and it makes the Morganites a real force when it comes to building cities and SP...(but they still blow on the military aspect)

Just my 2 cents worth

Thread ClosedTo close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Alpha Centauri Home

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