Alpha Centauri 2

Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri & Alien Crossfire => Modding => Topic started by: bvanevery on March 05, 2017, 06:34:47 PM

Title: why cheaper production on Small maps?
Post by: bvanevery on March 05, 2017, 06:34:47 PM

When I start on a Standard map, units have normal starting costs.  i.e. a Scout costs 10 minerals to produce.  When I start on a Small map, there seems to be a 10% reduction in cost, regardless of the faction being played.  A scout costs 9 minerals to produce.  Why is that?  Is unit cost tied to map size somewhere in the game configuration files?  I've never seen the reverse, i.e. units costing more on a Huge map.

Is it a bug?  I have verified the behavior starting the same faction on different maps.  I did it with more than 1 faction.  I tried deleting old saved games, hoping that would help.  I'll look to see if I can find any other stale configuration files lying around.

Further experimentation shows that Tiny maps have a 20% reduction in cost.  A Scout costs 8.  The behavior appears to be intentional; I just question why it's a good idea.

Title: Re: why cheaper production on Small maps?
Post by: Nevill on March 10, 2017, 03:25:11 PM

The primary reason to play a smaller map is to have a more fast-paced game.

Techs are cheaper on smaller maps, too, and the base limits before bureaucracy hits are stricter.

Title: Re: why cheaper production on Small maps?
Post by: bvanevery on March 10, 2017, 08:36:43 PM

I've proven you can make the game be damn slow anyways.  If you take a lot of time building base improvements, overestimating the AI's ability to "hang in there".

Most recent game I'm in the middle of, I'm doing more of a Fundamentalist military stomp.  I took so much territory though, including the Monsoon Jungle, that I did decide to build virtual worlded network nodes and police units before embarking on the big assault of the Caretakers.  I've pwned 3 human factions that were in my way.  Miriam is extant, but as she's Fundamentalist as well she probably won't come after me.  Miriam stomped Morgan early and he escaped.  I haven't met him in his second start location; I bet it doesn't amount to anything by the time I destroy the Caretakers.  I think the game is so certain that I question whether I'll continue it.

I did end up continuing it.  Unfortunately, with the "garrisoning and building up" mindset, like putting Formers to work in that Monsoon Jungle I had captured.  There was no real need of any of that.  It made the game continue to take longer with no military progress.  I don't think I was in any real danger from the AI, because it is incompetent.  I could have continued to steamroller forwards with my existing units, instead of succumbing to the "well I really should go steal his techs" mentality.

It was threatening to take a very long time, even an indefinite amount of time, so I quit.  Oh well, I can try again.

Title: Re: why cheaper production on Small maps?
Post by: Monringstar on September 14, 2017, 08:21:24 AM

I want this to be the best of the day.

Title: Re: why cheaper production on Small maps?
Post by: Nexii on November 08, 2017, 01:22:47 AM

I would say because on smaller maps you're likely to be at war more (closer quarters), and thus more of your minerals goes into units rather than improvements.  Or it might just be because you have less space to expand, less total bases means each of those has to get up quicker to compensate