More Expensive Units ???

[Impaler]

Had an interesting idea that might be a big boon to SMAC modding.  It's as simple as it is dramatic, just make an across the board increase (double or maybe even triple) in all chassis costs.  This will make all units more expensive.  This should have some significant effects on overall strategy, if every unit is twice the cost and you have half as many then it's as if support costs are half (or less).  And because A.I. generally wastes too many minerals on support this might benefit them.

An additional benefit will be less time spent moving units around, making for a less tedious game.  Police based Drone control would also be harder, though humans generally use specially designed cheap non-lethal units.

Now I'm not sure the A.I. will react by allocating the same ratio of production between buildings and units (as I'd hope), or would rather cut back even more on buildings to make the same number of units as before.  Some testing will be necessary to find out what happens and I'm hoping some other modders would be interested in running confirmation tests.  Simply modify each chassis line like such that the number just proceeding the Tech is doubled (or more).

Infantry,M1,  Squad,M1,      Sentinels,M2,   Garrison,M1,  1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 2, None,     Shock Troops,M2,   Elite Guard,M1,

[Yitzi]

Firstly, this would increase the military effectiveness of fusion (since the 3-line minimum for fusion units would not be increased, since it's hard-coded).  You sure you want that?
Secondly, decreasing the number of military units would weaken collateral damage, which favors air power and disfavors artillery.  You sure you want that?
Thirdly, it would make mind worms more of a threat.  You sure you want that?

If the concern is purely support costs, the answer might be as simple as changing the social engineering to give an across-the-board increase in support rating.

[Impaler]

Thanks for pointing out some knock-on effects I had overlooked.  I think most of those can be counter-balanced.

Fusion:  The tech can be pushed up in the tree, also are you sure it's hard-coded to the slot, or is it related to the Reactor HP multiplier of 2?

Artillery:  The artillery modifier and the max artillery damage should be able to compensate, I personally find large masses of artillery tedious because of poor UI, fewer piece doing more damage would be better.

Mind Worms:  I generally like the idea of making worms meaner as the most expansive player both geographically and industrially will suffer the most damage, thus slowing down his snowball.

[Yitzi]

Thanks for pointing out some knock-on effects I had overlooked.  I think most of those can be counter-balanced.

Fusion:  The tech can be pushed up in the tree, also are you sure it's hard-coded to the slot, or is it related to the Reactor HP multiplier of 2?

The HP multiplier, cost reduction, and cost minimum are all hard-coded to be linked with each other.  Pushing the level 2 reactor up in the tree could be done, but that will have a huge number of unexpected effects.

Artillery:  The artillery modifier and the max artillery damage should be able to compensate, I personally find large masses of artillery tedious because of poor UI, fewer piece doing more damage would be better.

Mind Worms:  I generally like the idea of making worms meaner as the most expansive player both geographically and industrially will suffer the most damage, thus slowing down his snowball.

And the air power effect?

Also, if you do do this, doubling the costs of all weapons and modules (except maybe guns) will probably give you a more uniform change than changing the chassis.  If you don't double gun cost, that will favor defense over offense more...which might not be such a bad thing.

[NewAgeOfPower]

This sounds like something you can do through txt editing. Try it!

[Mart]

I tried that - more expensive units - in UMOD. I'm working on version 0.4 currently. However, recently my aim was to shift strategy from attack to defense. Make quick conquests difficult. Such changes should work, but with complex rearrangement of other rules. E.g. problem of too big importance of air units - I made aerospace complexes cheaper to build and made them (and all military buildings in fact) with no upkeep cost, plus made them available sooner in tech tree. And there are few other things. I still have to check how it works against chop'n'drop

[Yitzi]

I tried that - more expensive units - in UMOD. I'm working on version 0.4 currently. However, recently my aim was to shift strategy from attack to defense. Make quick conquests difficult.

Good approach.  Don't forget to make nerve gas harder to use; I'd advise raising the cost to 4, but raising the tech requirement might work too.  For the late-game, consider raising the cost of Blink Displacer to 2.  And of course nerfing air units would be a must.

E.g. problem of too big importance of air units - I made aerospace complexes cheaper to build and made them (and all military buildings in fact) with no upkeep cost, plus made them available sooner in tech tree.

Instead of making aerospace complexes cheaper and available earlier (which is a double-edged sword, as it also helps air units somewhat), here's a different idea: Switch the second prerequisite of Doctrine: Air Power from Doctrine: Flexibility to Advanced Military Algorithms, and make Air Superiority (SAM) available with Advanced Military Algorithms.  Thus, you get AAA units and SAM units on the way to D:AP, allowing a strong anti-air defense (and counter to ZoC/"protection" tricks) even without aerospace complexes.  On top of that, reduce the cost of AAA to -1 (which makes it free for defensive units, like hypnotic trance), and reduce chopper speed (an upcoming patch will allow it to be reduced by not getting a boost from its reactor, but until then you can reduce it to 4).  Choppers' main strength is their ability to attack often, so by reducing their speed that will help a lot.

[Mart]

I tried other stuff too, e.g. gave infantry 2 move points. rovers 4, so they also can attack more times. There is choice: move only large distance or move less with replacing moves for attacks. hoovertanks get even more moves.
With infantry there is an issue, anything with more moves than 1 is considered mobile (gets bonus for mobile in open and no for infantry vs. base) I had to predesign infantry units with slow attribute (-1 moves) so AI can get them to have +25% base attack bonus.
Yes, making AAA available before jets and copters is good solution.
UMOD was thought to have big gameplay changes. I already got used to some changes, e.g. infantry with 2 move points - in case of formers they can move to flat or rolling tile with no road and start terraforming in the same turn.

[Yitzi]

I tried other stuff too, e.g. gave infantry 2 move points. rovers 4, so they also can attack more times.

That will change the game a lot.

anything with more moves than 1 is considered mobile (gets bonus for mobile in open and no for infantry vs. base)

Does that even apply to elite infantry?

[Mart]

...

Does that even apply to elite infantry?

I think not in standard rules, since elite infantry (as far as I remember) is still listed as x-1-1 unit, it just gets at the start of a turn an additional move point, it says: Moves:2

[Kilkakon]

Some interesting ideas here, keep it up.