Question

Not moddable; it's a hard code problem.

The issue has been addressed before and Brad has defended the decision at least for the GC2 iteration.  Feel free to make workable and valid suggestions for GC3, which is due to start development after Elemental launches in February 2010.

However, focus was nerfed to 80% efficiency if moving from industry to research or vice versa in TA, the latest expansion pack, which tends to make all-x and hence 100% funding of one type less effective, albeit by no means inefficient.

Reading this, it seems you've never seen the focus button.  In the planet view screen, if you click on the icons under the research production, it will "focus" production on research, taking 25% of the base value of funded social and 25% of the base value of funded military and transferring it to research.  (Do note that in TA 25% of the base funded value is taken, but only 20% of the base funded value is given.)  This works the same in reverse, with the exception of focusing social with funded military or vice versa, in which case 50% of the base of the one is transferred to the other (and TA doesn't depreciate this).

Granted, even with focus, it's somewhat difficult to do things the way you want to do them, but it is by no means impossible.

No, I'm aware of the focus buttons, I used them but I was still unsatisfied with the effect.  25% of my factory production goes to research?  Factories are researching?  Yet I'm not building research labs because they will be sitting idle?  I'm sorry, but that just doesn't feel right.

I would be interested to hear the justification for this system if someone could send me a link to the appropriate thread.  I just can't understand why my research labs would have to sit idle because my factories are running, or vice versa.  If I can fund everything to run at 100%, they should all run at 100%.  Setting the slider to 50%-50% is effectively the same as having 100% factories one turn, and 100% research the next.  Why can't they both work at once?  It just doesn't make sense, so it reminds me that I'm playing an arbitrary game with arbitrary rules.  I'm sure I could find a way to do it successfully, but if it doesn't make sense to me why the rules exist, then I'm just playing with numbers and random number generators, and it isn't fun.

I'm sorry to hear that.  I guess I will have to wait till the next game in this genre comes out.  Thanks for saving my time!

Grant

Balance is never arbitrary. And yes, factories can research if certain offices and personnel are set aside for that function. Just as certain research facilities can produce if they are converted to do so.

You have 'x' amount of funds, which you split between research and production. Production is then sub-divided into military and social spending. And there is no allowance for deficit spending.

Thus being such, you can never have 100% of your funds going to both research and production. You have to choose the balance between the two.

That being the case, a 50-50 split between production and research gives you equal funding (and capacity) for everything. But in cases of need you can globally focus on either area - in effect, putting all research capacity to aid in production (if you need a lot of ships very quickly, for example), or visa versa (when you need an extra level or two of weapons/defense tech very quickly).

It makes sense, but only if you are willing to accept the rules of the game.

"the way that you need to play 100% research or 100% production to make full use of your capacities."

That is where you are mistaken. You always make full use of your capacities, because the full use equals your total funding globally. But it is up to you to balance the relative capacity in each area.

I want to clarify the issue that I have, because Moosetek13 posted a reply that misses the point of my complaint.  This makes me suspect that I'm not being clear enough.

I'm afraid I don't know the exact values for things, so bear with me!  I know that people could correct this, but it isn't the exact values that matter but the idea:

Let's say I have a factory on one planet that has a capacity of 10 production points.  I can fund that factory completely, spending 10 money to get 10 actual production, or I can fund it at 50% or 0% and get 5 and 0 production, respectively.  Let's also say, for the sake of arguement, that this planet has a suplus of 10 money (or credits, or whatever it is called... it has been a while!), so in theory I could run it at full production indefinitely.

Let's say that I also have a research lab, on a different planet, with a capacity of 10 research points.  Same logic applies here... I can fund it or not.  Let's also say that this planet also has a surplus of 10 money so I can in theory run it at full capacity indefinitely.

Now, if I only had the first planet, it would produce 10 points of production every turn.  If I only had the second planet, it would produce 10 points of research every turn.  However, if I have both planets I can produce either 10 points of production, or 10 points of research each turn, or some combination, but I cannot do both.  Somehow the existence of the second planet interferes with the operation of the first.  This makes NO SENSE to me in the context of the game.

I understand the gameplay desire to force the player to make high-level decisions of this nature, but it doesn't make sense in the gameworld.  For me, this means that the gameworld itself doesn't make sense, and I lose immersion in the whole idea.  Once I have to turn off my factories so that my research can progress, I stop thinking of these things as factories and research labs, and I start thinking of them as values in equations that will get me some result I want.  It stops being a space strategy game for me.

Anyways, I should stop complaining.  The game was interesting and well executed otherwise, it is just a terrible shame that an otherwise great game was ruined (for me) by an unmoddable design decision.

Thanks again for your time,

Grant