IIRC gangs are supposed to grow in time - in numbers, leveling up, building facilities, upgrading gear, training troops... If the gear itself would go as you say, many players will do exactly opposite than you.
@Daithi Yeah, on the base level though all gangs want the same, priorities can be re-balanced later, no? That's why was having fun over equipment, no problem if the implementation doesn't fit, its principle is general - the gang AI being robust as bare while it's easy to add nuances (factions, global progression/upgrades, local space and time variations). You have much more going on though, of course. Except, you guys still want to tie the AI's hands for gear as opposite to nudging.
(btw. why is mafia always in the middle?)
I don't think anybody expects that anything will happen as imagined, on the contrary it a kind of frees...
(in case of trying to shoo the discussion, too mild tbh, hint: redirect)
I do see where you are coming from. You're looking at it from a business perspective. Only spend what you need and then spend reactively.
Not necessarily. Flexible system will let you do such if desired. Doesn't need to work like that though, probably won't.
The player is observing the gang in a particular area and evaluating their threat level. Then the player writes down three values. These are observational values.
Why can't they just apply?
Empirical... Mars does not live by epicycles, his mistress is the gravity.
And that's the beauty isn't is? When empirical laws do apply (under certain conditions), you can go by those laws and fight the enemy, and yet observing just effects of a bigger force...
Btw. a good summary from the player's perspective. Intel we're getting is a mixed bag indeed.
Let's categorize useful things to know:
- Attributes of a tile (basic resources, doesn't change)
- Gang's long term and short term activities in the area (strategical part)
- Crime rate (% of tile's wealth collected, not sure if its grow is set in stone or can vary)
- Number of tile occupants (goes with crime, unsure how exactly, upper limit for # of enemies for a battle?)
- Underboss / Leader (not sure how/if benefit, but their placement (hunting) is a part of gang's (player's) strategy)
- Special Encounters (??)
- Facility (gives local/global benefits to gangs)
- Tactical: Opposition to be faced in battle (varies, based on gang's strength, indirectly says how much gang values the tile at the moment)
- Number of enemies / Guard level (either exact or gives good sense how much to expect)
- Average level of enemies (it's tied to global leveling, not sure if useful to know)
- Danger level (how strong/buffed relative to gang's base troops)
- Equipment level (how well equipped, either relative to gang's current average, or exact in tiers)
- Mission objective
- Leader (morale mechanic, special enemy)
(things are uncertain, not sure how will correlate, took the liberty, feel free to correct)
Nomad's proposal to disentangle gear level and number of enemies is interesting, if possible (especially if helps to liberate AI:)). It makes sense next to the Danger. But I would keep Wealth and Crime too, those are good to know strategically.
The question of absolute vs. relative: Globally the gang is in the state reflected on all tiles. One needs to know is how it differs between them. One can use Guard/Danger/Gear level, with scores relative to gang's base. So Low Guard means 5 Survivalists but 7 Churchers, etc. You don't see absolute numbers, but if you pay enough attention will get the grip.
Alternative surveillance list v3 (ordered by approx intel % needed)
Gang
Guard level
Danger level
Equipment levelWealth
Crime rate
Leader / Special. Encounter
Facility
Edit: correction rackets-> spec. encounters; re-ordered list to put tactical intel first - just something to consider.