View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | Date Submitted | Last Update | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0000674 | AI War 1 / Classic | Suggestion - Game Mechanics | Oct 17, 2010 5:25 pm | Oct 18, 2010 9:53 pm | |
| Reporter | Fleet | Assigned To | Chris_McElligottPark | ||
| Status | resolved | Resolution | fixed | ||
| Product Version | 3.717 | ||||
| Fixed in Version | 3.719 | ||||
| Summary | 0000674: Simplifying the economy | ||||
| Description | Wowza, is this game having some difficulties right now. Soo many things have been tweaked with...nothing that some dedication to balance can't fix of course. And I'm not complaining about this either, its a complicated game and healing takes time!Anyways, onto the report.. Right now unit cost is reported in amount of resources required and build time. This makes things complicated...its hard to tell exactly what effect something will have on your economy. The economy seems to be hard to balance right now, since we have soo many different changes going on in build acceleration, starting income, etc. I propose making *cost per second*, and *build time*, the prominent information (hover-over tooltip, not just on the bottom bar). It would be vastly easier to assess balance (from your perspective and ours), because we can actually look at our total income (very easy to see) compared to the expenses, which are both in per second. If my economy is 300 metal/s, I can easily see whats sustainable by hovering over the unit and seeing how much it will take per second, and making a rough guess. If something needs balancing, like it requires an huge economy, just make it cost less per second, but keep the time the same. If its taking too long to build, just reduce the time, but have it cost the same amount. None of this funny business with the total cost as man-in-the-middle. I think this is a much better approach, because much of the economy is already supposed to be setting it and forgetting it, rather than building a few things, seeing if it kills the economy, then building some more...thats micro. I welcome feedback on why this will, or will not, work. | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| Internal Weight | |||||
|
|
The first issue I see with this is engineers, which will throw the cost-per-second and build times both out of whack. |
|
|
Ah, I forgot to mention that. Accelerating could be done by reducing the time to completion by a certain percentage while the engineer is active, while increasing the cost per second by a percentage. Or a fixed amount + %, or something. Does not seem too complicated though. |
|
|
We've been through multiple whole different versions of the economic model, and this was what was arrived at after a ton of discussion. I think one of the biggest problems in the version you were looking at was that the costs and so forth were just very out of whack in general, and not doing what they should. I feel like focusing on the flows and times would be confusing to new players, and that showing both flows and total costs would be overkill on the screen. All that said, I do agree that showing the costs per second would be an excellent idea, and that is now in: * The per-second costs of metal and crystal are now shown in a smaller parentheses in the ship costs line in tooltips. This will help with planning economic expenditures without diverting attention from the total fixed cost of these ships. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 17, 2010 5:25 pm | Fleet | New Issue | |
| Oct 17, 2010 5:44 pm | Toll | Note Added: 0001162 | |
| Oct 17, 2010 5:49 pm | Fleet | Note Added: 0001163 | |
| Oct 18, 2010 9:53 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Note Added: 0001246 | |
| Oct 18, 2010 9:53 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Status | new => resolved |
| Oct 18, 2010 9:53 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Fixed in Version | => 3.719 |
| Oct 18, 2010 9:53 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Resolution | open => fixed |
| Oct 18, 2010 9:53 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Assigned To | => Chris_McElligottPark |
