| Author |
Resources, Tech and the Economy |
Jim Starluck
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: October 22, 2001
Posts: 2232
From: Cincinnati, OH
|  Posted: 2008-10-15 00:23
From what I've heard, the way it currently works is that planets with starports try to arrange it so they all have equal amounts of resources. This doesn't make sense. We want to concentrate the resources on our shipyard and modding planets. The heavily-developed Terran worlds should have far more resources than some Barren mining colony out in the boondocks.
I think a good way to do this would be to check the tech level. The higher the tech level of a given planet, the bigger the chunk of the local resources it should take up. Thus the planets with the highest tech--like Shipyards--would be funneled resources from lower-tech planets. This would then encourage players to have their core worlds highly-developed, but supported by lower-tech mining colonies. Lower-tech worlds that have fewer defenses, and thus make easier targets, particularly for lower-ranking players. It would give the Metaverse more variety than simply having all worlds be high-tech fortresses, as they tend to be currently unless recently bombed.
Also, it seems right now that transports only trade within a given star system. Perhaps the current Starport could be renamed "Spaceport," and only one planet within a star system can have a Starport, which enables it to trade resources with other star systems. The Starport planet would become a hub of trade routes, with local transports ferrying resources to and from it and inter-system freighters (perhaps with a bigger, custom model?) coming and going to and from other star systems.
Of course, right now the only things resources are needed for are building, so perhaps certain structures have an upkeep requirement. Particularly power generators, as they need fuel to keep running, but also military structures--barracks, defense bases, shield generators, interdictors, etc--would consume resources in varying amounts. A blockade of an enemy planet would go from being a nuisance to a serious threat, as the blockaded world would start to run out of resources vital to powering its defenses. Ideally, most planets would be able to survive from their reserves for awhile, but if the blockade is not broken, eventually they will fall.
As an interesting extra feature, each faction could have a Mining Platform. Like any other platform, it can be built in orbit of a planet... and when completed, it automatically targets the nearest mine-able object and activates a single Mining Beam. It would then serve as a pick-up point for transports, with a large cargo hold to store resources until pick-up... and best of all, it would be able to maintain itself with the resources it mines, not requiring a player to come and reload it.
Finally... I think we could do with the old resources back. As in Hydrogen, Metals, Hypermatter, Urdanium, etc. With the above resource system, they would add a whole new layer of depth to the universe. Mining planets with rare and vital resources would become prime strategic targets. Structures would require specific resources to function; fusion generators would need Hydrogen, Quantum Generators and Variance Generators... perhaps Hypermatter or Urdanium, or one of the other "exotic" resources? Most military structures would just need Metal. Domes on planets without it would require Oxygen. Research labs would need a small trickle of exotics, how many types depending on the level of lab...
You Dev-type folks can pick and chose from these if one or more aren't to your liking. Any one would enrich the gameplay within the Metaverse, but all of them together would make the worlds of Darkspace seem much more vivid and living.
[ This Message was edited by: Jim Starluck on 2008-10-15 00:43 ]
_________________
If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger space battleship and try again.
|
Drafell
Grand Admiral
Mythica
Joined: May 30, 2003
Posts: 2449
From: United Kingdom
| Posted: 2008-10-15 19:24
Each structure contributes to a planets resource 'need'.
Shipyards contribute the highest need, followed by Starports and Factories.
Each other structure also contributes an amount, along with planet population.
_________________
It's gone now, no longer here...Yet still I see, and still I fear.rnrn
rnrn
DarkSpace Developer - Retired
|
Jim Starluck
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: October 22, 2001
Posts: 2232
From: Cincinnati, OH
| Posted: 2008-10-15 19:30
But don't factories produce resources? Or at least amplify the amount it has?
At any rate, the whole resource system could still potentially be so much more interesting than it is now.
[ This Message was edited by: Jim Starluck on 2008-10-15 19:30 ]
_________________
If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger space battleship and try again.
|
Gejaheline
Fleet Admiral
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 19, 2005
Posts: 1127
From: UGTO MUNIN HQ, Mars
| Posted: 2008-10-15 19:39
Mines and factories might want a negative weighting, since they'll be richer in resources and want resources moved away from them, perhaps?
_________________
[Darkspace Moderator] [Galactic Navy Fleet Officer]
|
Jim Starluck
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: October 22, 2001
Posts: 2232
From: Cincinnati, OH
| Posted: 2008-10-15 19:53
A good point. But I still think a tech-based factor could also work. It would give the low-tech structures a bigger role--right now, they're only used until we get the high-tech stuff built, and then they're scrapped and never looked at again.
_________________
If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger space battleship and try again.
|
Drafell
Grand Admiral
Mythica
Joined: May 30, 2003
Posts: 2449
From: United Kingdom
| Posted: 2008-10-15 20:19
Low tech civilian structures have more HP than the high tech versions...
_________________
It's gone now, no longer here...Yet still I see, and still I fear.rnrn
rnrn
DarkSpace Developer - Retired
|
Gejaheline
Fleet Admiral
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 19, 2005
Posts: 1127
From: UGTO MUNIN HQ, Mars
| Posted: 2008-10-15 20:28
Quote:
|
On 2008-10-15 20:19, Drafell wrote:
Low tech civilian structures have more HP than the high tech versions...
|
|
With the requirements for tech on buildings nowadays, I'm tempted to try a multi-level build, with low-level tough defences augmented by a few higher-level defences that will probably be the first casualties.
_________________
[Darkspace Moderator] [Galactic Navy Fleet Officer]
|
Jim Starluck
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: October 22, 2001
Posts: 2232
From: Cincinnati, OH
| Posted: 2008-10-16 00:00
Quote:
|
On 2008-10-15 20:19, Drafell wrote:
Low tech civilian structures have more HP than the high tech versions...
|
|
That's a good tactical advantage, but most planets spend 99% of their time not being bombed. I'm looking primarily at the economical advantages.
_________________
If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger space battleship and try again.
|
Jim Starluck
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: October 22, 2001
Posts: 2232
From: Cincinnati, OH
| Posted: 2008-10-18 16:51
Sorry for the double-post, but...
There are a couple problems with the way it currently works, first and foremost being that it's invisible to the player. Nowhere does it indicate that certain structures are tougher than others, or that others draw more resources to the planet. It does, however, indicate that some are better than others. And structure hitpoints aren't much of a bonus anyway. Sure, it'll make bombing a little harder, but if they can get their bombs through the planet's point-defense they're going to kill something. It's just a question of when.
Right now, there does not seem to be any motivation to leave planets at low-tech. So any planet which gets someone working on it almost always winds up with T3 defenses and mines and whatnot. Given long enough, EVERY planet in the entire Metaverse gets fully-built and heavily defended. This makes it difficult for new players to get any experience with bombing or capturing, since every planet is capable of holding off a much greater attack then they can bring to bear. Bomber Scouts, Frigates and Corvettes become useless except against targets which are almost entirely undefended.
And right now, with nothing except new construction, troop training and shipbuilding consuming resources, it becomes easy for planets to amass vast wealth.
As an example... let's say that every planet has a Colony Hub and one Mantle Extractor. That's a total of 17 Mining. Every ten seconds, it generates that many resources. That's 102 resources per minute, 6120 per hour, 146,880 per day. That's enough to build nearly two ICC Line Stations--our single most expensive ship--or about five and a half ICC Dreadnoughts every day, and since we don't have to pay resources for ships that are destroyed and returned to our storage...
And that's with one planet with only a hub and a single T3 mine. Right now the three factions own an average of 76 planets between them, which means that with one hub and one T3 mine on each, they all get 76 x 146,880 = 11,162,880 resources every twenty-four hours. That's enough that every faction can build one hundred sixty Line Stations or 421 Dreadnoughts EVERY SINGLE DAY. I don't think we even have that many active players.
What I'm suggesting would offer a persistent economic reason to have more low-tech planets than high-tech ones, and would give the game a more dynamic economy. It would create planets that are viable targets for new players and if you ask me lead to more interesting gameplay overall.
[ This Message was edited by: Jim Starluck on 2008-10-18 17:21 ]
_________________
If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger space battleship and try again.
|
Huffywuffy, Mr. Builder
Fleet Admiral
Interstellar Cultural Confederation United
Joined: August 20, 2003
Posts: 76
| Posted: 2008-10-18 17:15
I don't want to question your point, but one Colony Hub and a Mantle Extractor equal to 17 Mining, since the Hub only produces 5 Mining.
_________________
Quote:
- Operating under the theory that there's no such thing as too many Gaifen, added a (visually) new variant of the Gaifen.
|
|
Jim Starluck
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: October 22, 2001
Posts: 2232
From: Cincinnati, OH
| Posted: 2008-10-18 17:22
Yeah, my bad. Fixed it.
The numbers are still insane, if you ask me.
_________________
If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger space battleship and try again.
|
Fattierob
Vice Admiral
Joined: April 25, 2003
Posts: 4059
| Posted: 2008-10-18 17:27
Quote:
|
On 2008-10-18 16:51, Jim Starluck wrote:
What I'm suggesting would offer a persistent economic reason to have more low-tech planets than high-tech ones, and would give the game a more dynamic economy.
|
|
Perhaps if planet type definied the maximum research attainable ........
_________________
|
Mr Black
Grand Admiral
Palestar
Joined: September 20, 2003
Posts: 486
From: Gaifenland
| Posted: 2008-10-18 17:47
All upgrades cost resources; not great amounts but some.
Platforms require resources to build and maintain.
All planets now have resource caps, after which point any more resources mined are wasted. It is surprisingly easy to drain 150k resources from a planet by constructing a few platforms.
Bombing a planet also destroys a percentage of its stored resources. One successful bombing run with Mirvs will deplete at least 50% of a planets stockpile, and that is without hitting structures...
Front line systems will be affected by these resource sinks. They are subtle, but are so far performing quite well.
[ This Message was edited by: Mr Black on 2008-10-18 17:50 ]
_________________
 \\r\\n
DarkSpace Administrator - \\r\\n
drafell@palestar.com
|
Jim Starluck
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: October 22, 2001
Posts: 2232
From: Cincinnati, OH
| Posted: 2008-10-18 18:47
One successful bombing run. With sufficient T3 defenses that won't be easy at all, and will require significant effort to take any planet, regardless of its actual strategic value. In fact, aside from Shipyard worlds, every other planet has pretty much the exact same strategic value as any other one. There's no variety unless it hasn't gotten as much Engineer attention.
I'm not saying that the way it is right now is totally broken. It's working well enough. I just think it could be so much more.
Quote:
|
On 2008-10-18 17:27, His Wibbllency Fattierob wrote:
Perhaps if planet type definied the maximum research attainable ........ |
|
Why impose a hard limit when we can simply encourage by providing reasons not to drive for the maximum all the time?
Oh, and for platforms... it takes about 3000 resources to keep a platform going for another 24 hours. If we devoted only 1/10th of the income I described above to platform maintenance, we could sustain three hundred seventy-two platforms indefinitely. Enough to have five platforms in orbit of every single planet. And again, that's only 1/10th of the income.
[ This Message was edited by: Jim Starluck on 2008-10-22 17:26 ]
_________________
If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger space battleship and try again.
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
