Discussion: Player Economy

[keith.lamothe]

FS econ balance is a separate thing because of the spire city hab centers that give 300m+300c per second.  Generally speaking you want to build as many shipyards as possible so you only build the minimum of one hab center per city, but if you really need more resources you can get up to 3600m+c per second from a city assuming you've got enough shard-reactors elsewhere.  That produces 2Mm+c (the resource cap) in less that 10 minutes.

Conceivably that's not enough (the FS ships and city structures have huge costs considering how many you can build), but that's the tool I'd use to balance the FS econ separately from non-FS.

[Wingflier]

Well, it seems like we've gotten pretty much everyone to agree that upgraded Harvesters are an order of magnitude better than upgraded Econ Stations, which is a start.

[TechSY730]

Hang on, a full cap of your mark Is before the first wave?
Very early game economy may be a bit strong with harvester upgrades, but it's never been that strong for me. It is usually around the 3rd or 4th wave where I can finally build to cap.

And I don't think harvester upgrades are an order of magnitude better, but enough better that they are better in all cases except when most (or maybe even >2/3rds) of the planets that you want to take first are resource scarce (<3 resource spots), which is quite rare.

[KDR_11k]

if you really need more resources you can get up to 3600m+c per second from a city assuming you've got enough shard-reactors elsewhere.  That produces 2Mm+c (the resource cap) in less that 10 minutes.

A minor point but I think when people talk about m/c numbers they use the average, not the sum so the 1Mm/c is the cap, not 2M. Still, these numbers are so commonly combined I have to wonder if there's really much of a point to have that resource split. The difference only matters in very few cases as anything except harvesters produces both in equal amounts and anything expensive seems to cost both in equal amounts too.

[keith.lamothe]

A minor point but I think when people talk about m/c numbers they use the average, not the sum so the 1Mm/c is the cap, not 2M.

I add them, because they're convertible.

Still, these numbers are so commonly combined I have to wonder if there's really much of a point to have that resource split. The difference only matters in very few cases as anything except harvesters produces both in equal amounts and anything expensive seems to cost both in equal amounts too.

Some costs are pretty slanted (various starships, sniper/spider turrets, etc) but yes, in general you don't have to worry too much about how much of one or the other you're getting.  Though it's not totally ignorable in that if you just keep the starting allotment of resource-converters you're quite likely to wind up bottoming out on one resource and not the other.

In general the reason they stay split nowadays isn't because it's some vital mechanic, but because the gain from combining them would be pretty small, smaller than the (also small) gain from keeping them as-is.

[TechSY730]

if you really need more resources you can get up to 3600m+c per second from a city assuming you've got enough shard-reactors elsewhere.  That produces 2Mm+c (the resource cap) in less that 10 minutes.

A minor point but I think when people talk about m/c numbers they use the average, not the sum so the 1Mm/c is the cap, not 2M. Still, these numbers are so commonly combined I have to wonder if there's really much of a point to have that resource split. The difference only matters in very few cases as anything except harvesters produces both in equal amounts and anything expensive seems to cost both in equal amounts too.

Long term, yea the split makes little difference, but short term it heavily influences what I want to focus on building next, especially the more expensive stuff like starships and merc ships.

[Toranth]

Well, it seems like we've gotten pretty much everyone to agree that upgraded Harvesters are an order of magnitude better than upgraded Econ Stations, which is a start.

Not in all games, especially those which have middle-level counts of human controlled systems.
Harvesters get their early-game boost primarily because of the extreme resource point count on the human Homeworld.  However, once you have enough space to build your Econ IIIs, they outweigh the harvester income pretty solidly, up to the 10-15 system count.  After that (because you can't build more Econ IIIs) the harvesters take over again, and become the better choice.

No matter what numbers you come up with for harvester/Econ income values, this trend will always hold true.  Harvesters better when you can't build Econ IIIs, Econ IIIs better when you can.

Just as a reference, here's the thread we had last time the economy question was debated:  http://www.arcengames.com/forums/index.php/topic,10169.0.html

Hang on, a full cap of your mark Is before the first wave?
Very early game economy may be a bit strong with harvester upgrades, but it's never been that strong for me. It is usually around the 3rd or 4th wave where I can finally build to cap.

I usually upgrade to Harvester IIIs during the first second of the game, and usually complete a full cap of Mk I fleetships + some turrets about the time the first wave arrives.  Against some AI types (Spire Hammer, Starfleet Command, Heroic) this is pretty essential.  If the initial economy is nerfed hard, then these AI types can become impossible at high difficulty levels.

[zoutzakje]

yeah, I've been having a serious metal shortage in my current game, meaning bomber starships are not going to be a part of my fleet at all (spamming out rams in an attempt to stop the frequent champion attacks).

And well Techsy, It's been a while since I played 9/9 so I don't think I can build full caps of mk I fleetships before the first wave there (with mk III harvesters of course), but I'm definitely able to pull it off at 7/7. Gravity and tractor turrets are usually also online at that point.

[Wingflier]

Well, it seems like we've gotten pretty much everyone to agree that upgraded Harvesters are an order of magnitude better than upgraded Econ Stations, which is a start.

Not in all games, especially those which have middle-level counts of human controlled systems.
Harvesters get their early-game boost primarily because of the extreme resource point count on the human Homeworld.  However, once you have enough space to build your Econ IIIs, they outweigh the harvester income pretty solidly, up to the 10-15 system count.  After that (because you can't build more Econ IIIs) the harvesters take over again, and become the better choice.

No matter what numbers you come up with for harvester/Econ income values, this trend will always hold true.  Harvesters better when you can't build Econ IIIs, Econ IIIs better when you can.

Just as a reference, here's the thread we had last time the economy question was debated:  http://www.arcengames.com/forums/index.php/topic,10169.0.html

Hang on, a full cap of your mark Is before the first wave?
Very early game economy may be a bit strong with harvester upgrades, but it's never been that strong for me. It is usually around the 3rd or 4th wave where I can finally build to cap.

I usually upgrade to Harvester IIIs during the first second of the game, and usually complete a full cap of Mk I fleetships + some turrets about the time the first wave arrives.  Against some AI types (Spire Hammer, Starfleet Command, Heroic) this is pretty essential.  If the initial economy is nerfed hard, then these AI types can become impossible at high difficulty levels.

Thought we had already agreed that taking 10-15 planets wasn't feasible on higher difficulties because of the exponential effect AIP has on difficulty.

Secondly, you seem to be forgetting the massive benefit of using a Logistical or Military Orbital in place of an Econ Station, where upgraded Harvesters pose have no negative drawback in that regard.  Not sure why everybody keeps ignoring that.

+25% damage for the whole planet, basically immunity to raid starships, powerful defensive translocation ability, and immunity to blades (this is huge against many melee ships) OR half enemy speed, double your own speed (which has already been doubled, so it's like quadrupled right?).  And this is all just at level 1.  Let's please stop pretending like that isn't a factor when taking into account the benefits and drawbacks of Harvesters vs. Econ Stations.

[Mánagarmr]

Wouldn't early economy be solved simply by upping the starting resource pool, instead of upping the starting resource income? I'm definitely no econ genious, but that would allow you to pump out your first turrets and caps before the first wave, but you can't keep that insane production up once you run out of your starting "bank" so to speak.

[keith.lamothe]

Wouldn't early economy be solved simply by upping the starting resource pool, instead of upping the starting resource income? I'm definitely no econ genious, but that would allow you to pump out your first turrets and caps before the first wave, but you can't keep that insane production up once you run out of your starting "bank" so to speak.

... you know, I'd honestly never thought of that.

There's also the matter of the resource storage limits themselves, some adjustment of which (probably each non-home command station adding some storage, depending on type/mark) may help people be able to refleet without extensive delay as long as they have an hour or so between refleets to "recharge", even if they don't dump K on econ/harvester upgrades.

Of course, that could mess with FS balance pretty significantly, because if you can just engie-dump to build some of those later structures instantly it could be an issue... though not much of one, upon reflection, I think.

[Draco18s]

up to the 10-15 system count

You forget that in order to have a full cap of Mk3 econ stations, you need like 25 planets.

[Wingflier]

I've suggested this before, but giving Econ Stations an expanded resource cap would separate them from the other two, and make them slightly better than they are now, without making them too overpowered.  After all, if you're reaching cap resources all the time, you're probably going to win either way.

[Lancefighter]

No, the notify button SENDS ME EMAILS.
it doesnt add stuff to my 'show new replies to my posts' filter. I tried it once, last time someone told me that.

I feel like scaling caps would be very nice. I am not quite sure how much scaling caps is good though.. Like you said, being able to drop the combined 6m m/c into a spire city instantly somewhat mitigates the power of the 'on building city' exowave. (if I'm not stalling, any minor lull can rebuild a lot)

[Mánagarmr]

... you know, I'd honestly never thought of that.

You're welcome.

There's also the matter of the resource storage limits themselves, some adjustment of which (probably each non-home command station adding some storage, depending on type/mark) may help people be able to refleet without extensive delay as long as they have an hour or so between refleets to "recharge", even if they don't dump K on econ/harvester upgrades.

Not a bad idea either. As long as the econ stations have a significant increase in storage over normal stations. Either way, the increasing storage would help "big empires" more than small empires though, and it's usually small empires that struggle with econ so I'm not sure how that would help the situation though.