Do harvester upgrades now dominate econ command stations?

[Martyn van Buren]

I quite liked how econs worked before the harvester buffs --- I feel like the tradeoffs they create vs. logistic and military stations were interesting and should be preserved in whatever solution we eventually come up with.

---

I think I stand by my suggestion of not allowing harvester upgrades on human homeworlds so that econ stations' window is more like 0 - 12 rather than the less comprehensible 3 - 12.  That seems to me to create a very reasonable dilemma of investing in the quickest possible expansion vs. maximum long-term income.

Alternatively, could we fiddle with the k costs so that econ stations are considerably cheaper to research?  In that case, they might be a good-enough and less expensive approach to economy than harvesters.

[Draco18s]

I think I stand by my suggestion of not allowing harvester upgrades on human homeworlds so that econ stations' window is more like 0 - 12 rather than the less comprehensible 3 - 12.

While I agree with your...desired result, I do not agree with the suggested solution.

[sol_ilya]

I'm my opinion Harvesters shall have advantage when player have a big empire. 20+ planets unlocking harversters shall give more than econmic station. Before 20+ planets unlocking economic stations shall be more profitable than harvesters. In my opinion player economy was overbuffed with last harvesters buff.

According Chriss amount of capturing planets in a game "For normal play, my general answer is around 20-30 planets out of an 80 planet map".
http://www.arcengames.com/forums/index.php/topic,3654.msg23854.html#msg23854

I think here is where harvesters shall be balanced. Before 20 planets ecomic stations shall give more profit, after 20 planets more profitable becoming unlocking harvesters. Unlocking ecomic stations or harvesters shall be  a strategic decision, based on amounts planets player has or goes to capture.

[contingencyplan]

I dunno - the idea of nerfing one unit to make another unit more useful seems off to me. I'd rather look at making econs more interesting. However, I admittedly haven't been playing nearly as long as most of y'all have. Or maybe I'm just greedy and want +10k M/C / s

I do like the "bonus to harvesters" (something similar had crossed my mind as well) and repair bots ideas. The only potential problem I see with the latter is Golems and other similar high-priced items: auto-repair / construct on those items can crater your econ, and microing the station to only repair certain things would be a PITA, especially since you would have to give similar commands to two sets of units (the station and the engineers). I expect this problem would be solvable by fiddling with the "don't repair if cost above X" setting, though.

The resource-cap increase sounds interesting as well, but honestly I rarely encounter the problem for more than a few seconds before I notice it and re-enable construction on my expensive items / merc docks. More frequently, I encounter the situation where my resources are lopsided - I'm nanostalled because my crystal has cratered but I still have 500k metal. I have some ideas for better handling of the converters that I'll (eventually) put in another post, but this might be another way that econ stations could have an impact. Even being a heavy, even-trade (i.e., 1:1) converter would be useful here.

I have a few other ideas, but I'll wait till they're better formulated before posting them (and may make a separate thread so as not to derail this one).

[Wingflier]

According Chriss amount of capturing planets in a game "For normal play, my general answer is around 20-30 planets out of an 80 planet map".
http://www.arcengames.com/forums/index.php/topic,3654.msg23854.html#msg23854

Great, but when you're playing with 4 people that's like 5 a piece.  There's no point in having a unit that's only useful when you're playing by yourself.  Even in solo games you're going to struggle to place all your MK2 and MK3 Economic Orbitals without putting your "empire" at risk for a cataclysmic cascade that you can't respond to fast enough.  Besides, you would never need all of those resources anyway.

I still think my idea of allowing Economic Orbitals increase your resource cap makes them useful without any major changes.

[Hearteater]

Just did some rough math, but I'm tired and don't have time to double check.  For reference, this thread covers node distribution and should still be accurate.  I assumed 7 nodes of each on the home world.

For 20 planets to break even (using pretty round numbers) between unlocking III Harvesters (both) and III Economic CS, the following values work:

• Economic Command Station: 50 / 100 / 200 (was 32 / 80 / 160)
• Harvesters: 20 / 30 / 45 (was 20 / 30 / 55)

Just looking at metal, with 20 planets there are 45 nodes (7 home world + 2/captured planet) and 19 Command Station slots.  Home Command Station produces 300.
Building 6xECS-III, 6xECS-II, and 7xECS-I, and 45xH-I = 3350 metal/sec
Building 19xECS-I, 45xH-III = 3275 metal/sec

Only a 75 metal/second difference.  Not accounting for K-cost, just running balance numbers on resource production.  For Reference, currently with 19xECS-I and 45xH-III you get 3383 metal/sec.  So these values keep the expected production very close to present values at 20 planets.  Harvester IIIs would be hurt, but the Econ Mark I buff helps offset.

[Kahuna]

hm I had an idea.. Econ CS itself wouldn't produce metal or crystal. It would produce a nice amount of energy (The Energy Collector could be nerfed a little bit to make Econ CSs a more viable option) and increase the effectiveness of the harvesters on that planet by 25%/50%/100%. This way Econ CS would work well WITH upgraded Harvesters.

And in addition that that.. maybe Economic Command Station could make building or repairing units or whatever on that planet 10%/20%/40% cheaper? That might be a viable option for Logistic and Military Command Stations. Rebuilding the destroyed ships and defenses after a wave would be cheaper.. but you wouldn't have the benefits of the Logistic or Military Command Station.

http://www.arcengames.com/mantisbt/view.php?id=9076

[_K_]

And in addition that that.. maybe Economic Command Station could make building or repairing units or whatever on that planet 10%/20%/40% cheaper?

You do understand that putting all your production on some planet with adv fac and such thing would basically be equal to a GLOBAL 60% (for 40% discount) bonus in resources?
The discount approach means you will ever need at most 2-3 stations. One for production, one for rebuilding turretball, and maybe 1 temporary for golem repair.


Making eco stations give bonus to harvesters doesnt actually give people any new options. It only gives an additional step you can make to boost your economy after harvesters are fully researched.

[Kahuna]

And in addition that that.. maybe Economic Command Station could make building or repairing units or whatever on that planet 10%/20%/40% cheaper?

You do understand that putting all your production on some planet with adv fac and such thing would basically be equal to a GLOBAL 60% (for 40% discount) bonus in resources?
The discount approach means you will ever need at most 2-3 stations. One for production, one for rebuilding turretball, and maybe 1 temporary for golem repair.


Making eco stations give bonus to harvesters doesnt actually give people any new options. It only gives an additional step you can make to boost your economy after harvesters are fully researched.

You do understand that Econ CSs wouldn't have to work exactly as I said nor would the numbers have to be exactly what I said?
The discount approach doesn't mean I would need at most 2-3 econ stations. I might need 5 or just 1. There would be a problem though.. at least 1 econ station to help at building ships would be a "must" Even if the discount was 1%/2%/3%.

Harvesters could be nerfed and Econ stations could keep their flat resource productions.

[Varone]

The problem seems to be a mixture of people want resources right at the start of the game so they unlock harvesters automatically AND that the sacrifice of having an econ station on a planet outweighs the benefits of the extra resources you gain. Most people would prefer a military or logistic station instead.

To fix the first problem perhaps the Home station should generate a random amount of Metal/Crystal comparable to x/x MKIII harvesters on the homeworld. Then have zero harvesters on the homeworld planet. Therefore unlocking MKIII harvesters would be a medium term decision instead of a no brainer if you want more resources.

For the second problem the econ station needs to give a benefit that would make building it a temptation over harvesters if you want more resources AND comparable to the usefulness of a military/logistic station. I do like the idea of the resource cap going up with econ stations, combined with planet wide repair and rebuild or another buff that someone else can think of.

[_K_]

To fix the first problem perhaps the Home station should generate a random amount of Metal/Crystal comparable to x/x MKIII harvesters on the homeworld. Then have zero harvesters on the homeworld planet. Therefore unlocking MKIII harvesters would be a medium term decision instead of a no brainer if you want more resources.

This is actually a great idea and i dont know how nobody came up with thie earlier.

[Draco18s]

And in addition that that.. maybe Economic Command Station could make building or repairing units or whatever on that planet 10%/20%/40% cheaper?

You do understand that putting all your production on some planet with adv fac and such thing would basically be equal to a GLOBAL 60% (for 40% discount) bonus in resources?

It's not a 60% bonus in resources.  It's a 40% bonus in resources.

Here, an example, you want to buy something that normally costs $100.  There's no discount.
$100 spent.  $0 left over.
Effective resources: $100 (spent) / $100 (initial) = 1.0
You want to buy something that normally costs $100.  There's a discount of 40%.
$60 spent.  $40 left over.
You spend the $40 on something else (no discounts, yay easy math).
Effective resources: $140 (spent) / $100 (initial) = 1.4
1.4 = 140% normal = 40% bonus

[relmz32]

I think it would be interesting if each command station research gave the home world a foldout or mini-command station that buffed the system, such as researching some cmd station mk 2 will create a mini station next to the home world command station. The station would produce an effect similar to the effect of the station, and also improve the economy similar to the effect of the researched station.


So, with unlocking econ mk2, you get a mini econ mk 2 on the home world, which produces extra resources.
Unlocking econ mk 3, either replaces the mk 2 or adds an additional mini econ mk 3, which produces more resources.
Unlocking military mk 2 gives you a mini military mk 2, which gives tach coverage and fires damaging shots.

When destroyed they drop remains.

Also,

And in addition that that.. maybe Economic Command Station could make building or repairing units or whatever on that planet 10%/20%/40% cheaper?

You do understand that putting all your production on some planet with adv fac and such thing would basically be equal to a GLOBAL 60% (for 40% discount) bonus in resources?

It's not a 60% bonus in resources.  It's a 40% bonus in resources.

Here, an example, you want to buy something that normally costs $100.  There's no discount.
$100 spent.  $0 left over.
Effective resources: $100 (spent) / $100 (initial) = 1.0
You want to buy something that normally costs $100.  There's a discount of 40%.
$60 spent.  $40 left over.
You spend the $40 on something else (no discounts, yay easy math).
Effective resources: $140 (spent) / $100 (initial) = 1.4
1.4 = 140% normal = 40% bonus

Don't forget to spend the extra 40 dollars on stuff at a 40% discount. I would assume that if you had a 40% decrease in spending, you would always spend there, given a choice. Also, you spend 60 dollars on something that cost 100, we don't care about the leftovers.
The correct equation to use is:
c = (1-d)*e
c = cash to spend
d = discount
e = effective cash spent

c = 100
d = 40% or .4

100 = (1-.4)*e
100 = .6*e
100/.6 = e
e ~= 167

efficiency = e/c
efficiency = 167/100
efficiency = 167% increase

[Diazo]

I'm not sure what changes there should be but there are two things I have not seen mentioned that I think apply.

First, harvesters still need a bit of tweaking regardless. In my current game I have 9 metal and 4 crystal in my homeworld. Even if I needed crystal only, it is still more efficient for me to unlock Mk III metal harvesters and convert then it is to unlock Mk II metal and crystal harvesters.

As I am not using exclusively crystal my total resource production is even higher.

I'm not sure what to do about this issue, Mk III harvesters should produce a lot of resources after all.


Actually, I do have one suggestion. The big deal seems to be that early game Harvesters are the easy choice and that late game the econ stations are the easy choice.

What about making them the same unlock? This does take away options as there is now only one unlock to increase your economy but right now harvesters are all that are unlocked anyway. (At least for me, playstyles vary of course.)

The other issue is that the economic station is a non-military structure while the logistic and military command stations are military structures. What about removing economic command stations and replacing their upgrades with unlocks that give military command and logistic command stations increased resource production as long as all warp points in the system are friendly?

That way in systems exposed to the AI where you would not build economic command stations (usually) they behave as they always have but when all warp points are friendly, so no AI exposure, they increase their resource production by however much you've unlocked with K.

Really, it once again comes down to trying balance a military unit (military and logistics commands) against a non-military unit (econ command station).

This is made worse by the fact that the other economic option (harvesters) does not have a military option and so is only balanced against itself.

What about making a military unit that could be built on resource points? That would give the same military vs. non-military choice for resource points that currently exist for the command station.

There has to be something more interesting then just a super-turret for this though.

D.

[keith.lamothe]

To fix the first problem perhaps the Home station should generate a random amount of Metal/Crystal comparable to x/x MKIII harvesters on the homeworld. Then have zero harvesters on the homeworld planet. Therefore unlocking MKIII harvesters would be a medium term decision instead of a no brainer if you want more resources.

This is actually a great idea and i dont know how nobody came up with thie earlier.

It occurred to me at one point yesterday but I shelved it because it would make the homeworld more "bare" and remove a tactical wrinkle (the AI loves to go after those tasty, tasty harvesters) in homeworld assaults.

Not that that'd be the end of the world, but I don't think it's necessary.

I dunno - the idea of nerfing one unit to make another unit more useful seems off to me.

Normally I agree, but when the one unit has relatively recently received a huge buff to catch up with the other unit (that's how harvesters got their buff), restoring balance by re-nerfing makes a lot of sense as otherwise the total system just keeps going up and up.  With the econ mechanic, that increasingly trivializes two of the main resources in the game.  I'm glad that it's generous right now, because refleeting takes more than long enough as it is, but I don't want to push that bar up higher.