Author Topic: Do harvester upgrades now dominate econ command stations?  (Read 19217 times)

Offline chemical_art

  • Core Member Mark IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,952
  • Fabulous
Re: Do harvester upgrades now dominate econ command stations?
« Reply #75 on: August 01, 2012, 09:11:15 am »

You're trying to make the argument that 80% of 100 is bigger than 15% of 1,000.

No one is buying it.

That situational benefit is HUGE when it comes up, absolutely MASSIVE.

For example, I once had a wave of ships attack a planet where I had a military command station under a FF mk1.  I don't know why I didn't hear about it, but I didn't.  Anyway, an hour later* the "command station under attack" warning fired and when I peeked at the system there was 200 enemy ships scattered all over the entire system.

I was able to bring my fleet in and clean up long before the command station was in danger.

Had that been an econ system?  I'd have lost it, and likely the next system too.

*Total guess, but that's about how long I think it took them to knock down the FF, given how unfocused their attack was.

If it were a "wave" with diff 7 or greater with over say 300 aip then any lvl of military station could not hold it off. A military station in its mark, over a hour of time, can hold of 50 * mk of com station ships maybe. I get waves of 150 on ultra low caps with 200 ish aip on difficulty 7. I don't know if you too play super low caps with low aip, but otherwise it didn't hold a "wave". It held border aggression, which as I said, the military station does well.


and what if you did lose it? 200 ships are nasty, yes, but then you zip your fleet in. If you put even a single shield over your worlds that border border worlds they usually stall at least 3 minutes. More then enough time for the fleet to zoom in and clean up.

So assuming your initial proposition is correct (for I do not know the whole story).

If you acted rapidly from the very moment you saw the first world fall, be able to rebuild it in 10 minutes. Since you said you somehow held the planet from a wave for a hour, then you have at least 50 minutes of where the econ is supierior to the military station (because that is when the next wave hit). Which comes out too...300k in m + c per planet. if you compare a military III to a econ III. And while those planets are doing their thing, your other 4 econ III planets are shining the military III's by 360k per hour per planet.

And there is nothing wrong with putting military I's on your border worlds if for some reason you don't put defenses on all of them.

Perhaps, then, it comes down to if you play defensive or offensive, and if you try to keep inner worlds or not.

If you are defensive and have no inner worlds, military stations can be better.

If you play offensive and/or have no inner worlds, economic stations are better.

Which still leaves my wondering what to do with those logistic stations.
« Last Edit: August 01, 2012, 09:35:21 am by chemical_art »
Life is short. Have fun.

Offline Diazo

  • Master Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,717
  • I love/hate Diff 10
Re: Do harvester upgrades now dominate econ command stations?
« Reply #76 on: August 01, 2012, 09:31:49 am »
@Hearteater: Unless I'm mistaken, a lot of people did use econ stations until the harvester buff, right? I mean it was a plausible choice not to, but I think it was more of a decision than it is now.

Actually this is a good point.

When the harvester changes went in was at about the same time I started really scaling up the difficulty of my games and one thing I have noticed is that as the difficulty scales up there will be fewer planets conquered during the course of the game.

It used to be I would take a defensive buffer around my homeworld so I had several non-border worlds to build econ stations on so that was the way I went.

On the higher difficulties it actually makes more defensive sense to keep my homeworld exposed and tank the waves there then it does to build defensive depth so I don't have any systems to build econ stations in so I have to go with harvesters.

My current game (which is the starship test game so I'm maybe slower then usual) had me capturing my first system at about the 1hour 15 minute mark.

That makes it simple as with no systems to build econ stations in my only other option is harvesters.

D.

Offline Kahuna

  • Core Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,222
  • Kahuna Matata!
Re: Do harvester upgrades now dominate econ command stations?
« Reply #77 on: August 01, 2012, 09:46:12 am »
Make Logistic CSs increase the movement speed of friendly ships by 50%/100%/150% and decrease the movement speed of enemy ships by 20%/40%/60% OR increase by 25%/50%/100% and decrease by 15%/30%/60%.
BOOM! Problem solved!
set /A diff=10
if %diff%==max (
   set /A me=:)
) else (
   set /A me=SadPanda
)
echo Check out my AI War strategy guide and find your inner Super Cat!
echo 2592 hours of AI War and counting!
echo Kahuna matata!

Offline Draco18s

  • Resident Velociraptor
  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,251
Re: Do harvester upgrades now dominate econ command stations?
« Reply #78 on: August 01, 2012, 10:03:40 am »
If it were a "wave" with diff 7 or greater with over say 300 aip then any lvl of military station could not hold it off. A military station in its mark, over a hour of time, can hold of 50 * mk of com station ships maybe. I get waves of 150 on ultra low caps with 200 ish aip on difficulty 7. I don't know if you too play super low caps with low aip, but otherwise it didn't hold a "wave". It held border aggression, which as I said, the military station does well.

This was a long time ago for one.  But I know that I'd have bee on low caps, as for AIP level, I don't know.

Quote
and what if you did lose it? 200 ships are nasty, yes, but then you zip your fleet in. If you put even a single shield over your worlds that border border worlds they usually stall at least 3 minutes. More then enough time for the fleet to zoom in and clean up.

Ah.  But you forget.  Enemy units firing on a FF doesn't trigger an alert.  If it did, then I'd have been in on top of that system before the military command station had had much to do.

But I didn't even know that those ships were there at all.

Quote
So assuming your initial proposition is correct (for I do not know the whole story).

If you acted rapidly from the very moment you saw the first world fall, be able to rebuild it in 10 minutes. Since you said you somehow held the planet from a wave for a hour, then you have at least 50 minutes of where the econ is supierior to the military station (because that is when the next wave hit).

Wait wait, what?  I held that world for 50 minutes due to the translocating nature of the military command station's shots: every time it fired, it shunted the enemy to a random location, and it took those ships a fairly significant amount of time for them to get back.  If I'd had an econ station there, the system would have lasted 3 minutes, not 50.

I vaguely recall those ships being slowed for some reason, but I don't remember what effect was causing it.

OOOH.  I remember what it was, because it was lovably HILARIOUS.  It was a Grav Drill system.

Quote
If you are defensive and have no inner worlds, military stations can be better.

If you play offensive and/or have no inner worlds, economic stations are better.

Which still leaves my wondering what to do with those logistic stations.

I use logistic stations on my border worlds.  It slows enemy movement significantly and allows my turrets more shots, as well as an increased amount of time to get my fleet in position if I need it.

Offline chemical_art

  • Core Member Mark IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,952
  • Fabulous
Re: Do harvester upgrades now dominate econ command stations?
« Reply #79 on: August 01, 2012, 10:06:53 am »
It was a grav world?

ROFL


oh god lol.


ok, yes, military com station is king then, hands down.

We can agree on that.
Life is short. Have fun.

Offline Hearteater

  • Core Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,334
Re: Do harvester upgrades now dominate econ command stations?
« Reply #80 on: August 01, 2012, 10:10:17 am »
@Hearteater: Unless I'm mistaken, a lot of people did use econ stations until the harvester buff, right? I mean it was a plausible choice not to, but I think it was more of a decision than it is now.
The problem was the economy was so important you really had no choice but to use Economic CS.  Once Harvesters got buffed, Econ CS became much less important.  So unimportant in fact that the other two CS options replaced them.  If you have 12 systems and Mark III Harvesters, you don't need Econ Command Stations at all.  And certainly not 12 of them.

On Logistic Command Stations, they add speed in addition to doubling speed, which means they are more powerful for slower ships, such as Missile Frigates, because they get a much greater percentage speed boost.  Maybe the Mark III Log should prevent your ships from taking Engine Damage.  A unique effect and semi-useful against certain units.  I could also see it reducing the energy cost of turrets (and Fortresses?) in the system.

Offline Draco18s

  • Resident Velociraptor
  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,251
Re: Do harvester upgrades now dominate econ command stations?
« Reply #81 on: August 01, 2012, 10:12:59 am »
ok, yes, military com station is king then, hands down.

We can agree on that.

It does tweak my example a bit in the mil's favor, yes.  Took me a while to remember why the ships were so slow in recovering from the translocation.
It's probably the only time I've ever used a mil instead of a logi

Offline keith.lamothe

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,505
Re: Do harvester upgrades now dominate econ command stations?
« Reply #82 on: August 01, 2012, 10:22:24 am »
Ooh, fancy.  Keith, thoughts?
I'm following the thread but it's proving more difficult than usual to untangle the thoroughly-playtesting-backed complaints from the personal preferences and assertions :)

In general I don't think any major overhauls are needed here; I have an idea for how to make the econ station upgrades more competitive with harvester upgrades when the player has a relatively low number of planets.  The econ vs log vs military thing is interesting and I'm figuring it will need to be changed eventually but whenever I'm seeing "A is the obvious choice" AND "B is the obvious choice" from player feedback (consistently, over time), I assume that A and B are at least not wildly out of balance with each other ;)
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games? Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline chemical_art

  • Core Member Mark IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,952
  • Fabulous
Re: Do harvester upgrades now dominate econ command stations?
« Reply #83 on: August 01, 2012, 10:26:08 am »
ok, yes, military com station is king then, hands down.

We can agree on that.

It does tweak my example a bit in the mil's favor, yes.  Took me a while to remember why the ships were so slow in recovering from the translocation.
It's probably the only time I've ever used a mil instead of a logi

If only the Zenith trader sold grav drillers...
Life is short. Have fun.

Offline Draco18s

  • Resident Velociraptor
  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,251
Re: Do harvester upgrades now dominate econ command stations?
« Reply #84 on: August 01, 2012, 10:30:32 am »
If only the Zenith trader sold grav drillers...

OH MY GOD.  I'd buy them every day of the week.
Even at a billion m+c to build, I'd still get one.

Offline keith.lamothe

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,505
Re: Do harvester upgrades now dominate econ command stations?
« Reply #85 on: August 01, 2012, 10:31:25 am »
If only the Zenith trader sold grav drillers...
Tried that once.  The AI said "Nice ship you've got there, it would be a shame if..."
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games? Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline chemical_art

  • Core Member Mark IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,952
  • Fabulous
Re: Do harvester upgrades now dominate econ command stations?
« Reply #86 on: August 01, 2012, 10:33:50 am »
Ooh, fancy.  Keith, thoughts?
  The econ vs log vs military thing is interesting and I'm figuring it will need to be changed eventually but whenever I'm seeing "A is the obvious choice" AND "B is the obvious choice" from player feedback (consistently, over time), I assume that A and B are at least not wildly out of balance with each other ;)

Poor option C though is ignored.

It's not ignored in that it is bad. It is ignored in that, aside from teleports, there is little reason to upgrade it compared to using MK I's and put the 9k into harvestors.

[Option C is logistical stations. As Kahuna said make it with higher mk the stronger the effects of speed then its good to go in my book]
Life is short. Have fun.

Offline keith.lamothe

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,505
Re: Do harvester upgrades now dominate econ command stations?
« Reply #87 on: August 01, 2012, 10:47:49 am »
Varying the movement speed change by logistics mark would be tricky, as the move-speed-calculation code is very much in the critical path and anything much worse than a single bitshift operation (it currently just does ">> 1") could have a problematic performance impact.  Multiply and divide are right out ;)
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games? Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline Wingflier

  • Core Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,753
  • To add me on Steam, click the little Steam icon ^
Re: Do harvester upgrades now dominate econ command stations?
« Reply #88 on: August 01, 2012, 11:10:33 am »
I'm beginning to think that the econ station needs to be scrapped entirely and find something else to fill the void.  Some other way to ... get an offensive or defensive bonus, similar to the remaining two stations.
How about replacing the Econ CS with a Warp Gate Command Station? It would allow the player to teleport ships between the Warp Gate CSs. It would work like Transports. You put ships in it on planet A and unload them on planet B (ofc planet A and B both would need the Warp Gate CS). Boom! Teleported! This could be hella handy.. for example.. I could easily defend my Experimental Starship Fabricator or Advanced Factory on a distant planet (few AI planets between the "distant planet" and my other planets).

This could be added even if Econ CS wont be removed. Imo that would be awesome.

EDIT: MarkI could teleport ships over 3 hops
MarkII over 6 hops
MarkIII over 9 hops
or something like that. Ships immune to transportation couldn't be teleported.

EDIT2: It could be used offensively too. It could be built on a beachhead planet to avoid deep striking and to bring reinforcements when attacking the AIs' home planets.

http://www.arcengames.com/mantisbt/view.php?id=9082
I like this idea
"Inner peace is the void of expectation. It is the absence of our shared desperation to feel a certain way."

Offline TechSY730

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,570
Re: Do harvester upgrades now dominate econ command stations?
« Reply #89 on: August 01, 2012, 11:42:42 am »
My only real objective suggestions are to improve the Mk. II econ and harvester benefit to knowledge ratio (it's rather poor right now), and possibly reduce the benefit to knowledge ratio of the Mk. IIIs (though possibly that could be for harvester Mk. IIIs only). As I mentioned earlier, Mk. III+ units are typically intentionally a bit overpriced in terms of knowledge, to promote diversity and to make "halfway research through a tree" research paths competitively viable (and indeed, more optimal, bar certain circumstances where you need the Mk. III for a specific situation), as part of the whole promoting variety thing. Right now, the econ and harvester unlocks are the other way around, Mk. II giving poor returns for their knowledge cost, but Mk. IIIs giving great returns for their knowledge cost.

Also, fiddling with the numbers to make econ stations Mk. II, say more optimal for 3-12 planets (up from 4-11), and econ station Mk. III more optimal for 4-13 planets (up from 5-12). That home command station "foldouts" for Mk. II and up unlocks of stations would probably help out with that.