Economy of Choice

[Kron]

In summary: they'll be suitably awesome while they're alive, they don't stir up the AI, they don't cost knowledge, they don't increase AI Progress, or anything else.  But they require the finite resource of asteroids, and quite a bit of metal/crystal, and when they're gone, they're gone.  This makes the spirecraft, in essence, trump cards.  Very interesting trump cards.

I think that's a lot more interesting than making them more like golems with heavy ongoing costs, or weaker like starships.  These are something new, and I think people will like it.  There's no reason to fear using these, because not using them is as bad as losing them or not having them to begin with.  So I don't think we'll see people avoiding these like we did with the golems at the start.

I think the aip cost of golems is what made them powerful.. when it only became a matter of picking it up off the street, giving it a new set of clothes and pointing it at stuff to kill.. they became a little lame.

This deceptively-named thread is about AIP costs to certain actions. They used to exist for repairing Golems, but apparently that's been removed.

There's an economic concept called economic efficiency, which comes down to "are you using all the resources you have at your disposal?". Back when Golems used to cost AIP, the choice of whether a player should resurrect a Golem was a real choice.

... Right now, if you have an empire with some rare-mineral asteroids and a few sleeping Golems, then the economically efficient route is to simply convert those asteroids into Spirecraft and wake those Golems up.

I greatly dislike this; the entire point of an economic model is to give the player a smooth spectrum of mutually exclusive choices.

• Metal, Crystal, Energy: All of these have can be used to build defences, build fleetships, build starships.
• Knowledge: Choosing what to unlock with your Knowledge is another tough choice.
• AIP: Various weapons would cost you AIP, and players basically have to weigh the pros and cons of making it easier to win the battle... while making it harder to win the war.

The extra asteroids and the Golems now act as completely separate economies!  

[MaxAstro]

I see your point.

However, as a counterpoint, when Golems cost AIP no one used them.

Partly this was because the benefit/cost was HUGE ("waking" a Golem cost five planets, and any skirmish where the Golem didn't completely dominate cost another planet, at least), admittedly.  But also consider that taking a planet is an AIP expenditure, and you pretty much need to take a planet to wake a golem.  Fabricators also give a pretty substantial boost for no more cost than the AIP of the planet they are one, not to mention ARS and Mark IV Factories.

[Kron]

Agreed! Golem AIP was pretty darn excessive.
But choosing between 50 AIP and 0 AIP is a false dichotomy. Can't we just reduce the AIP cost?

Also there may be other ways to re-integrate the 'expansion micro-economies' back into the main one without using AIP. But I haven't thought of any good ways to do this.

[snrub_guy]

The other downside to golems is the increased AI reinforcement to the world it's on. So it may not have the AI progress cost- something I am very happy with- but it does still have downsides you need to take into account.

[x4000]

Yes -- please don't rail on golems without trying them.  Or spirecraft, for that matter.  You have some points of merit, but they look at such a narrow part of the spectrum that it's completely wrong. 

Metal, crystal, knowledge, and AI Progress aren't the only currencies in the economy here.  We also have one-use or limited-use ships of various sorts (Advanced Factories being the oldest of these -- lose all your advanced factories and it hurts as much as making the AIP go too high).  And there are other costs, such as time (the AI reinforces over time, and sends waves), and stirring-up-of-the-AI (either increasing wave sizes, reinforcement sizes, giving extra reinforcements, or some mix of all of the above).  And lastly, the newest thing we also have is the direct-counterattack cost, which is nontrivial as it can be a way to an early loss.  In the case of the Fallen Spire, that's the event waves.  Spirecraft may get something like that.

In short: don't decry something based on the theory alone, as this game is so freaking complex that usually you're missing the critical elements.  My degree was in business, not computer science, so you don't have to explain basic economics to me.  And, I think I've proved over time I'm not an idiot.  A little trust would be nice.   But skepticism is also healthy, and no one is more skeptical of my ideas than me.  AI War has been really painstakingly built and balanced over time, and a ton of elements that just weren't working have been tossed out outright.  When it comes to something genuinely new and large, there's no way to fully know if it will work until it's been tried.

That is all.

[Kron]

Actually, most of the economics stuff was for other players. No offence, but making a thread isn't just about talking to you... '^^

And while I'll admit that my experience with Golems is lacking, I don't think that means I should automatically shut up. Especially since games of AI War take such a long time; I feel justified in analyzing basic mechanics and throwing out my two cents. Admittedly, you've probably heard these two cents before.


Continuing form a point you made in the 4.037 thread (since I don't particularly want to split this discussion amongst two threads), players tend to be very strategically conservative. This I can see.

I'm not actually sure if AIP is the best way to ground Golems, to be honest. I was considering a separate mechanism where you can choose to either repair the Golem and use it as a warmachine, or scrap its husk for knowledge (since you're doing a careful destructive analysis on it). That would give players a choice too?

I'm going to have to think this through further.

[x4000]

Actually, most of the economics stuff was for other players. No offence, but making a thread isn't just about talking to you... '^^

That's fine, but when it recommends changes to the games (or implies thus), I assume you're talking to me, as other players can't change the game.

And while I'll admit that my experience with Golems is lacking, I don't think that means I should automatically shut up.

No, that's not what I meant either.  But before suggesting sweeping changes to something, I just figured it would make sense to at least look at that thing in game to see what it really was.  Not that I don't want input from you, but there are cheats that easily spawn these, etc, for at least taking a cursory look.

I'm not actually sure if AIP is the best way to ground Golems, to be honest. I was considering a separate mechanism where you can choose to either repair the Golem and use it as a warmachine, or scrap its husk for knowledge (since you're doing a careful destructive analysis on it). That would give players a choice too?

That's true, having them be an alternative way to get knowledge would certainly make them attractive, but I fear that most players would opt for the knowledge since that then paves the way to more renewable ships, rather than something that is gone once used.  Which sort of negates the use of golems at all, once again, except as knowledge caches.

[zebramatt]

I used to feel that Golems were too energy hungry until I routinely started including MkII and III Econ Comm Stations in my unlocks and ZPGs in my Trader purchases / captures - now I got energy coming out of my ears and can often support two or three Golems at a time by the mid to late game.

My only remaining gripe with Golems is that they might be just a little bit too fragile. I can only use them on the front lines due to their nuanced supply mechanic... but if I take my eye off them for even a second they're eaten by Guardians!

I'm not suggesting I should be able to throw them right into the fray and go do something else, mind you. Simply that I be able to actually use them for something without having to make sure they have a clear escape path at all times for fear of them being munched before I can do anything about it.

More health for Golems, I say! 

[x4000]

I think that probably is the ticket -- Guardians changed the landscape enough that the golems fill a different niche now than they did 3 months ago when they were last rebalanced.

[Winter Born]

I used to feel that Golems were too energy hungry until I routinely started including MkII and III Econ Comm Stations in my unlocks and ZPGs in my Trader purchases / captures - now I got energy coming out of my ears and can often support two or three Golems at a time by the mid to late game.

My only remaining gripe with Golems is that they might be just a little bit too fragile. I can only use them on the front lines due to their nuanced supply mechanic... but if I take my eye off them for even a second they're eaten by Guardians!

I'm not suggesting I should be able to throw them right into the fray and go do something else, mind you. Simply that I be able to actually use them for something without having to make sure they have a clear escape path at all times for fear of them being munched before I can do anything about it.

More health for Golems, I say! 

Sounds like a mantis issue so it doesn't get forgotten post LotS release.
See my sig

[x4000]

I love that sig.

I will have to make that my sig, too!

[NickAragua]

Yeah, other than beefing up their health a little bit, I don't really see any reason to tinker majorly with golems. Like others have said, there's already an extra cost associated with them, in the form of increased waves to the planet in question, in addition to the several hundred thousand energy units and ungodly amount of metal/crystal required to repair them. Now, some might think "oh, it's all metal/crystal", keep in mind that you're probably using that metal/crystal to build fleet ships, starships or defenses. If you've got enough surplus that you can just say "ok, let's activate this golem" without even blinking, then you're probably playing at too low a difficulty level anyway.

My one experience with golems so far was kind of unfortunate, I captured a planet with a cursed golem, then got hit elsewhere with some size-2000 AI waves, at which point I forgot about the golem - until I went back to check that planet about half an hour later, and noticed the golem was gone. So I guess I should have set an alert on that system, but it also had two fabricators, and it was pretty much impossible to defend all of them at the same time.

[Kron]

That's true, having them be an alternative way to get knowledge would certainly make them attractive, but I fear that most players would opt for the knowledge since that then paves the way to more renewable ships, rather than something that is gone once used.  Which sort of negates the use of golems at all, once again, except as knowledge caches.

You're probably right, which is why I don't think this can work either. :/

Sorry if I sound like I'm making a big fuss, but I just feel like Spirecraft took the 'niche' that Golems filled (gigantic superweapon / ace-in-the-hole), and I'm not sure how well they'd work together. I think I'll pipe down for a while (at least until you enter the balance phase of development). :$

[Vaos]

Maybe you missed that, but the Spirecraft actually can't be repaired, nor regenerate health. They are one time usage ships.

[TheDeadlyShoe]

I think that probably is the ticket -- Guardians changed the landscape enough that the golems fill a different niche now than they did 3 months ago when they were last rebalanced.

Some of the Golems also have weaker Guardian versions now (Zombie and Tractor, for example). That plus the starshippy nature of Guardians means Golems are basically mk VI guardians. Of course the trick there is that the player can use golems but not guardians.

I think Golems could generally stand to be more badass, specifically tougher. As it stands some of the Spire fleet ships seem to be as tough individual targets as weaker Golems. The notable exception seems to be the Black Widow Golem, which is both a.) tough and b.) hella annoying.   I don't use many golems myself - not for lack of trying. The Energy cost is really rough. I only first used a Botnet a couple weeks ago, and I don't think I've ever used an Armored or Cursed. But I usually have a Golemite in my games because I find it to be the most interesting 'Vanilla' AI.... so I have a lot of experience fighting individual AI golems.

Regenerator golems are really fun but I'm not sure theyre... useful, specifically.  Well, they're niche - they don't specifically do much you can't accomplish with a frontline spacedock or even Enclave starship. They can keep up captured ships, or mk iv/v far from their factory, which is hella sweet. And they synergize well with low-hp units like space planes and deflector drones.   But general creep in unit HP, introduction of Guardians, and several other things have left them kinda weak relatively.  Ai Regenerators run out of hp REALLY REALLY FAST owing to the player doing way more damage to the ai than vice versa which is kinda terrible, since they have so much less hp in the first place.

Artillery Golems were kinda pantsed by the evolution of the Dreadnought into the Siege Starship.  It needs more gimmicks, like doing 100 million damage to forcefield and EMP shock to everything near where it hits. Something like that. Also: more hitpoints. Artillery and Botnet golems are both very fragile but for players their weakness is gimmicked away by forcefields. Particularly for botnets. Both golems could be a lot tougher while remaining balanced, if they were unable to benefit from forcefields. Lowering Golem speed a bit might also help keep higher HP balanced.

Armored Golems are theoretically tough but in the AIs hands useless since players will always hard counter them. Or just use Spire ships on them - Armored are just kicked in the pants by photon cannons, its not even fair.