Author Topic: So, Enclave Starships  (Read 9811 times)

Offline Radiant Phoenix

  • Sr. Member Mark II
  • ****
  • Posts: 362
Re: So, Enclave Starships
« Reply #30 on: April 23, 2013, 10:19:40 pm »
I currently use the Mk1 very often in the late game, but I usually don't unlock higher marks, unless I've already unlocked all four relevant Mk2 turrets. And then I discovered that the Mk3 requires Mk3 turrets. :_(

If they automatically came with a full complement of drones unlocked, I would probably get the sub-IV marks eventually.

Being able to give separate orders for the rally and the ship itself would be really nice too, but wouldn't change my decision on whether to unlock it.

Also, if the drones could go through wormholes...

I like the automatic production idea, though.

Offline Aeson

  • Full Member Mark II
  • ***
  • Posts: 176
Re: So, Enclave Starships
« Reply #31 on: April 23, 2013, 10:27:16 pm »
Mark IV split:
I don't really see much point to it, at least for me. When I build enclaves, they generally just end up as Spacedocks that I can more easily relocate, that also can provide a minor military force to whatever system they're in. I generally don't use drones, and I don't usually use enclaves for supporting fleets away from home, so aside from increasing the energy costs of having the full set of enclave starships it doesn't really do anything with how I play the game.


Cost reduction:
1000 knowledge less is nice but doesn't really matter on an 18000 knowledge investment - even at 17000 knowledge it's 6 worlds for just mobile production facilities. Shifting the final cost from 14000 knowledge to 12000 knowledge is more useful, since that's a change from 5 worlds of knowledge to four worlds. I think that the problem is more that if you want to open up the full enclave line and get something worthwhile for the last 12000 knowledge (14000 currently), you're essentially asking players to increase the number of planets they take by about 50% to 100% in a non-superweapon game, assuming that normal levels of conquest involve taking 6 to 12 worlds on an 80-planet map. That, or knowledge-hack enough planets to get enough knowledge.

I think that most of the problem people have with Enclave IVs is that, in 'normal' games, it very nearly looks like you can either unlock the ships you'd be able to build out of the Enclave IV, or you can unlock the Enclave IVs. If the expected number of worlds taken in a normal game is 6 to 12 planets, this isn't likely to change unless knowledge costs of either Mk III fleetships and turrets or the Enclaves themselves is significantly reduced (note that I haven't played since 6.016, so if the knowledge costs of any of these has gone down since then this might not be particularly applicable). Let's assume that you'd normally unlock 2-4 Mk III fleetships in a game. That's 17000-34000 knowledge, or 2-7 planets and the homeworld (assuming you unlocked both Mk II and Mk III), and most likely you'll have other unlocks that you'd get in a 'normal' game which bring you to your 6-12 total occupied planets. Since most likely you only take about as many planets as you need for knowledge for your 'normal' game (enough to cover fleet unlocks, economy upgrades, and extra defenses), we probably have no more than 3000 spare knowledge by the time we have our 6 to 12 worlds. If Mark III fleetships cost 4000 knowledge apiece rather than the 6000 current, then we're looking at having an extra 4000-8000 knowledge in a 'normal' game, which makes the Enclave IV much more reachable at its current cost, since if we've got this 'extra' 4000-8000 knowledge we're only looking at 3 or 4 extra planets to take (or raid) rather than 6 extra planets (possibly less, since we might have that 'spare' 3000-ish knowledge), or at skimping a little on the defensive/economy unlocks.

So basically I feel that a large part of the Enclave IV's problems would be solved by making Fleetship IIIs cost less knowledge. Reducing the turret unlock costs would also help for people who like drones, but I don't really care one way or the other about drones. Spreading the knowledge cost of the Enclave line around a little more would also help, as saving up that last 14000 is a lot less tempting when I could instead take more forcefields or better harvesters or more turrets or more ships before I ever save up enough knowledge. It's kind of like looking at real-world purchasing habits - I might not be willing to spend $50-$100 dollars on a game all at once, but a $40 base game followed with two $20 expansions and the handful of $5-$10 mini-expansions/DLCs spread out over a year or two? Same with knowledge unlocks - I'd sooner take several unlocks for 2000 to 6000 knowledge as I gain the knowledge than save for one unlock at 14000.


Cloaking/Brave toggle:
Sure, why not. I usually leave them at home anyways, but having cloaking and a 'brave' toggle can't hurt.

Automatic Drone Production:
As long as there's a way to turn it off without shutting off the entire enclave, I'm fine with it. I can think of situations where I might not want drones spawning but I do want to make use of the Enclave as mobile production facilities (mostly, when I'm hugging the energy brownout line to spare my economy from the costs of more than the absolute minimum number of matter converters I can run the fleet on, or if there's something I don't want to wake up on the planet and I don't want to bother with catching the drones when they spawn).
« Last Edit: April 23, 2013, 10:28:50 pm by Aeson »

Offline chemical_art

  • Core Member Mark IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,952
  • Fabulous
Re: So, Enclave Starships
« Reply #32 on: April 24, 2013, 07:50:27 am »
Still liking drones be produced automatically, which can be somehow toggled off if desired. This, combined with the potential turret K reduction, would cause me to resume using enclaves like I once did.

Life is short. Have fun.

Offline Kahuna

  • Core Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,222
  • Kahuna Matata!
Re: So, Enclave Starships
« Reply #33 on: April 24, 2013, 08:29:13 am »
2) Set K cost from 0/2000/2000/14000 => 0/1000/2000/2000/12000
No one will ever pay 12k K for anything. Could as well just remove it from the game.

My suggestions:
#1. 0/1000/1500/2000/9000
#2. 0/1000/2500/4000/5500
#3. 0/2000/3000/4000/5000
#4. 0/1500/3000/4500/6000
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 chemical_art

  • Core Member Mark IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,952
  • Fabulous
Re: So, Enclave Starships
« Reply #34 on: April 24, 2013, 08:58:22 am »
2) Set K cost from 0/2000/2000/14000 => 0/1000/2000/2000/12000
No one will ever pay 12k K for anything. Could as well just remove it from the game.

My suggestions:
#1. 0/1000/1500/2000/9000
#2. 0/1000/2500/4000/5500
#3. 0/2000/3000/4000/5000
#4. 0/1500/3000/4500/6000

Considering you need to spend, at least, 2.25k in additional cost for the cheapest mk III drone, and a whopping 7k (!) for the most expensive drone, in addition to the 12k for the IV, and it is clear that you are spending borderline superweapon K costs for...nenzul younglings lights.

In general, the ratio of K spent to power needs to be brought down dramatically. The base cost of the enclave IV and on average 5k per drone to unlock the needed per drone means, to unlock all the IV drones and the IV enclave, you need a whopping 32 K to fully unlock the nenzul enclave

The changes to enclaves are tied very, very strongly to the K costs of turrets.


For reference, with 32k, you can unlock the mk III's of flagship, zenith, spire, raid, parasite, siege, and bomber starships. I think it is clear which is more useful if you don't need the turrets.

To put it another way, with 32k, with careful planning I can win non superweapon games.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2013, 09:12:21 am by chemical_art »
Life is short. Have fun.

Offline Diazo

  • Master Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,717
  • I love/hate Diff 10
Re: So, Enclave Starships
« Reply #35 on: April 24, 2013, 11:10:40 am »
Okay, while interesting I don't see anything here that addresses what is (IMO) the core issue with the Enclave.

The Enclave is a mobile space dock that does not require supply and so is designed for operations away from human space.

What's this? Deep Strike counter threat?

Well, I guess I'm not using the Enclave.

For me to commit enough K to unlock higher level Enclaves (at any sort of K cost that is remotely balanced), the Enclaves need to be able to support an independent fleet far enough away from my worlds that it is not cheaper (in K and/or M+C) to simply carve a path and rebuild the ships I lose from the Space Docks in my territory.

The drones, the building units faster, and any other bells and whistles the Enclave gets are simply band-aids and workarounds to justify the unit's existence.

I'm not really sure what to say here. Has enough other buffs gone in (Special Forces, Strategic Reserve) that the Deep Strike response can be looked at?

Barring that, the Enclave very much feels like it simply doesn't 'fit' in the game to me.

D.

Offline KDR_11k

  • Hero Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 904
Re: So, Enclave Starships
« Reply #36 on: April 24, 2013, 11:16:47 am »
Also intra warp gates give enough ability to relocate your production within friendly space.

What we need to look at is what the Enclave should be: A mobile reinforcement system or basically a swarm deployment system.

For the former I'd suggest dropping the Enclave's marks completely, you already paid a ton of K to get those higher mark units, a mobile production facility is not valuable enough to warrant extra costs. Your space docks can make all three basic marks, why not let the Enclave do the same?

For the latter I'd suggest installing transport bays on the Enclave that newly produced units go into so you can unleash them all at once like a Hive Golem. Especially since the Enclave seems designed around self-attritioning units this would make a lot of sense.

With the whole drone talk we're basically repurposing the Enclave as a Carrier ship with its minions. Is that perhaps the intention? In that case perhaps make the transport bays also act as a Neinzul Regeneration Chamber?

Offline Hearteater

  • Core Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,334
Re: So, Enclave Starships
« Reply #37 on: April 24, 2013, 11:37:28 am »
I also feel the Enclave doesn't really fit.  I don't need a mobile ship yard really, and if I did, it would be better suited as a single-mark ship.  I like the drones, but I think ultimately it is really feeling like two different ships.  The "hive golem lite" Enclave actually sounds pretty appealing.

Offline contingencyplan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
Re: So, Enclave Starships
« Reply #38 on: April 24, 2013, 02:05:00 pm »
Yeah, I think that a better idea is to shift the Enclave to a modular support / beachhead unit, similar to how Riots are a modular assault / crowd-control unit. Higher marks have more modules, and all of them can build MkI - MkIII units. Split out MkIV stuff to a separate unlock (I'd say make it a building) for, say, 6 - 12k, and do the same for ASFs. That way each can be balanced separately --- the cost of MkIVs without capturables and the front-line reinforcements / drones / support, since those are very different goals with very different balance points.

(Aside: splitting out the rebuildable MkIV would also make it easier to work with if the extended hacking mechanic comes to pass --- hack a MkIV / ASF to essentially unlock the unit for a hacking cost rather than a knowledge cost, without having to futz with Enclaves at all.)

You could have the enclaves able to build MkIV units when the building is unlocked or possibly just as long as the player controls a unit that has MkIV production capabilities if you really wanted.

For drones, if a keybinding could be added that turned off releasing drones, then have a "drone bay" module to permit the mini-hive behavior. While drone release was disabled, drones would be built up to the module's capacity; enabling drones again would "RELEASE THE HOUNDS DRONES!"

A "Regen Chamber" module might work, but 1) I expect it'd be trickier to implement than Keith would want to take on; and 2) with the exception of MkIV / MkV, it's faster to just crank out another one since they're so cheap.

For the build-speed increase, you could make that a module as well --- Enclaves have standard construction speed, but modules can be added that increase it, so you have to choose whether you want more reinforcements or other supporting behaviors.

Another idea would be a repair-arm module, with higher marks unlocked by unlocking engineers, since I saw that engineers were fairly high in the poll thread (though I haven't gotten very far in the thread itself). I know that's horning in on the MRS's turf, but honestly I've never unlocked them or much seen a point to them, so I'm not too upset about that. I'm sure somebody else feels differently, but perhaps this would suit their needs as well? If nothing else, the MRS would still have a purpose, since the player would have to choose between repair arms and other supporting behaviors (especially drones) and likely wouldn't be able to put 20 repair arms together anyways.

One final idea while I'm thinking about it: a mini-speed / armor / firepower boosting module. Doesn't have to be a major boost, just something like 10 - 20%, but serves as a planet-wide boost. Similarly, you could have a mini-attrition / mini-anti-attrition that gradually harms / heals enemy / ally ships on the planet. Some of these should probably require a "large" module that's only available on higher mk Enclaves, but an interesting thought from a "support the team" standpoint.

Offline keith.lamothe

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,505
Re: So, Enclave Starships
« Reply #39 on: April 24, 2013, 02:22:45 pm »
Given that some people do actually enjoy the unit as it is I don't want to re-invent it into a modular thing if I can avoid it (so if I wanted to go the auto-drone route I'd have them spawn directly from the enclave, no module step necessary).  If folks want an additional type of modular starship (which many have expressed over the years, which is part of the reason for the Spire Corvette) that's a separate issue.

It may be better to move the drones to a separate ship type (and do the mini-hive-golem idea... though I confess that now sounds like a balance problem waiting to happen, though I guess everything interesting is that to some extent) and just collapse the neinzul enclave starship to 2 marks: 1 that starts unlocked that produces mk I/II/III and also IV if you have an advFact, and a second mark with the normal cumulative K cost that produces all 4 regardless of AdvFact.

Though I wonder if the ability to pay obscene K cost to get a "replaceable advFact" really matters anymore?  Y'all keep telling me how you'll never pay that much K for it ;)
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 TechSY730

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,570
Re: So, Enclave Starships
« Reply #40 on: April 24, 2013, 02:34:52 pm »
(...)and just collapse the neinzul enclave starship to 2 marks: 1 that starts unlocked that produces mk I/II/III and also IV if you have an advFact, and a second mark with the normal cumulative K cost that produces all 4 regardless of AdvFact.

Though I wonder if the ability to pay obscene K cost to get a "replaceable advFact" really matters anymore?  Y'all keep telling me how you'll never pay that much K for it ;)

Does this mean that the Mk. I version will no longer be pre-unlocked? That would give a reason to make the mercenary version more attractive. (I guess the mercenary version would also then reflect the Mk. I rather than the Mk. II version)

Well, presumably, the net "obscene K cost" will go down now that there are only two tiers.
Unless you plan on adding in the old Mk. III cost and the (old Mk. II cost - new Mk. I cost) into the knowledge costs, in which case, yes, we still would not pay for it.
10000 + (1000 to 2000 for Mk. I) cost total seems much closer to reasonable than the current 10000 + however much it takes to unlock previous marks cost.

Though there still is the issue of Mk. IV fleet ships not really being all that important in terms of getting what you need to win the game (You can usually make do with up to Mk. I-III fleet ships + Mk. I starships or even Mk. I-II fleetships + Mk. I-II starships), so maybe the cost should go down some more still beyond what merely removing the previous marks imply.

Offline keith.lamothe

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,505
Re: So, Enclave Starships
« Reply #41 on: April 24, 2013, 02:36:25 pm »
Bouncing back and forth and haven't read it all yet, but I was amused:

Quote
(...)1 that starts unlocked

Does this mean that the Mk. I version will no longer be pre-unlocked?

:)
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 Hearteater

  • Core Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,334
Re: So, Enclave Starships
« Reply #42 on: April 24, 2013, 02:40:38 pm »
Though I wonder if the ability to pay obscene K cost to get a "replaceable advFact" really matters anymore?  Y'all keep telling me how you'll never pay that much K for it ;)
I don't think I'll every pay for this.  Honestly, if it was free, I probably would still not use it very often.  Because I don't use Mark III ships very often, so I can't even produce Mark IVs.  Realistically, the resource costs of Mark III+ is often too high on 8 planets, even with Harvester IIIs, to keep up an aggressive pace.  So I save K and don't unlock Mark IIIs, which means I don't have access to Mark IVs.

Mark IV Starships though, they are workable, because of how infrequently I need to rebuild them.

Offline orzelek

  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,096
Re: So, Enclave Starships
« Reply #43 on: April 24, 2013, 02:44:38 pm »
Looking at recent discussions about rarity of actual Mk III unlocks... I don't see how would you pay additional 15K+ for being able to build what you unlocked anywhere.
For people that bother to get and defend Mk IV factory - they will unlock more toys for that K to defend it.
Ones that don't bother with Mk IV... don't need it anyway.

Offline TechSY730

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,570
Re: So, Enclave Starships
« Reply #44 on: April 24, 2013, 02:51:02 pm »
Though I wonder if the ability to pay obscene K cost to get a "replaceable advFact" really matters anymore?  Y'all keep telling me how you'll never pay that much K for it ;)
I don't think I'll every pay for this.  Honestly, if it was free, I probably would still not use it very often.  Because I don't use Mark III ships very often, so I can't even produce Mark IVs.  Realistically, the resource costs of Mark III+ is often too high on 8 planets, even with Harvester IIIs, to keep up an aggressive pace.  So I save K and don't unlock Mark IIIs, which means I don't have access to Mark IVs.

Mark IV Starships though, they are workable, because of how infrequently I need to rebuild them.

Ah yes, the diminishing returns thing hits hard with Mk. IV.
It turns out that the resource cost increases at a higher "rate"/slope over mark than the power increase, making each mark up a worse and worse deal.
More concretely:
Mk. II has roughly 2x the "utility" of Mk. I, and 2x the cost
Mk. III has roughly 3x the "utility" of Mk. I, and 4x the cost
Mk. IV has roughly 4x the "utility" of Mk. I, and 6x the cost
Mk. V has roughly 5x the "utility" of Mk. I, and 8x the cost


From what I know, this was an intentional design choice, though I wonder if it was taken a bit too far. (Would a slope for "utility" remaing at 1x but bumping down the slope for cost from 2x to 1.5x for >= Mk. III (leaving Mk. I at 1x cost and Mk. II at 2x, but taking down Mk. III to 3x cost, Mk. IV to 4.5x, and MK. V to 6x) be good?

This also explains why many players seem to be happier about Mk. IV starships, even though they follow the same "utility" and cost curves.
Turns out, there is actually one place in the current metagame for normal "base game" offensive stuff where durability makes a statistical difference, resource costs. The more durable it is, the less likely you will lose it, and thus, the less important construction are on average because you will be rebuilding them less. (Yes, construction costs factor into repair costs, but at a .25x repair rate or whatever it is right now, that doesn't matter nearly as much)


EDIT: And of course, there is the whole issue of usually not needing Mk. IV fleetships to win. You can usually do it with just Mk. I-III or even Mk. I-II if you throw in some Mk. II starships as well. (see my previous post)
« Last Edit: April 24, 2013, 02:55:51 pm by TechSY730 »