The "One planet project" - what could we improve in gamelogic

  • Greatings to ya all :)


    I set out to test the gamelogic behind the Ogame and decided to make a test using only one planet, and see what limitations it would present and what suggestions for gamelogic improvements it might yield.


    It took me less than a week to hit the first limitation: no more fields on the main planet.




    By now I have used the standard terraforming to level 8 and the logic would be to pay an additional 12,8 mio crystal, 25,6 mio deuterium and use 256.000 energy units from my Gravition research.


    In addition to be very expensive it is also a limited solution, because the extra five planet fields would be used in no time. The next step would then be to invest in an additional 256.000 energy units (plus the additional resources), and that is where the gamelogic ends on my part.


    When a new player enters the universe, the planet should at least have a sufficient size to provide a LONG PERIOD OF GAMETIME before fields becomes an issue. And since it is possible to find bigger planets by colonization, it would be the only gamelogic, that the MAIN planet is of maximum size.


    Furthermore research options are needed for players to keep wanting to play Ogame, where the limitation in planetsize will end up making some new players leave the game.


    Proposal for changing the gamelogic would be:


    a) the main planet must be of the maximum size available to find during colonization

    b) every level of Energy technology researched above level 12 will add additional fields to every level of Terraformer build (could be one or more extra fields)


    Gamelogic buildings (planet)


    The cost of a building should reflect the value it adds to the account, and not simply a progressive cost as it is for each level build now.


    Buildings NOT adding to additional value beside basic value should be continued as it is now, but buildings as e.g. Missile Silo and Terraformer should be the same cost per level, because new levels do not add value to the account as such (same number of rockets and planet fields per level ought to be same basic cost per building level).


    Alliance Depot is a dead-end feature and should be removed from the gamedesign (userinterface) or adding value to the account and be placed in orbit like the Space Dock.


    Gamelogic buildings (moon)


    The creation of a moon comes form the debris field (DF), which should REDUCE the debris field by the same amount, that the moon is made out of. Hence reducing the DF when a moon is made or leaving the DF as maximum DF when no moon is created.


    The DF should likewise be reduced by the % of ships in the wreckage salvageable by the Space Dock (e.g. The DF should be reduced by the percentage of each level build in the Space Dock before the DF is used for the construction of the moon - it makes no sense, that the DF can result in a moon, salvage of destroyed ships AND a maximum amount of debris collected by the recyclers).


    The moon buildings for storage adds no value to the game and should NOT be possible to build on a moon, whereas Nanite Factory makes good sense to ADD to the moon buildings).


    As the gamelogic mentioned for planetary fields, the same missing logic can apply to the moon. Each level of Lunar Base should cost the same.


    Gamelogic production.


    Old accounts have an advantage that makes every universe a dead-end programming, because there are no limitations build-in in the game.


    In the real world mines are depleted and an upkeep for maintenance is required. This should be adapted to the gamelogic, so an universe never becomes obsolete and increasing the chance for new accounts to battle for top positions.


    As inspiration for improvement in gamelogic.


    A) mines have a basic waste that can be reduced by a new mine research optimizing the mine-output

    b) a mine loses production output over time forcing the players to build new mines and/or abandoned the planet in search of new production on new planets

    c) mines must have a basic cost for maintenance, which can be reduced by a new research which also in turn can add to automated repair functionality for the buildings on the planet (automated maintenance feature).


    Maintenance costs should apply to all types of buildings, fleet and defenses.


    Gamelogic resources.


    When scrapping fleet and defenses the option of using the Scrap Merchant is available, but when deconstructing buildings this is done at a cost minus 4% costreduction achieved through each level of Ion Technology researched.


    This makes no sense and the gamelogic must be aligned to comply to both deconstruction (scrap) of buildings, fleet and defenses.


    As for resources the game handles own production plus raids from other planets. Here the gamelogic is inconsistent to, because a fleet can fill its cargo in an instant, when attacking a planet or moon.


    The loading and unloading of resources should be timeconsuming, hence adding time to the total flight. This would also make the game more interesting, because the fleet can be attached while loading/unloading.


    Fuelconsumption should be recalculated when and if a fleet is recalled, returning unused deuterium to storage (deuterium consumption should be calculated as deuterium per time unit - time left after recall of a fleet yields the deuterium returned to storage).


    An random factor could also be used to increase the tactical aspects of the gamelogic, which could be a random on espionage giving not the exact values but a randomized approximately value. Same basic randomfactor could be applied to "battle time", which would make a battle between ships and/or defenses take a random period of time, as it is also applying to the expeditions, sometimes resulting in longer flight and late arrival of the fleet.


    Well I think that's just about it. It was a different way of playing Ogame and I guess there is a reason for players having more than one planet :D

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Neutron ().

  • I'm interested in what you have built on the planet that has already used up all the fields so quickly?

    Ong7Kn6.png
    SGO - Bellatrix & Quantum & Oberon & Cosmos & Vega & Janice
    Specific In game issue? Please use the ticket system

  • You can abandon your main planet at any time and colonize another instead of it. Although I like the idea with over 12th level of energy tech to add 1 bonus field to the terraformer:)


    I don't really care about the cost of missile silo:) As for alliance depot, i remember them(GF) saying, it's a pain in the leg to remove it, so it's better to leave it as it is. Better focus programming resources for other updates.


    Makes sense to remove the DF from which was the moon created. As for Space Dock - it rebuilds ships from the other chunk of DF. For example. In an universe of 50% df, after a fleet is crashed you are able to collect 50% of the total (metal+crystal) cost of the ships involved. Space Dock will be able (depending on the level, but practically impossible) to rebuild up to 50% of the ships lost by the defender. So it does not rebuild from the DF, but from the other, lost, half.


    Moon storage - same story as depot.


    If the buildings on the moon won't increase the cost and you'd also have nanites accessible on the moon, there will be some turtled up moons in the end, which would be practically impossible to pop, which would make one of the main features of the game (MD) obsolete.


    Mines.


    If you make the mines deplete, then there should be some end-of-life for ships, after a certain time of usage..


    But no - thank you.




    totally on board with building scrapping.

    Nah, I don’t watch porn when I probe Parsec

  • Silverwind


    What type of buildings players decide to focus on is a question of gamestyle I guess. In my case its:



    alex stukov


    You have a valid argument for the repair of ships from DF. Good point.

    As for the changes to the UI (user interface) it should not take more than a couple of minuts to remove the Depot and Storage (moon) for a skilled programmer. As to the posibility of abandon the main planet, I fully aware of the possibilities - but it does not make sence in terms of gamelogic, that the first a player has to do, is to abandon the default planet ;) Thanks for your comments.

    The post was edited 2 times, last by Neutron ().

  • As for the changes to the UI (user interface) it should not take more than a couple of minuts to remove the Depot and Storage (moon) for a skilled programmer. As to the posibility of abandon the main planet, I fully aware of the possibilities - but it does not make sence in terms of gamelogic, that the first a player has to do, is to abandon the default planet ;) Thanks for your comments.

    Well .. maybe there aren't a lot of skilled... you know what... never mind :D :D


    As for the gamelogic - it makes perfect sense to abandon the main planet. It's a cosmic conquest game. You are born on one planet, you screw that planet and you leave it behind in exchange of new worlds.

    What type of buildings players decide to focus on is a question of gamestyle I guess. In my case its:

    You have also the possibility to buy additional fields on your planet/moon if you like. And don't you think it's more logical to adapt your strategy to the game play than to adapt the game play to everybodys strategy... ? I mean - if I raid the same inactive, my ships should move faster, because the pilots already know the directions to it xD


    As seen on your screenshot I can say the following:


    You can limit your solar plant to level 25. The rest of the energy can be obtained by solar satellites and fusion reactor with good energy tech.

    You definitely don't need Shipyard 15.

    You don't need Robo Factory 15.

    You don't need Crystal Storage 13.

    Nah, I don’t watch porn when I probe Parsec

  • alex stukov


    Quote

    "if I raid the same inactive, my ships should move faster, because the pilots already know the directions to it xD"

    Though I know the way to work, it doesn´t make my car any faster or the route shorter :D

    Thanks for your advice on the buildings - it was not the main purpose of the test to make the best combination of buildings, but simply test basic gamelogic :thumbsup:

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Neutron ().

  • Neutron have you considered scaling back robo and shipyards in favor of higher nanites?


    In one Uni (Speed x6/x7) I have Robo 10, Ship 12, and Nanite 10. This allows 1 second build for all ships, except Death Star 2:19 and seems more efficient...I haven't calculated here but if it's close then that can free up some space. Should work out the same speeds here in Quantum?


    You could also free up some space with removing some solar plants and going fussion or sats or combination of both?


    This is a very interesting little project. :biggrin:

    Ong7Kn6.png
    SGO - Bellatrix & Quantum & Oberon & Cosmos & Vega & Janice
    Specific In game issue? Please use the ticket system

  • Silverwind


    If I didn´t run full speed (to see how fast it could be done) and saved ressources for a plan, I guess I would have focused more on nanite and less on robot factory also combining solar with fusion. But again a new account doesn´t have the necessary techs for effective usage of fusion nor production capacity - I have used "time" as a scale for the build-up of the planet.

    I will however redo the entire project on a new and bigger planet. It was just for fun and to test the gamelogics.

    And if reflection on the building time for ships: how come that we cannot build more ships per second. Where is the logic, that a probe and a destroyer both takes 1 sec to build :D Would be nice if the capacity was ship ressource units per second enabling us to produce more ships per second.

  • Oh , I agree, that's silly the 1 sec is minimum. In the US community there was a movement underway at some point to change it to multiple ships in 1 second...bascally a guy came along and said why can't we build 10 LF instead of 1 in comparison to a destroyer.


    I guess back in the old x1x1 Universes that Ogame first created they probably did not dream of nanite 10 in x6 Universes :P


    But I see your speed method and understand, and I am making notes.


    Where this seems sort of interesting is the possibility of getting a new account in a new universe going and strongly built quickly.

    Ong7Kn6.png
    SGO - Bellatrix & Quantum & Oberon & Cosmos & Vega & Janice
    Specific In game issue? Please use the ticket system

  • the thing that Realy peeves me off, is the Return on investment of mines, Less and Less Each time.

    your mine output needs to be 1.5x more in growth.

    eg. your next level of Deut mine will Provide 30,000 per hour.
    it needs to be 45,000 per hour considering i just invested 2.500.000.000 Metal/800.000.000 Crystal Resource on it.

  • That's how the game stops people from just running away with it tho - every incremental improvement costs more and delivers less. Otherwise once a player takes a lead that lead just grows exponentially (assuming identically decent play from both the leader and the people chasing them)

  • i disagree, there should be the option for miners to compete with Fleeters.

    fleeters can amass fleet at a 1:1 Ratio from 1 unit up to 2 Billion Units.

    us miners have Less Return on our investments where as im only getting a ratio of


    1:0.079 for my investment

  • Guys, really? Make the mines more productive in order for miners to be able to compete with fleeters?

    Do you really think fleeters don’t build mines?)

    Nah, I don’t watch porn when I probe Parsec

  • Guys, really? Make the mines more productive in order for miners to be able to compete with fleeters?

    Do you really think fleeters don’t build mines?)

    we all know that, but fleet is really much cheaper.

    and who are the fleets flying to? mostly only miner

  • Guys, really? Make the mines more productive in order for miners to be able to compete with fleeters?

    Do you really think fleeters don’t build mines?)

    we all know that, but fleet is really much cheaper.

    and who are the fleets flying to? mostly only miner

    fleeters are actually even more miners than miners themselves, as they mine not only their own mines... :)

    Nah, I don’t watch porn when I probe Parsec

  • Older accounts have a leg up on the field size if they were made in the old design vs redesign. I have some planets with 300+ fields and that's before terraforming.

    I already have 300 fields :), with the new design:biggrin:

  • Guys, really? Make the mines more productive in order for miners to be able to compete with fleeters?

    Do you really think fleeters don’t build mines?)

    we all know that, but fleet is really much cheaper.

    and who are the fleets flying to? mostly only miner

    fleeters are actually even more miners than miners themselves, as they mine not only their own mines... :)

    it's true somehow, only they can resort to more resources