Posts by Godiva

    Think out of the box?

    Destroy your Moon. Chance at DM based on size of moon. Or maybe just moons destroyed on missions. Low amount since it was a low amount of res that goes into a moon.

    Give up a planet. Chance at DM based on amount of economy on that planet. This is to people from spam colonizing and giving up worlds.

    Add it as an option in the auction or I/E.

    All (outside of HW) were 255 plus when I got them with 8 of them 300+ because I am old enough that I got them before the redesign and lower limits. I know I should drop and rebuild my HW but it pains me to lose that much time and effort not to mention the point drop. So not a problem of fields but a question of long term planning and not wanting to keep things in inventory for no purpose.

    Moon slots are the same thing, I personally would prefer more bronzes so I could spread out the boost to multiple moons then to have one moon with a ton of empty slots while I am building more LB on the other ones.

    Variety is the spice of life.

    Now that the events have been running for some time I would like to see some more variety in the types of rewards.


    Typical one is a platinum planet booster for +20 fields. Almost every event has one of these.

    Why not 5 bronze for an event?

    My reasoning: I have put platinum boosters on the planets I need them on. I can't stack the same level of booster so any additional ones either just stay in my inventory or go to planets that already have plenty of fields. It also means that players have more options to spread out the reward.

    Same could be said for many other boosters. I would accept 4 bronze boosters in the place of 1 platinum every now and then to have some variety. It could be argued unless you putting boosters on every planet, splitting up a single 40% worth of boost is safer from a production standpoint because you don't have one outlying planet that needs to be resourced saved on a different schedule then the rest.


    I think people get to caught up on trying to finish these events as fast as possible, when you don't get any better rewards if you finish on day 11 (shortest possible) or day 14.

    For perspective you can get a maximum of 14,000 tritium without officers (16800 with officers) and your need 12500 . So 1500 spare from the low end value. That is:

    15 events worth 100 or

    7 events worth 200 or

    5 events worth 300 or

    Or some combination of these.

    You need to average 893 per day. So miss a 100 event every day and you still finish in time (again even easier when you have officers). If you don't miss any event on a given day your average required for the rest of the event drops even lower.

    Some of the old hands can correct me if I'm wrong but on the switch from 2 to 1.75 for astro we didn't lose points. I think the game just looks at your action at the time of completion and either adds or subtracts from a tally you have. It's not actively looking at everything you have and seeing their current values and all past levels are.

    How will the new overtake the old (assuming they are both active) they are both using the same system.

    It the exact same as when the eco speeds change. You wouldn't say someone who started after the eco switch is going to overtake him in a year or two. They are now just both running at a faster speed.

    It means that if the old took 3 years to reach 100mil points (starting at beginning of universe) it will take the new guy 2 years. The old guy still has however many years of a head start.

    The technocrat idea relies on people still putting out DM to get the benefit, and is felt across the breadth of research. My requires no DM spent and is focused on the worst offenders for research time. Most research is fine to take a week or a month. Plasma is taking 16. Astro is taking 115 weeks. You don't need to speed up the first set. Thou maybe more researches are put on the multiplier plan as universe gets older.

    I would like to discuss having certain multipliers reduced on a predictable schedule as a universe ages.

    I propose this to increase activity in the universes. As regardless of playing styles researches become some of the largest expenditures for a player and the time to perform the research (without the DM bypass) is a long road.

    This is how it would happen (Precise numbers of course up for review).

    Universe opens with all multipliers at 2

    1st Anniversary chosen researches multipliers go down to 1.95

    2nd down to 1.90

    3rd 1.85

    4th 1.80

    5th 1.75 (current)

    6th and on go down by .02 instead

    This means that by year 18th of a universe the multipler 1.49

    What is the effect of this?

    This lowers the entry barrier to older universes.

    New players can quickly perform research at lower cost compared to when the older players did it. This means that they can gain points quickly, and become more viable players.

    Older Players can advance further as the cost of those limiting researches is lowered.

    By having a schedule players can plan accordingly.

    Now the question which researches

    Astro: Of course because this is the largest research people will have.

    Collectors like it because easier to get another planet.

    Discovers like it because it will be easier to get that next square for an additional slot

    Generals like it because it means you can have another mobile planet which represents less of your overall production.

    Miners like it because more planets

    Raiders like it because it should produce more inactives in the long term.

    Fleeters like it because it will mean larger chance of finding a fleet in range.

    Plasma: Another large investment but I will admit this helps Collectors/Miners most

    Computer: Might not be the largest but this one helps Generals/Discovers/Raider more then Miners/Collectors so it is more to balance out.

    Anything else?

    Questions on how the planet booster works.

    The helps says only one can be active on a planet at a time, fair enough.

    It you can't overwrite a stronger booster with a weaker one, again fair enough cause what if those fields are now filled how would that work.

    But what happens with the overwritten booster (i.e you have a gold active on a planet, you activate a platinum).

    Does the old one just disappear? Did you just pay x amount of DM for the old booster that has now gone up in smoke?

    Trying to plan my use of the boosters and if it is worth it to get anything less than a platinum.

    If you need to poison pill someone else's choice to get your to pass it's not a good choice.

    None of these choices require the others to function as intended (they are all sever-able to use the judicial terminology) so they should be voted on their individual merit.

    Individual votes, let the chips fall as they may.

    Yes but between auctions, reward events, expos (even non discoverer ones), import/export you can build up quite a supply without needing to purchase any. I have 390 hrs without spending a single DM on them, just saving them for the right research for the last year. And that's where my change in percentages comes in. Now assuming it is % of original, not % of remaining time left:

    I have 390 hrs of boosters saved up between all the levels (16.25 days). Not even a 2 % of my next astro level. So no point in using them there, it's a rounding error in this format.

    The OP would say I have up to 99% of 3.35 researches saved up if I use them in the right order (Plat--Gold--Sil--Bronze). I can do 3 levels of astro (if I have the resources available) without spending a single DM

    My version I still have up to 99% of 2.63 researches saved up if I use them in the right order (Plat--Gold--Sil--Bronze) I can do 2 levels of astro (if I have the resources available) without spending a single DM.

    Now the type of researches you are doing that require boosts are not save for a few days and then start. They are month's long planning. So it's just another part of the research save. If you make it to generous, GF won't like it because it cuts DM so never gets going.

    Really they need to change how research labs work. Late game you might as well scrap all your labs except one planet and just complete using DM. It would free up a ton of slots on multiple planets, to put to better use as mines.

    This would be very disconcerting, considering i relocated 13 planets to slot 15, i would be seriously mad if i didn't get all my planets back to slot 15 with all the free relocations they would give me. I mean, that would literary mean taking something away from that that you payed for. I hope it never comes to that.

    The important part here would be that I believe you retain planet temp wherever you go. So if you end up in a slot 1 by some chance, then you’d still have your slot 15 temp

    That would be hilarious, cold planet for max deut plus the crystal bonus?

    This could probably go in the suggestions forum.

    I would tweak it done (1/2/3/4 respective). The reason is to have a chance of GF taking this change you need to balance the benefit of the increase with the decrease in DM they will be receiving. Ideas that screw with the DM cow to much won't see the light of day. And spending DM on research is one of the most consistent DM sources for GF because research takes to long to practically let run it's own.

    Ways to "Add" slots:

    Proper choice of planets when Colonizing (Discard smaller ones)

    Terraforming (can easily get additional 40 slots before you would even need to think about the resources required, mainly energy)

    Switch to Fusion (and increase energy tech) or Solar Satellites. This reduces number of slots used for power. When I started switching to fusion it was saving me 12 slots.

    Build-up nanites and then deconstruct robotic factory to level 2, more efficient use of slots as each nanite 1/2 construction time while each robo is a 1/x factor. So from 10 to 2 saves 8 slots, use 4 of those for nanites and you are still ahead 4 slots with a massive boost in construction time.

    Reduce Shipyard to 8 on the small planets. everything else that requires higher (i.e. RIPS with 12) can be shipped in.

    Reduce Research lab on the small planet. Again diminishing returns for additional research speed and IRN helps more. Say from 10 (which you need for IRN) to 3 (needed for astro)

    Fleet save more resources to reduce storage slots on planets.

    After all of this you can "add" easily 67-72 slots to your homeworld (the planet that should be your smallest, barring mobile planet) by making it more efficient, this is before you need to start really planning (high terraforming levels, boosters)

    And if you are going to use boosters spend the DM and get gold or platinum.

    I like the idea in theory. Needs some serious thought though. Some of these techs will be OP. Man if I could get Energy tech 24 I’d be laughing. On the other hand I wouldn’t classify some of these as worth it as a long time player. If I got the option between Laser 13, the next Combustion level and the next Impulse level I probably wouldn’t even bother

    But that's the point of my event. I have been wondering how to close the gap between low point active players and the higher players in older universes in ways that minimize the chances of misuse by high level players. One reason why people don't join older universes is they look at the top pointers and say it is going to take me years to get there. This event if they use it right can help lower players who want to be active make up ground. But the benefit phases out as you move up.

    Also to your point there is tech you just don't add to the list. Anything that has a logical cap (laser tech for instance). If you are high enough to not bother with free research this event focused on you.

    Why do you to close the gap though? I’ve worked very hard on my account for well over 10 years now. Why would I support something that only benefits a select few? Why do I want someone who had only been playing a year, rapidly catching up to me with free gifts? If I log on an average of 360 days a year for the last 10 years shouldn’t I get the same kind of valued reward?

    You close the gap so that a universe has higher user retention and people don't just drop off universes after a few months because it is hopeless to reach the top 50 even, let alone higher.

    Plus raising up the bottom can help you to.

    1) keeping people active means more fleets are still around to crash.

    2) People will still be leaving their accounts but at higher point levels means the inactives are creating more for raiders.

    3) More people to farm.

    4) If you are a miner, more targets for fleeters to focus on instead of you.

    5) More and higher quality of traders.

    6) Potential for actually harming the top players as more people are willing to group to attack them.

    And I would bet point value wise your gift is still worth more than the 1 yr old account. It just doesn't have the same potential ROI.

    To pull from economics this is about what value we want for a Gini index. We don't need a flat (0) value but I would argue we are to close to 1 for healthy game play.