A small note concerning astrophysics and plasma: treat them like they are mines and build/research whatever has the shortest return on investment time.
-> Is building my M/C/D mines from level 0 to 22/18/18 cheaper than upgrading a single mine on a planet and providing a smaller ROI time? Yes? Boom, go for astro.
As Wraith said, there is already something alike. The specifics of this are openly posted on the German boards, at least how the standings are now.
For those interested, here is the discussion translated in English (hopefully the google translate links stays valid for a while):
Don't forget the start of the game. You say that you could upgrade your tech by 10 levels at once but you account is very advanced. Everyone also suddenly researched 10 levels of hyperspace tech when the change was added. The suggested change has a usefulness tipping point where it becomes absolutely profitable to upgrade the tech and you are well past it for now.
The balance of this technology comes with the fact that for every extra 1% its cost doubles, while mines costs are in ^1.5 or ^1.6. Things slow down. Your research frenzy stops naturally after some point.
Also please don't bring dark matter in the conversation as it obviously destroys any idea of balancing based on time and that is true for any tech. Not everyone wants to spend 20€ for an upgrade. That being said, making it a tech as important as astrophysics (at least for collectors) does have the side effect of buffing DM users, again... Which I don't care about anymore. They pay for the servers, they can stay on the top. We can't balance anything around that.
I believe the long research time will be the main factor that stops people from going too far.
In the recent times, we got great changes to the plasma and hyperspace techs. The laser tech could be next.
My proposal is that it should reduce the cost of buildings by 1%, which is small enough to not be overkill and large enough to make a worthwhile impact at higher levels. I can easily see miners dump hundreds of millions of resources and a month of research to get laser 24 because the investment will be repayed when they build new mines, and thus make laser just as important as plasma or astrophysics in the optimization of a build order.
Optionally, the change could affect only metal and crystal costs, because a better laser cutting precision means less material wasted in the process of building, while its functioning cost (deut) is unchanged.
I just hope the reduction in combat finds in expos is balanced out with an increased variable to finding res, salvages and items. Otherwise expos become rather obsolete.
They need to remove "nothing" events entirely even if that means reducing the amount of asteroids and salvageable fleets you find, to keep the average yield constant.
Expeditions are literally a frustration generator. Why make a feature that gives you nothing 1/5 of the time? Let expeditions trickle resources nicely.
Yep, collectors definitely need something to define them as a class other than "we produce more". Generals and discoverers are much more specialized than collector in my opinion.
> Bunkers may not be built past the point where their capacity exceeds the planetary storage capacity or 12h worth of production, whichever is lower.
This part is a bit contrary to how everything else works. Just make it work like crawlers or reapers: you can level up that "hideout" as high as you want but it does not have an effect after <condition>.
Say I'm looking for 1000 crawlers or I have 1000 destroyers to sell.
I could put an "ad" in the marketplace so that people know there is something to trade, and then they can discuss of a price. Otherwise it's too risky to just put the things in the marketplace without the insurance that the cost you picked is right. It's just a recipe for losing 15% value at every attempt. Almost nobody is selling ships in old universes because of that.
Is the extension still working? The latest version blocks on "loading..." forever for me on Firefox 66.0.4.
I'm happy about the metal part because it's a logical thing to have planets in different slots produce different amounts of resources.
The thing that worries me is how "Fleetspeed works now in 5% steps". That sounds like a great way to reduce the chances of a successful blind phalanx.
You seem like a good person!
Sufficiently : )
Sometimes, for example when you raid a lot, you already know the content of your messages: attack report, harvest report, returned fleet... I don't want to have to interrupt what I'm doing, go to the messages section and each relevant sub-section to clear the messages.
The suggested handy button would do that for me.
In addition, we should have a "sort by" icon to alternate between best ratio at the top / biggest total amount at the top / no sorting.
I think I understand why some are hostile to it. It's a symptom of how easy it is to farm inactives and they are afraid to lose their primary source of resources.
In the meantime, it's also the most boring activity. Login, send a "rake" of 15 fleets to raid nearby, repeat... I don't think OGame was meant to be a air-controller simulator.
even farm inactives will require to pay attention to the attacks.
Well, quick and nearby inactives would not need supervision. Overnight ones would. Turtled inactives where you send a large combat fleet would. Everyone would have to defend "their" inactives instead of just farming them. You'd have interesting territory fights. Overall inactives would hold more resources because of that.
I think that's because the resources are displayed in pounds on the US server instead of kilograms. 
Being able to use inactives as battlegrounds would make them more interesting. That would also add new tactics to the game.
Are they deleted? I thought the resources were automatically unloaded on the target planet without owner consent.
