View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | Date Submitted | Last Update | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0015750 | AI War 1 / Classic | Suggestion - Game Mechanics | Aug 29, 2014 10:10 am | Aug 29, 2014 1:25 pm | |
| Reporter | MondSemmel | Assigned To | |||
| Status | new | Resolution | open | ||
| Product Version | 8.003 | ||||
| Summary | 0015750: Spirecraft Asteroids - Ease of Use 3/3 | ||||
| Description | Using Spirecraft Asteroids can be kind of annoying due to some interface quirks. Current situation: Building a Spirecraft unit first creates a "Mining Enclosure" on the asteroid, which eventually turns into one or multiple ships. This is different from building something else, e.g. a Colony Ship. Consequences: 1) One can give the Colony Ship orders to do something (like move somewhere) once completed; this doesn't work with the Mining Enclosure. 2) One can only build things like the Colony Ship if one has enough energy, so it's not typically possible to get a negative energy balance that way. However, some Spirecraft asteroids can be turned into _multiple_ ships (e.g. one asteroid becomes two rams) which _each_ cost the listed energy, so once the Mining Enclosure is complete, one suddenly has to pay e.g. not 6000 energy but 2x6000, which can make one's energy balance negative. 3) Related to 2): I can build 2 Spirecraft Rams Mk II from Pysite for 120k metal, or 4 from Xampite for 120k metal. More generally, this means that the listed cost of such Spirecraft is internally inconsistent; there's no single fact of the matter as to how much metal such a Spirecraft Ram Mk II costs. Suggestions: For 1): Have Mining Enclosures behave like Space Docks: one can give an order to the Mining Enclosure which is inherited by the finished Spirecraft ship. This would make _such_ a difference in ease of use. For 2) and 3): No idea. Maybe adjust the energy costs displayed by the Mining Ship so that building two Spirecraft Ram Mk II is correctly considered to cost 12k energy, rather than 6k? Or, the easiest remedy: Remove Mining Enclosures altogether and treat building Spirecraft like building Colony Ships. | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| Internal Weight | |||||
|
|
1) Agreed, this would be useful. 2) When a recipe gives 2x units or more, it should consider the same level of energy cost to build. You should not be allowed to brown yourself out without some nonsense like destructing a power station. 3) I just assume that the higher level asteroids contain more metals and stuff that are needed, reducing the econ cost of the units. I would be against removing this as it's a trade off as you could have had a higher level unit. I would instead make mining ships a deployable structure that take in nearby asteroids and output ships. Rather than starting several at once, if you want them to build at the same rate, you could send several mining ships. As it is, mining ships are pretty trivial, they cost money, but are very low risk as they never need to stick around to finish the job. |
|
|
Concerning 3), I agree it's not a problem by itself that things cost different amounts for different asteroid types. But it causes other problems. For instance, Spirecraft Rams are repairable. But repair costs are based on the listed metal price, which is higher than one actually paid for building them. I like your change of the Mining Ship, too. As long as they get less annoying to use, I'm open to pretty much anything. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 29, 2014 10:10 am | MondSemmel | New Issue | |
| Aug 29, 2014 12:38 pm | Chthonic One | Note Added: 0039135 | |
| Aug 29, 2014 1:25 pm | MondSemmel | Note Added: 0039137 |
