View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryLast Update
0005869AI War 1 / ClassicSuggestion - Game MechanicsFeb 13, 2012 3:22 pm
ReporterFunnyMan Assigned ToChris_McElligottPark  
Status closedResolutionwon't fix 
Summary0005869: Multiply resource cap by homeworld count
DescriptionSince 5.025 increased the energy supplies of a N-homeworld player to match those of N 1-homeworld players, it seems that there's only one major asymmetry remaining: resource cap. One player has a resource cap of 1 million metal and crystal, regardless of their homeworld count.

The only disadvantage I can see is a fairly minor one: the UI would need a little tweaking to fit 1-2 extra digits on the metal and crystal counts. Beyond that, it seems like a natural extension of the general trend making N-homeworld players equivalent to N 1-homeworld players.
TagsNo tags attached.
Internal WeightNew

Activities

Chris_McElligottPark

Feb 13, 2012 12:13 pm

administrator   ~0018996

The UI can't actually grow, because there's not enough room on the minimum size monitors that we support.

But, beyond that, the ability to stockpile too many resources is disastrous for game balance regardless of how many homeworlds you have -- players need to have a fairly low cap of resources so that throughput remains an ongoing concern. I written about this in vastly greater length elsewhere in the past.

FunnyMan

Feb 13, 2012 1:53 pm

reporter   ~0019010

On the first point, wouldn't dropping the font size a bit solve that problem?

On the second point, I'd argue that this isn't allowing the player to stockpile "too many" resources, merely adjusting the amount he can stockpile to be proportional to what he can build. Having a second homeworld already doubles the amount of opposing forces (hence damage suffered) and the number of units and structures the player can build.

Where a 1-homeworld player would need a single fortress (mkI) to defend a system, a 2-homeworld player now needs two, as the opposition has doubled. Further, he can actually place two, because his own unit cap has doubled as well. Thus, doubling the resource store doesn't mean that the player can afford to build more: the two fortresses he now requires are still about half his total resource cap.

The same math applies to (re)building fleets. With the current resource caps, replacing your fleet with a second homeworld effectively takes twice the stored resources, because the fleet is twice as large with the same per-ship costs. And you're just as likely to lose the fleet, because the enemy has twice as many ships as well.

Chris_McElligottPark

Feb 13, 2012 2:53 pm

administrator   ~0019021

Sure, we could drop the font size a bit, but then people complain they can't read it. And the way AIW's fonts currently work, I can't just dynamically scale font sizes -- I have to make a new font for each specific size, which is really annoying and wasteful of system resources. The new GUI system in AVWW is a lot better, and I hope to backport that to AIW during the next expansion work for AIW.

In terms of the stockpiling of resources being equivalent between the multiple planets, the math doesn't work out how you think. On the surface it seems simple, but there are actually many invisible factors there. There's a coordination cost, for example, with multiple players vs one. And there's other factors also, which I delved into in great depth in the other post I referred to again. The math doesn't support increasing stockpiles, it just leads to broken balance.

FunnyMan

Feb 13, 2012 3:22 pm

reporter   ~0019023

Fair enough.

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
Feb 13, 2012 11:33 am FunnyMan New Issue
Feb 13, 2012 12:13 pm Chris_McElligottPark Internal Weight => New
Feb 13, 2012 12:13 pm Chris_McElligottPark Note Added: 0018996
Feb 13, 2012 12:13 pm Chris_McElligottPark Status new => closed
Feb 13, 2012 12:13 pm Chris_McElligottPark Assigned To => Chris_McElligottPark
Feb 13, 2012 12:13 pm Chris_McElligottPark Resolution open => won't fix
Feb 13, 2012 1:53 pm FunnyMan Note Added: 0019010
Feb 13, 2012 1:53 pm FunnyMan Status closed => feedback
Feb 13, 2012 1:53 pm FunnyMan Resolution won't fix => reopened
Feb 13, 2012 2:53 pm Chris_McElligottPark Note Added: 0019021
Feb 13, 2012 2:53 pm Chris_McElligottPark Status feedback => closed
Feb 13, 2012 2:53 pm Chris_McElligottPark Resolution reopened => won't fix
Feb 13, 2012 3:22 pm FunnyMan Note Added: 0019023