View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | Date Submitted | Last Update | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0009076 | AI War 1 / Classic | Suggestion - Game Mechanics | Jul 31, 2012 5:24 am | Aug 14, 2013 3:32 pm | |
| Reporter | Kahuna | Assigned To | |||
| Status | considering | Resolution | open | ||
| Summary | 0009076: Making the Economic Command Station a more viable option. | ||||
| Description | Econ CS itself wouldn't produce metal or crystal. It would produce a nice amount of energy (The Energy Collector could be nerfed a little bit to make Econ CSs a more viable option) and increase the effectiveness of the harvesters on that planet by 25%/50%/100%. This way Econ CS would work well WITH upgraded Harvesters. And in addition that that.. maybe Economic Command Station could make building or repairing units or whatever on that planet 10%/20%/40% cheaper? That might be a viable option for Logistic and Military Command Stations. Rebuilding the destroyed ships and defenses after a wave would be cheaper.. but you wouldn't have the benefits of the Logistic or Military Command Station. | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| Internal Weight | Feature Suggestion | ||||
|
|
Reduced resource cost is a bit iffy. However, it does seem reasonable. Having it produce drastically more energy would make it viable as an option. Adding an Amp to resource harvesters makes sense, as it would synergize with those upgrades. (Especially spire cities. Gonna get military Damage amp, Speed boost/debuff, or increase resource generation?) Having the T3 instead of going from 50% to 100%, instead giving 75%, and amping adjacnet planets by 10-25%, might be better. (Admittedly, would want that kind of effect on other com stations too, lesser on adjacent planets) |
|
|
Agreed on giving it more energy production for all of the tiers. However, the econ station foldouts for the Mk. II and Mk. III have already made researching them much more viable when compared to harvesters, though the question still remains whether it is worth compared to the other stations (probably not, unless you spawned in a resource spot barren area of the galaxy) |
|
|
Well, if you don't have Spire enabled, which tends to dominate the resource production scene (at least in the few game's I've played) I would say that the extra resources are critical. Early in the game, I do think it is well worth it for early resource boost, at least at Mark 2. Not sure about Mark 3 however. If you clear out a relatively isolated area, putting Eco stations there is reasonable, but I don't think unlocking T3 is worth it. The foldouts make it more worth it, as it gives an extra station, essentially. |
|
|
I've often play with Double Home, but even there I'd say unlocking the Eco station isn't worth it. The resource boost isn't shining and the Energy bonus is negligible (Looking for a zenith power gen, not necessarily from trader, is much better). I support the move for a buff of the Eco station. Especially for resource rich-systems would be nice. |
|
|
"And in addition that that.. maybe Economic Command Station could make building or repairing units or whatever on that planet 10%/20%/40% cheaper?" - I don't like that bit, as it would encourage the tedious micro of moving damaged ships to a different planet before repairing them, disabling any auto-repairing facilities along the way. |
|
|
+1 on extra energy production. Moving 30K ~ 50K from the energy collection and giving it to Econ-I could give players a strong reason to build these over Log-I or Mil-I. Energy bonuses would scale up similarly: Econ-II (2x) and Econ-III (4x). = = = I would prefer that Econ commands keep their flat resource bonus, because their current main utility over harvestor upgrades *is* resource generation in a barren corner. Otherwise, I will still unlock the harvestors first. If we were to (also/instead) give them per-resource-boosts, I would prefer flat values. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 31, 2012 5:24 am | Kahuna | New Issue | |
| Jul 31, 2012 5:29 am | Kahuna | Description Updated | |
| Jul 31, 2012 5:33 am | Kahuna | Description Updated | |
| Jul 31, 2012 8:10 am | tigersfan | Internal Weight | => Feature Suggestion |
| Jul 31, 2012 8:10 am | tigersfan | Status | new => considering |
| Jun 30, 2013 3:10 pm | Ranakastrasz | Note Added: 0033038 | |
| Jul 1, 2013 1:43 am | TechSY730 | Note Added: 0033043 | |
| Jul 1, 2013 12:45 pm | Ranakastrasz | Note Added: 0033045 | |
| Jul 10, 2013 1:07 pm | ArnaudB | Note Added: 0033106 | |
| Jul 29, 2013 11:39 pm | Bognor | Note Added: 0033180 | |
| Aug 14, 2013 3:32 pm | zharmad | Note Added: 0033259 |
