## Edited - apologies to Emi for way I presented it earlier ##
The issue with player incomes from stash is not the size of the income - that doesnt really matter. The problem is the compounding nature of the income - where incomes increase at an increasing rate - therefore spiralling upwards faster and faster.
Theres no real need to reduce incomes at all - all that needs to be done is to stop it being an exponential growth curve, and flatten it to a linear one. Capping stash by using segments does that nicely, segment growth is basically linear. There is a slight curve upwards thats attributed to increasing encrypt level, but that is neglible.
- The planets will take over the production of the stash, we can't make planets profitable as long as stash interest is the main income source.
Theres no reason why planets cant be profitable just because players have some income from stash - as I outlined earlier, its not the total income thats the problem - its the non-linear growth - a stash cap tied to segs will work. Planets are likely to need extensive testing to balance - they are not going to be ready tomorrow, which is when we need the fix.
Whats the right income from planets? How long will it take to tech them up, or whatever is needed for them to earn enough income to replace stash and workers? Players will need to research and build them - if the income is tech related, then that means the top players have the same starting position as everyone else - which is huge cut in income, and no faster growth than anyone else to recover.
Surely its better to leave the current income streams and just give planets a good production capabilty. Workers and stash can be tied to segments - but planets are going to be really hard to control, they are unlike anything else currently in the game - the balancing issues for this project are likely to be nightmarishly difficult - this is a huge change and will really need thorough testing.
- We got a lot of unused turns that will go into planet construction and maybe maintenance
No-one who plays consistently at any level has spare turns. In fact more turns are needed - suggestions have been made regarding adding items from missions that give free travel turns (my idea, convert warp travel items to free travel), and tech turns items (an idea by Chrys, quite a nice idea I think). This keeps up the incentive to do missions at the high end where the segs growth is so flat its hardly worth doing missions at all.
- Worker production is also a major profit generator, making cycle 60 minutes enables planets to serve a higher role in generating profit
If stash is removed and workers cut to 15% of current production rates, then planets have to make up 93% of players current incomes - thats only if stash and workers were balanced - and for the AI guys they arent. Planets will be the ONLY source of income - its a new idea with a huge impact, its got great potential, for going horribly wrong.
Surely it needs to be phased in over time - with slow movements based on player feedback and credible testing.
One other thing thats important to note, the game changes with high incomes - the potential is amazing - only a few players are currently pushing these limits and exploring what can be done. Cutting current incomes so drastically kills off a game world 99% of the players dont even know exists yet - and they want to see it, I guarantee it.
- 50% more worker production for Gold (not such a big impact on non-Gold once the planets take over the economy)
Planets really need to be in and working before making adjustments to economies, otherwise things can go badly wrong - trying to get it all done in one hit is very likely to be a disaster - it would require a miracle to get it right on the first try.
Adjusting gold bonuses is likely to annoy players, they either are relying on having them, or planning on being competitive without them.
The objective:
- To split the secret base income and divide it amoung the planets, making planets conquerable and income generators will stimulate fighting on the planets and for the planets, increasing indirect PvP where the attacker disrupts the supply lines (planets) of enemy, increasing overall galaxy combat.
The conceptual changes this will introduce are huge, it just looks like too big a change to the game fundamentals to rush an implementation. However, I like planets and I believe they can be added and still keep all the good things about the current game.
The game is 95% working, some issues remain outstanding - but with such a complex system, your always going to have to be making small adjustments to try and keep it balanced.
Direct attacks have been the basis of the game since it began, why change it before its even working properly? Normal combat still needs work, attacks are currently too weak, and should be increased in value and impact - but these changes would decay them (by 85% or so) to a point that they are not worth making at all.
Planets are going to be really difficult to integrate I think, they need to be tested thoroughly, phased in slowly with limited tech available to prevent errors being overpowering and then adjusted and fine tuned on implementation.
If planets, workers and stash are all balanced against each other - then direct attacks still have value - and taking planets is also profitable. Stash and worker caps based on segments, and planets able to generate higher income than either of those individually, but maybe not as much as both combined.
This is a huge change - implementing this on WARS without extensive testing is a big risk, it greatly reduces the value of segments (to 15% of their original value), which up to this point have theen the basis of all PvP action - direct attacks would cease to be an option.
