PTR Changelog 2016-09-19
-
Being limited to only reserving a certain number of rooms would be just as limiting if energy is nerfed. unreserved rooms right now are barely worth harvesting. if energy is nerfed as is the plan, unreserved rooms will never be worth mining, it would cost more to mine and end up with no energy gain. I can understand nerfing minerals, but as others have pointed out, the entire game revolves around energy, reducing available energy makes it that much more difficult to advance.
-
EDIT: I just noticed you mentioned it would be the same effect as the original reduction, implying this would replace the original nerf plan, I could see that working better than a straight energy nerf.
-
Another alternative to reducing unclaimed energy sources capacity (first two changes in the changelog)
would be limiting the reservations count available to a player depending on his/her GCL. Say, three reserved
rooms per one claimed room. You can harvest as many remote sources as you wish, but you can “upgrade” only
6 remote sources per claimed room maximum. It'd allow to achieve nearly the same effect we want to see with
these first two items in the changelog.
What do you think about it?This looks like a much better solution if the issue is excessive reservations. I honestly doubt that there are that many people who would be affected by this change, but it does allow for GCL scaling, which I like.
-
Another alternative to reducing unclaimed energy sources capacity (first two changes in the changelog) would be limiting the reservations count available to a player depending on his/her GCL. Say, three reserved rooms per one claimed room.
I like this idea much better. Having no limit on room reservations essentially means there is no cap on how much energy you can bring in(EDIT: other then spawn ticks), and simply adding a limit would be a better solution rather then nerfing everyone. My only suggestion, rather then basing it on GCL, it may be better to base it on actual claimed room number (ie GCL 7 player with 3 claimed rooms, would have 9 reserves not 21). This should make people spend more energy on defending their rooms too, as the number of claimed rooms with dictate how many remote mines you can have.
-
I greatly prefer limiting reservations, but I'm concerned about how rooms you don't plan on mining but are still important for territory control would be affected. Could there be some secondary type of reservation where the sources are still capped down to 500 energy, but you obtain territorial control of the room to prevent players spawning in it?
-
This looks like a much better solution if the issue is excessive reservations.
The issue is excessive energy. But we can deal with it in different ways.
I greatly prefer limiting reservations, but I’m concerned about how rooms you don’t plan on mining but are still important for territory control would be affected. Could there be some secondary type of reservation where the sources are still capped down to 500 energy, but you obtain territorial control of the room to prevent players spawning in it?
Some time ago, when reservations were not increasing energy sources, there were almost no players who reserved something just for control sake. I doubt it would be a very demanded feature.
-
How long ago was that? The player population has grown substantially even since I have joined, and I'm concerned about territory control with the number of players who are looking for places to spawn being so high. I know for myself that the way the map features around me are designed that a few rooms are important to the navigation of my creeps around my empire, but I don't want to mine them for multiple reasons.
-
My thoughts-
* Nerf the source keeper rooms more than you're planning on it. Even if you don't nerf the reserved rooms the source keeper income is really unbalanced right now, and if you do introduce a cap on number of reserved rooms then it will make the source keeper rooms even more valuable since they don't need to be reserved at all and thus wouldn't count against the limit. In the case that you do introduce a cap I would recommend putting the SK rooms down to 3k.
* Don't put H and O at exactly the same as ZKUL. Maybe nerf them a little, but not to the extreme you're talking- at least not until after we'd seen how these other changes take affect.
-
Artem, first of all, thanks for listening to the community.
Thanks for explaining the problem, which really is energy abundance. I can certainly say that this seems plausible. When I turned off power processing for 1 day my storages were full within 5 hours, and bugs ensued. Let's battle that problem together.
For n00bish his statement about territory control, E6N11 is a perfect example of that. It prevents invaders from spawning at certain areas, which is useful, If we're going with this change this should be a must. It's also amazing for annoying players by preventing them from mining certain areas.
I DO like the GCL*3 change, my only worry is current player locations as well. some rooms will only have 1 source, which will probably become obsolete after this patch. this can be fixed by either "reserving" the territory compared to "boostSourceClaim".
It does raise the issue:
- Current player locations are picked based on certain expansion idea's, these might be thrown overboard now.
- What happens with current reserved rooms? Will random rooms be unreserved?
I currently got 134 reserved rooms and 28 owned rooms. With this new proposal I would have to cut back on 47 rooms. Which is fine by me. I will probably drop the 1-sourced rooms, and just reserve the territory.
Theoretical resource limit for my GCL will be ( 29 + 87 ) * 2 * 10 = 2320, which isn't close to what I'm running on now, but I can adjust.
For me personally It will also require less code changes to get this running, I don't have to re-look into the energy calculations whatsoever.
------------------------------ Mineral thoughts ----------------------
Minerals did get hefty nerfs lately:
- 20K to 50K timer increase
- Now 50% mineral decrease for all minerals, and H and O by 75%
What is the real reason behind it? It now seems impossible to boost all your rooms 24/7 with XGH2O. Was this the goal? The market was quite healthy lately, and was stabilizing. It seemed to work well. This change might throw it off again.
-
Don’t put H and O at exactly the same as ZKUL.
Don’t forget there are twice as many H/O rooms as Z/K/U/L on the world map. That can be approximately matched to XGH2O formula (the most used compound).
-
I know there are twice as many rooms, but people have been claiming rooms based off of the current structure. That means that for the market, and peoples empires, to properly respond it's going to take time as people unclaim rooms to reclaim and build to RCL6 the newly more valuable H and O rooms. For that reason alone I think it makes sense to phase this in.
-
I'm totally against the reservations limit unless it counts towards sources and not rooms - e.g. u get 6 boosted sources in the reserved rooms, but not allowing us to reserve rooms basically negates the idea of it.
All the players that complain about the reduced reserved room sources are at low GCL, so increasing the owned room energy sources from 3k to 3.5k should fix their concerns with not much extra energy input into the game
SK rooms definitely need more nerfing
I'm also sharing Dissi's and tedivm's concerns about the H and O minerals - there may be twice as many on the map, but noone has claimed twice as many of it, so maybe reduce them by 50% as the rest?
-
I'm totally against the reservations limit unless it counts towards sources and not rooms - e.g. u get 6 boosted sources in the reserved rooms, but not allowing us to reserve rooms basically negates the idea of it.Id suggest seperating claiming and boosting sources, and requiring a claim to unlock the sources.
1 claimbodypart doing creep.boostSources(controller) gives... 100ticks of boost, but they disappear if the claim runs out.
-
> 1 claimbodypart doing creep.boostSources(controller) gives... 100ticks of boost, but they disappear if the claim runs out
This makes claim creeps more expensive than the source gain.
I think the gcl limit is a great idea, but maybe we should call it mining outposts and normal outposts.
Mining outposts can be reserved like now and increase source count.
On the other hand we have outposts, which can be reserved. This should yield 2 "reservation ticks"
-
So, my own two cents are that the original balance changes seem like a good idea. It takes some adjustment in the meantime, but it's not a "breaking" change. It just means that the current behavior of some AIs would become inefficient or counterproductive. I like the original plan because it places a natural limit on energy (i.e. a point at which it's impractical or unwise to reserve another room) rather than just implementing a hard cap. Natural limits are, I think, more interesting from a gameplay perspective. Viability of remote mining is then limited by how efficient you can make your mining operation, not by some arbitrary number.
Big thanks to Artem so far for engaging with all the feedback, it's great to see you're interested in (and responsive to) our thoughts. I think some of the concern stems from the fact that, as players, we are all constantly seeking more resources. This makes the thought of scaling them back both unpalatable and scary, but I totally agree that excessive resource abundance is a gameplay problem right now. I would much rather experience short term pain in adjusting to a change in how efficient some processes are, then end up with a lot of artifical / arbitrary game limitations in the long run.
-
I like the GCL*3 limit for reservations better.
Nerfing remote mining makes it much harder for new players to get a foothold.
-
Another pile-on comment: GCL*3 limit makes a lot more sense. I had to rely on single source mines to get up through GCL4 given where I started. 3000 -> 2000 for a single-source room means actually very close to zero profit unless you size haulers, add roads built + repaired, add containers, have remote mine defenders, and don't have bugs in any of that.
Having rooms surrounded by two-source rooms available for remote mines does seem to give a bit too much energy. SK's seem pretty heavy too. Some adjustment would be nice.
The mineral changes seem harsh... but not as breaking as reducing single-source mines to be profit-less.
If two workers harvest the same extractor in the same tick, do one or both succeed?
-
So since the market has required essentially a rebalance of the entire game and a restructuring of the most basic ideas of the game that have existed for over a year now (that is, keep your rooms spaced out to mine the most sources), is it safe to assume we will be doing this incredibly annoying dance all over again for the next big update (which I am 100% sure is not power creeps)?
Also I want to point out that it's ridiculous that you have the time to do this but you don't have the time to give the reasons for doing it because of "OSS server" (which I personally really don't care about)
-
I'm not a fan of most of these changes. Harvesters mining minerals every 6th tick? What will all these harvesters be doing for their 1000+ downtime ticks? It's not enough time to get anywhere else to do something productive. Why not just raise the cooldown and lower the amounts some more? Seems like an unnecessary energy/cpu sink. Even T3 boosted harvesters will be much slower than before the changes.
1 source reserved rooms will be much harder to get energy-positive. Why take away the option to control the nearby 1 source rooms? Is it to impose another cost on players looking to reserve nearby rooms to stop NPC attacks in their main room?
I've been energy starved.. Maybe it's expected to be a requirement to have SK harvesters at mid-level GCLs?
-
If we go with the cap of 3 reserved rooms per 1 claimed room, can you just make all room having 2 sources right now? Otherwise it's just incredibly annoying with large swath of rooms being empty -- realistically no one will ever claim 1-source room anymore, nor reserving them.
