A.Miner Starbase Discussion

OP 22/08/2010 · 05:52 AM #1

Ok people it`s time to vote on these idea`s if you would pls submit all your votes to the empire PollMeister on RT. this will decide which or all of these shall go through. just copy paste the format below with your choices

1) Lakko Version one, with BR of either 4 or 3.
Lakko version two
or Lakko the Redesigned Concept.

2) kyro upkeep reduction (y/n)

3) Livid upkeep reduction (y/n)

4) lyth upkeep reduction (y/n)

5 Chlor build rate reduction and Epidote build rate increase (y/n)

in a format similar to this pls
1) lakko version two
2)Yes
3)No
4)No
5)No

*note the changes to hoko will go through, and Chlor and epidote is a package deal, you can`t get either or.

also only one vote per person, not account, if we find you voted with multiple accounts all your votes will be discounted for wasting our time. Also for those of you that have taken the Lakko as part of a UW Reward, you will have the option to choose another ship.
------------------

These are the current changes proposed by the staff, please discuss them in a constructive manner, feel free to also pm feed back directly to us.

Lakko version one

upkeep is increased from 2,352 to 7,195

Build rate, dropped from 5 to 4 or 3
which means instead of 55,350 pr a turn it`s now 44,280 or 33,210 pr a turn

or

M.Lakko redesign concept
Energy Damage 11,500
Missile Damage 24,000
Hull 55,000
Range 3
Scanner rating 623
Power rating 36,666
1 turn produces 1
Ship upkeep 32,999

Ship Specials
No retaliation
Ships attacked by this ship cannot return fire.

Energy Shield +40%
Absorption Shield -60%
ECM +40%
Ionized Hull -95%

Or..

M.Lakko Ver. 2
4,000 Total Damage
1,500 Energy Damage
1,500 Kinetic Damage
1,000 Missile Damage
Hull 15,000
Scanner 900
Range 8
Power Rating 11,061
1 turn produces 5
Ship upkeep 6,032

Ship Specials
No defense
This ship can`t return fire if attacked.

Energy Shield +30%
Absorption Shield +30% Was +15%
ECM -40% Was -30%
Ionized Hull +40%

Hoko

upkeep increased from 1,450 to 4,475

build rate dropped from 6 to 5
which means instead of 59,670 pr a turn it`s now 49,725 pr a turn

Kyro

upkeep reduced from 45,000 to 32,328

Lyth

upkeep reduced from 52,052 to 41,154

Livid (r)

upkeep reduced from 20,000 to 15,641

Chlor

build rate dropped from 10 to 8

Epidote

build rate increased from 10 to 12

Edited by ShatterdDreams on 2010-08-28

Edited by BadWolf on 2010-08-29

Edited by BadWolf on 2010-08-29

Edited by BadWolf on 2010-08-29

Edited by ShatterdDreams on 2010-08-29

S ShatterdDreams

24/08/2010 · 08:26 PM #195

CG miners already got an income boost it was increased by 150% actually. people know the risk and of course these bases are affordable look at the list grad posted up about the upkeeps...this still keeps them well below most other miner ships, ships that plenty of people have spammed to fairly high prs.

now a tax and mineral miner can go to higher prs than a cg miner with the bases, but such is life...it`s just like a tax viral can spam more lyth than a comm viral, or a agri terran can spam more nirvana....

and no, bases upkeep shouldn`t really have anything to do with any other bases upkeep, they should be proportional to their races ships. there could be BR correlations, though the BR should more so reflect the ships it was designed to defend against/attack.

ii might be persuaded to drop to .6 upkeep instead of .64 on the lakko possibly.

polls are hard to regulate DM, people can spam them and fudge the results

N NiHiLiM

24/08/2010 · 05:45 PM #194

>the reason no one wants to be a cg miner is cause they dont wanna have to post cg`s every 5 min cuase of 2bill cap

i`ve been a cg-miner on RT.. where i provided about 50% off all goods on market.
2bil cap is indeed ridiculous. one of the main reasons i stopped as CG minder

A Aacra

24/08/2010 · 05:19 PM #193

the reason no one wants to be a cg miner is cause they dont wanna have to post cg`s every 5 min cuase of 2bill cap

T Thief

24/08/2010 · 05:01 PM #192

seems like nobody objects to the miner getting a minor cg boost and as a small incentive to stay or go miner where we can see how a few people might get the base nerf and switch from that race... can`t hurt to even those things out... and yes terran caps are more expensive than the miners with the exception of lyth. it would be nice to give the cg miner something not to quit over because i remember when they took my herc br from 2 to 1 i left the game for years because i spent so long building my empire and got the shaft

D DrunkenMasters

24/08/2010 · 04:43 PM #191

I have a better idea - why not go to some free web site(google has that option), make a poll whether a certain ship should be changed. Give the poll some time(a week?two weeks? you decide...). Then if the answer is yes from the majority of players - the guides/admins or whoever you decide(but small group of people) make some suggestions for the changes(give people a few options!) then vote again. That way it will be the most unbiased.

D DrunkenMasters

24/08/2010 · 04:41 PM #190

These balancing threads are ridiculous, 99% of the posts are flaming/showing off/telling others how lame they are.

G GradualIncline

24/08/2010 · 03:46 PM #189

There have also been times where I`ve gone CGs just to help combat the lack of them on the market Thief, and I`m mainly set up for tax (only 50 levels in industry....wow, that`s ironic, the amount BW used in his example, lol) I made over 150 billion CGs before going back to a tax empire and never had a problem selling the CGs. Even on Ultra, where I`m a mineral miner, I produce CGs on the side, since I need something to do with the land, and I still have my goods sell minutes after it comes up on the market, sometimes seconds. In Fast, I wish there were CGs, I`m a guardian, and I love the little income boost. I remember keeping track of names and races of who bought my goods, and all races just love em. Every single tax empire in fact, if they don`t produce their own, like myself.

I agree, further attempts to make CG miner more attractive would be nice (a-miners already got boosted a lot once I believe) but this isn`t really the place to discuss it, so much as another thread.

Back on topic, now that I did the calculations, and see what kind of a ratio the bases will both still have, I don`t mind them too much, though the Lakko could stand to not have it`s ratio go up too much for the first nerf. Nor do I mind Hoko going to 5 BR, or Lakko to 4, though I think I would still object to 3. Thanks for the PMs explaining your reasonings, it does make sense when put in those lights.

C chessRPGrulerKoA

24/08/2010 · 02:35 PM #188

Assuming for a moment you`re an RT player as most of us are, Thief...
Have you seen the CG section of the market? Empty probably 99% of the time. What does that say about the supply vs demand of that commodity? There is more demand than supply. Currently, and for the past THREE years, a CG miner is guaranteed to sell their CGs almost immediately at all hours of the day.
On the other hand, there obviously aren`t very many CG miners, and I wouldn`t be against making that a more attractive build to play. But, that has nothing to do with the ships themselves.

BadWolfOP

24/08/2010 · 02:34 PM #187

And for further comparisons the difference between Comm terran and Agri terran is roughly the same as tax to CG for miners..

BadWolfOP

24/08/2010 · 02:30 PM #186

@Thief

A comm Terran with 50k land and 50 infra makes 1,305,003 per turn and terran upkeeps are fairly balanced for comm incomes as well.. (Which is around .27 of what a CG miner makes with lower overall upkeep..) and yes i am comm terran on fast if anyone happens to be wondering..

Edited by BadWolf on 2010-08-24

T Thief

24/08/2010 · 01:27 PM #185

yeah i know there is meant to be a difference for sure, but over time the problem for a cg miner is once they can afford to build and play at higher pr, their base pr is pretty high regardless, because of how much land it takes to be a successful cg miner. if you think it is balanced fair right now, im willing to understand that the game rely`s on tax empires to create demand for food, but the cg miners are just somewhat of a luxury when it comes to the market, so the demand isnt as high for them. One thing i want us to consider when it comes to trippling or more the price of the bases is: are the bases relative to the other starbases in price from all other races? And the last thing would be are we absolutelety sure that when we think of miner we aren`t just thinking of filthy rich taxxerrs and mineral miners. If a cg miner makes half of a taxxer and less than a terran, should he have to pay 2x or more for his bases? I suggest bringing the upkeep down a little for the lakko, yeah make it the most expensive base but .6 will do? and if not maybe 50% more effenciany to the cg guys??

A aacra

24/08/2010 · 10:57 AM #184

Just my two cents, but I dont think build rate vs cap ship build rate means anything because most bases built in dp, and I dont think dp is supposed to be a place where you out build and overpower your opponents.

BadWolfOP

24/08/2010 · 09:59 AM #183

@Thief

Time for some figures for you..

CG miner with 50 infra and 50k land (45k in industry) Makes 1,215,000 CG`s per turn Which on average will amount to 4,815,000 (after -45,000 for RM to make CG`s) with goods selling at 4 per.

And that allows you to build approx.

7,405,830 Pr on the suggested Lakko upkeep before losing money
And
10,690,875 PR on the suggested Hoko Upkeep before losing money

And a tax miner with 50k land and 50 infra makes.. 8,210,000 After food costs with food at 10 per.

The comparison between the two while still pretty big overall isn`t as big as it once was and is still a plausible source of income and these changes upkeep wise would not really hurt a CG miners wallet unless they used them to spam to high PR`s everyday..

Edited by BadWolf on 2010-08-24

H Hopeless

24/08/2010 · 09:42 AM #182

WOW, the bases sure have small upkeep compared to other miner ships

C CaptainCharisma

24/08/2010 · 09:32 AM #181

blah ned you talk to much let others talk and just nerf the dang things instead if a rebuild for if you rebuild them im goingto push for even better terran starbases which i couldnt give a care for starbases are meant to be for smaller ships if that or pr to ecape enslavement

M Mazuku

24/08/2010 · 09:31 AM #180

honestly you knew or found out very quickly CG producer isn`t a very fruitful income path till you have lots of land and infra and you guys are in the minority i believe :S Although in your defense i wouldn`t mind seeing CG miner be a bit more viable since it never worked for me well.. But thats a topic for another thread.

T Thief

24/08/2010 · 09:19 AM #179

tax viral makes alot more than cg miner..... please adress the difference in cg miner/min miner/tax miner incomes.... dont punish cg miners by assuming they can afford the new changes cause they are miner

BadWolfOP

24/08/2010 · 09:18 AM #178

Actually grad im glad you posted that up now everyone can take a look upkeep ratios for themselves lol

G GradualIncline

24/08/2010 · 09:18 AM #177

to bed! I`m going to bed! Gah, I can`t even type properly any more.

G GradualIncline

24/08/2010 · 09:17 AM #176

uhhh, I just realized that you said you could provide the ratio comparisons, not that you wanted someone to post them SD....umm, yeah....I think I need some sleep. admins, feel free to modify or delete my previous post as you wish, I`m going to be before I can make a fool out of myself any more...Also, complete redesign sounds interesting. I wonder what the thing will look like afterwards this time.

Reply