Loxley Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 What does that do to my citizens and taxes, why would I want to reset the number? It gives you 6% extra citizens, stored on the moon colony, which will never be lost no matter what happens to your nation (unless your moon colony is destroyed or expires). You may choose to reset the stored citizen count based on your current citizen population as you grow, for example if you have 10,000 citizens, you would create a colony of 600 on the moon. Then a while later you have grown to 20,000 citizens, you can 'reset' the number to 6% of your current number (1200) which would then 'store away' more citizens. Will there be one or many hotspots? Just one on Mars and one on the Moon, so team work, communication and multiple wonders etc will help groups to hunt down the most efficient spot on the map... until it moves Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Just one on Mars and one on the Moon, so team work, communication and multiple wonders etc will help groups to hunt down the most efficient spot on the map... until it moves You make this sound fun, but to me, it seems like a pain in the $@! more than anything else. I do like however that it adds a bonus to those willing to really work and put time into the game however. It provides the (basic) idea of a "end game" where you cannot pass without ridiculous activity. The random resources are obnoxious, its bad enough getting trades for people who have bad resources to begin with, imagine having lead/gold and getting the FF/Beer bonus resource, you probably will never benefit without finding people willing to screw their trade circle for your sake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loxley Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 You make this sound fun, but to me, it seems like a pain in the $@! more than anything else.I do like however that it adds a bonus to those willing to really work and put time into the game however. It provides the (basic) idea of a "end game" where you cannot pass without ridiculous activity. The random resources are obnoxious, its bad enough getting trades for people who have bad resources to begin with, imagine having lead/gold and getting the FF/Beer bonus resource, you probably will never benefit without finding people willing to screw their trade circle for your sake. Given the popularity of the new bonus resources, we're actually tweaking the Moon Mine to act similarly to the Mars Mine... So, there are some more bonus resources in the works for the Moon Mine... stay tuned But yeah, The Moon Mine is geared to try and boost the weaker standard resources, while the Mars Mine is loosely aimed at boosting the weaker tradesets (as the 'weaker' sets have more bonuses). Eg, the 8/7BG and even 5BG, will be more likely to have a reasonable boost from the Mars Mine no matter what resource you score. The 3BG or AffPop/FJ/Beer or Steel circles you're really going to have to get the right one to get the boost you are looking for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kippa Tarxien Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 (edited) Is the hot spot only tied to the efficiency of the Mars base, or does it also influence the working of the Mars Mine? If the last is the case, that would need the player to decide: going for the hotspot or for the correct bonus resource. I don't see how one can pick an ideal compromise with only one pick every 7 days and a random change every 30 days. Or, are the bonus resource spots kept at the same location? That would be interesting, you would have to map how far the bonus resource territory goes towards the hotspot direction. Edited July 22, 2009 by Kippa Tarxien Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loxley Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Is the hot spot only tied to the efficiency of the Mars base, or does it also influence the working of the Mars Mine?If the last is the case, that would need the player to decide: going for the hotspot or for the correct bonus resource. I don't see how one can pick an ideal compromise with only one pick every 7 days and a random change every 30 days. Or, are the bonus resource spots kept at the same location? That would be interesting, you would have to map how far the bonus resource territory goes towards the hotspot direction. The hotspot effects the efficiency of the Mine as well. Wherever you place your mine originally, you will get a bonus resource at random, and an efficiency based on how close you are to the hotspot. 7 days later, you have the option to move closer to the hotspot, and if you want, once you move you can dig for a different resource at the new location. If the new location is closer to the hotspot, you would get more efficiency out of your new bonus resource. If you are already on the hotspot, and don't want to move and only dig for a different resource AFAIK (I will check) you will just be able to move your mine a tiny distance and dig for a new resource, and you should still be in the hotspot zone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kippa Tarxien Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Thanks, I get it, the keywords are and if you want, once you move you can dig for a different resource My bad, I should have read that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jer Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 You make this sound fun, but to me, it seems like a pain in the $@! more than anything else. Agreed... I like not having to do much with my nation, two minutes of micro-management a day suits me just fine. Having to play chase the hotspot every seven days just to get the best out of what I bought seems like it could get pretty irritating. The rest of the stuff seems cool though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echostorm Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 I'd like to see the cost formula come down quite a bit, the expiration removed (nothing else expires), and the hot spot thing 86ed, it doesn't seem fun at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loxley Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 If you don't want to put time into the hotspots, you don't have to. Because the hotspot moves each new moon (once per month), Leaving your wonders wherever you put them should, over the course of the wonders life, give it an average efficiency of around 75%... If you have a bad efficiency this month, you could end up right on the hotspot next month to make up for it. But if other people can be bothered to put the time, effort and money in to try and optimise it, then they should be rewarded a little. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sande Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 If you don't want to put your time into finding hotspots (Which I believe is really easy to do with about 3-4 nations), you don't deserve to get the bonus. You should be more active in this to get the benefits. Something like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangulation Ideas so far: Prices should still be based mostly on infra. Maybe 1000 x infra and 100 x tech kind of thing. Most of the price is based on infra. (10000 x infra, 1000 x tech | x5? | x10? etc.) It is really unfair because some nations that got beaten down in the war and who kept large warchests, can now buy the wonders at really cheap prices... (NPO nations, anyone?) But this will at least take some money away from the large nations with warchest in billions of dongs. Expiration... Well, the Mars/Moon base should not expire because of it's cost. Or at least you should be able to "upgrade" it so that you wouldn't lose it. The age counter goes back to 1200 days. And the upgrade should take less money. Maybe half of the original cost? Dunno if the happiness bonus should be reset or it should rise to the maximum and stay there. For Moon, it should be reset, for Mars, maybe keep it rising. If base is non-expiring, then the mines and colonies should be upgradable. I think the new bonus resources are really useful. Any major trade set is represented. Magnesium is a bit underpowered though. Maybe extra +3 happiness just because it's Magnesium. Used in fireworks etc. If a nation would have temporary trade sets he gets access to (Hint, aqua nations, I am trying to set up a temp trade market for this purpose. ask me for more info) Potassium would be useful for collecting taxes after 19 days of inactivity. Basalt is good for buying infra and paying bills. If a nation just has BCFF set (Beer, Construction, Fast Food) and he doesn't change the resources, he can use Sodium. Good income boost. Also, wtf space. Can't you think of something more realistic? Just because it's new, I like it. And I see some interesting stuff happening there. Please, don't add space events. I don't want to be abducted by aliens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loxley Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 No plans on adding Space events that I know of. On making the costs based on Infra vs NS, I think you're argument actually works better the other way. Theres currently an NPO nation over 20,000NS, with 26 infrastructure. If this nation happened to have a huge warchest, and the price of this wonder was based on infra, they could grab it now dirt cheap, and then grow and get great benefits. Alternatively, making the price based off NS, still means if they have a huge warchest they can grab it cheaper now, but it isn't as cheap as it would be if it was based only off infra. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sande Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Maybe there should be a higher base cost... Infra increases the cost of the wonder and tech decreases it. Something like 300 000 000 + 20 000 * infra - 10 000 * tech ? With a minimum and maximum border* From 250 mil to 600 mil? 800 mil? Since higher technology should make it easier for a nation to develop an outer space program... The prices shouldn't go to ridiculous heights IMO. Anything below 600 mil would be good. Especially since this should be available for very large nations, ideally. I could see space events that remove the connection to bonuses for a planet. Could happen in RL too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamlin Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 No plans on adding Space events that I know of.On making the costs based on Infra vs NS, I think you're argument actually works better the other way. Theres currently an NPO nation over 20,000NS, with 26 infrastructure. If this nation happened to have a huge warchest, and the price of this wonder was based on infra, they could grab it now dirt cheap, and then grow and get great benefits. Alternatively, making the price based off NS, still means if they have a huge warchest they can grab it cheaper now, but it isn't as cheap as it would be if it was based only off infra. There's a couple arguments against this. First, Why shouldn't that nation be able to reap large benefits from this wonder. This was a very advanced nation and spent the time to save vast sums of money, they shouldn't be punished for being able to keep a large level of technology while having lost a large amount of infrastructure. The static part of the cost (in the placeholder numbers it's 100-200M) ensures that you won't have us (CN players) dropping 18m to a tiny nation and having them buy it for ultra cheap. Also, the income potential, and the RoI for the wonder, is dramatically higher for infra than for tech. Given that NS goes up faster with tech than infra you're essentially punishing people for buying tech as not only are they spending money on something they already don't get a good RoI on, it also dramatically increases the cost of the wonders. Every 50 tech increases the cost of a Mars base by (50*5*10000) = 2.5M while it barely affects your nation in terms of increased income. On the other hand 50 infra increases the cost of a Mars base by (50*3*10000) = 1.5M but it also increases your income potential, and the saving potential for the wonder, by a good amount. What this seems to reward now is infra heavy, tech light nations. The second argument is a logical one. Increasing levels of technology should not increase the cost of doing something that is inherently technologically geared. As my nation becomes more advanced it shouldn't cost more to put a man on the moon/mars. It should cost less. To bring a real world example in. If we wanted to land a man on the moon today it would cost far, far less than the ~$150 billion it cost for the Apollo program (adjusted for inflation). In fact, depending on estimates, we could currently build a *base* on the moon for the same cost it took Armstrong to simply walk. If anything tech should decrease the cost of a wonder, although not let it go below the 'base' cost (so as to prevent the 20k NS 26 infra nation from getting it for 5M) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 ugh I hate this game (</3 admin ) for making me interested in something right as I go inactive Basing the costs off NS alone is not the best idea imo. Unless these are intended to be toys for the biggest of nations (which the way the previous costs were set to prohibit), the costs will need to really be reworked. For example, it provides roughly the equivalent of a +5 happiness wonder initially - why buy something that costs 8 or 10 or 20 times as much for that benefit, unless you have all those wonders already? To me this just screams that it is intended for huge nations with nothing else to do with money but sit on it. But at the same time, it needs to be actually worthwhile for them to buy, while also being accessable to nations that are not behemoths. The ideal solution would be to make the cost essentially fixed for the initial bases, and have the additional wonders cost have variable costs based on strength, tech, and infra levels. For example have one of the secondary wonders cost less for more tech heavy nations, and the other less for infra heavy nations. Having the initial wonder be something that everyone can afford would definitely be a good thing however (anyone purchasing wonders at least, so nations in the 3999 and above infra range, perhaps a minimum of 100-150 million or so would be good, but still it will always be better to get the large number of cheap economic wonders first unless the initial bases are much cheaper). Having the initial base be at least comparable to the standard eco wonders would be nice to give some options instead of a "standard" order to wonder purchasing - if a nation at 7999 infra could get these, for less benefit, but cheaper than at 10k infra or latter on in the natino development, it might actually provide incentive to purchase them out of order instead of just doing the "which wonder is better" decision, which for economic wonders, is really easy right now. Hopefully that makes sense. I would like to see these at least comparable to other wonders for purchase (just the base, I have no problems with the other ones being fairly expensive). Otherwise they are ONLY going to be used by nations bored with no wonders left to purchase. Hopefully this makes sense. CN is way to "do this it is best always" and this gives a chance to break a little of that mold. It might also be a neat effect to add something to really active/smart players to be able to somehow give them reward for this, perhaps allowing for every 5 minutes to "mine" and get a relatively small amount of money, not enough to be significant unless a player chooses to mine many many times in one day. This could provide a solution to the "no new players can catch up at all" problem that CN has - if someone mined every 5 minutes every day the amount of income should then be enough to actually give them a reasonable boost above similarily sized nations. Someone devoting that sort of energy to this game SHOULD be rewarded more than someone who checks in once a week, but as it currently stands, there is almost no difference in terms of nation development potential based on the amount of effort one puts into CN. For example, I will be checking my nation weekly in the next months. If someone else has a nation that was identical to mine, and checks it daily multiple times, they are almost completely not going to grow more than I do, but if this wonder let them "mine" frequently during the day, they clearly would get more money than an inactive me. If the wonders are reasonably priced so that initially nations in the 3999-5000 infra range could afford them this might allow people with newer nations to stand some chance at competing with larger nations in the "growth race." This would be a huge plus for CN as a game. The expiring thing is kinda lame in my opinion. At least make it not some arbitrary number of days, make it 3 months, or 12 months, or 48 months, or whatever, so it actually expires on a day that makes sense instead of a random day (ie after 9 months, it will expire on the same day of that month as the month when the wonder was bought). Potassium and Sodium are also much better than the other two resources, Potassium in particular (two +5% bonuses for aff pop?!). Magnesium is rather weak, considering that Basalt is hands down better (not even a contest). It is important to remember that positive bonuses stack and become more effective, whereas discounts become less effective the more you have. Regarding movement, it would be nice to see a similar idea developed. If the map could be divided to hexes, then instead of moving once a week, allowing perhaps every 12 hours a move to an adjacent hex would also allow players who are active to benefit more, and people who are inactive to not be able to get to the same location as fast. What will happen is that someone will find the "good place" and then everyone who has not bothered to move their installations will just hop on over and benefit, with no work required. Just some thoughts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiss Goodbye Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Technology defines our ability to do things like go to mars. It absolutely should factor into the equation to make the wonder cheaper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nc1701 Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 My feelings on this are rather mixed, but I'm hopeful. I want this to stay Cybernations not Spacenations, so while as few basic colony ideas are cool we need to keep them to a minimum and not be able to build huge bases on Moon/Mars. The benefits from these seem quite small and I'm not sure they would be worth buying, certainly not at the high prices I have heard discussed. Also I'm unclear on the colonies exact effect, right now I'm assuming they increase and protect 6 or 8 percent of your citizens, but if they only protect them then the price needs to drop considerably further. Prices should be based on [base cost + n(infra/tech)], so that we can scale the price with infra, but have tech signifigantly reduce the cost as higher tech nations could run better space programs more cheaply. Base cost needs to be high enough that nations with absurdly high tech can't get it too cheaply of course. I definitely like the idea of getting special bonus resources and think it should be applied to the lunar mine as well, and think that we should create an undersea mine with similar effects as well for variety. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flak attack Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 It's an obvious money sink, and not a very practical one. Getting the total set of Mars wonders at the current price would cost me only about $2 million less than my total bills paid, which is about over 300 days worth of bills at my current size. I almost could make the infra jump from my current 8k to 14k infra with that amount of money (the infra jump only takes $2 million more assuming I do best trades). Even the set of lunar wonders would cost 150 days of bills, enough to jump to almost 11k infra, and buy a WRC on the way up. It's a cool idea, but if you want people to buy it, make the cost more reasonable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Andrew IV Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 I want this to stay Cybernations not Spacenations This. I think this idea is silly and is just an attempt to turn this game into something its not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamlin Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 (edited) First, Why shouldn't that nation be able to reap large benefits from this wonder. This was a very advanced nation and spent the time to save vast sums of money, they shouldn't be punished for being able to keep a large level of technology while having lost a large amount of infrastructure.The static part of the cost (in the placeholder numbers it's 100-200M) ensures that you won't have us (CN players) dropping 18m to a tiny nation and having them buy it for ultra cheap. Also, the income potential, and the RoI for the wonder, is dramatically higher for infra than for tech. Given that NS goes up faster with tech than infra you're essentially punishing people for buying tech as not only are they spending money on something they already don't get a good RoI on, it also dramatically increases the cost of the wonders. Every 50 tech increases the cost of a Mars base by (50*5*10000) = 2.5M while it barely affects your nation in terms of increased income. On the other hand 50 infra increases the cost of a Mars base by (50*3*10000) = 1.5M but it also increases your income potential, and the saving potential for the wonder, by a good amount. What this seems to reward now is infra heavy, tech light nations. To expand on this because I don't think I said it as well as I could have: The income a nation makes is almost exclusively derived from it's level of infrastructure. Yes, tech plays a role in happiness and bill reduction but a nation with 10k infra and 1k tech will make vast vast vast sums more than a nation with 10k tech and 1k infra. Without doing actual numbers I would hazard a guess that the average nation has 90-95% of it's income (post bills) derived from it's infra (including improvements and wonders which are essentially tied to infra) and 5-10% derived from its tech. Essentially you end up with a wonder that not only costs a large income nation less in real money, it costs far less in 'adjusted' money (essentially 1M means the same to a nation making 2M/day as 5M does to a nation making 10M/day). It also provides said nation with far more benefit as none of the new wonders or resources are modified by tech, they all provide bonuses to either citizen population (directly pulled from infra) or infra cost and bills. So, in effect, not only are high tech nations punished by an initial cost, they receive much less benefit from the wonder than a 'similar' nation which has focused more in infra. Edited July 22, 2009 by hamlin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drai Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Are all of the bonus resources going to have a 25% chance of being mined? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oktavia Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Do we have an idea on what the requirements are going to be to purchase them? These look like high end nation wonders. If they're available to everyone than I can buy my Space Program now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drai Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 (edited) Do we have an idea on what the requirements are going to be to purchase them? These look like high end nation wonders. If they're available to everyone than I can buy my Space Program now. Previously (before this got taken out for review) there were no requirements * but they were very expensive with a base cost plus an additional cost dependent on Nation Strength. Edit: * Other than the Space Program of course. Edited July 22, 2009 by Drai Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oktavia Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Will it be worth paying such a massive fee to purchase the wonders? The WRC wonder already takes most nations a month to save up for. I don't think it'd be fun saving for 2-3 months for one wonder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steeldor Posted July 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 (edited) Now they've added 4 BR resources unique to the moon; calcium, radon, titanium, and silicon. They really seem to favor the "worse" starting resources. Edited July 22, 2009 by steeldor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kippa Tarxien Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 If the wonders are reasonably priced so that initially nations in the 3999-5000 infra range could afford them this might allow people with newer nations to stand some chance at competing with larger nations in the "growth race." This would be a huge plus for CN as a game. As ender land says, the main CN problem could be solved: the narrow, almost impossible to get top nations list, can get broader if cost is - Lower basic cost - Infra multiplied cost - Low tech price deduction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.