Resource pricing and game economy

[the1sean]

ORIGINAL: WiZz

I don't understand, why propose some improvements, which totally illogical, artificial or hard to implement?

1) Inflation. Idea is good, but mechanism of economics in DW is not so complex and developed for this feature.
2) Honestly, don't understand this proposition. Just listen - expansion for large empire is more difficult than small empires. Nothing strange?
3) Agree, but I think, this is difficult to implement.

What are my propositions?
1) First of all, remove huge bonuses for money which provided by leaders/governors. Or just make them very rare.
2) Greatly raise prices for every new technology component. After couple of years reduce it, because industry set up their production.
3) Set development costs for new founded colonies. It is good implemented in Sword of the stars. This feature really slows expansion. When colony becomes enough developed this cost = 0.
4) Set payments for serving ground facilities.
5) Set hire price for ground troops on some governments (Republic/Democracy).
6) Set salaries for all characters.
7) Set payments for intelligence missions.

Great suggestions, WiZz, +1!

[WiZz]

Omg, reclaiming of Syberia and Alaska was done by Russian Empire, not Soviet Union. And sale of Alaska was mistake, what show geological discoveries in Alaska later...

As for me, I never give full control to AI. I prefer total manual. In most of my games I found, that controlling empire in galaxy with 700 stars is still possible (yes, I like a lot of micromanagement).

For my opinion expansion in DW must be limited only number of available planets, cash for colonizers/availability colonists, distance to enemies/competitors, etc. This factors also useful, when we take for example human history. If you read about expanding some empires by colonizing you may find, that their colonization was only limited by available territory/distance to colonies of other empires. By the way, main reason is that Crimea war began against French/Great Britain, why Alaska was sold. Russians had decided to sale Alaska, because there was threat, that GB troops in Canada could easily conquest it.
But never mind, sorry for small lecture of Russian history.
I sure, that main limitation of expansion should be high costs for development of new colonies like sots. Take a look for this game, this gameplay element fits perfectly for DW colonize concept.

[feelotraveller]

With you there Wizz, I too like full manual control.  [:)]  It is even possible to do it with 15x15 1400 stars.  I turn control over to the computer only when there is no point/challenge left in the game.  Meaning my empire is so far ahead it will make next to no difference letting the computer finish it.
 
I've played a couple of SotS games since paradox gave it to me for free - the changing tech tree is its appeal for me.  The reason I am not attracted by the idea of paying for development costs of new colonies is that this is exactly the sort of thing a human player will stretch to accommodate (read anticipate) and the computer does very badly with.  The computer will never run a deficit whereas I tend to always.  Meaning the comparative colonisation rates of the player will go up not down.

[J HG T]

@WiZz
Very interesting suggestions. Many of these could indeed work nicely. The only problem is to get 'em balanced, so they don't harm the "AI" players while skilled human player finds a way around and reaps the benefits.

The problem with somewhat complicated (by gaming stantards) economies in games is that they always favor human players, as they know how to take necessary risks and how to exploit the mechanics of the system.
That's why I think keeping the economy system in a game relatively simple gives the "AI" more even ground with human players.

Some have may said this before, but I think DWs current problems with the AI are:
- Inferior ship designs compared to human player. This leads to the fact that wars are always more costly to a computer player; The "AI" sends masses of rubbish ships to their deaths while players state-of-the-art ships mop the Grid with 'em without taking any noticeably casulties.
If the computer player would use optimized ships designs it could save loads of money and be real threat for a player, causing them to invest more money on military, thus leading to less excess credits.

- Better exploration AI. The empires trail behind in exploration if you decide to MM your exploration ships. Enhancing the "AI" empires exploration would help them colonize more, find derelict ships and other stuff and form beneficial treaties with other races faster, making them more competitive with the player.

These are just my two interstellar credits, but I think I'm not completely wrong with 'em.

Still, WiZz's an others ideas to nerf late game empires sound good and could fix some of the problems with the overkill economies.
I hope Elliot and Erik at least consider some of these suggestions.

[jpwrunyan]

Just raising the maint cost on some components like life support and hab modules for example would do wonders to make the game more challenging and not introduce any new complexity. Mining comps could also use more maint cost and this would curb empire income. Simple, safe, and easy to implement solution.