Star Sonata
http://www.starsonata.com/forum/

Constructive Criticism-Current Design Decisions in SS
http://www.starsonata.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=107&t=51920		 Page 3 of 4
Author:  paxiprime [ Thu May 03, 2012 10:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Constructive Criticism-Current Design Decisions in SS
I do think that DG's should drop more than a 100m or so per boss, the credits dropped should be increased significantly per boss.
Author:  trevor54 [ Thu May 03, 2012 10:18 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Constructive Criticism-Current Design Decisions in SS
If I recall, they have increased credits dropped by a DG boss a ton already?
Author:  anilv [ Thu May 03, 2012 10:44 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Constructive Criticism-Current Design Decisions in SS
DGs aren't an alternative to colonies since people can easily do both. I think we should make colonial administration more hands-on so people can't get full colony revenue plus whatever money they can make actually playing the game. That's not to say that you should have to spend hours every day tweaking your colonies though.

Anyway, the game is starving for a legitimate alternative to colonies but the fact that colonies are so passive (once they're set up) is a real stumbling block. One of my ideas was a prospecting-style skill that actually reduces your account base slots so you can't really build strong while also going for prospecting, but you can make decent credits through that instead.
Author:  Chaosking3 [ Thu May 03, 2012 11:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Constructive Criticism-Current Design Decisions in SS
There are a few workable solutions. Another one was that CA kits had to be certain techs to give certain returns which would limit the amount of colos a ton (I use t6 kits for instance)

Again, no change to colos will matter until some alternatives are put in.
Author:  anilv [ Thu May 03, 2012 11:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Constructive Criticism-Current Design Decisions in SS
Chaosking3 wrote:
Again, no change to colos will matter until some alternatives are put in.


Yes, but many alternatives are unworkable without a change to colonies. Anything you can do while also earning colony money is NOT a true alternative.
Author:  Chaosking3 [ Thu May 03, 2012 11:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Constructive Criticism-Current Design Decisions in SS
Fair enough, a tandem change would need to occur.
Author:  kilua [ Thu May 03, 2012 11:31 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Constructive Criticism-Current Design Decisions in SS
wars between teams doesn't exist because ya'll carebears and crybabies...

every single war between any team i have ever seen got too personal, members from team X Cussing and swearing on members from Team Y, because the attacked them and took their GG, and bla bla bla.. Seriously some of the players need to understand that this is a game, if you got killed, lost something.. you can get it again.. its not real life.. remember?

and i see people complaining about Unfair PvP.. attacking someone who isn't ready to actually fight back, this is quite rude and not necessary.. for anyone who likes to do that.. stop it..

wars should be, Team X vs Team Y.. al members of each team should always be prepared for an unwanted attack, all galaxies should be ready to fight back an assault, fights occur between few or many individuals but ends up with virtual handshakes and "God ,that was fun.." ...

not "Fuck You you FUCKING TWEAKER!!"...
Author:  kanescreed [ Thu May 03, 2012 11:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Constructive Criticism-Current Design Decisions in SS
kilua wrote:
wars between teams doesn't exist because ya'll carebears and crybabies...

k-2 i barly knew you in SS but know we are friends.
Author:  Belliaum [ Fri May 04, 2012 5:02 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Constructive Criticism-Current Design Decisions in SS
Seems once again a person who dont know anything about colonies is posting that they are too good. The time and credits invested into colonies is something fools who dont know anything about them always complain about. You can not setup a col and just go afk to earn money. Colonies need loads of time and loads of accounts to work properly. Also with jeff messing up the average planet quaility this uni the investment into terraforming has gone up quite a bit. This uni at the beginning I invested 150 bill into terraforming and inititally build up my colonies. For the first 3 weeks I did nothing but setup bases. Just scanning a damn galaxy with a eniac omega scanner takes ages, I spent several hours doing just that to find out where to build extraction bases.

To all you fools who say colonies are to easy just shut the fuck up you do not know what you are talking about.
Author:  Russell [ Fri May 04, 2012 5:13 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Constructive Criticism-Current Design Decisions in SS
"The second thing I want to discuss is colonies, and the autonomous nature of them. This is something we are all aware of; many players are making colonies at the beginning of a uni, afking most of the uni, and coming back to many billions. I don't know if this is not good in most developers opinions, which is partly the point of this thread. I want to know what they think of making ridiculous amounts of money by simply setting up a colony and forgetting about it.

All that being said, I think that if you had to be more active to manage your colonies, the amount of money made from them would be entirely fine because there really aren't that many options to make money out there."

This is simply untrue and if you were a colony builder you would not have posted this.

Many people think that you merely slap a base down and wait for the money to roll in.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Colonies have to be constantly managed to make the oft quoted 200-300m per day.
Colonies all have to be supported by ExE bases and protected by StM bases. The whole lot have to be serviced by scores of slaves.
This is an extremely delicately balanced operation requiring thousands of commands (assuming about 15-20 colonies).
Things go wrong all the time (particularly when the server goes down) and unless it is fixed, can result in production ceasing in one or several bases or worse the bases run out of ration and die.

BTW I use to think that colonies generated the main money supply for the game. However given the apparantly huge supply of money in the game there seems to be much more money in the game than from colonies alone.
There is a small amount from DGs but I think there has to be another supply (particularly when you look at the very rich teams and compare that to population - pop is the basis of colonies-. I suggest you look for blueprints for items that can be built cheaply and sold to the AI bases for a substantial profit.

Further the nerfing of planet suitability this uni has resulted, in my team at least, of far less people building colonies mainly because of the cost and extra work of terraforming.
Author:  Devileye [ Fri May 04, 2012 5:19 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Constructive Criticism-Current Design Decisions in SS
I agree with enkelin post where he mentioned abt semi-frequent unpredictable disasters. This will also demote players to build 30-40 colonies each uni becuze the more colos u have, the harder it gets to control disasters.
Author:  Jey123456 [ Fri May 04, 2012 5:19 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Constructive Criticism-Current Design Decisions in SS
well, personally i made quite a few hundred bils selling commodity to ai bases (thats how i started my fortune actually), although once again, its not something you can just do, it require a lot of work and balancing to actually get any longterm profit from that.

As for where the money come from, its true that a very good part come from colonies, but being created in a colony doesn't mean it actually stay with the colony owner ;).

There are offcourse the stupidly crazy colony builder who make 15+. But there are a lot more who only have 2-3 colony, enough to give them a slight income without having to spend hours and hours of work to get them perfect. Those generally also dg and buy / sell shit, creating a money flow which offcourse, all flow directly back into my wallet :twisted:
Author:  Imra15 [ Fri May 04, 2012 5:48 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Constructive Criticism-Current Design Decisions in SS
Oh don't worry, it's not like the developers are going to magically grant your wish and return gear glue. RageQuit people, RageQuit.
Author:  tynmishoe22 [ Fri May 04, 2012 11:17 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Constructive Criticism-Current Design Decisions in SS
Jey123456 wrote:
well, personally i made quite a few hundred bils selling commodity to ai bases


This used to be possible, and it used to be how I made my money, but you guys changed something and now a base will buy like a fifth or less of what it used to buy before it stops. I wish this method were valid, for my sake.
Author:  Zekk [ Fri May 04, 2012 11:18 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Constructive Criticism-Current Design Decisions in SS
@Auralaz, many of my responses may not make sense to you, since you're so low level and will be based in history which you were not here for.

1) Been there, done that. It was not nearly as much fun as you think. Having the separate layer free of bases actually promotes the possibility of PvP since engaging in PvP wouldn't cut you off from most content.

2) Enk's suggestion of random disasters is a good one, but they MUST require construction projects to fix them or else you can automate their management. (unlike the O.P. suggestion of selling them shit) That being said, you need to understand that it takes me probably 60+ hours to set up my colonies at the beginning of each universe, and then I have to wait a whole MONTH for them to mature, and then reap decent profits for the next two months of the universe. (~38b per week this uni with 17 colonies, 3 accounts pretty much maxed out for slaves and stations). And I should also mention the 10b or so I had to drop into terraforming all those colonies too...

3) Wars don't happen not because there's no incentive to make war, but rather because there's so much incentive to NOT make war. The game is set up in such a way that you could lose hundreds of manhours of work overnight in a war, which no one is really prepared to do. Furthermore, it can and will go both ways, with losses on both sides, so there is no incentive for aggression. To actually "win" a war, you need to have lots of people on 24/7, which really isn't practical.

4) Even without dropping gear, the losses due to bases dying are still astronomical, especially with the threat of capping.

5) Finally a reasonable suggestion. Yes. Managing them from the website would be even better. :-D
Page 3 of 4 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/