Easy to Implement Suggestions for the Next Release

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
24 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Easy to Implement Suggestions for the Next Release

crazy_german
Buildcaps I can believe are a solid feature. But can you post something with simple working maintenance costs?
Correctly crazy, disingenuously German
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Easy to Implement Suggestions for the Next Release

RogerCooper
I will try creating a scenario on the weekend as a test. I will probably make the maintenance cost 1/5 the purchase price. If I triple costs and income, things should work.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Easy to Implement Suggestions for the Next Release

crazy_german
Ah, so you haven't actually done it before?

I have tried doing exactly that, and I had the same thoughts you do, and realized its much harder than you would think. With your numbers, if my total income is 120 (40 tripled) a turn, I can't have more than 600 TUV of stuff (which really isn't that high) or my net income hits 0. There are multiple maps where with those numbers no one could buy anything till they started killing of their own soldiers.

One thing I overlooked was that TripleA maps tend to have really high starting total unit value relative to income, its hard to get the maintenance to actually matter (since you don't massively increase TUV as a % turn for turn, not even in the notorious stack heavy NWO), without just instantly bankrupting everyone. Another thing is the giant death stacks tend to be comprised of cheap units. I don't think people are complaining about seeing three battleships, but if you tie maintenance directly to TUV they cost more to maintain than fat infantry piles. (You can argue its realistic, but it kills strategic options). Feel free to try, but you are going to realize pretty quick that killing off infantry barely touches a nation's TUV.

I'm not saying it can't work, I'm sure someday someone will make a great map with it. But I really think you are going to have to change a lot of things, which goes back to my point, its not something you can just stick on to a map.
Correctly crazy, disingenuously German
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Easy to Implement Suggestions for the Next Release

RogerCooper
I took AAR multiplied all the costs and incomes by 10 and made the original cost the per turn maintenance. I am having a problem with setting the factory build limit to a different value than the income, but the AI does not take advantage of the glitch so I can make the following observations.

The games works but you need to give the Russians a bid worth 4-5 infantry to make it balance. The problem is that the maintenance cost is the same everywhere, which has the odd effect of favoring the strategic attacker.

In A&A the player disadvantaged on a front will slowly retreat back to his factories, reinforcing his armies while the advantaged player must march his infantry forward. With maintenance, new production is much lower, with disadvantage player being disproportionally affected by the lost income. It is hard to defend at all.

I agree that adding maintenance costs requires changing other parts of the game to make it work well. Build Caps seem to work better.

I will post the scenario once the build limit problem is fixed.
12