Zoolimar wrote:On the topic of ship upkeep cost and number of ships it seems that the problem lies in the fact that upkeep cost is a flat number while income grows in multiple ways.
I've been hemming and hawing all morning about whether or not I think a nonlinear part pricing model is worth doing. I've pulled more numbers from an AI vs. AI test game. "Balance" has always been pretty rough in SiS, particularly as it exists between the different factions, and while that roughness is certainly in evidence in these spreadsheets, I'm not seeing clear enough anomalies to be tempted to do a serious upkeep rebalancing pass. Sure, in very late game, Orthin Gunships get some crazy good offensive efficiency numbers, but that's actually more or less working as intended. Some of the Yoral destroyers are also very effective "glass cannon" type designs, but, again, that's arguably "working as intended".Zoolimar wrote:If there is a worry about that pricing modules directly will lead to builds heavily favouring offence what about power 2 for Tech Tier weighting? So that higher tech contributes larger part of the ship maintenance than lower tech.
Based on the playtesting I've done, my general sense is that the upkeep balance is actually in an ok sortof place in the "in_development" build. I think I can see some relatively modest changes that ought to be made to be made to the income mechanics -- as zolobolo's posts suggest, markets probably need a higher understaffing penalty. And as other players have mentioned, the +2 trade cap bonus granted by each outpost is probably far too high. I've tried to address both these issues in the diff set for r38135, but, I don't expect the changes I'm making there to have huge impacts on the current balance.