anderclayton
Captain
Reged: 08/05/02
Posts: 894
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49008 - 02/02/03 04:59 PM (208.186.188.131)
|
|
|
But would require more active coding... "Simple" isn't necessarily the way it is going to work.
If it does work that way though, is it going to drop leftover BP's or carry them over to the next buidling?
Ander
Edited by anderclayton (02/02/03 05:20 PM)
|
Stalker17
General
Reged: 06/24/02
Posts: 2581
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49013 - 02/02/03 05:19 PM (68.159.0.183)
|
|
|
well how else is it going to work? remember you don't have a pool of X BPs now, you have a number of crews
--------------------
"Insanity is just another word for true creativity"
da SEXY Stalker17, out
|
anderclayton
Captain
Reged: 08/05/02
Posts: 894
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49014 - 02/02/03 05:23 PM (208.186.188.131)
|
|
|
Now? Now I have a bunch of builders (some civilians, some infantry)...
What are you trying to say exactly?
[sorry, I edited my last post right as you were posting a new one]
Ander
|
TheDeadlyShoe
Lieutenant Colonel
Reged: 06/22/02
Posts: 1621
Loc: Redmond, WA
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49037 - 02/02/03 10:59 PM (4.40.153.191)
|
|
|
the issue with civvie builders was actually that they changed the BP in a zone every nevday. 
--------------------
Shoe for the NSI
|
anderclayton
Captain
Reged: 08/05/02
Posts: 894
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49039 - 02/02/03 11:05 PM (208.186.188.144)
|
|
|
I wasn't raising an issue with civvie builders. I am going with the thread. If the civvie builders are the big problem then I doubt it would raise any real protests to get rid of them entirely. They are mostly just a neato coolio little extra anyhow.
Ander
|
TheDeadlyShoe
Lieutenant Colonel
Reged: 06/22/02
Posts: 1621
Loc: Redmond, WA
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49051 - 02/03/03 12:12 AM (4.40.153.191)
|
|
|
bah ok forget the civvie builders 
--------------------
Shoe for the NSI
|
Selina
Recruit
Reged: 07/12/02
Posts: 51
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49075 - 02/03/03 06:12 AM (134.76.25.103)
|
|
|
What's your problem Flameseeker ? This thread is basically a poll about who will be willing to support Neveron after these changes and who won't. No more, no less.
Those that think, that the changes are Ok or that Neveron will be worth their money even after the changes, will continue donating, those that think otherwise might stop. Seems like a good idea to get a picture of the mood.
Selina
|
Selina
Recruit
Reged: 07/12/02
Posts: 51
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49076 - 02/03/03 06:18 AM (134.76.25.103)
|
|
|
In reply to:
Nev needs the money from somewhere, yes, but lately it's been IMHO pushing too hard to get that money. That's the way this particular donor feels about it. There's a fine line between voluntarily supporting a small team of developpers trying to make a free game, and feeling like it's turning into a "you're not getting anywhere unless you pay up" kind of a scam. Of course, it is just my own view of it, and it may well be very wrong. But of course, I'll base my choice of whether to send more money on that subjective view. And, of course, you're 100% free to think otherwise.
Very well said. It's a pity that Neveron seems to changing from a really good game (despite the bugs and other little problems) to something where you can't really get ahead, unless you are willing to pay lots of money.
I've donated in the past, but after all the changes in the last few months plus the upcomming builder changes, it gets less and less likely that I will ever donate again.
Selina
|
Selina
Recruit
Reged: 07/12/02
Posts: 51
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49077 - 02/03/03 06:27 AM (134.76.25.103)
|
|
|
In reply to:
Personally, I don't see why Randy & Co. feel they have to change the construction rules. I am perfectly happy with them the way they are, and I don't think they need to be changed. I doubt they'll listen to me, though, and they will probably go through with this foolish notion of using construction crews.
Well, the idea behind the changes is, that they want to cut down lag. The main idea of using a precalculated timestamp instead of daily updates is a really good one (those regular update scripts make for a application, that must have problems with scalability).
But although I like the basic idea of just calculating how long a building will take instead of updating it's status 10 times a day, I can't really agree with the suggested implementation.
It's plainly to expensive (especially when working on bigger projects) and it suddenly makes many investments worthless (EVs as well as many of the infantry techs and factories to build inf stuff). I would hope, that it gets adjusted before it is finally implemented, but somehow I don't have much faith left.
Selina
|
Selina
Recruit
Reged: 07/12/02
Posts: 51
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49078 - 02/03/03 06:31 AM (134.76.25.103)
|
|
|
In reply to:
It is, however, very doubtful that the EV prices are even going to be staying stable in the future.
I disagree. In fact many of the larger empires will have a large surplus of EVs, if the change is implemented as suggested, and their demand for new EVs will dwindle. I think if anything EV-prices will stay stable. Afterall production is already higher than the demand.
Selina
|
davion76
Lieutenant Colonel
Reged: 08/07/02
Posts: 1605
Loc: Ridgecrest CA, USA
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49081 - 02/03/03 07:05 AM (138.163.0.42)
|
|
|
I don't think production is higher than demand, the sellers just won't reduce the price. I know they are making a hefty profit on EV's at 6 mil. I bet you if the price dropped to 4 mil or less there wouldn't be many on the market. I know several people that would jump all over them, myself included.
|
Wayward_Son
Major
Reged: 07/05/02
Posts: 1287
|
Fuzzy Math
#49101 - 02/03/03 12:09 PM (216.19.47.83)
|
|
|
I think maybe you need to do some math and figure out the actual costs here because you seem to be overreacting. Building overall is actually *cheaper* from both a cost (unless you are producing infantry weapons and have a large draft reserve) and maintenance standpoint than before. Let's compare at the lower end:
Type: AR Unit
Cost: +/-$500,000
Maint: $2,000
BP: 2.8
Type: Level 2 BC
Cost:$500,000
Maint: $3,000
BP: 4
Type: Level 3 BC
Cost: $2,000,000
Maint: $8,000
BP: 10
As you can see level 3 Build Crews (BC) start to become slightly less efficient than AR units (assuming market prices
stay below profitable levels), but they also build quite quickly. A 75 CF 4 level residential building can be built in just over 18 Nevdays. Level 1 BC's are not listed above but are extremly efficient cost-wise, particularly on the maintenance end. Patient empires and smaller empires will save a bundle of cash by using level 1's and even level 2's. The only reason to get the larger BC's are for when you are building very large structures (TC's and Repair facilities) and want them done in a more reasonable amount of time. We just reduced the build cost of TC's from 200,000 BP's to 40,000 to help make up for this change.
Larger empires will also greatly benefit from the fact that most have and use EV's to build, which GREATLY increase the efficinecy of builders. EV's will no longer be able to be used as the sole source of construction, but they will probably be more worth the outrageous prices people pay for them.
Few other aspects of building are changing. You can queue up only as many buildings as you have crews working in that zone. Since crew movement and purchase will be instantaneous, you can easily move however many crews you need to a specific zone, commission your buildings and let them build. If you have more crews than buildings in a zone, the game will only use as many crews as there are buildings to calclulate progress, choosing better crews over worse ones.
WS
|
Flameseeker
Major
Reged: 07/18/02
Posts: 1304
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49108 - 02/03/03 01:48 PM (66.82.9.16)
|
|
|
Selina, I was angry at Countergod for trying to sink a great game. Some people (me) can ignore the bugs, play it for fun, play it for the strategy and tactics. Other people have to have it perfect, they have to win, they have to have their DP stuff. And WS, nice job. *Clap clap clap clap* That's all I have to say. Except for, Countergod, I apologize. I was angry and I acted rashly. From now on that poll doesn't matter. 
--------------------
Cpt. Searo "Ace" Ficha of the Darkfire Legionnaires
|
anderclayton
Captain
Reged: 08/05/02
Posts: 894
|
Re: Fuzzy Math
#49111 - 02/03/03 02:06 PM (208.186.188.128)
|
|
|
"You can queue up only as many buildings as you have crews working in that zone. "
Well... That answers the queu question. No queus.
Ander
|
anderclayton
Captain
Reged: 08/05/02
Posts: 894
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49119 - 02/03/03 02:20 PM (208.186.188.128)
|
|
|
You also have a good portion of the people that weren't really aware of the breakdown of what they are worth prior to this change. Now it is plainly spelled out and anyone with a calculator can see how much they are worth. It is pretty likely that the EV price will probably double when the changes go through.
Ander
|
anderclayton
Captain
Reged: 08/05/02
Posts: 894
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49120 - 02/03/03 02:26 PM (208.186.188.128)
|
|
|
It was brought forward as a proposed change, not a New Change. The "proposed" wording would lead one to believe that discussing it, debating it, etc would be an encouraged thing. Bagging on people that are discussing it like that is kinda against the supposed purpose.
Ander
|
anderclayton
Captain
Reged: 08/05/02
Posts: 894
|
Re: Fuzzy Math
#49121 - 02/03/03 02:38 PM (208.186.188.128)
|
|
|
If you are actually saying that that was an aspect that "isn't changing," you are a bit off there. Right now you can build as many buildings as you have BP (pretty much) and split them any way that they can be split. If you can only have as many buildings being produced as you have crews, this means that you are going to have to wait with bated breath on your 'build' button for a crew to stop or just lose that crew's actions until you can tell them to start another building.
Right now if your buildings are nearing completion, you can just add more buildings to the amount that your workers are producing. With the proposed changes, you have to be able to start producing right after they get done.
You do realize that the term queu refers to what is basically new requisitions, right?
"A 75 CF 4 level residential building can be built in just over 18 Nevdays. "
Hmmmm... Including basement (most people do that), it would take 23 Nevdays actually. 225BP construction and you get smacked for the last five BP. Right now I can get a set done in a day or two in some of my empires.
Ander
|
Mortimus_Jones
Sergeant Major
Reged: 11/30/02
Posts: 273
Loc: Middle o' the US of A
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49123 - 02/03/03 03:05 PM (65.69.50.215)
|
|
|
Yes, and trying to get people to stop donating over building costs is just as silly. But hey, why should we care (those that take the good with the bad) We shouldnt, I guess, it should be just fine to freak out over building costs, and to get as many n00bs to NOT donate, (and, in essence, not start up Empires, and not play) then, hell, no new donations, all the large donators stay big, all the small guys stay small, we all have something else to bitch and whine about, and the game goes on. Sad.
I see where Flame is coming from, and I have to agree. This is just one way for people to try to get things their way, which it was NEVER stated that donating would gain you leverage for game changes. Discussing it, yes, but trying to get people to stop donating, to keep something that can, and most likely will, (in my opinion) benefit the game, is silly. They never, ever stated that changing it over to BC's would REDUCE THE TOTAL COST. If you look at it, the ONLY thing it changes is the abillity to buy a crap load of Inf at the beginning. Thats just horribly WRONG, now isnt it? They said the aim was to reduce lag. Nowhere in the update did they say they were trying to "reduce" the costs, the costs even out (FOR BUILDING). And, if this is about being a n00b, and being able to go "quickly", or build your Empire up faster, come on. That, I am sorry to say, should not even be brought into it. If you start this game, thinking that there is a way to get some kind of "jump" or accelerated building pace by using Inf, you are in the wrong game anyway. This game was NOT meant to go fast, it was not meant to take a week to reach a substantial gain in your Empire (unless you plan on going into the arena, or landwar) so that is a pretty lame reason for getting pissed about this.
I am a total n00b. Been playing for less than 3 months, (notice the n00b questions that I post, quite frequently?) and I am still growing at a snail pace. Maybe I could have done something different in the beginning, but that would not change the fact that this is a SLOW paced game, something meant to be built up over time. Saying that this is going to make New Empires grow slower, is like saying they need to lower Mech costs so Small Empires can purchase them earlier. I think thats a GREAT idea . That way, new Empires wont have to build as much infra, and they can still grow (based on BV) and then participate in LW and high level arenas sooner, giving them the abillity to grow real fast. Silly. And yes, the little "Poll" about donating pisses me off too. I voted for all of the above, because thats a load of crap. To try to get people to stop donating because of this change is sad, and to try to say that this change will ruin the game is worse. Yea, re-tooling my current Empires will cost, yea, it may take me longer to reach level 5, but hell, I did not, in any way, expect it to go quickly. THAT would be a mistake.
--------------------
Oh poop off already.....
|
davion76
Lieutenant Colonel
Reged: 08/07/02
Posts: 1605
Loc: Ridgecrest CA, USA
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49136 - 02/03/03 04:14 PM (138.163.0.44)
|
|
|
What the purpose of this poll was, is to let the admins know that we have some power too. Each individual has nearly no power, but if a significant majority of the people who donate to keep nav running are solidly against something, we can get it changed by the force of refusing to donate. The admins have the choice of changing or shutting down nev. I seroiusly doubt that this point is important eniugh to Randy that he wuld shut down nev. Note that I'm NOT one of those who will refuse to donate because of this, but I AM DEFINITLEY in favor of the discussion that this poll has enabled.
|
Flameseeker
Major
Reged: 07/18/02
Posts: 1304
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49145 - 02/03/03 05:11 PM (205.188.193.161)
|
|
|
I don't want to put him in the position that he might WANT to shut down Nev. This is a fun, free game. Acting like a spoiled little brat isn't gonna help. Were you chained to the ground and did you have a gun at your head when and if you donated? No, you wanted to get big fast. If you are so mad at Randy for creating HIS game HIS way, buy your own server, and code your own game. I won't be playing it, good luck.
--------------------
Cpt. Searo "Ace" Ficha of the Darkfire Legionnaires
|
davion76
Lieutenant Colonel
Reged: 08/07/02
Posts: 1605
Loc: Ridgecrest CA, USA
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49176 - 02/03/03 06:14 PM (12.219.245.15)
|
|
|
I'm not mad at him, I just donated $200 this past week. That makes a total of $500 I have donated. That being said, the players are alot of what keeps nev running, and because of that, as a group, we have power. If we as a group all want something realistic w eshould get it.
|
TheDeadlyShoe
Lieutenant Colonel
Reged: 06/22/02
Posts: 1621
Loc: Redmond, WA
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49207 - 02/03/03 08:20 PM (4.40.153.191)
|
|
|
A note on basements, if you are yelling about how builders might be ineffecient at building or cost more money, you really shouldnt be using basements.
--------------------
Shoe for the NSI
|
Moraelin
Sergeant
Reged: 08/05/02
Posts: 304
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49244 - 02/03/03 11:17 PM (217.225.108.49)
|
|
|
Flameseeker, let's put it like this: if I wanted to have a quick win for my DP, I would have bought a lance of level 2 mechs and marched them through your main city. With the money I paid, I could have had 4 times the infra by now, without even hiring a single builder ever. And I couldn't have cared less about any builder changes, if that was the case.
So please step out of the fanboy fit already. The people who are pissed off here are the builders, not the people who want a quick gain for their DP. The people who want a quick win for their DP are that-a-way. They're the nice chaps over there with the lances of Stone Rhino and Nemesis. The chaps that you see in the war log every single day.
They're also the people that Randy and WWS catter to. I don't know how much those guys paid Randy for that perpetual LW, but I would guess more than I paid to build. Because what Randy wants is still more LW, not more people building stuff.
But either way, lemme get this straight. You throw this big a fit over someone wanting to stop paying, as if they absolutely _must_ keep paying... but you never paid anything yourself. A bit hypocritical, eh? It seems to me like _you_ already decided that Neveron is _not_ worth your money. Then what gives you the right to throw a fit when someone else is getting to the same conclusion? If you really think that Neveron needs money to survive, you don't need to throw fits, you just need to go to PayPal and send it some money. That's all. That's the only thing which would prove that you actually believe Neveron is worth the money. Until then, you just "voted with your wallet" that Neveron isn't worth paying for. Thank you for your vote.
--------------------
---
Moraelin - The proud member of the Idiots' Guild
|
TheDeadlyShoe
Lieutenant Colonel
Reged: 06/22/02
Posts: 1621
Loc: Redmond, WA
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49256 - 02/03/03 11:50 PM (4.40.153.191)
|
|
|
Randy is maybe more in favor of lots more landwar, but he's also in favor of more limited landwar, as opposed to the most common type of LW we have today, the crush-an-empire-in-a-few-hours. Sadly, Moraelin, most empires are crushed so easily because they dont have a military worth a DAMN. Admittedly, anyone Sly attacks is pretty much screwed unless he invested in a massive group of towers, but when Sly attacks you you get your infra back. Other landwar-empires might not have the sheer striking power of Irregulars, but ehy might not be as nice with infra. The sad thing is that most of the empires you see that are hit are NOT set up for defense in ANY kind of proper fashion. Wake up, people! When you get to level 5 or 6... you...are....a.... target . a BIG target. you NEED to invest in towers, have a well trained, well equipped military, have lots of reserve cash on hand, invest in alliances, have standby empires ready to counter-attack, join a faction that can actively contribute to your defense, generate terrain on your zones, PLACE YOUR BLEEDIN' TROOPS (I canNOT stress that enough), et. al.
It's just sad te number of level 5-6 empires I see get smeared. The times I have landwarred I have not once come against a significant defense force. not once. We really need to add another section to the tutorial: How to Defend your Empire.
sorry for the insta-rant, I hate to see so many empires die with barely a whimper.
--------------------
Shoe for the NSI
|
anderclayton
Captain
Reged: 08/05/02
Posts: 894
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49258 - 02/04/03 12:19 AM (208.186.188.141)
|
|
|
 Me, I was going on the issue of speed but seriously you could make the same case for building 150 CF buildings or even building 50 CF buildings. At least as far as cost efficiency is concerned. Larger CF buildings are much more inefficient than smaller ones.
Lame straw horse argument.
Ander
|
Flameseeker
Major
Reged: 07/18/02
Posts: 1304
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49281 - 02/04/03 06:23 AM (66.82.9.32)
|
|
|
I'm broke.  Also, DP buys so little unless you spend 100+ dollars, which I don't have, and if I did, I probably would't donate with. BTW, if you attacked me, you would gain very little. I am a small empire, with not enough population to waste attacking.
--------------------
Cpt. Searo "Ace" Ficha of the Darkfire Legionnaires
|
Moraelin
Sergeant
Reged: 08/05/02
Posts: 304
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49302 - 02/04/03 08:59 AM (194.114.62.38)
|
|
|
I wasn't planning to attack you, nor anyone else anyway. That was the whole point. That if I just wanted a quick return of investment, I'd attack someone for infra and morale. Definitely quicker than trying to argue with Randy and WWS anyway. And definitely more fun.
Or even better, for that kind of money I could have just bought me a level 8 or 9 empire. E.g., I see Jere's Black Towers empire is up for sale for around the same money as what I donated so far. It's a level 9, has good military, a 0/0 Stone Rhino, good income, and generally is _much_ better than the level 7 and 5 I built. So there you go: yet another way to get not only more bang per US$ than trying to build your own, but also to get it much faster.
The whole discussion here was about how this change affects the builder and manufacturer empires, not how to get a quick benefit out of your DP. That was my point.
In reply to:
Also, DP buys so little unless you spend 100+ dollars, which I don't have, and if I did, I probably would't donate with.
Which on one hand means you're a lot more sane than I was, but on the other had, well, you've just said that whether Neveron "sinks" or not, it isn't worth saving with _your_ money. Again, very sane and pragmatic point of view. No arguments from me there. But surely then you'll have some understanding for those of us who are slowly (and too late) getting to the exact same conclusion.
--------------------
---
Moraelin - The proud member of the Idiots' Guild
|
Flameseeker
Major
Reged: 07/18/02
Posts: 1304
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49352 - 02/04/03 02:12 PM (66.82.9.30)
|
|
|
Darn, DPing fools have discovered my scheme.....  *Looks around suspiciously*
--------------------
Cpt. Searo "Ace" Ficha of the Darkfire Legionnaires
|
anderclayton
Captain
Reged: 08/05/02
Posts: 894
|
Re: DP BOYCOTT VOTED ON AND CONFIRMED IN CHAT VOTE HERE
#49376 - 02/04/03 03:58 PM (208.186.188.133)
|
|
|
Well... Question 3 was answered (we can't queu buildings). The other ones really haven't been covered.
More questions though:
5. What happens to construction crews when a zone gets invaded? Do they run away? If so, do they cause a loss of morale from running? Do they just go away? Are they taken over by the invader? If the latter, that might be a nice bonus for invading...
6. Do construction crews have any effect on morale (as in, if we disband them, do we lose morale)?
7. Is transfering infantry to construction crews going to cause a loss of morale?
Ander
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
