April 2014 FMR review - fleet maintenance

[hideAndSeek]

Curious, at what number would everyone think is a good soft/hard cap? 100 million? 200 million?

I think it should scale with server age, or based server average, less the top and bottom 20%. The thing about static caps is that they are only "just right" for a limited slice of time. A hard number winds up being too high (like the rent!) at the beginning, and too low 1 year into the server (or vice-versa)

How would you propose we scale it? Simply by server age? Prod cap? Econ?

Base it on the average of the middle 80% of fleet total, as an example. Could do middle 90, middle 70... devs have better access to the stats, what you are trying to avoid in the average is letting the outliers distort your median. People with 0 or almost 0 fleet will drag the average down a lot (especially since there are a lot of them), but you can't take them out without also taking out the very top fleet holders (since there are few of them); they would drag the average up. So you subtract the lowest and highest from the dataset and see if that number looks good, maybe you have to remove more or less (or nothing) from the dataset to get a solid baseline. I can only guess, but I am certain you would want to eliminate *some* because there are so many accounts with basically no fleet for the entire life of any given server.

Once you find that "middle class", you can use that fleet average as a factor to create a proportionate cap that will grow with the server. It also has the advantage of scaling with events in the server as a result of game play -- after a crash, the averages come down, and there is generally less fleet on the server. Server age cannot flex like that, and econ doesn't necessarily correlate to fleet totals.

this would take away all the point of the maintenance. if maintenance gets cheaper(or whatever that will allow bigger fleets) as the server gets old, then at some point one guild can have big enough fleets, enough to keep the hole server hindered, just like it happens on the servers today, thus the rest of the players would be in the same situation and not being able to take an overpowered guild... it would take more time for that, but it would happen at the same. i think the point is not let ever a server die...
by averages cant see making it work either! as after a crash the averages drop a lot, so a player with 60M fleet that didn't participated on the crash would be screwed if the averages dropped to 40M

Early server it's common for people (that know what they are doing and aren't under constant threat of attack) to keep their econ significantly above their prod. But cybernetics keeps shrinking that gap until it becomes impossible to maintain even with many, many occupations.

and hope it keeps like that if there is a new economic structure or something else that gives extra economic, will make people more lazy and would be an incentive for simming, as the need for hunting would be less

[Hellion]

As for Mules post though I agree that a fleet maint of sorts is ideal if you want the game to actually survive long term. My post in response to his will go into far more detail of my thoughts on it. I will quote them out of convenience of not having to get on that thread and locate them.

Over complicating it will just confuse most people in the game.

5 million fleet, 20 armor:
5,000,000 * 0.00138% = 6,900

200 million fleet, 30 armor:
200,000,000 * 0.00158% = 316,000

200 million fleet, 20 armor:
200,000,000 * 0.00138% = 276,000

This is a good example of what I have been stating in my first post. This would successfully stop blobbing but at the same time it will stop most combat as well. Without a substantial rise in econ that would allow the ability to actually afford those during different wars. It will cripple free accounts far worse being that they are already hurting for area. The higher the armor tech the worse off you are which again makes it bad to tech up if you plan to sim.

As it stands without any repair bays a small 5 million fleet would wipe out half of a decent accounts hourly econ. In order to get this person out to actually make hits they have to feel they will actually turn a profit. This would be factored into said profit.

As an example

I am frigs on one of my accounts so were dealing with small numbers here and fast fleet.

9 hrs to a new cluster and I will use a smaller ammount of 100m which is 158000 at 30 armor.

At this point 9*158000=1422000 for the first flight since it was in movement and not at my base and being that I would need to set up a route beforehand that already has limited slots I will state 1.4 mil so far.

Mind you this isn't taking into consideration if I need more hops as most raids you land in a different galaxy first then jump to another one. Lets say it took me 12 hrs to take out a fleet then 9 hrs back. so 21 more hrs which isn't totally unrealistic or the need to wait on others to get online to make a specific hit. So 21*158000= 3318000+1422000= 4740000. In order to break even on this particular op if I decided to move a 100 mil fleet is going to need to be 4.7 mil... Also as mentioned free accounts will not be able to get the 158+ repair bays needed to curve it let alone more for those that already teched a bit higher then that.

Though I do like the general concept of it I also think it would effectively cripple combat in general and turn it into a build your empire game.

Based on the initial post the numbers are kind of painful even at 100m (not factoring in any restocks or base defenses). It also punishes people for putting credits into research when if anything higher tech should be more of a pro than a con and should be rewarded for the investment.

I could see something along the lines that if you are under 5-10 mil fleet you will never see any maint (to avoid issues early game).

Tie fleet maint to server age and fleet size after a particular amount.

Use tech/buildings to mitigate some of repairs with the possibility of moving your prod cap to offset some of the repairs. Example: One base could build something similar to goods but it uses its prod cap to help offset repair costs.

You don't want costs to be such a hindrance that it makes it unprofitable to go to war because doing so would effectively kill combat. As others mentioned taking it out of hourly income is preferable otherwise you run into negative credits and other issues while if it hits hourly and goes negative it will just zero out and require pushing production towards repairs meaning you will then not be able to continue producing at much as its focused on dealing with repairs. If you do not work on getting your hourly income back at all you will run into some other disadvantage (fleet not moving I feel might be a bad route as it makes it harder for players to correct it naturally).

This all being said I think the introduction of fleet maint there should also be a better means of boosting econ to counter it a little bit. Econ as is would neuter most accounts pretty heavily but raising econ for newer players would allow them to keep more queues going until they get larger easier while help countering fleet maint to some degree for the older accounts. Otherwise its just a matter of finding the happy medium for that.

[Whis]

Now that this is rolled out on a live server, is there any tweaks that the populous thinks would be beneficial?

Saying remove it is not acceptable, we're looking for actual ideas.

[hideAndSeek]

maybe change maintenance to be based only on the eco of bases , and always taking in count the eco base, not the income base.
So that even a player that is been farmed can have the same free fleet as the player that is farming (assuming both have bases with similar eco).

Although, i come to realize that being so much impossible to have fleet on an outside cluster, this becomes a higher incentive to disband and relocate, witch is the only way to evolve 100% anyways. But i´m afraid it is making it much more easy to conquer a galaxy in the beginning of a server, and taking a huge blow to be able to fight back too soon.

[JokeySmurf]

i would prefer that the formula was tweaked so that it rounds out to a 0 or 5....

otherwise make fighters cost 1 credit.

>_>

[sternenpunk]

While I like the basic concept, I think that the current version has two basic flaws:

1. economy is getting far to important

Free supported fleet =Economy^1.6+(Economy/100)^3.2
Fleet Maintenance =(Fleet above limit/125)^0.7

Both formulas are linked to your hourly income and both formulas are exponential, you can combine them like this:

Maximum fleet = Economy^1.6+(Economy/100)^3.2 +(Economy^(1/0.7))*125

The result being that a hit to your economy is always hurting you double and the same improvement of economy gives much more benefits to a high eco account than to a low eco account. I don't see how this levels the playing field.

After reaching that limit the whole situation is suddenly reversed because:

2. there is no penalty for not beeing able to pay for fleet maintenance!

Your economy doesn't matter anymore, you can disband all eco buildings and feed your prod cap from derbs only.

I would propose to fix the first problem by using a flat formula for free fleet not linked to eco like for example 1000 * base population or 1m * bases. The fleet maintenance formula itself doesn't need to be changed.

The second problem could be fixed by a degradation of prod capacity. For example reduction by 1% for every tick you can't pay the maintenance.

[Winchester]

The free fleet needs to be higher, and here's a solid reason why. I'm currently working three jobs while also participating in summer competitions for law school; I don't have time to be super active, particularly in early game where jumpgates don't yet exist and fleet travel takes hours. I'm in a small guild of casual players, surrounded by the #1 zerg on the server. Thanks to the higher base costs, it's taken me significantly longer to increase my number of bases, which stifles my econ. I have enough econ to sim fleet until the weekends, when I have some time to use it...but my econ and my prod cap leaves me without much fleet to play with before I start incurring a penalty.

A week ago, I was right around my maximum free fleet of 33k when I got zeroed. I'm now up to 40k, and could be at 60k+ if I'd gone full tilt on production. I'm building faster than I can use it, obviously, because I don't have the free time to spend six hours flying to a hit and then three hours to clean it up (since I don't want to use up more of my free fleet for recs, I have fewer, and thus need even more time to make hits). Meanwhile, I can't just stage my fleet near a target and wait until I get home from work, because my galaxy is crawling with enemies.

In short, I'm being harmed as the little guy because my capacities and econ far exceed my free fleet. I can build past my free fleet in a week, and that's a problem. The formula needs to change, or else it's going to be even harder for the people that don't zerg. I know that I've offered formulas in the past, and I believe that I've seen the suggestion of fleet maintenance not kicking in until six months into the server. I'd be okay with that, or even with having fleet maintenance tied to level protection - either no maintenance until level thirty, or reduce maintenance accordingly by your level. Under ten = 5% of maintenance. 10-19.99 = 15% maintenance. 20-29.99 = 25% maintenance. 30+ = full maintenance.

Here's another idea. Take the current fleet maintenance and automatically double the free fleet. Each base reduces that bonus free fleet by 8%; with five bases, you get +60% free fleet; ten bases, +20% free fleet; fifteen bases, -20% free fleet. I believe Wizard said the new base soft cap would be right around 16-18, so that's perfect - at soft cap you have significantly less free fleet. Until then, you get an advantage for running fewer bases, which balances out with the advantage of more econ.

[Karsus]

Indeed if you are the underdog and your bases are getting hammered (pillaged and TR's plundered) the fleet maintenance kicks in way too early.

I experienced this twice when people tried to perma occ me. Among other things I had to watch out my fleet numbers so my hammered eco wouldn't get more hammered.

As it is now

Free supported fleet =Economy^1.6+(Economy/100)^3.2

I think the first term should be adapted. It is the one that matters for early game hence the one we have feedback from.

Free supported fleet =x*Economy^y+(Economy/100)^3.2

I think something like x=1,5 and y~2 would be better. Numbers can be reworked, haven't worked too much on them.

[Tasman]

It shouldn't be based on total eco in the first place.

When UCs disbands or when someone drops a TR with you aren't the effect of any war, yet this will affect your cap.

If you want it tied to eco the only option which makes sense is base eco (Original eco, not after occ eco).

[JokeySmurf]

this is why i said in the feedback, that this should not be tied to econ at all, it should be tied to a new mechanic, population.

[Karsus]

It could be tied on Production Capacity.

That d hurt less when eco plunges suddenly.

[Whis]

An iteration I really liked was tied to production. I'm almost 100% sure it was wlerin's idea..

But yes, production would be the most logical thing to tie it to IMHO

[Karsus]

Cool, Didn't know that. I came back recently from 2+ year break to try v2.

One could even use current formula but make it eco -> (eco+Prod)/2 if eco is meant to be so important now. It's easier to lockdown a galaxy now and farm ppl out of the game when you hit their bases and what fleet they have left starts taking away the little econ available to them to free themselves.

And later when a guild wins a war and pillages the bases of defeated guild's star players their comeback will be a LOT slower which defeats the purpose behind fleet maintenance.

[Hasdrubal]

Fleet maintenance can do more things on game mechanics if something is included in formula:

1. I would decrease the value where fleet maintenance is added and probably increase the value one must pay for maintenance - the value of each can be discussed and I would not give preferred number, but,

2. Each fleet at home bases is deducted from maintenance formula - thus, more fleet on bases means less paying, fleet out of bases means, you have to pay for maintenance. Fleets on blobs means pay for maintenance.

This solution can solve also some of blob problems, also, players would find more targets when play.

[Whis]

Then no one would use their fleets, if you get penalized for having them not on your base, most would keep them on their base.