Managing Mundane vs. Cutting Edge Gear and Equipment

[Starship_Yard]

In regards to the economy discussion, I think a lot of the problems of excess income will disappear when the game incorporates the increased tempo of alien activity as time progresses.  At first there are relatively few incursions.  After a few months there will be a significant number each week to deal with, more with slightly larger groups of aliens.  Hence the pressure is on as you are hiring to keep enough combat capable troops and supplies on hand combined with satisfaction levels dropping as more chance of missions failing, etc.

Right now it seems there are a fixed number of missions per month or even diminishing as time progresses.  And hence the excess cash flow for many players.

Brett

[nemchenk]

Bret, what you describe can be simulated in campaign.ufo. I think the campaign is the way it is because UFO:AI is a different game

I am kinda tinkering with writing a more "1990s UFO:EU" campaign as we speak, which starts more slowly and leads up to the "Mumbai Incident", as it were.

As regards funding, I would say the player should get enough money to build one base, and then funding to upkeep it. Any growth should be through player action, i.e. increasing the happiness of nations, researching and manufacturing equipment, and selling off loot.

Some of the costs of equipment still seem a bit strange to me, though.

Just my 2p,

nemchenk

[FrancoC]

@Starship_Yard: that will probably be true in the future, but now the game has no use for the large amount of money you receive. You will reach 10Mil soon even with 6/8 full bases loaded with interceptors, soldiers, scientists and everything you like. Money is not a concern after few months.
While I think that it sould not be the biggest problem for a player in this game, you should at least think: Should I spend those credits building a new base or upgrading something I have?

@nemchenk: you can play with it and if you find any value that work let know.
That is what BTAxis told me (not actual word but that was the meaning:)


Those values are far from being final. My goal was to reach a macro balance at least.
Quoting my own post:
"Second collect feedback and correct major inconsistences.
Then, only then, change the small items costs like weapons and ammo."

I made more than I suggested as I felt that it needed some work also, but it was a bit rushed.

If you don't say "WTH is this, how can one play with these values" I'm more than happy

More in detail:
- I gave some items (i.e: ir googles) some weird values as they are not functional in current 2.2 release, they need to be changed when they do something.
- I feel alien technology could have a little higher costs, think of alien astrogation or alien engines.
If I'm correct they have no use today, they can only be researched, you can't install in one of your craft. When they do, you will have to choose: you want some easy cash or you want to upgrade your interceptors?
- Stiletto may be a Phalanx only technology, but today even an ammo clip can take serious time to be produced, if you have to produce each and all components for an interceptor you will have them readyed too late for the Aliens may already be sleeping in your own bed.

There are many questions I can't answer because the game is in progress, I read the final game will have 100 missions, now it ends with 25/30, it will need a serious rebalance for the prolonged and maybe harder campaign.

Edit: corrected some misspell.

[nemchenk]

FrancoC, I hope I did not offend you -- I greatly appreciate your work on this, and am only trying to help.

That's why I posted my list of thoughts -- to find out if you were thinking the same way. I will post some concrete numbers soon -- I'm a little overwhelmed with work at the moment


Yours,

nemchenk

[Psawhn]

Yes, this is definitely some well-needed and appreciated work.

Another idea is just to increase the cost of items all around the board, such that it really does feel like you're running a multi-million dollar international organization. Base modules could cost millions to build, instead of a few hundred thousand. Aircraft would cost several million each.

But I haven't given that enough thought to see if it would balance well with other, lesser things, such as weapons and ammo, and salaries. You'd have better experience to know.

[eleazar]

Another idea is just to increase the cost of items all around the board, such that it really does feel like you're running a multi-million dollar international organization. Base modules could cost millions to build, instead of a few hundred thousand. Aircraft would cost several million each.

Blech.  Adding several zeros to the cost of everything simply makes it harder to quickly understand and compare costs.  The eye can be boggled by when comparing 71200000 with 9810000 much more easily than when comparing 712 with 98.

If you want the flavor of large amounts of money then lets simply define the "$" (or whatever symbol is used) as thousands or millions of dollars (or credits, or bottlecaps...).  But spare the player the trouble of dealing with large, complex numbers.

[Surrealistik]

No. The more 0s the better. I want particle beams that cost a hundred million bazillion dollars and fill the screen with them. THINK OF THE INFLATION!!

[nemchenk]

It's true, more 0s make everything harder to read. But then again, the player ends up buyng bases and interceptors on the same "scale", as it were, as flashbangs and pistol magazines

Perhaps as someone suggested make pistol ammo cost 1c and work prices on a scale from there? I might give that a try, post some figures here, even if all it does is make it clear that the idea is of no practical use You never know...

[BTAxis]

The eye can be boggled by when comparing 71200000 with 9810000 much more easily than when comparing 712 with 98.

Would you have trouble comparing 71,200,000 with 9,810,000, though?

[eleazar]

Would you have trouble comparing 71,200,000 with 9,810,000, though?

Certainly commas (which 2.2 doesn't use) make it easier to compare large numbers.  But there's no question that 712 and 98 are much easier to compare and understand than the two in your quote.

When designing a game GUI "is it possible to get the necessary information?" -- is the wrong question.
Rather "is it as easy as possible to get the necessary information?" should be asked.

We throw a ton of information at the player, and generally the player will have something a lot more complex going through his mind than simply comparing two prices... I.E. he'll be comparing prices to see if it's possible to buy that base upgrade, and a couple new fighter planes while leaving enough left over to....

[Psawhn]

Or, to make everything incredibly confusing, use metric suffixes!

$71,200,000 becomes 72.2 Mc (megacredits),
$512,000 becomes 512 Kc (kilocredits), and the yearly expenditure of
$8,987,559,000 becomes 8.987559 Gc (gigacredits)!
And the sweetener for the morning coffee adds an extra 300mc (microcredits) to the price of a 1.5c (credit) coffee.
Those numbers become fun to compare.


Nah, seriously, I do think that the player would be more immersed if the numbers were either on the low end or the high end. On the low end, a state of the art laboratory cost of 120 credits is obviously not $120, but representing something like $12,000,000 or even $120,000,000. In the middle ground, a player might just believe he's buying that laboratory for $12,000 or $120,000.

But on the other hand, using denominations such that the cost of the cheapest purchasable item (pistol clips) is in the single digits, to me that reduces believability. "Why is pistol ammo conveniently at $1.00, and Assault rifle ammo $2.00?" I'd wonder. Better to leave Terran firearm ammo (or even most guns themselves) free and subsidized by the U.N.

[Surrealistik]

A higher price scale is appropriate both because of the actual costs of items commonly purchased in a game of UFO:AI, and because of inflation. Seriously, 60 or more years into the future, that stuff is going to be signifigantly more expensive than it is now (assuming 2-3% inflation per year).

Seriously though more zeroes, lol.

[nemchenk]

"Why is pistol ammo conveniently at $1.00, and Assault rifle ammo $2.00?" I'd wonder.

Admin overhead? 

[FrancoC]

@nemchenk: none offence taken, I hope the same is for you. English is not my first language so I apologize if my post sounded harsh.

I wanted to say that I have no special right on such work because I'm just a player, so anyone can be free to post any solution as I was.
Anyone using my "work" as starting point is welcome, I could say it is GPL

BTW: it made it somehow in actual trunk code, the "spirit" is in the game now even if the values are not exactly what I suggested. That means, for me at least, I will give them a try and eventually give my feedback.

[FrancoC]

It is not necessary to have many 0's, the game uses Credits not USD as currency, so any number would fit as long as an ammo clip cost is proportional to aircraft or building cost.

1.000.000 for stiletto
1.000 for a rifle

is the same game-wise as

1.000 for stiletto
1 for a rifle

note that I used " . " as currency format because many countries (i.e: Italy where I am from) use the comma as decimal separator.

If you use small numbers you can avoid the jungle of format for currencies.