Maintenance Costs

[FrozenFallout]

Hi everyone,

I have been thinking of late game aspects of the Economy in Horizon and there was one thing I noticed that might be the cause of late game having way to much money and nothing to spend it on but billions of ships. Currently the Cost of a ship and its maintenance costs aren't greatly influenced by the kinda tech they have on them or the level of that tech. So as the game progresses your base cost and maintenance of ships stays about the same while your Economy continues to grow as your new worlds start to develop and you get better techs. This can easily lead to having Trillions of credits to spend but not much to spend it on while getting 100s of billions of credits a turn or even Trillions of credits a turn in very late game.

Currently there isn't much in the way to balance this. One thing I was thinking that would greatly help though would be to connect Maintenance costs and the cost of ships go up based on the tech level they are at and have some Techs cost allot more for both Maintenance and ship build cost. I would also suggest that some techs also add a multiplier to buy outs and in general make buy outs allot more expensive. Currently even mid game and some what in early game its much to easy to buy out a product then to wait for it to build which greatly reduces the need for industry on any planet.

I keep thinking back to Moo2 where Mid and Late game you could have a not so great economy depending on how much you put on your planets and how big your fleet was above the max allowed. They did a great job of offering up lots of different build options on your planets with the tech you got as you played. If you just built everything you found on every planet you could find yourself running out of money quick, also if you had a fleet over your max allowed (which was dependent on how many space stations you had and the size of the space station. Starting out you can only have like 5 points for ships (1 point for scout 2 points for destroyer and so on). Now you could go over this limit but it greatly increased the Maintenance of your fleet to do so. Would be nice to have something like this in game as well to help control Econ late game (give something for us to spend all those credits on), as currently you have very little to spend all your credits on once you get to late game.

As a little side note: Currently when looking at fleets your listed Maintencance cost for Starbases is 2 billion credits instead of the new and improved 200 million credits it costs a turn.

[Zaimat]

I like those ideas for increasing mid-to-late game spending. Another idea someone had suggested was for ship maintenance to go up as your fleet ages, not sure if players would like that though since it would eventually force you to scrap older ships?

Thanks for the bug report, I've fixed it.

[FrozenFallout]

I like those ideas for increasing mid-to-late game spending. Another idea someone had suggested was for ship maintenance to go up as your fleet ages, not sure if players would like that though since it would eventually force you to scrap older ships?

Thanks for the bug report, I've fixed it.

I think that having an additional cost for maintenance should also come from higher "level" ships. Once the exp system and leveling of ships gets into the game I think it would make sense to up the cost of more experienced crews as that makes realistic sense (would be really cool, however not sure if possible, if you could move crew from one ship to another or side line them if you are having financial problems), as just like in the real world you pay your more experienced people (at least in some business) more money. However I would make that a small % compared to the maintenance cost of maintenance of the tech on the ship. I think it would also help making ship building a bit more complex if different techs really changed the cost of your ship and its maintenance adding another layer to what you need to think about when building a ship.

[Yarodin]

I like the idea of ships costing more maintenance on higher levels or depending on how sophisticated your equipment is (e.g. more complex organic engines cost more maintenance than some old-fashioned, easy to use fusion drive).

But then I'd strongly recommend to show the maintenance cost in the ship build list and also in a economic overview screen. I'd want to know how much my fleet costs me every turn and even more important how many the ships currently in build will add to this sum. Otherwise, I'll find myself in trouble when building too much ships when I got the money and have to scrap half of them just to pay the running costs.

For the experience of ship crews, I see two ways: Either I can refit some older ship type to a more modern one or I build a new ship and transfer the experienced crew of a scrapped one to a new ship, maybe with some penalty because they'd have to learn how the new hardware works. New hardware doesn't invalidate your tactical experiance, but the crew have to get used to their new equipment.

I haven't especially looked for the costs of a buy out, but I took as a given that more expensive ships do cost more to buy out?

[FrozenFallout]

I like the idea of ships costing more maintenance on higher levels or depending on how sophisticated your equipment is (e.g. more complex organic engines cost more maintenance than some old-fashioned, easy to use fusion drive).

But then I'd strongly recommend to show the maintenance cost in the ship build list and also in a economic overview screen. I'd want to know how much my fleet costs me every turn and even more important how many the ships currently in build will add to this sum. Otherwise, I'll find myself in trouble when building too much ships when I got the money and have to scrap half of them just to pay the running costs.

For the experience of ship crews, I see two ways: Either I can refit some older ship type to a more modern one or I build a new ship and transfer the experienced crew of a scrapped one to a new ship, maybe with some penalty because they'd have to learn how the new hardware works. New hardware doesn't invalidate your tactical experiance, but the crew have to get used to their new equipment.

I haven't especially looked for the costs of a buy out, but I took as a given that more expensive ships do cost more to buy out?

I 100% agree that if maintenance cost is based on what you put on the ship (not just the ship size as it is now) its necessary to include in the build screen an area that informs you what what the base cost of the ship is to build and what its Maintenance cost would be.

Currently you can see what your ships/fleets cost you per turn by looking at the fleet list but having a complete economic brake down some where would be nice.

If we get refits for ships I really hope they keep their exp (maybe a small penalty like you said to relearn the new systems).

From what I can tell buy out is based on a multiplier of the base cost. I just want that multiplier increased... alot... as at present by turn 100 or so I start ripping down all the industry on planets (or never build it in the first place) to free up room for useful stuff. As it stands even in early game I buy out most everything and only use industry to help with my buy outs if I have to wait a few turns to save up the cash for the buy out. Only things that are hard to buy out (until ultra econ kicks in late game where you make more then you could ever wish to spend) are the 40 billion+ facilities and maybe Motherships but that doesn't last long once you start getting into End game. It really makes industry one of the worst things to build once you have mid game cash flow.

[Madbiologist]

I agree with a lot of the suggestions.

Increasing maint. for ships based on tech and what is in it is almost a must. Also, when crew XP is introduced having that increase maint. could help.

I actually do like the idea of the aging inflation cost to maint. However, I think it shouldn't go up too quickly and have a max cap it can increase to based on the initial cost. Maybe something upto 1.5 of the initial maint. or around there. Though the concern of it putting of players is valid, it still can be an interesting mechanic to consider.

What do you guys think?

[Yarodin]

Why should an old design cost more maintainance? Because you don't have any spare parts left and have to buy it on the black market?

[Madbiologist]

Why should an old design cost more maintainance? Because you don't have any spare parts left and have to buy it on the black market?

It is pretty much how it is in real life. Older devices especially on massive scales become harder to maintain because things seem to break more often. It is not a matter of the parts are harder to get (though it can happen), it is a matter stuff seems to break more often then the do when the ship is new. You get to the point that it becomes a steady rotation of parts and repairs.

Also, things get messy when new tech gets introduced as you need to interface that new ECCM module in an older hull with 'wiring' that was never meant to handle it. Suddenly you get a stream of repairs and require parts that might not be mass produced anymore (as you make components that are designed for the newest systems). You literally get a sort vintage effect going on.

"What do you mean we need X-34 Azteri Power Couplings to integrate the new engines into the power grid, do they still make those?"

Newer ships tend to be built around the new tech and are much more well integrated and everything is spanking new so less stuff breaks on a regular basis.

[Yarodin]

Ok, I can see that. Especially the part with material fatigue. At least, ship won't rust in space

[CellNav]

Ok ... Great suggestions! ... I'd like to add some more ...

(1) Maintenance Cost increases 1% per turn since last refit. In other words, we are scraping the space barnacles off the hull, fixing cracks, etc. This alone will give me incentive to send ships back to port even though there isn't a tech upgrade, but merely for a good quality "swabbing of the deck".

(2) Charge us for Refitting? ... Might get ugly since it's free now, but if the player is allowed to allocate funds to a "Refit Account" perhaps the player can save money per turn towards any future upgrades. Basically, the game tracks the cost to refit and each turn the player could allocate money to match the cost (if he wants), otherwise the ship never upgrades if the player can't keep pace with the upgrade cost ... In that case, no harm no foul, the ship get's a good free wash 'n wax but never upgrades the installed tech.

(3) Troop Cost? ... These guys and gals are working for free, well androids might not complain but hey, if we don't pay them they might revolt?

Overall, I think we need a military budget screen. Nothing fancy and perhaps a simply 3-way toggle for items (like the pollution control)

[Lithari]

You need to take into consideration that on Star Trek, the Starfleet personnel don't get paid, the Federation is not close to revolt at all.

[Yarodin]

Yeah, but that's a point they never really made clear. I understood that the confederation doesn't use money at all, it's some kind of working communism. Money is used only for external trade. (Correct me if I'm wrong.)

[Madbiologist]

I see in game money to be either actual money, some sort of commodity, or resource allocation or whatever represents the distribution of resources in a wealthless society. For the sake of the players, it is easier to use the same credits in-game to represent this.

So even a moneyless society like ST Federation still has resources allocated. It's just such a high-tech one that resource overabundance is staggering. It is the game's equivalent of having such a strong economy from tech that the maintenance of everything is nothing compared to your influx of resources.

StarFleet still has a burden on the Federation's resources. It is just that the Federation is so abundent that it is not a concern. It probably doesn't measure its internal 'economy' with credits either. But as I said, from a game's perspective you put everyone under a common model to be represented. It is an abstraction.

Also the Humans in Horizon seem to be more B5ish then STish, at least in my opinion they seem to be.

[CellNav]

Ok ... Forget about salaries for the troops, change that term to read maintenance.

I would think that troop maintenance falls under the mechanics of ... Build and Maintain. When we create a barracks the troops start "building" which should cost us something (whether it be industrial units or money). Once the troops reach the cap, we need to spend something to maintain them every year (turn).

Other ideas might fall into Military Buildings ... Like civilian buildings (trade,farm, etc), we have 5 levels of barracks, missile, and beam. Each level has a cap (and maintenance cost). Basically the same mechanics.

I agree with Madbiologist's explaination of money ...

I see in game money to be either actual money, some sort of commodity, or resource allocation or whatever represents the distribution of resources in a wealthless society. For the sake of the players, it is easier to use the same credits in-game to represent this.

[Yarodin]

Makes sense to me. Even if the troops where not "paid" in Credits, they need to eat, sleep, need equipment, training etc. All resulting in costs the one or the other way.

[FrozenFallout]

Ok ... Forget about salaries for the troops, change that term to read maintenance.

I would think that troop maintenance falls under the mechanics of ... Build and Maintain. When we create a barracks the troops start "building" which should cost us something (whether it be industrial units or money). Once the troops reach the cap, we need to spend something to maintain them every year (turn).

Other ideas might fall into Military Buildings ... Like civilian buildings (trade,farm, etc), we have 5 levels of barracks, missile, and beam. Each level has a cap (and maintenance cost). Basically the same mechanics.

I agree with Madbiologist's explaination of money ...

I see in game money to be either actual money, some sort of commodity, or resource allocation or whatever represents the distribution of resources in a wealthless society. For the sake of the players, it is easier to use the same credits in-game to represent this.

I really like the idea of Barracks, Misslies, and Beams having levels to them. Something I didn't consider until you said it CellNav but now that you mention it that makes allot of sense. The more things for us to spend our credits on the better