Gameplay suggestion: Resource market changes + logistics hubs

Post Reply
UberWaffe
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:33 am

Gameplay suggestion: Resource market changes + logistics hubs

Post by UberWaffe »

Summary
MVP 1: Make resource market buy and sell resources. Resource availability is limited. Resource cost based on resource type and amount in the market.
MVP 2: MVP 1 + Adjust eco and spoils priorities for nations to also add resources into the resource market. Bonus from resource regions.
MVP 3: MVP 2 + Technologies for improving resource generation on earth. Events (such as global energy crisis) affecting earth resource production.
Logistics: Change supply depo on stations to special slot (like mine on habs) that can also use boost to add delta V to fleets transferring from the station.
Full: MVP 3 + Logistics + Remove building in space beyond earth-luna with funding and boost.

Problem
The mechanic of being able to sell to Earth but only buy if you are missing some, but then pay boost to transport it, except you never have to pay boost to move resources under any other circumstances, is unintuitive.

Add to that the 'I can claim a spot on the other side of the solar system, even though my hab will only get there two years later' makes colony ships seem pointless to new players (and be redundant until mid / late game).
It also scales strangely in comparison to engine technologies.

Lastly with enough boost and funding you can run a bunch of shipyards in earth orbit even if you do not have space resources. It leads to strange gameplay like spending your resources first in far-away shipyards and then start building earth-orbit only when you hit a bottleneck on a resource.
(Noble metals, I'm looking at you.)
Since funding and boost are both 'increasing yearly incomes', you can get to quite high incomes of them later on if you want to, and have time for nation splitting and unification tedium.


Details of suggestion
Change the resource market to be able to buy and sell resources, and not just sell, as long as the player has at least one station in Earth interface orbit.
Each 1 decaton of resources bought would also cost 1 boost over and above their funds cost.

Each resource (separately) would then track how much of it is available for purchase on the space market, with some maximum stockpile cap, and a base monthly market income (i.e. how much gets added to the space market each month).

You can only purchase a resource if there is available on the space market, and prices vary according to availability.
If stockpile is between 60% and 100% of maximum: Abundance. Price scales towards half the normal price as it approaches 100%. (Configurable)
If stockpile is between 40% and 60% of maximum: Price is the standard price.
If stockpile is between 0% and 40% of maximum: Scarcity. Price scales towards quadruple the normal price as it approaches 0%. (Configurable)

The cost of resources (metal, noble metals and fissiles) will no longer be adjusted upwards based in completion of the economic priority.

Each resource would have a few additional parameters:
- Maximum stockpile. (Increased or decreased via effects. Tech, event, etc.)
- Base income per month. (Increased or decreased via effects. Tech, event, etc. Some global technologies improve base income.)
- Income each time economic priority is completed. (Increased or decreased via effects. Tech, event, etc. Some faction projects improve this.)
- Price multiplier at total scarcity. (Should be around 4.0)
- Price multiplier at total abundance. (Should be around 0.5)

Water would have a very large maximum stockpile, and a good base income and economic priority income.
Volatiles would have a decent maximum stockpile, base income and priority income (boosted by oil regions).
Metals would have an average maximum stockpile, base income and priority income (boosted by resource regions).
Noble Metals would have a small maximum stockpile, base income and priority income (boosted by resource regions).
Fissiles would have a very small maximum stockpile, base income and priority income (boosted by resource regions).

Initial amounts (and base monthly incomes) should be sufficient for all factions to comfortably get their first few settlements and stations going, but require effort to scale up to amounts for later game fleet and mass-habitat building.


[EDIT]Suggestion originally had a new resource priority suggested, but was adjusted to economy and spoils changes only based on good feedback.[/EDIT]
Change to Economy priority:
- Adds resources to the space market, increased by the presence of any resource regions. (Or oil regions for volatiles.)
- If the space market is at capacity for any of the generated resources, then funds are given to the control point owners instead, based on the current price for that resource (which will be lower than normal, given the stockpile is full).

Change to spoils priority:
- Adds a good amount of resources to space market on completion (more so than economic priority. Maybe 2x times?).
- If the space market is at capacity for any of the generated resources, then funds are given to the control point owners instead, based on the current price for that resource (which will be lower than normal, given the stockpile is full).
- Increased pollution generated.


Finally restrict boost + funds to only be usable for founding orbitals and habitats in the earth-luna system. Modules and ships must be fully paid from normal resources (which can now be bought).
Habitats (orbital and settlements) beyond earth-luna needs to be done via colony ships.
Each of the outpost or platform projects (outpost core, platform core, settlement core, orbital core, etc.) also grants access to a new utility module that founds the equivalent, without any additional power generation or construction modules. (Adjusted cost / mass.)

To assist the human factions in getting over the initial (engines suck too much to go anywhere) hurdle, as well as give humans and aliens a means to move single ships (or at cost fleets) around more easily, we change supply depo to a special slot 'logistics depo' (I would change the slot 'north' of the core to special, same as mines on settlements, but otherwise leave station layouts the same (maybe add an additional normal slot 'south'?).

A logistics depo can resupply like a supply depo can, but can also spend boost to add delta-v to a fleet launching from the station using 'assisted transfer' (same button, icon just changes text and icon).
The amount of boost cost depends on the total weight of the fleet, and the amount of additional delta-v requested. (Boost cost would use the same formulae as the current funds + boost cost formulae for moving weight.)
A tier 1 logistics depo can add a maximum of 2 km/s, and reduces the final boost cost by 2 (i.e. small delta-v boosts to small mass amounts could even be done for free.)
A tier 2 logistics hub can add a maximum of 5 km/s, and reduces the final boost cost by 4.
A tier 3 logistics array can add a maximum of 20 km/s, and reduces the final boost cost by 10.

The existing techs that speed up module delivery (Ex: Space tugs) instead give boosts to the maximum delta-v logistics can add to an assisted transfers.
The existing techs that reduce the cost module delivery (Ex: Nuclear freighters) instead reduce the cost of boost for assisted transfers.
Some techs (Ex: "Directed Energy Launch Systems") adds to how much 'free' boost you get per assisted transfer.

Assisted transfer button shows how much boost it will cost.
Assisted transfer button will show a slider for how much delta-v boost you want. By default it uses the minimum.
The minimum possible delta-v boost is however much 'free' delta-v you can get based on the fleet weight and the 'free' boost the logistics hub gives. (i.e. Net 0 boost cost.)
The maximum possible delta-v boost is the minimum between the maximum delta-v the logistics hub can provide OR the maximum delta-v you can get based on your current boost stockpile.
A tickbox for 'Do assisted transfer' is ticked by default in this scenario, but can be unticked to do a normal unassisted transfer.

After granting an assisted transfer, the same station cannot do another assisted transfer for 5 days.
This is to avoid players breaking up fleets and spamming assisted transfer on them all. You can still do that, but your fleet will arrive piecemeal (with 5 day gaps in between, allowing enemies to defeat you in detail.)


Aliens get a large amount of 'free' boost per assisted transfer, reflecting their advanced technologies.


This mechanic would also allow players make more use of high-thrust low-efficiency engines, though by paying a boost penalty.
Also gives an ongoing key use for boost, other than filing geriatrics away in space containers, in terrible for your health zero gravity, high-g launches, and no magnetic field protection against cosmic radiation. (Face it, TI geriatric facilities is just murder with extra steps and bills.)
Spending boost to fling nuclear torpedo armed interstellar atrocities at alien habitats is much more humane.
Last edited by UberWaffe on Thu Dec 01, 2022 8:37 am, edited 4 times in total.
PAwleus
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2021 12:58 pm

Re: Gameplay suggestion: Resource market changes + logistics hubs

Post by PAwleus »

Very, very nicely done and I like your suggestion very much.

Even in the current state of the game colonizers are useful starting from Mercury (players usually don't have enough resources to build them and mines on Mars) and new players would just need some reminder they are an option (they often even don't know about them) but your suggestion wonderfully addresses the issue with AI factions too easily starved of mined resources by a player (in my games they have a lot of boost but places to establish good mines are scarce for them).

Perhaps also the Resource Priority is not really needed as modified Economy and Spoils priorities might be enough but I am fully supporting the rest of suggested changes even if they couldn't be introduced before DLCs or some next game (I will hint, again, at Human Reach :) ).

However, don't be so harsh on those Geriatrics - they are obviously not murder, just pricey assisted suicide ;)
UberWaffe
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:33 am

Re: Gameplay suggestion: Resource market changes + logistics hubs

Post by UberWaffe »

PAwleus wrote: Wed Nov 30, 2022 1:26 pm Very, very nicely done and I like your suggestion very much.
Thank you, I appreciate the feedback.
PAwleus wrote: Wed Nov 30, 2022 1:26 pm ...
Perhaps also the Resource Priority is not really needed as modified Economy and Spoils priorities might be enough...
Good point, a new priority is likely an unnecessary complication. Also gives a reason to keep running economic priority even once the GDP is already good.
So as follows perhaps?

Change to Economy priority:
- Adds resources to the space market, increased by the presence of any resource regions. (Or oil regions for volatiles.)
- If the space market is at capacity for any of the generated resources, then funds are given to the control point owners instead, based on the current price for that resource (which will be lower than normal, given the stockpile is full).

Change to spoils priority:
- Adds a good amount of resources to space market on completion (more so than economic priority).
- If the space market is at capacity for any of the generated resources, then funds are given to the control point owners instead, based on the current price for that resource (which will be lower than normal, given the stockpile is full).
- Increased pollution generated.

Yes, the above changes means that you can potentially get funding from the economy priority, but you'd have to first fill up the space market. I'm sure all the other factions would just completely ignore the now very cheap resources available for purchase.
Also, if some other faction is doing all the effort of putting all those delicious resources on the market, I can just focus funds or spoils and buy it all up.

PAwleus wrote: Wed Nov 30, 2022 1:26 pm ...your suggestion wonderfully addresses the issue with AI factions too easily starved of mined resources by a player...
I didn't even really think of the 'stole all the good spots' scenario.
I was mainly just thinking that this would allow factions that are stuck with smaller / poorer nations to still get some benefit from the larger nation factions.

[EDIT]
Thinking now, this could also be used as an incentive to build up underdeveloped nations.

Add some events for underdeveloped nations / regions that once their GDP crosses a certain threshold, you can then randomly get an event (once off per allowed region) to spawn a resource region there for some funds + influence investment. (I.e. they are starting to mine previously untapped resources.)
[/EDIT]
PAwleus
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2021 12:58 pm

Re: Gameplay suggestion: Resource market changes + logistics hubs

Post by PAwleus »

Your idea with the incentive to develop "undeveloped" countries is a nice one, however, thinking more about the whole concept I am less enthusiastic about your suggestion as it would demand additional changes to the game and main ones are (the second one is a big one):
1. Colonizers would also have to provide a basic mine (otherwise there is no way to build it outside of Earth-Luna)
2. Earth stockpile of resources should be counted separately for space and for Earth because boost is needed to launch them from Earth but not necessarily from space and certainly boost would be needed in other amounts and thus also prices of resources would be different on the surface of Earth and in Earth orbits (unless Earth is totally dominated by resource gathering in space).

I am less enthusiastic mainly because it does not address at all my issue with AI players too easily resource-starved by me. I was mistaken thinking it would do so but maintenance costs of space presence would still quickly starve them in boost as well. Even the above point 2 is not an answer because I would probably not sell any basic resources that limit them until late game because the same resources would probably limit also me as generally in games, if resources not limit me strongly then it means I am not trying hard enough. I can not see any solution to the issue apart from the mechanic that is already in-game: Extensive Network of Mines. It helps in addressing the problem but it is not enough alone. Hm... unless there is even a bigger change:

3. Part of player resource space stockpile is automatically sold to the Earth Orbit Stockpile (or generally Overall Space Stockpile). You could set how large is this part but the smaller it is the more Influence it would cost to maintain (large enough parts could even add Influence) and perhaps also have influence on Public Opinion (negative or positive depending on how large the part is).
DarthVicious
Posts: 98
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2022 7:38 pm

Re: Gameplay suggestion: Resource market changes + logistics hubs

Post by DarthVicious »

Not sure I followed all the above.

Some good ideas, but some concepts also vague. Probably one of the main detractions from immersion for me is the abstraction of resources. On the other hand, having physical resource piles would add a massive complication to the game. This is one of the attractions that Distant Worlds has for me, in that resources have to be physically moved.

I conveniently forget or put out of my mind that I am constructing ships at Jupiter or Saturn with resources primarily mined at Mercury or Mars. Part of me is thinking that each construction module / supply base or shipyard should have its own resource stockpile. Then you should be paying 'boost' to move resources between habs, or the volumes moved should be limited by the mine (mass driver) level, or the cost should be scaled by the gravity of the location. So lifting resources from Mars should be more expensive than lifting it from an asteroid.

Now my head is spinning. It is a bit disingenuous that only Earth requires 'boost'. I have only the beginnings of a concept of how to do this in game. Thinking.
Richard Baxton held off four waves of mind worms. We immediately purchased his identity manifests and repackaged him into the Recon Rover Rick character. People need heroes. They don't need to know he died clawing his eyes out, screaming for mercy.
PAwleus
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2021 12:58 pm

Re: Gameplay suggestion: Resource market changes + logistics hubs

Post by PAwleus »

I was thinking on how to prevent a player from buying resources back and starving AI human factions, anyway. This is refinement of point 2 and 3 from my previous post with some new ideas added:


2. SPACE IS DIFFERENT: Market should be divided to the Earth Resource Market and the Space Resource Market (SRM represents a net of all human Mines and Supply Depots with their mass drivers, resource packets in transit and catching/stockpiling equipment - by buying on it a faction buys rights to resource packets in transit or to packets already in space resource stockpiles close to places where a faction needs them). ERM works as it is suggested by UberWaffe (prices depend on availability and perhaps are different for selling and buying) - factions are intended to buy from it when there is not enough resources on SRM but boost is needed to lift them from the surface of Earth. Prices on SRM work similarly but independently to ERM - buying is different, though (more about it in p. 4).


3. SPACE IS SHARED: A fraction of faction rate of mining is automatically sold to the Space Resource Market at current price. This fraction has certain default average, eg. 30% (perhaps modified by technologies), and a faction can set it below this average paying Influence to maintain it (perhaps also directly lowering their Public Opinion) or above this average gaining Influence (and perhaps Public Opinion). Selling is gradual but perhaps there should also be the current way of immediate selling available (I don't think it's necessary).


4. SPACE IS ENORMOUS so buying is also gradual (this is to prevent a player from buying all resources - it could also be applied to ERM but it isn't really necessary there, I think): To buy from SRM a faction has to place a purchase order - in its purchase order a faction can specify what resource, the amount of it (upper limit should be a larger value from: the amount present on SRM or the amount possible to get by all humanity at the current rate of human space mining of this resource - current at the moment of placing the purchase order - in the specified period of delivery multiplied by the fraction from p.2, eg 30%) and expected period of delivery in small packets (shorter period than default average, eg. a year, modifies the current price of buying it upward, longer - downward). The faction can't place its next purchase order for this resource until all of this resource from the previous purchase order is delivered (a player should be notified when all resources of a category are delivered) or until its purchase order is cancelled (however, perhaps it's too much freedom to allow cancelling for free). If the combined rate of delivering resources to all factions is larger than the rate at which they get to SRM and the amount on SRM drops to zero then the combined rate of delivery obviously has to be lowered to the level of this resource getting to SRM and fractions of the combined rate that actually go to factions have to be dependent on the price paid in their purchase orders with periods of delivery extended accordingly.


5. SPACE IS HARSH: Even when a faction has negative rate of acquiring a certain kind of resources (maintenance costs larger than mining rates and purchase order delivery rates) and 0 in its faction stockpile it still automatically sells the specified fraction from p.2 but a player should be warned (eg. by a councilor) that such situation happened and that the fraction can be lowered at the price of influence paid to maintain it.


To sum up:
- Placing a purchase order on the Space Resource Market is a way of competing for shared space resources 
- Sharing more resources by automatically selling is a way of gaining Influence (and perhaps Public Opinion)
- After placing a purchase order the faction gains resources from it at a constant rate in the specified period of time unless the amount of those resources on SRM drops to 0 when the rate is lowered and the period extended. Paying for a purchase order is also gradual.
- A faction can place a purchase order on the Space Resource Market and can get resources even if there is 0 amount of them when at least one human space mine has non-zero rate of mining of this kind of resources.

EDIT: As UberWaffe rightly noticed I meant "purchase order" when saying "bid" so I allowed myself to correct it in all instances of using it.
Last edited by PAwleus on Mon Dec 05, 2022 2:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.
UberWaffe
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:33 am

Re: Gameplay suggestion: Resource market changes + logistics hubs

Post by UberWaffe »

DarthVicious wrote: Thu Dec 01, 2022 6:30 pm ...
Probably one of the main detractions from immersion for me is the abstraction of resources. On the other hand, having physical resource piles would add a massive complication to the game.
...
Personally I would love if resource stockpiles were separate, but as you noted I think it adds a level of complexity that most players would not want, not to mention AI complications.
Hence why I tried to keep this suggestion inline with current abstractions.

An idea that I toyed with was 'forcing' the player to setup an abstracted semblance of cargo transportation.
Though I would say this is mod territory, or maybe DLC, though I expect only the more hardcore players would go for it.

It would be something like this:
Summary
Mines have a soft cap on how much excess they can produce per resource per month. It is small by default.
Logistics modules in interface orbits raise the soft cap. (More mass drivers.)
You can assign cargo ships to further raise the soft cap.
Cargo ships can be shot.
Blockades of mass driver packets are possible.
Aliens have high soft-cap (Advanced mass-drivers) and can build resource hubs on any tier 3 station (i.e. no soft cap once they fully build out a station).


Mining soft cap
  • Mines have a new soft cap. Say 3 per resource per month for tier 1 mine, 10 for tier 2, 30 for tier 3.
  • If, after local colony consumption is paid, a mine produces more than its cap of a resource the output is capped.
  • If there is at least 1 station in interface orbit of the planet, and it has a logistics module, then the mine's soft cap can be raised.
  • An interface orbit station with a logistics module will raise the soft cap as follows: Tier 1= +3 per resource. Tier 2= +10. Tier 3=+30. (Basically double, since it has its own mass-driver to send some resource packets with.)
  • Multiple stations in interface orbit with logistics modules will work together to add to the soft cap of all mines on the surface, but with diminishing effect.
  • There are some new techs for raising the soft cap from mass drivers (for both mines and logistics modules)
  • Further soft cap bonus requires cargo ships (see below) to be assigned to the logistics module.
Resource hubs for unlimited mining cap
  • There is a new Tier 3 'Resource Hub' station module (upgrade from Tier 3 logistics hub), that can only be built in interface orbit in Earth-Luna or where population exceeds 50k (like hospitals or tourist modules). I.e. where there is a 'significant' production base.
  • If you have a Resource Hub in interface orbit, you have unlimited soft cap on production.
  • If you do not, then you have to setup a 'cargo route' to a nearby Resource Hub to raise soft cap.
Cargo routes
  • An interface orbit logistics module can assist in cargo shipping (raising the soft cap) by having cargo ships assigned.
  • A cargo ship is any ship that has one or more of the new 'cargo transport' utility module.
  • A cargo transport utility module has adds to the soft cap of the logistics module it is assigned to, but increases ship weight.
  • All ships assigned to a logistics hub are automated, and simply flies (as a fleet) between that station and the nearest resource hub, and always assumes assisted transfers.
  • The mean time of the trip is used in calculation for soft cap bonus, and long trips reduce the efficiency of the cargo fleet. (i.e. you want light, high delta-v, cargo ships and a nearby resource hubs where possible.) I know this is still a gross simplification, but let us not strangle the game either.
  • If the cargo fleet cannot reach any Resource Hub with the available delta-v, then no raising of soft cap. It will wait and recheck monthly.
  • Each time the cargo fleet completes a trip, it find the closest resource hub and start a new trip. Updating soft cap bonus based on new mean travel time.
  • Cargo fleets do not appear in the normal fleet list, they are 'automated'.
  • If a new ship is assigned to a logistics hub as a cargo ship, it only joins the cargo fleet and starts adding to the soft cap when the cargo fleet finishes their current trip.
Interception
  • Since cargo fleets are actual fleets that fly around, Alien can intercept them. Losing a cargo fleet reduces the soft production cap of the station they were assigned to.
  • This means there is an incentive to put weapons and armour on cargo ships, though that will reduce how effective they are as cargo ships.
Blockades
  • If an enemy fleet is in interface orbit, then the soft cap of those from mass-drivers is treated as being 0. (I.e. they are shooting down the mass-driver flung packets.)
  • Cargo ships can still run during blockade, assuming enemies down intercept them.
Alien logistics
  • Aliens are treated as having all of the mass-driver related techs that raise the soft cap, and then some more to reflect their advanced technology.
  • Aliens can build alien resource hubs anywhere (no 50k population restriction), so they don't suffer any soft cap penalty once they build out a station.
New station modules
  • New modules unlocked via research that increase the mass-driver soft cap, as well as, the 'free' delta-v during assisted transfers that the logistics module on the station provides. (i.e. You can specialise a station in logistics.)

Why this approach
  • More complex that universal instant everywhere resources. (Only a good thing if that is what you want.)
  • Allows for 'minimal effort' / 'under the radar' approach of no cargo ships and relying only on many small outposts.
  • Add additional reason for aiming for planets with many sites, where you could get a population of over 50k going so you can establish a resource hub.
  • Allows the aliens more ways to attack and disrupt you, without having to face down laser-happy stations or settlements.
  • Late game, mass-driver techs will allow for more hands-off approach due to higher soft cap.
  • Late game, better engines will allow for faster, more fuel efficient, cargo haulers.
  • Late game, as ship production scales up, you can easily queue up a bunch of cargo ships and then assign them to logistics. (i.e. relatively little effort to scale up, doesn't require additional micro-management afterwards.)
UberWaffe
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:33 am

Re: Gameplay suggestion: Resource market changes + logistics hubs

Post by UberWaffe »

Apologies for double post. This is a separate response and other one was already getting very long.
PAwleus wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 9:04 pm ...
2. SPACE IS DIFFERENT: ...

3. SPACE IS SHARED: ...
I really like this idea.
Gives habs a way to get some funding (which you might very well then just spend to try and buy back some of the resources you just sold).
Gives a way for underdogs to 'buy back into the game'.
You can choose not to, but there is some cost and penalty to it. (I also like that it gives more use for influence.)
I also really like the idea of allowing a faction to be 'more generous' than required, for an opinion boost and influence (they'll get more funds as well from the sales anyway, so they can still do the buying wars.)


My only real comment would be that I don't see why the space-side of the space market should be separate from the earth-side of the space market.
I'd rather just reduce the complexity and waiver the boost cost of buying resources from earth.
We can make up a decent lore reason for it. (I.e. you already pay more funds when buying than you get while selling, so this could be in part for covering transport costs, etc.)

PAwleus wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 9:04 pm 4. SPACE IS ENORMOUS ...

5. SPACE IS HARSH: ...
I do like the idea of it not just being 'first-to-click' wins.
In terms of the bidding system, I'd personally rather use a slight variant (purchase orders with influence).
(I might also be misunderstanding, because your summary section sounds closer to purchase orders than bidding.)

So you start with your idea of the bought resources coming in over time. Which I'm going to assume works something like:
I.e. you say how much you want to buy, and up to 10% if your original request (or 100 decatons, whichever is more) is fulfilled each day, at whatever the market price is at that time, assuming resources are available on the market.
Ex: I put in a purchase order for 5000 decatons of metal.
That means 500 is fulfilled on day +1, leaving 4500.
500 on day +2, leaving 4000.
500 on day +3, leaving 3500.
etc.
So 10 days at most (less for small purchases) to fulfil the whole order, assuming sufficient stockpiles.

Then I would add the following rules:
You can only have one ongoing purchase order per resource. If you want more, then do bigger orders or speed it up.
You can 'force' your purchase to be fulfilled before other purchase orders by spending influence (The purchase order with the most influence per decaton of resource is fulfilled first.).
There is one button per purchase order for 'Influence the market', and it will (if you have enough influence) add enough influence per decaton so that you have 1 more influence per decaton than the next highest influencer. (I.e. your order will be fulfilled first.)
If a purchase order has more influence attached than all other purchase orders for the same resource, then it is fulfilled first and twice as fast. (20% per day, or 200 decatons, whichever is more.)
Only really matters if you want your order to be done faster, or if there isn't enough of that resource to fulfil all orders.
Or you just want to be first to buy so you get the best price per decaton, since the resource price gets adjusted after every purchase. (Which will only really matter if the market stockpile is outside the stable range.)

In the case where two or more purchase orders have the same amount of influence attached (likely 0 influence), then a purchase order is chosen at random to be fulfilled first.

That would mean that one faction cannot easily crash/boom the entire market in a single day before others can get in on it.
(Even more difficult to lock it down, except maybe for very short periods at great expense.)
PAwleus
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2021 12:58 pm

Re: Gameplay suggestion: Resource market changes + logistics hubs

Post by PAwleus »

UberWaffe wrote: Mon Dec 05, 2022 10:54 am My only real comment would be that I don't see why the space-side of the space market should be separate from the earth-side of the space market.
I'd rather just reduce the complexity and waiver the boost cost of buying resources from earth.
We can make up a decent lore reason for it. (I.e. you already pay more funds when buying than you get while selling, so this could be in part for covering transport costs, etc.)
Unfortunately, we can't just waiver the boost cost of buying resources from Earth - this is a too important way of slowing early space expansion and at the same time it's very realistic (having mineral resources isn't enough - you need infrastructure and technology to lift them efficiently from Earth). Additionally, without it there is much less of incentive to develop the space mining (you would just get resources from Earth damaging environment because aliens are a much greater threat) and the game wonderfully shows how important it is for our future.
UberWaffe wrote: Mon Dec 05, 2022 10:54 am In terms of the bidding system, I'd personally rather use a slight variant (purchase orders with influence).
(I might also be misunderstanding, because your summary section sounds closer to purchase orders than bidding.)
You are of course right - I meant "purchase order" and my English failed me so my previous post is corrected.
UberWaffe wrote: Mon Dec 05, 2022 10:54 am So you start with your idea of the bought resources coming in over time. Which I'm going to assume works something like:
I.e. you say how much you want to buy, and up to 10% if your original request (or 100 decatons, whichever is more) is fulfilled each day, at whatever the market price is at that time, assuming resources are available on the market.
Ex: I put in a purchase order for 5000 decatons of metal.
That means 500 is fulfilled on day +1, leaving 4500.
500 on day +2, leaving 4000.
500 on day +3, leaving 3500.
etc.
So 10 days at most (less for small purchases) to fulfil the whole order, assuming sufficient stockpiles.
Yes, it would basically work as you expect but with caveats:
Purchase order: 5000 decatons of metal, assuming it did not exceed the limit I specified in p.4 (SPACE IS ENORMOUS)
Estimated period of delivery: (default) 1 year (a player could choose a shorter period paying larger price or a longer period paying lower price)
This means that your daily rate of acquiring metal is modified by +5000/365, unless the amount of metal on the market reaches 0. 
If the amount of metal on the market reaches 0 then it means that the combined rate of delivering metal to all factions is larger than the rate at which it gets to SRM so this combined rate has to be lowered for the rates to be equal. In this situation how large fraction of the combined rate goes to a particular faction depends on how relatively large it was before and it should additionally be dependent on the price paid in their purchase orders (in a shortage situation customers paying more have relatively more delivered). Periods of delivery are extended, accordingly, as to deliver all purchased metal.
If a faction makes a new purchase order when there is no metal on the market then all fractions of the combined rate of delivery are also lowered and all periods of delivery extended, accordingly.
When the rate at which metal gets to SRM is somehow elevated later then the combined rate of metal delivery can also be elevated (up to the original one if possible) and fractions of it have to be recalculated. Periods of delivery can be shortened, then (down to original ones if possible, perhaps extended for the period of the shortage).
UberWaffe wrote: Mon Dec 05, 2022 10:54 am Then I would add the following rules:
You can only have one ongoing purchase order per resource. If you want more, then do bigger orders or speed it up.
This is exactly what I propose.
UberWaffe wrote: Mon Dec 05, 2022 10:54 am You can 'force' your purchase to be fulfilled before other purchase orders by spending influence (The purchase order with the most influence per decaton of resource is fulfilled first.).
There is one button per purchase order for 'Influence the market', and it will (if you have enough influence) add enough influence per decaton so that you have 1 more influence per decaton than the next highest influencer. (I.e. your order will be fulfilled first.)
If a purchase order has more influence attached than all other purchase orders for the same resource, then it is fulfilled first and twice as fast. (20% per day, or 200 decatons, whichever is more.)
Only really matters if you want your order to be done faster, or if there isn't enough of that resource to fulfil all orders.
Or you just want to be first to buy so you get the best price per decaton, since the resource price gets adjusted after every purchase. (Which will only really matter if the market stockpile is outside the stable range.)
In the case where two or more purchase orders have the same amount of influence attached (likely 0 influence), then a purchase order is chosen at random to be fulfilled first.
That would mean that one faction cannot easily crash/boom the entire market in a single day before others can get in on it.
(Even more difficult to lock it down, except maybe for very short periods at great expense.)
You can also do it the way you propose. In my proposition the same is done by establishing the estimated period of delivery with an option of shortening/lengthening it using just higher prices and with fractions of the combine rate of delivery depending on those prices when there is 0 of the resource stored on Space Resource Market. I didn't want to use Influence in this case because it would somewhat undermine using Influence in p. 3 (SPACE IS SHARED).
Post Reply