Right now, each HQ level gets us one additional base - but what if the connection was not that straight-forward. My idea is to use “HQ Points” instead. All the numerical values below are for example:
When you start the game you start with 50 HQ Points, and you get 10 more each time you upgrade your HQ. (HQ costs are the same, so 10 points counts more and more as you go on). So, how are the HQ points used?
Your initial base (on a starter planet by default) costs 30 HQ Points. Additional bases have varying costs - they vary based on the habitability of the planet, and on its distance from the ‘core’. So say a habitable planet (no need for INS/etc) costs 10 HQ points, while for each type of special stuff it needs (1-3) you take 2 points off, so a planet needing INS would be 8 HQ points, a planet needing INS and HSE would be 6 HQ points, and if you need all three then 4 HQ points. If you are “halfway” to the rim, that is a point discount (9/7/5/4) and in the outer rim, two point discount (8/6/4/2).
You can shift the discount for hostile environments to 1 per version for less steep discount. But this does reward older players to both settle the outer rim and also leave the starter planets because those bases are expensive in HQ points.
Also, because HQ points are now a different measure, you can reward players for being a governor (1 HQ point?) or building large projects, or whatever else the Devs can think of.
Anyway, just an idea I had, at least partially, someone else came up with the “variable cost” in the last DevLog (maybe it was FireFreak) but I fleshed out the HQ point idea to split it from the HQ level.
I like it as well - I would really like to see incentives to build worlds outside of the core. This is a really interesting idea and dodges some of the downsides which I’ve seen from other ideas. It seems so simple in hindsight lol. If there are economic incentives for people to build “out”, that is a wonderful example of a really fair way to make them.
Right now the only incentives to use planets further out is higher resource extraction rates. With more of them we’ll see a lot more further out development and options open up, for especially new players, which is the all important thing to me!
I really like the core of the idea. Incentivizing a more widespread settlement pattern through cheaper permitting of otherwise less desirable planets seems technically feasible (I hope) and easy for players to understand.
I like that, compared to some other proposals to address this issue, it doesn’t particularly punish anyone or make certain play styles unavailable to new players, but it introduces a new set of tradeoffs to consider, which is the whole point of the game anyway.
I just wanted to resurface this idea - I have been working on settling a bunch of bases “north” of Verdant on the way to hubur - one problem that has come to light is either the time for supply ships to make a round-trip - or the problem of storage if you setup a hub-and-spoke system. I never realized how useful it was to have the infinite storage at Moria for my planets around there.
Once I started to use UP-170b as a hub for my RIM operations - I realized just how much space I had to sacrifice to have enough storage. (Yes, working on my warehouse - but when you have 4 STO, the warehouse just doesn’t get big enough). On planets with a really small population, maybe have a cheaper storage option? Or maybe at HQ 25 you get a “one space station” you can put somewhere (or maybe need to build it) that gives you a whole bunch of storage - maybe require it to be in non-faction space?
Personally, I’m not a huge fan of this. I don’t want to have to tear down bases on inner planets and move them 12 jumps away to keep scaling. Plus, there are no regions in the rim that have everything needed to be efficiently self sufficient (that I have found), they just often have high concentrations of a limited number of raw materials. I am however in favor of incentivizing settling outside denser regions. I’d just do this by like increasing the area given per permit, not by pushing people to leave the inner regions entirely. Plus, pushing veteran players out to the rim will leave inner economies with a lot less demand for the basics that beginners typically produce such as fuel or consumables. But I’d be all for making it so if the planet was 10+ jumps away from a major CX, first permit would give 500 as usual, but each added permit would add 500 in stead of the usual 250.
I’m pretty sure that in practice this works the other way around. Veteran players are the main producers of everything, and beginners mostly buy from them rather than from each other.
So encouraging veteran players to move further out and specialize in non-beginner production while buying more goods from beginners would actually be one of the benefits of this proposal.
I may be mistaken, but larger players will tend to focus on higher tier production largely for their own use such as Afabs for upgrading their HQ, or shipbuilding like Evov. Meanwhile, they will rely on the CX to supply them with things like PE, RAT, DW, etc.
As a larger player who does specialize in shipbuilding, I will say that I provide most of my needs inhouse - I make my own PE and PG, but then my “goal” for the game was to be self-sufficient. I have since modified that to include “except for MM goods”.
But the overall point of the proposal was to add interest for senior players while not penalizing smaller players. As you start moving past 20 bases it becomes a real grind to afford your next base. I believe this saps the will of senior players (I know it saps MINE) because one of the most “fun” parts of the game (IMHO) is planning and executing expansion plans (or remodels). As HQ levels get worse (in terms of cost) this drives senior players to Min/Max their bases for profitability - driving them into cookie-cutter empires (which is why the IDC was so coveted, and the nerfing of this upset players).
So this is really about giving players more choices later in the game and hopefully encouraging large empires to still have interesting decisions and tradeoffs and also (hopefully) allowing them to get bigger as well. This is related to “end-game” content which does have a negative impact on games - this drives senior players to leave the game which is not helpful to beginning players.
Hopefully this explains what my goal with this was a little clearer.
I have for a while thought about more granular HQ permit points, as I said back in ‘21: Some thoughts about HQ Upgrades, Base Permits and Base Expansions - #5 by McCowen . The idea would also be that ships require permit points (based on size/cost), and base size is more flexible but larger bases provide diminishing returns on HQ points spent.
In terms of storage, I think a few more storage buildings would help, a 5 area one, a weight one, and a volume one. It’s been suggested to use ship components to have truly massive storage buildings: More STO buildings .
I love the idea of having larger STO buildings at a very high cost. I think that’s a great balance of giving players a way to grow without causing rich players to overshadow new players.
If rich players boosted their efficiency, new players would have no way to make a profit on manufacturing (which happens in Eve). But high cost base storage issues don’t cause that imbalance.
I’m thinking like a 20 area storage facility made of afabs and a couple HCBs, and a few TRS. Plus it would give more uses for those cool new gateway mats, and make them more widely useful for all players.
