Upgrades Scaling
- WhyteDragon
- Yarrr
- Posts: 493
- Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 1:33 am
- Wiki edits: 126
Upgrades Scaling
With the upcoming changes to upgrades, a lot of chatter has been going around about what could be improved about them. One of the larger drawbacks of upgrades originally was that a lot of time had to be set aside by the captain to actually research them -- however, with the upcoming change of 'unmanned upgrading,' this is going to be less of an issue, and the limitation will become more about particular resources.
Furthermore, the current metagame heavily promotes 'maximizing' a single field due to the effective return. While there's some point in getting 'one or two' of an upgrade, the 'optimal strategy' still is 'max one field out first' -- tiered upgrades was a way of addressing this, and has to an extent, but does little to dissuade from the idea still. There is little benefit in 'dipping' in multiple upgrade types.
So here's the question I'm putting forth;
Should upgrade costs scale based upon the level of the upgrade you are researching?
By example, currently Upgraded Mining Lasers will always cost 15y 20r at all levels. Instead, perhaps it should be something closer to...
Level 1: 15y 20r
Level 2: 20y 30r
Level 3: 30y 5b 50r
Level 4: 40y 15b 70r
Level 5: 55y 25b 90r 5g
Level 6: 75y 40b 120r 10g
... just as an example, for the sake of discussion.
The point of such a task would be to make 'min maxing' less prominent, and give a more 'equal opportunities' look at all of the upgrades. It's basically an easier way of addressing the 'balancing' of each upgrade by creating a situation where despite a certain upgrade being superior to another, the effective increase in cost might push you to look at something else first.
Moreover, this also puts a much heftier focus upon all of those accumulating resources during the late game. Achieving a 'maximum power' battlecruiser means a requirement for more resources -- and currently in the late game, resources come in abundance. This creates a sort of dump for them such that they become more useful.
Even more than that though, this creates a situation where proactive play is encouraged. Rather than sitting around, waiting for a max power battlecruiser, a team may reach a point where they truly say, "Okay. We can't get resources fast enough for upgrades -- if we delay any longer, they'll start catching up due to the relatively lower costs of their upgrades, so we should fight." What I mean by this is it creates a situation where it's a lot more plausible for a team to 'catch up' if given extra time, since the effective number of upgrades you can achieve over time given a static income becomes a lot smaller.
I think it's an idea worth discussing. I'm surprised we haven't really talked about it at some point earlier, really. So... what are all your thoughts?
EDIT: We're working on the concept on a google excel. If you're interested in helping to tweak the numbers, or just want to look, please ask around the skype chat.
Furthermore, the current metagame heavily promotes 'maximizing' a single field due to the effective return. While there's some point in getting 'one or two' of an upgrade, the 'optimal strategy' still is 'max one field out first' -- tiered upgrades was a way of addressing this, and has to an extent, but does little to dissuade from the idea still. There is little benefit in 'dipping' in multiple upgrade types.
So here's the question I'm putting forth;
Should upgrade costs scale based upon the level of the upgrade you are researching?
By example, currently Upgraded Mining Lasers will always cost 15y 20r at all levels. Instead, perhaps it should be something closer to...
Level 1: 15y 20r
Level 2: 20y 30r
Level 3: 30y 5b 50r
Level 4: 40y 15b 70r
Level 5: 55y 25b 90r 5g
Level 6: 75y 40b 120r 10g
... just as an example, for the sake of discussion.
The point of such a task would be to make 'min maxing' less prominent, and give a more 'equal opportunities' look at all of the upgrades. It's basically an easier way of addressing the 'balancing' of each upgrade by creating a situation where despite a certain upgrade being superior to another, the effective increase in cost might push you to look at something else first.
Moreover, this also puts a much heftier focus upon all of those accumulating resources during the late game. Achieving a 'maximum power' battlecruiser means a requirement for more resources -- and currently in the late game, resources come in abundance. This creates a sort of dump for them such that they become more useful.
Even more than that though, this creates a situation where proactive play is encouraged. Rather than sitting around, waiting for a max power battlecruiser, a team may reach a point where they truly say, "Okay. We can't get resources fast enough for upgrades -- if we delay any longer, they'll start catching up due to the relatively lower costs of their upgrades, so we should fight." What I mean by this is it creates a situation where it's a lot more plausible for a team to 'catch up' if given extra time, since the effective number of upgrades you can achieve over time given a static income becomes a lot smaller.
I think it's an idea worth discussing. I'm surprised we haven't really talked about it at some point earlier, really. So... what are all your thoughts?
EDIT: We're working on the concept on a google excel. If you're interested in helping to tweak the numbers, or just want to look, please ask around the skype chat.
Last edited by WhyteDragon on Fri Oct 10, 2014 2:34 pm, edited 3 times in total.
- Red-Rocket
- CCI
- Posts: 843
- Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:00 pm
- Wiki edits: 16
- Location: North America
Re: Upgades Scaling
(uses incredible feedback)
ok
ok
Oh its not orders I'm giving, but rather... "aggressive suggestions".
Re: Upgrades Scaling
I think smallship upgrades should be less "affected" by that than some of the major BC upgades such as Weapon laser level and Hardened shield.
Also, triple slightly more expensive, Penta quite more expensive.
Also, triple slightly more expensive, Penta quite more expensive.
Discord ServerWhyteDragon wrote:"[...]As to what Caladbold said -- he's right.[...]"
Better replay suggestion
Merwins-island.dyndns.org Unofficial Teamspeak server.
Re: Upgrades Scaling
I agree, especially hardened shielding and laser upgrades, since it's almost never a "should I max it", but rather "how fast can I max this"

- Degra
- CCA
- Posts: 233
- Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2013 6:00 pm
- Wiki edits: 0
- Location: Baden-Württemberg, Germany, EU
Re: Upgrades Scaling
I fully support the idea, as we already discussed and evaluated the consequences in the Skype discussion and came to the conclusion that it would be a good change.
- Red-Rocket
- CCI
- Posts: 843
- Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:00 pm
- Wiki edits: 16
- Location: North America
Re: Upgrades Scaling
Oh did we now?Degra wrote:I fully support the idea, as we already discussed and evaluated the consequences in the Skype discussion and came to the conclusion that it would be a good change.
Oh its not orders I'm giving, but rather... "aggressive suggestions".
- Degra
- CCA
- Posts: 233
- Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2013 6:00 pm
- Wiki edits: 0
- Location: Baden-Württemberg, Germany, EU
Re: Upgrades Scaling
Red-Rocket wrote:Oh did we now?Degra wrote:I fully support the idea, as we already discussed and evaluated the consequences in the Skype discussion and came to the conclusion that it would be a good change.
Okay to clarify then, the participants were:
WhyteDragon
Caladbolg
Slapshot
Degra.
- Dreadnought
- CCI
- Posts: 263
- Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 2:56 am
- Wiki edits: 22
Re: Upgrades Scaling
Ok im sorry, but this change sucks, along with exclusive teir upgrades (which makes teired upgrades worse then before, when you could have had all of those as seperate upgrades anyways)
Upgrade scaling is boring, it takes the game a longer time to complete, and your just waiting around for resources, and then the time to upgrade is still there...which involves more waiting.....which is even more boring, look i know *some* time is neccessary, because back in Beta, things where instant, and you could easily get a quick advantage....but now its incredibly boring, boring...and boring....any more questions? oh and screw tiered upgrades as a whole....let alone exclusive ones (didnt i just say that already?)
Upgrade scaling is boring, it takes the game a longer time to complete, and your just waiting around for resources, and then the time to upgrade is still there...which involves more waiting.....which is even more boring, look i know *some* time is neccessary, because back in Beta, things where instant, and you could easily get a quick advantage....but now its incredibly boring, boring...and boring....any more questions? oh and screw tiered upgrades as a whole....let alone exclusive ones (didnt i just say that already?)
You merely adopted Cruiser Command. I was born in it, molded by it.
One day a wise man introduced me to this game. "It shall protect your virginity, my lad" he said.
Dont touch me you filthy casual.
One day a wise man introduced me to this game. "It shall protect your virginity, my lad" he said.
Dont touch me you filthy casual.
- DinoChicken
- Member
- Posts: 75
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 1:08 pm
- Wiki edits: 0
Re: Upgrades Scaling
after playing with the upgrade scaling, I think that it makes the games unnecessarily longer then they should be. I do not think it is a positive change, as fewer and fewer people WANT to captain. Which is not what upgrade scaling should be doing.
Re: Upgrades Scaling
I like upgrade scaling, but I think upgrades in general take too long.