MatGB wrote:

we now have the code in the backend to allow for part based upkeep and had a test case where it was 0.1 per part instead of 1 per hull, that actually worked really well but had a few problems with edge cases, specifically it meant that Comsats now produced no upkeep cost so having huge numbers was actually good strategy.

You didn't consider counting the empty hull as a 'part' for this purpose?

**Quote:**

We decided to put back working on it until this release cycle but haven't actually started discussing ideas for it, I have a few in mind but they're all in the "pick the least awful" pile at the moment.

It should be quite simple, actually. Other games I know use formulas that can be generalized as (I hope I got it right)

**Code:**

C * (1 + k logX (1 + B + C)) / N

- C here would be the initial cost of the ship (or any other kind of unit, depending on the game)
- k is often 0, unless you want to avoid chaff strategies then it's often 0.5 or 1 or close - making this value higher makes large ships have lesser upkeep costs than several smaller designs of the same total cost
- X is whatever logarithmic base you find convenient
- B is typically 0, else it must be positive but should remain small compared to the expected cost of even inexpensive ships (think of it as a flat cost applied to upkeep.) Fiddle with k, X and B to get the proper 'anti-chaffing' balance
- Common values for N if k=0 are 10, 12 or 20 in my experience, if k ~ 1 it's more like 30

Sometimes the logarithmic part is replaced with a square root (or more generally an exponent e<1), but I don't think it makes much of a difference.

Some also halve the final result for non-combat units.