why seperate minerals & industry?

For what's not in 'Top Priority Game Design'. Post your ideas, visions, suggestions for the game, rules, modifications, etc.

Moderators: Oberlus, Oberlus

Post Reply
Message
Author
Satyagraha
Space Kraken
Posts: 195
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 4:11 pm
Location: Austria

why seperate minerals & industry?

#1 Post by Satyagraha » Wed Jul 14, 2004 10:46 am

first, i thought industry was used to determine how effectively stockpiled minerals could be used. then, i though it was a local factor that determines how effectively globally pooled minerals could be used at a particular planet.

finally, i read in wiki:
"Industry determines the Production Points (PP) generated by a world. Each Industry point must be matched with a Mineral point to produce PP. In addition to Focus and the effects of various Actors, this meter is modified by planet size"

so the current effect is that it´s better to conquer 2 mineral planets or 2 industry planets instead of 1 mineral and 1 industry planet, and you benefit from focusing small planets on industry? at the same time, you have to constantly balance minerals/industry ratio, which doesn´t sound like a lot of fun to me. :? then i read drek would actually prefer to drop industry. it seems that industry was originally a good idea, but lost it´s purpose on the way... or did i simply miss something?
need some clarification :)


edit: just read in wiki we now have trade (money) as 5th resource. this seems to be more interesting as a focus, planets near an other empire (or planets/system with mixed population) might produce more money when focused on trade. if you notice your ally hasn´t focused his border planets on trade, this might be a sign he is planning to backstab you sooner or later.

vishnou00
Space Kraken
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:15 am

#2 Post by vishnou00 » Wed Jul 14, 2004 6:00 pm

I thing the PP-mineral duality make sense in a local production model (the very industrial world that recieve mineral from mining planets, trade from other empire, mining fleets). But it is global, so I think that either PP or minerals should be ditched, unless somebody comes up with interesting gameplay mechanics that require mineral AND production points.

In fact, I wonder how money would be different than PP. It would be stockpiled PP?

User avatar
noelte
Juggernaut
Posts: 872
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2003 12:42 pm
Location: Germany, Berlin

#3 Post by noelte » Wed Jul 14, 2004 6:21 pm

Hmm, PP are now calculated as :
PP = min(Minerals(),Industry())

We might later abjust this formula by for instance adding something like advanced mineral usaged which has the effect that you need less minerals for each industry point

PP = min(Minerals()/MineralsPerIndustry(),Industry())

Or you might have some automatic factory tech which increases your industry produced by workers AND add a const value.


PP = min(Minerals()*MineralsPerIndustry(),Industry() + PopIndepentIndustry())

and so on ....

That's why i think we need PP, Mineral P and Industry P
Press any key to continue or any other key to cancel.
Can COWs fly?

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 12403
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

#4 Post by Geoff the Medio » Wed Jul 14, 2004 7:16 pm

I don't know if the whole idea was nixed, but I sorta figured that minerals could be stockpiled / traded, while PP could not. The significance of this distinction in perhaps minimal in practice.

Better, I 'd like to see minerals and PP decoupled completely. They should be independent resources, without minerals required to "make" a pp out of an industry point. More so, I hoped that each construction project would require differing amounts of both PP and minerals (and other resources in some cases). Building a ship would require lots of minearls, but not so much for a building. Theoretical research requires only science points, but applied research requires science and PP (industry).

Think of PP and minearals like gold and wood in warcraft, or minerals and vespene in starcraft, respectively.

Ditching Minearls for Money as a focus would save the trouble of redesigning the focus selection quad thing to accomodate the 5th option.

User avatar
noelte
Juggernaut
Posts: 872
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2003 12:42 pm
Location: Germany, Berlin

#5 Post by noelte » Wed Jul 14, 2004 7:39 pm

I like the idea of using minerals in different ways when constructing things. As you said ships might need other/more/less minerals than buildings (as handle in stars!).

Anyway, if i remember correctly minerals/industry/pp aren't supposed to be stockpiled and the way minerals are used by industry to generate PP which are used to construct things is already(?) decided.
Press any key to continue or any other key to cancel.
Can COWs fly?

drek
Designer Emeritus
Posts: 935
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 8:07 am

#6 Post by drek » Wed Jul 14, 2004 9:17 pm

PP isn't stockpiled. Minerals are. (As far as I know.)

User avatar
tzlaine
Programming Lead Emeritus
Posts: 1092
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 1:33 pm

#7 Post by tzlaine » Wed Jul 14, 2004 9:21 pm

Geoff the Medio wrote:I don't know if the whole idea was nixed, but I sorta figured that minerals could be stockpiled / traded, while PP could not. The significance of this distinction in perhaps minimal in practice.

Better, I 'd like to see minerals and PP decoupled completely. They should be independent resources, without minerals required to "make" a pp out of an industry point. More so, I hoped that each construction project would require differing amounts of both PP and minerals (and other resources in some cases). Building a ship would require lots of minearls, but not so much for a building. Theoretical research requires only science points, but applied research requires science and PP (industry).

Think of PP and minearals like gold and wood in warcraft, or minerals and vespene in starcraft, respectively.

Ditching Minearls for Money as a focus would save the trouble of redesigning the focus selection quad thing to accomodate the 5th option.
The fact that PP use of minerals is 1:1 right now is only temporary, iirc. In future, different buildings or ships will require different amount of minerals/PP.

guiguibaah
Creative Contributor
Posts: 440
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 1:00 am

Miner's Guild Meeting 2417b, 2243.03

#8 Post by guiguibaah » Thu Jul 15, 2004 12:02 am

Brothers, friends and fellow neighbors. Thank you, thank you... I said thank you.. yes.. thank you... thanks. yes.. settle down.. yes.. settle...ye.KNOCK IF OFF YOU CLUNKS OR I'LL SHOVE THIS DRILL UP YER ARSE SO HARD YO... . Okay! Look we gotta lot 'o ground to cover today, so let's proceed with Miner's union #2148b agenda. All in favour of last month's minutes? Good.

On the agenda today... Okay the first issue up for bids is the misuse of the ore crusher. Look guys, the crusher is meant to crush ROCKS. It's NOT a food processor, it's NOT a garbage receptacle, and, Jesus Christ, it's NOT a hazing tool. We've already lost 4 interns since the last meeting and I'm hard pressed to find more at such short notice.

Okay, second issue. The industrial world of Defasco in Beta Aquilae has just been bombed to high hell again and that means for the next couple of months a lot of our production is going to be sitting here in storage, so we had to relocate berthing quarters C and D with berthing quaters B. Unless you all want to repeat the public health nightmare of last year, there will be no more sharing of beds. The union is looking at selling some of this extra crap to the Gigasu so hopefully this won't hurt us too much ... Oh, and regrets go to Druk Methnoger, who once again had his entire family suffer a painful and lingering death when Defasco was ripped in half. Let's try to raise at least SOME money to buy him a half-assed card this time.

Third issue - The Missile defence platform. Okay, I've said this already and I'm really getting pissed off about it. I'm getting REAL tired of you yoinks who keep firing that thing at asteroids. You guys aren't military, and I'm getting sick of writing eulogies for freighter captains. That last convoy WAS our food shipment, so I hope you guys like the shit they feed at the cafeteria. Let me remind you that every time you fire that thing you're cutting into our mineral supplies, which means less minerals being shipped offworld, which means less pay for the lot of you. If you guys want sport go play something like tag.

Fourth Issue - Mineral richness. After wednesday's incident it turns out we've been upgraded from a regular mining world to a rich mining world. This means we'll now be able to supply both the industrial worlds of Cedelphi AND New New York. This means now you'll only have to pay for half of your total dental expenses.

Fifth Issue - The Geological survey team. Okay, I don't want to know HOW it happened, but the first person to retreive the bodies of the geological team by Saturday will get their Christmas bonus this year.

LAST Issue - The Teleporter. The Teleporter wonder is nearly complete here and we're going to have to up a bit more production to feed the Teleporter test reactors. We're probably going to need about another 35 minerals to feed the reactors and hopefully once it's done we can get back to our regular schedule. Also, since a couple of you yo-yos in section B thought it was funny to horse around with that thing before it was complete, we now have to wait another two years before our next shipment of eggheads arrives. Since you had so much fun pushing the scientists into that thing, you now get the glorious task of picking off all the cooked guts from the ceiling fans before the ants get to them again.

This concludes our weekly meeting.
There are three kinds of people in this world - those who can count, and those who can't.

drek
Designer Emeritus
Posts: 935
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 8:07 am

#9 Post by drek » Thu Jul 15, 2004 12:35 am

rofl.

good game.

User avatar
Daveybaby
Small Juggernaut
Posts: 724
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2003 11:07 am
Location: Hastings, UK

#10 Post by Daveybaby » Thu Jul 15, 2004 8:01 am

I'd like to see a limit on mineral stockpiling, say, equal some multiple of your total mining capacity per turn (i.e. some proportion of your mining infrastructure is storage facilities). This would encourage trading and/or constant use of minerals, while still giving a buffer for emergencies.

Again, maybe there would be techs to increase this capacity, or possibly a building which doubles or trebles storage capacity for a world.
The COW Project : You have a spy in your midst.

vishnou00
Space Kraken
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:15 am

Re: Miner's Guild Meeting 2417b, 2243.03

#11 Post by vishnou00 » Thu Jul 15, 2004 6:55 pm

guiguibaah wrote:our weekly meeting.
Sounds like fun, but does it passes the zero micromanagement test? (ie, to make it happen, you cannot globalize production and minerals)

Satyagraha
Space Kraken
Posts: 195
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 4:11 pm
Location: Austria

#12 Post by Satyagraha » Thu Jul 15, 2004 7:49 pm

guiguibaah is the best ^^

User avatar
Sandlapper
Dyson Forest
Posts: 243
Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2003 11:50 pm
Location: South Carolina, USA

#13 Post by Sandlapper » Fri Jul 16, 2004 12:58 am

I see guiguibaah has provided us some more immersive space opera for our perusal; well done, again, guiguibaah.

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 12403
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

#14 Post by Geoff the Medio » Fri Jul 16, 2004 2:03 am

Daveybaby wrote:I'd like to see a limit on mineral stockpiling [...] This would encourage trading and/or constant use of minerals, while still giving a buffer for emergencies.
I think building stuff provides rather good encouragement to constantly use and trade for minerals... :P

Post Reply