Population research
 

I saw TheoDD post in the nag thread about that we now need to research the ability to use our full population.

I personally don't have a huge problem with the change, but since I expect more complaints about it: here you go.

The only problem I have with the change is that it (needlessly) takes things away from players, which feels much worse than if we'd been given new abilities. I would've gone with doubling the efficiency of each point of population and halving the population limits in each category (effectively keeping everything the same), then continuing to offering research to unlock 100% of your population and possibly simultaneously raising the category limits a little in each research.

Re: Population research
 

I think its nice to have some new feature in here. So the tick plans have to be modified a bit.

Its true that it takes away something from the players. Maybe it would have been nice to have full population, but have the option to max the values of a single category to 100% by research.

Re: Population research
 

I like the change, it's not the worst idea and while it doesn't give new abilities it does make modifying tick plans more fun :p

Re: Population research
 

Interesting with changes.

Re: Population research
 

when i first read the pop update i thought we were getting more % to use :P

Re: Population research
 

Good idea. Ridiculously executed. Do you not have a team of players to tell you your implementation is pathetic at best?!

I'll expand more when I'm at my laptop cos there needs to be some heads knocked together over this.

Re: Population research
 

Well this just makes anyting but demo govt at start obsolete.

The start which is already slow is getting even slower now.....

Re: Population research
 

Also indirectly hurting xan more than other race due to their poor base research stats.

The game doesnt need more overly complicated features, it needs to be simplified if anything.

Re: Population research
 

Ok so im home now.

Where to start.....

a) Anything that gives morre diversity to the playstyle is GOOD. The less our planets look like carbon copies of each other the better for the game.


b) but.... as mz says, why remove things from everyone? It should have been an additional 50% of population or another way of wording it not to look like you have chopped pop in half.

c) Why does it only research based? Why again make it linear in its attainment? You are basically saying you cant win as Xan, there is around a 250 tick difference to obtain this and other 'basic' researches vs Cath. Thats a lot of ticks to have a 50% reduction on boosts to a race that is already behind on research.

It should have been a quest reward. It should have been a new quest section that as you completed Tech Tree areas or hit Construction markers (10/20/30/40/50 cons) you unlocked 10% for each achivement. That would have allowed people to still play in their desired way and added strategy to the tickplans.

Now even if cat is total crap and xan is OP as hell i have to consider should i gimp myself for half the round going Xan or do i go Cat and sim 500 ticks whilst scooping in loads of bonuses...

In conclusion, its nice to see a new idea in the game but the way it has been implemented has not been thought out at all.

I personally hate the concept of Xan/cloak but i would still never advocate hard coded gimps on choosing them. Race choice should be free of such restraints.

Re: Population research
 

Keep in mind that 'cloaked, low eta, low init' is by far the strongest race characteristic of all. Research as a major weakness hasn't been nearly to keep Xan down on its own: to keep it balanced, stats makers have had to reduce their A/C by ~24% compared to the non-cloak kill ships other races possess, while their D/C has only been ~7% higher (average between r20 and r63). Maybe this change will help?

Re: Population research
 

Xan only works as long as it maintains value unless the stats are really poor. Giving Cat a huge research lead (cores and gates and HCT done pre tick 200) and then rewarding high research with more space to keep research high and add 25% roid income boost will put the average Xan way behind on value, and if you are behind on value in normal PA you stop landing. And lose.

Re: Population research
 

Also we highlight Xan as it is the race that is known to have crap research (95 base) but Etd (100), Ter (105) and Zik (105) are all miles behind Cat (125). So it's not really just Xan that suffers. It just suffers most obviously. I would actually say Etd is worst affected as it normally runs a BS fleet (a research Xan can leave if wanted) alongside everything else for only 5 base rp more than Xan.

Re: Population research
 

Agree, theres no wonder Cat is proving so popular again this round. 95 base seems harsh

Re: Population research
 

I disagree. Xan is less dependent on doing well in the early game than Etd or Zik, because they have a very strong comeback mechanic that other races lack: faking. Even if you're doing badly as Xan, you can just launch 3 attack fleets every night, where Etd and Zik usually have to make do with 2.

(Cat needs to do even better in the early game, because they're everyone's favourite target. And, for the sake of completeness: Ter doesn't need to do as well early on, because they can catch back up with FCs and refs.)

This is a better characterization of the problem. I don't think I would have a problem with nerfing Cat construction speed by another 5 percentage points, or maybe buffing Xan, Zik and Etd construction speed (Ter doesn't need it), or maybe both. Playing around with base alert (not stealth!) rates might be another way to hurt Cat early game.

Re: Population research
 

We will have to disagree, you put far too much emphasis on faking. Although it is good it will not 'catch you up' if you are behind by 250 ticks worth of a 25% resource bonus/extra research.

We have seen evidence of this in multiple rounds of troll alliances that crash and lose value as xans. Early on they are a threat due to value being close but come tick 500+ then are like a fly being swatted. Invariably 1 fleet coverd or self covered. And although yes Xan is able to put more useful fleets into attacks than non cloaked races when 2-3 fleets are needed to break emp or make a land viable all that advantage is gobbled up quivkly.

I don't see how buffing con points solves the issue. There is no amount of boost that can currently replicate a 50% pop boost or such a huge research boost. This wasn't designed to be a cat only feature but it's rubbish implementation has made it just that.

Appoco has 5 days to be sensible and remove it from the game, actually get a team to work out how best to put it in the game and then moot the idea at eorc (or on his revamped forums lol).

Otherwise why would you ever go anything other than cat. The boost is gonna make them immune to all

Re: Population research
 

That team is ppl in the alliance rep channel, which as far as i heard is Munkee and Butcher.... So you know... yeah... :D

Re: Population research
 

I've been in ally reps channel. And yeah they have the common sense of well... the alliances they represent....

Re: Population research
 

I think the best idea for a change to pop would be to make it so we can use 100% as we have always been doing but make it so we can research the ability to put more % into each so:

Miners 25% research to -> 30% or 35%
Researchers 50% research to -> 55% or 60%
Construction Workers 35% research to -> 40% or 45%
Shipwrights 60% research to -> 65% or 70%
Security Guards 50% research to -> 55% or 50%

Obviously you can mix and match the numbers and figure out where each should be in the research line

Re: Population research
 

No, this thing hasnt been discussed in that channel.
Mostly its code bugs, BP sizes, etc.. being brought up

Re: Population research
 

IMO, another change for the sake of change. Does absolutely nothing to improve the game, but effectively makes it harder AGAIN for new players especially (with another mechanic poorly explained anywhere that has no relation to "real world", hence no intuitive learning curve). On top of gimping the odd new player learning the game, it's making the game harder of already "research crippled" races (every other race but cath). Giving cath another massive edge on other races (and/or rewarding hyperactive cov-oppers) is exactly what this game did not need.

Re: Population research
 

I expect everyone to unlock 70% early on, as the RP costs are pretty low there (~13 ticks for Xan). That makes the difference much smaller. Not nothing, but smaller.

I don't think the comparison with troll alliances is fair, and '1 fleet covered' is a gross exaggeration. Planets in troll alliances tended to sit on 300 average roids all round long, focus heavily on dists rather than value-building constructions, and abstain from attacking for profit in favour of attacking for 'teh lulz', as the youngsters say. No wonder their ability to land went down dramatically as the round goes on. That is not the way a normal value-oriented Xan planet plays the game.

I want to avoid making all race bonuses the same. Cat having fast research is flavourful, just like Xan having slow research and Ter having very fast construction speed is. If there's an imbalance here, then we should be able to find a way to tweak the race bonuses without turning Cat into just another Zik or Etd.

Honestly, though, I think we're fundamentally on the same page. Cat benefits most from this new feature, and we should look into re-balancing the races to create a level playing field.

Re: Population research
 

This idea I like!

Re: Population research
 

yay more research to do

Re: Population research
 

could be interesting

Re: Population research
 

I do like change to be honest, the game clearly needs updates from time to time to keep it interesting. Reading the comments above it might not work as intended or it might work great, it's hard to tell without trying it first.
It's hard to please everyone with a change anyway.

Re: Population research
 

I think there is space in techtree for a such change. I had noting reasonable to research the last part of the round, so this is all welcome in an attempt to try to add some strategic part for research order.

Re: Population research
 

This seems kinda redundant.

Re: Population research
 

Curious to see how this 'new feature' will work out. Tickplan got bit more complicated

Re: Population research
 

I think someone should be able to put 100% on anything they want.. Don't nerve it..

Re: Population research
 

will be interesting to see how this affects the round

Re: Population research
 

It is what it is so we just get on with it. What can I say ? I am a follower.....

Re: Population research
 

I think this new population change hurts xan more and helps cath more two things that didnt need to happen.

Re: Population research
 

Test it and see if it works. its only 1 round

Re: Population research
 

Seesm fine so far

Re: Population research
 

Will be interesting to see how it works out.

Re: Population research
 

This change is definetly unbalanced between the different races (as noted by others before).
That said, while I do find it interesting to see different strat options with that change I honestly don't think it's for the better of the game.

Once the "new" effect will be vanished (annoying or refreshing depending on the people you ask) it's just adding complexity for the sake of complexity IMO.

Re: Population research
 

I don't mind the change, it's nice to have things be different here and there, even if it only lasts a round. I do agree with whoever it was earlier that said the explanation hasn't been great and it makes things hard on new/newer players. A good future change would be review all the manuals and guides.

Re: Population research
 

happy to give it a go and good luck everyone!

Re: Population research
 

:up:
LOVE THE IDEA... if you want 100% on for example Con. the rest on 0% .. that should be funny :D

Re: Population research
 

This change just (1) slowed down attacking period which is the area the game should seek to improve, (2) made the game a wee bit complex, again an area that needs improvement instead of otherwise, (3) a backward change, planets already getting a feature, that got taken away.

i believe population may add another strategic element

but then it will be a good round to test

I dont like repetition

Re: Population research
 

pop change was unnecessary as myx said. why not just add features instead of making them "interesting" in your eyes.

Re: Population research
 

I didn't have time to think, and you inserted more thinking. I'm still into it. This should be interesting.

Re: Population research
 

POPULATION research is broken, it wont finish the research and continues on ....

raise this in #support

Re: Population research
 

Finished "for real" this tick, wondering if it's going to fubar on the next one...

Re: Population research
 

I'm happy to welcome another category to research, but as with some others above fail to see why it starts out as a penalty instead of bringing new capabilities. I would have preferred an overhaul of research in general, e.g. I think infrastructure seems to maybe start too low, and the higher reaches of HCT are meaningless for many players. I agree that it will be interesting to see how people change their tick plans to accommodate the population research.

Re: Population research
 

It's okay

Re: Population research
 

As a lot have said I was expecting to gain something I stead of getting what I already had... This just makes the most boring part of the game which is the start longer and that's not fun.

Re: Population research
 

One day, Blizzard introduced a new feature to WoW: you'd only get normal XP for the first X hours of play every week. After that, all XP gained was halved.

Of course, there was a massive player outcry. So what did Blizzard do? Change it back? No: they changed the wording of the new feature: the first X hours of every week, you'd gain bonus XP, and for the rest, normal XP. But they didn't actually change any of the numbers, only the descriptions. What is now 'bonus XP' was the exactly equal to what was previously called 'normal XP', and what is now 'normal XP' is exactly equal to what was previously called 'reduced XP'.


Moral of the story? Framing matters!

Re: Population research
 

Maybe its poorly framed but i like the change