Jump to content

Orbital Habitats (project)


Malakai
 Share

Recommended Posts

Effect:  Reduce population density by 3%, reduce future city cost by 4%, and reduce global radiation effects by 25%.

Cost:  $275M, 3.50M food, 115K steel, 95K aluminum, 75K uranium, 60K gasoline, 20K munitions.

Prerequisites: Missile Pad, Space Program, and 25 cities

Edited by Optima
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, lightside said:

Rather then reducing pop density it should increase population by 3%. That would be much more useful.

Also the resouce cost is excessive and there is no reason for a city requirrement.

This project is meant to target larger nations, to help reduce disease without sacrificing improvement slots for hospitals, which in turn would help population growth in the long term instead of a single 3% boost. Additionally, realistically, pulling people off the surface to live in such a habitat would reduce the population density, not increase the overall population, at least not in the beginning.

The city requirement is necessary. I wouldn't expect alliances to change their build orders for improvements, as the UP & AUP already offer lower tier nations a means to reduce city build costs. It would cut into military readiness and resource production for warchests.  Besides, low costs paired with raiding, alliance accelerated build programs funded via taxes, and low yield bank loans offer an efficient means to become self-sufficient in record time. This project is not a catapult with which to launch a week old nation to whale status within a few months to a year. Its a minor reduction for exponentially increasing costs for long term players.

As for the costs, you are beginning to colonize space, its going to be expensive. The resource cost is intended to be excessive, though I went over the top to allow for room to trim it down. Honestly the cost of cash and resources to build it should exceed the cost of cities 25 & 26 (~$941,697,500) in my opinion. My next city (32) is going to cost roughly $1,136,988,750,  the savings I would get is an additional $51,479,550 over the UP and AUP but as I add cities that is going to grow and grow, therefore purposeful restrictions for building and the initial investment needs to be larger on the front end to rationalize the value that will be realized with each new addition.

Edited by Optima
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Optima said:

This project is meant to target larger nations, to help reduce disease without sacrificing improvement slots for hospitals, which in turn would help population growth in the long term instead of a single 3% boost. Additionally, realistically, pulling people off the surface to live in such a habitat would reduce the population density, not increase the overall population, at least not in the beginning.

The city requirement is necessary. I wouldn't expect alliances to change their build orders for improvements, as the UP & AUP already offer lower tier nations a means to reduce city build costs. It would cut into military readiness and resource production for warchests.  Besides, low costs paired with raiding, alliance accelerated build programs funded via taxes, and low yield bank loans offer an efficient means to become self-sufficient in record time. This project is not a catapult with which to launch a week old nation to whale status within a few months to a year. Its a minor reduction for exponentially increasing costs for long term players.

As for the costs, you are beginning to colonize space, its going to be expensive. The resource cost is intended to be excessive, though I went over the top to allow for room to trim it down. Honestly the cost of cash and resources to build it should exceed the cost of cities 25 & 26 (~$941,697,500) in my opinion. My next city (32) is going to cost roughly $1,136,988,750,  the savings I would get is an additional $51,479,550 over the UP and AUP but as I add cities that is going to grow and grow, therefore purposeful restrictions for building and the initial investment needs to be larger on the front end to rationalize the value that will be realized with each new addition.

I am a larger nation and I can tell you the disease from pop density is practically meanless with how small it is. A reduction of 3% wouldn’t increase my income by even 20000 per day. With the way pop density is calculated adding a 3% pop multiplyer wouldn’t increase it as it’s based on base pop not real pop.

The only 2 projects that need city requirements are the city planning projects and that’s because we don’t want city cost to be negative. Trying to add a city cost to control play style is ridiculous. The project cost and roi will control whether someone gets it or not. As such we don’t ever need hard limits there.

The project cost as you put it right now is close to 2 billion. Even if you build every city from 30 to 40 with this project you won’t break even. A more realistic number would be in the range of 500-1000mil

Edited by lightside
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

15 hours ago, lightside said:

I am a larger nation and I can tell you the disease from pop density is practically meanless with how small it is. A reduction of 3% wouldn’t increase my income by even 20000 per day. With the way pop density is calculated adding a 3% pop multiplyer wouldn’t increase it as it’s based on base pop not real pop.

The only 2 projects that need city requirements are the city planning projects and that’s because we don’t want city cost to be negative. Trying to add a city cost to control play style is ridiculous. The project cost and roi will control whether someone gets it or not. As such we don’t ever need hard limits there.

The project cost as you put it right now is close to 2 billion. Even if you build every city from 30 to 40 with this project you won’t break even. A more realistic number would be in the range of 500-1000mil

Orbital habitats would decrease the population on the planet, reducing the density. This modification to the mechanic is not the focus of this particular project, so even if density would be affected by a 3% instant bump, it still doesn't fit logically (to me), additionally this project isn't meant to directly drive up revenue, but cushion building costs.

Its not a matter of controlling play style, its rational deduction. UP and AUP offer reductions of city costs at cities 11 and 18. The next logical step would be around city 25-27. Maybe I'm thinking too deep into long term game play, but I'm willing to remove all other effects from my recommendation if it shifts the focus of this project to make it a scalable application, rather than a fixed unit, to adjust an element that increases exponentially. 

I've also reduced the cost factors, what do you think?

 

Orbital Habitat Breakdown.pdf

Orbital Habitat Breakdown.jpg

Edited by Optima
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've made an expensive project in my day, but daym. 

Considering the theme of your project, you might want to consider this project providing an improvement slot for each city above 1k Infra, it also helps work in with the cost more than maybe the population density part of it. Since you have a floating real-estate, a new place to build an improvement. 

  • Haha 1

scSqPGJ.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Prefontaine said:

I've made an expensive project in my day, but daym. 

Considering the theme of your project, you might want to consider this project providing an improvement slot for each city above 1k Infra, it also helps work in with the cost more than maybe the population density part of it. Since you have a floating real-estate, a new place to build an improvement. 

I've whittled the costs down considerably. I've also incorporated your improvement slot, however, I doubled the infra. I really don't see nations with 1k buying this, especially with a minimum of 25 cities required to purchase. Plus it feels more realistic that a nation would need to have a sizable infrastructure all around to be able to think about colonizing space in any capacity.

Effect: Reduce city cost by 8%, reduce global radiation effects by 20%, and adds one additional improvement slot to every city over 2k infrastructure.

Cost:  $120M, 1.75M food, 75K steel, 50K aluminum, 35K uranium, 30K munitions.

Prerequisites: Missile Pad, Space Program, and 25 cities

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Optima said:

I've whittled the costs down considerably. I've also incorporated your improvement slot, however, I doubled the infra. I really don't see nations with 1k buying this, especially with a minimum of 25 cities required to purchase. Plus it feels more realistic that a nation would need to have a sizable infrastructure all around to be able to think about colonizing space in any capacity.

Effect: Reduce city cost by 8%, reduce global radiation effects by 20%, and adds one additional improvement slot to every city over 2k infrastructure.

Cost:  $120M, 1.75M food, 75K steel, 50K aluminum, 35K uranium, 30K munitions.

Prerequisites: Missile Pad, Space Program, and 25 cities

It's less about people with 1k infra buying it, and more of people who buy it and then have infra destroyed and having the benefit when low infra raiding. 

scSqPGJ.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Prefontaine said:

It's less about people with 1k infra buying it, and more of people who buy it and then have infra destroyed and having the benefit when low infra raiding. 

I don’t see a benefit of the scenario. How would you use it? Be detailed please. 

Edited by Optima
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Optima said:

I don’t see a benefit of the scenario. How would you use it? Be detailed please. 

It’s fairly straight forward, if a city has more than 1k infra, this project grants an additional improvement. 

scSqPGJ.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Optima said:

I've whittled the costs down considerably. I've also incorporated your improvement slot, however, I doubled the infra. I really don't see nations with 1k buying this, especially with a minimum of 25 cities required to purchase. Plus it feels more realistic that a nation would need to have a sizable infrastructure all around to be able to think about colonizing space in any capacity.

Effect: Reduce city cost by 8%, reduce global radiation effects by 20%, and adds one additional improvement slot to every city over 2k infrastructure.

Cost:  $120M, 1.75M food, 75K steel, 50K aluminum, 35K uranium, 30K munitions.

Prerequisites: Missile Pad, Space Program, and 25 cities

i would buy the shit out of that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Prefontaine said:

It’s fairly straight forward, if a city has more than 1k infra, this project grants an additional improvement. 

You are a character. I meant from a raiding context. I haven't had to raid in years, so I want to make sure this doesn't end up being a foot on the throat of some of our up and comers.

Edited by Optima
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.