Fuel rebalancing

[george moromisato]

I'm planning to rebalance fuel items and would love some feedback:

I would like fuel density (fuelCapacity per unit weight) to increase consistently from level to level. This will insure that as the player upgrades, the amount of mass required to hold fuel remains more or less constant.

In addition, I would like the price per fuelCapacity to be (roughly) constant at all levels. [Since fuelCapacity increases geometrically, price will also increase at the same rate.]

To that end, I would like to set the standard scale for fuel density by level as follows (I chose units of 100 Kg because that is the mass of a helium fuel rod; also, I'm measuring fuelCapacity in units of a single helium fuel rod):

Code: Select all

Level     Fuel Density (fuelCapacity / 100 Kg)
1             1
2             1.6
3             2.6
4             4.1
5             6.6
6             10
7             17
8             27
9             50
10             80

To adhere to this scale, I propose the following changes:

1. Helium3 reactor assembly:
fuelCapacity increased to 6 (from 4)
cost increased to 150 (from 75)

2. Xenotite fuel rod:
mass decreased to 120 (from 200)
cost increased to 200 (from 160)

3. Heliotrope fuel:
fuelCapacity increased to 20 (from 10)

4. Pteracnium fuel rod:
mass decreased to 120 (from 200)
cost increased to 500 (from 300)

5. Hadron-vacuum fuel cell
cost increased to 2500 (from 2000)

As you can see, in general there is an increase in fuel density across the board (more fuel per ton). But there is also an increase in price.

I think the increase in fuel density will help at the higher levels when it is hard to keep enough fuel in the hold.

The increase in price should not be too bad, since at the higher level one generally has lots of credits. [With the above price changes, fuel consistently costs around 25 credits per unit of fuel (where 1 unit = 1 helium fuel rod). But since density is increasing, price per kilogram increases as you go up the levels.]

Feedback welcome!

[Arisaya]

looks ok to me, but I've never really had a chance to study fuel balance in-depth.

Some things I think should be investigated are the balance of the unique fuel types, specifically uranium, heliotrope & longzhu. Heliotrope I guess sounds about right, uranium I think should have about level 1 densities if not worse (very heavy fuel but it also provides a good amount of energy), and longzhus... I'm not sure what their base stats are. I havn't used the for fuel in ages, ever since discovering they can enhance energy weapons & shields.

Also I think that at higher levels the fuel should be slightly cheaper per unit of fuel because you're selling the energy in bulk. (ie, 100units in pteracnium is more economical than 100units in Hydrogen fuel rods)

[blizgerg]

Also I think that at higher levels the fuel should be slightly cheaper per unit of fuel because you're selling the energy in bulk. (ie, 100units in pteracnium is more economical than 100units in Hydrogen fuel rods)

Generally the reason buying in quantity is cheaper per unit is because cost = (unit cost)*(num units) + (fixed cost). I think such a formula for cost makes sense and would give the appearance of larger quantities having a lower per unit cost as the per unit cost seen from the consumer is (unit cost) + (fixed cost)/(num units). This kind of model may or may not work well in game because the packaging is changing and such you can say the fixed cost part is changing as well. After all, it's all about making it fun and interesting.

Other than that, I'd say the suggested changes in fuel prices/weights/capacities seem reasonable to me.

[digdug]

That looks very good!

At the beginning I was worried about the new cost of the Helium3 assemblies, but that's just 33% increase if you take in consideration the higher density.
I wonder how that 33% increased cost translates into game balance, considering that assemblies are the most widespread fuel rods found on shipclasses in the game.

[Ttech]

I would suspect the 33% increase would cause other stuff to increase as well, however it would be interesting if all prices in Transcendence were controlled (for the most part) by the cost of fuel and in the later parts of the game as fuel would likely be more scarce have a higher cost on items.

[Atarlost]

Also I think that at higher levels the fuel should be slightly cheaper per unit of fuel because you're selling the energy in bulk. (ie, 100units in pteracnium is more economical than 100units in Hydrogen fuel rods)

Generally the reason buying in quantity is cheaper per unit is because cost = (unit cost)*(num units) + (fixed cost). I think such a formula for cost makes sense and would give the appearance of larger quantities having a lower per unit cost as the per unit cost seen from the consumer is (unit cost) + (fixed cost)/(num units). This kind of model may or may not work well in game because the packaging is changing and such you can say the fixed cost part is changing as well. After all, it's all about making it fun and interesting.

Other than that, I'd say the suggested changes in fuel prices/weights/capacities seem reasonable to me.

There wouldn't be fixed costs since the fuel types are not the same. There are three components to the supply curve for a fuel:

1. Mining costs
2. Refining costs
3. Transport costs

The first two are arbitrary. The first is linked to mineral ore prices, but the amount of fuel that can be refined from a ton of pteracnium, xenotite, or helium regolith is unspecified, as are the refining costs. The third is the price dropper. The transport costs for fuel rods are related solely to their mass.

The thing about this is that ships would use the highest fuel they can, rather than frequently using the lowest. Even if refining costs are fudged to compensate for transport costs to give a constant cost per joule there would be a preference for the highest grade fuel possible, except for a few militaries where reactors used can share a common fuel lower than the highest their largest reactors can handle. I think the Sung may be the only example.

[Prophet]

I would be concerned that fuel would become more valuable as a commodity then a fuel source.

At low levels fuel is difficult to come by, generally purchasing it is the only reliable source. Already strapped for cash, added fuel costs (doubled for He Assemblies) could be devastating.

Mid game there is lots of fuel to loot and rarely is purchasing ever required. Increased fuel prices lead to more disposable income.

Late game fuel is hard to come by and purchasing fuel is standard practice (if not being refuel for free at a CSC)


I would recommend pricing fuel at increasing costs by level, culminating in the Hadron fuel cells priced at 5000 (compared to the proposed 2500) while the lower level fuels remain cheap and not to be exploited for profit.

Of course this could all be moot by eliminating or reducing the price stations will pay for fuel.

[Arisaya]

Thats still broken though because stations will always sell you the highest fuel type your reactor can use.

[PM]

Fuel in the early game is enough of a money sink that I scum for solar equipment at the start of the game. I cannot buy such equipment immediately, but I will get them as soon as possible. Solar equipment pays for itself many times over. Increased cost for helium assemblies will hurt players who are struggling to raise cash (I did when I first played the game), and also encourage me to rely on solar equipment (or Pilgram's Aid if I lose patience with solar equipment) even more than I already do.

By mid game, once the misery player gets a jumpdrive, he can warp to a system with Sisters of Domina, donate items to increase the Sisters' attitude, then redeem those points for fuel. The more expensive fuel gets, the more money the player saves when exploiting Pilgram's Aid. Paying (or looting) a few hundred credits worth of commodities, donating them to the Sisters, and finally use Pilgram's Aid for several thousand credits worth of fuel is a steal. Perhaps attitude points lost should vary by how much fuel is given to the player, rather than only one per refueling.

By late game, completing CSC missions becomes top priority since free fuel (and dock services) is too good to pass up. Jumpdrive lets the player reach CSCs (or Point Juno) quickly on demand.

(To Prophet) I use helium fuel rods as a commodity. I hoard them until midgame, then sell them en masse to ice farms for maximum profit. (Later, I buy the farms out for eventual fabricator abuse, but that is another topic.) More expensive fuel would likely end up as a money source for me.

(To Wolfy) Longzhus are the equivalent of ten pteracnium fuel rods or two hadron-vacuum fuel cells. As you know, using longzhus for anything other than enhancing devices is pure stupidity.

If anything, provided that the (annoyingly too fast) fuel draining rate stays the same, fuel should be cheaper than it is now.

[Amilir]

Fuel is supposed to be a significant money sink. If you have serious troubles with fuel I would suggest that you are using way too much power. Shields are generally the biggest sink, so if you aren't using a specific shield, just back down a couple levels.

Now, I'm not for raising the price of fuel much either. While making prices equal over levels seems fair, it might be okay to bump the overall price down a bit to compensate.

[PM]

The playstyle I used in previous games was equip solar armor and use it until I get a jumpdrive and free fuel from Fleet dock services. For protection, I relied on the most powerful shield I get my hands on. Anytime the shield collapses or reaches critically low (about 25% or less), I fled. Even after I upgraded armor to <foo>carbide or light Iocrym plate, I still relied on my shield as my primary defense and fled when it dropped. If I have Domina powers, replace flee with Restore, and even then, I may back off until the powers recharge. As for weapons, if I am doing missions, I want a strong weapon, preferably an overleveled one if available, to maximize my chance of success. The RNG can send overpowered encounters your way during a mission and the only way to defend against such attacks is to be overpowered yourself.

Fuel drain is obnoxiously fast unless I am underleveled (other than reactor). For instance, at endgame I have a Hyperion reactor, IM90 (or Fracture Cannon), Taikon-200, and a jumpdrive; in short, top-of-the-line in everything. After a couple big fights in a level 9 or 10 system, I am down from full to about half power, more or less. If the player uses roughly half of his reactor power at all times, he can expect to go from full to empty in little over four minutes, provided autopilot is off the whole time. Before anyone replies travel with devices off, I have been burned by that tactic by surprise attacks while the autopilot was on. In early game, armor gets damaged, and I pay more in repairs than I would in refueling had my shield been up instead. In mid game, Sapiens turn my ship into a radioactive mess, or Dwarg masters paralyze my ship. In late game, Ventari damage my devices (my games were pre-1.04, when damage was permanent). Turning off shields and weapons to save fuel is a desperation tactic. Besides, NPCs never do.

I see fuel as a commodity to be exploited in profitable ways, and I rely on solar equipment or other sources of cheap fuel. Fuel to be used as intended (i.e., feed your ship) is something to do in an emergency, or if you are stuck in an escort mission that will take more power than your reactor's full capacity.

[Amilir]

It would indeed appear that you are looking at fuel the wrong way. In other notes:
Using the biggest shield you can is what causes painful amounts of drain.
You might want to reconsider your definition of underleveled. Less powerful than you possibly can be is not a good one.
Ammo weapons require very low amounts of power.
Using half your reactor power continuously is a stupid idea.
The RNG is quite incapable of throwing overpowered encounters at you. It can only send whatever the programmer considered reasonable.
If you can't hit a few buttons when you see 'enemy ships detected' pop up, you might want to pay more attention to the screen during autopilot.
There appears to be some indication that free fuel sources are overpowered.
As a repeat: Fuel is not supposed to be a triviality. You should not be able to go through multiple difficult fights without needing maintenance in some form. Fuel is that form most of the time. The player is not intended to be a mobile base, but instead dependent on friendly support.

[Atarlost]

Shields are a problem though. Standby power use really needs to be decoupled from peak power use in the XML for the Lazarus to become viable unless high end fuel rods are made to have so many units fuel becomes trivial, and other shields could probably benefit from tweaking as well not to mention mods.

[PM]

I may look at the fuel "the wrong way", but that is because the game encourages it thanks to various exploits. Here are some I use:
* Sell helium fuel to Ice Farms. They pay double market price for helium fuel -- very profitable! Buy the farm out, then sell several hundred fuel rods. After the transaction, I am 10000 credits richer and loaded with valuable food. Guess where all of that food goes? (Hint: I do not sell the food.)
* Donate 750 or more credits worth of fuel to Sisters to Domina, then use Pilgram's Aid to refuel your high level reactor with the equivalent of several thousand credits worth of fuel.
* Obtain Fleet rank Master Sergeant for free fuel at CSCs.
* Feed fuel to Teraton fabricator as part of a recipe to spawn high level devices or replicate otherwise rare ammo.

Using the biggest shield you can is what causes painful amounts of drain.

Yes, but it also helps me live, especially when fighting enemies that do bad things if they hit armor (e.g., Ventari). More so if the armor is weak, such as solar armor past early game. Some of those enemies also have very long range (e.g, Dwarg master). Also, firing a non-ammo weapon for extended periods of time causes as much or more fuel drain than a shield.

Ammo weapons require very low amounts of power.

I dislike most ammo weapons due to a variety of reasons. Their advantages rarely offset their disadvantages. The only one I use consistently from game to game is the NAMI missile launcher, and that loses steam somewhere between mid and late game.

Using half your reactor power continuously is a stupid idea.

Of course it is, just don't tell that to NPCs. That said, some fights can be drawn out, long enough that I need to keep an eye on fuel as if playing a game of Scramble.

If you can't hit a few buttons when you see 'enemy ships detected' pop up, you might want to pay more attention to the screen during autopilot.

When autopilot is on, things happen very fast. If enemies spawn ahead of me then approach while I fly toward them on autopilot (especially during escort missions), I may have a fraction of a second to react before firing starts. If the enemy has extremely long range such as a Dwarg master or Xenophobe worldship, they may start firing before they even appear.

[PM]

On an unrelated note, I bet longzhu spheres were intended to be used primarily as ammo for the Qianlong archcannon, and maybe emergency refuel in a pinch. However, using them to enhance devices is a much more powerful option, enough that I burn every last trading post order on a longzhu sphere each. They are also cheaper than higher level enhancers such as an ion power capacitor. Maybe if longzhu spheres could not enhance devices, the Qianlong would be useful, if not necessarily dominant.