Proposal: Settlements, attempt 2
Brend
Dragonmaster352
Chriz
Gerben
Fedor
Elmer
Open in chat • 13 posts (analysis)
• Page 1 of 1
Proposal: Settlements, attempt 2
Brend » Sun Apr 13, 2014 10:54 pm
Based on our discussions during the write-a-thon yesterday, we (being me and Chris) have drafted a proposal for the Settlement option of colonization. We have mainly focussed on costs, repayment period and the amount of taxes and goods that should flow into it.
We have not taken into account possible necessary technologies, as we feel that they wouldn't add much in way of cost/benefit ratios. Next to that, the star wars setting is filled with smaller worlds that are perfectly fine settlements, and as such we assume that the knowledge on how to actually settle a world is something innate to all peoples.
Below you will find a short listing of the constraints we put on the project, and the costs we envision for the different steps. This is followed short analysis of the final cost, and the justification for these costs.
[ Note on 'Settlement' versus 'Colony': A settlement is a place, typically one that has hitherto been uninhabited, where people establish a community. A colony is a a group of people of one nationality or ethnic group living in a foreign city or country. So, what we are looking for here is settlement. ]
2014-04-19: Adds link to sector capacity limits. Fixes bug in calculations. (Updates in add and del.)
2014-07-24: Updates for proposed change after discussion. Updates only the "Surveying and Settling" section -- cost justification is not recalculated. (Updates in changed.)
During system creation, zones are generated through
. A settlement should be worse than an actual system started by a new player. As such, we have put some stringent constraints on newly discovered sites for settlements:
you can only get mediocre and bad stars, netting you at most 2 
at 34 . The amount of means that you will nearly always have open orbits. The use of asteroids is a more appealing option which nets you a little more zones per , and which also results in more interesting 'second-rate' systems.
We discussed the addition of the option to get 1
at length, as you can use it to get a +1 . In the end we decided in favour of this option, because it allows for much more interesting systems. Since the prerequisites of the specials rule out anything with 
or 
, most specials are very good for such a system. [ Note: Of course, the potential system still needs to be validated in the System Creation forum, so any strangeness can be caught and discussed there. ]
The different steps that need to be undertaken to get a settlement up and running are (both IC and OOC):
, nor any way to actually get this. This is very important, so there will be no technologies to get , nor should we validate any system that does somehow sneak it in.
Furthermore, we have removed the requirement for an augmentation zone from the list of required zones. An augmentation zones does not anything in the way of economic independence. The fact that a starting system has one is due to historic reasons mainly -- we do not feel that they are useful or an addition to the starting system.
The upkeep is steep (netting out at 1000
per 
if products are assumed to be at 12-set value). This is deliberate: an indepent settlement should lean heavily on their parent system, and together with the +2000 surcharge this helps to make the settlement an impressive (not to mention expensive) late game option. In fact, if you want to commit to a settlement, you will have to make sure to meet the upkeep. If you don't, not only does your settlement not produce anything, or grow a single , it will continue costing upkeep for longer periods!
requirements.
Wheh! That was a lot of information in little text. Let's look at the actual costs a little better so we can explain them. To summarize the settlement process:
(= 50 * 550 , 100 
, 100 
, 100 
, 100 
, 100 
and 100 
; we assume that you will be paying upkeep for at least 50 based on a turnly expenditure of 2000 to development)...
~269 132 for a 70-zones settlement (with at minimum 40 to independence, of which 20 surveying),
~369 132 for a 100-zones settlement (with at minimum 90 to independence, of which 70 surveying)!
The first thing to note is that the 'minimum turns to independence' is really the absolute minimum. We don't expect a lot of people to actually make this -- it requires extremely high development speeds at 5000 per turn! During our calculations we assumed that the player could spend 2000 on development next to the upkeep payments.
The repayment time calculations are a little tricky, as the generated settlement can have as many as 110 zones. However, this would give a strange and unfair view as the settlement has to be fileld first. Going with only the first 20 zones doesn't give us a good idea of the situation either. So we settled for calculating the repayment time based on half of the available zones in the settlement (with upgrades take into account as they rock on any world that is more expensive than 2000 per zone).
A bare settlement with only 20 surveying will repay itself in 334.58 321.64 , while a settlement with everything surveyed in will repay itself in 335 326.48 . There as a trick to squeeze a little shorter repayment time out of the settlement: survey only the and and then use that all to get more zones. This trick nets out at a repayment time of 309.88 301.65 .
This section contains some notes and points on the design of the settlement proposal above.
We would like to point out that, starting the moment the outpost reaches economic independence, the full effect of repayment times of all the possible options in a system is available. This includes specialization through corporations, though because of the prohibition on using, this will be an expensive proposition as well since terraformation has to be deployed as well.
Another interesting point is this: the moment the outpost is economically independent, it would qualify for membership of the Union under the OOCly world requirements, save for the 'Be sovereign over their entire territory' condition. However, the government of the settlement might decide to declare independence from the government of the parent system -- making them eligible to try for Union membership and all the horrible political infighting resulting from it ^_^
I (Brend) would like to note that the above post contains a lot of new information. This also means that there might be small errors or unclarities in the text. Please be so kind as to help us find them by pointing them out and asking questions on any part that you find difficult to follow or understand!
We have not taken into account possible necessary technologies, as we feel that they wouldn't add much in way of cost/benefit ratios. Next to that, the star wars setting is filled with smaller worlds that are perfectly fine settlements, and as such we assume that the knowledge on how to actually settle a world is something innate to all peoples.
Below you will find a short listing of the constraints we put on the project, and the costs we envision for the different steps. This is followed short analysis of the final cost, and the justification for these costs.
[ Note on 'Settlement' versus 'Colony': A settlement is a place, typically one that has hitherto been uninhabited, where people establish a community. A colony is a a group of people of one nationality or ethnic group living in a foreign city or country. So, what we are looking for here is settlement. ]
Revisions
2014-04-19: Adds link to sector capacity limits. Fixes bug in calculations. (Updates in add and del.)
2014-07-24: Updates for proposed change after discussion. Updates only the "Surveying and Settling" section -- cost justification is not recalculated. (Updates in changed.)
Settlement - Constraints
We wanted to make sure that building a settlement was an exercise in getting additional zones that also started the process to having an independent system. Because of this, and because of our earlier thought experiments in settlements.During system creation, zones are generated through
. A settlement should be worse than an actual system started by a new player. As such, we have put some stringent constraints on newly discovered sites for settlements:- Starts out with 25 , with a maximum of 35
- Starts out with 70 , with a maximum of 100
- Starts out with no , and it is not possible to get (not even by having left-over )
- Starts out with 0 , with a maximum of 1
you can only get mediocre and bad stars, netting you at most 2 at 34 . The amount of means that you will nearly always have open orbits. The use of asteroids is a more appealing option which nets you a little more zones per , and which also results in more interesting 'second-rate' systems.We discussed the addition of the option to get 1
at length, as you can use it to get a +1 . In the end we decided in favour of this option, because it allows for much more interesting systems. Since the prerequisites of the specials rule out anything with or , most specials are very good for such a system. [ Note: Of course, the potential system still needs to be validated in the System Creation forum, so any strangeness can be caught and discussed there. ]Settlement - Surveying and Settling
A number of steps must be undertaken to get a settlement up and running. Each of these steps has their own cost, and sometimes an associated duration. Together these steps create a fully independeny settlement system.The different steps that need to be undertaken to get a settlement up and running are (both IC and OOC):
- System Design & Validation (ooc)
The system you want to find must be designed and validated by the forum. It is advisable to design and validate your system before starting surveying. In this step, you determine how long you want to survey, where you want to survey, and what you will find in the new settlement site.
- Surveying (ic)
The settlement site needs to be surveyed. Surveying is split into two phases: basic surveying and extended surveying. Extended surveying on top of the base duration allows you to have additional system design resources. There are severals options during this phase,
Surveying for such a basic site takes 20, with a cost of 1500 per . A basic settlement site will have 25 , 70 . Extended surveying can be done in increments of 10 at 2000 per . The optional additions to the basic system are +10 , +1 , or +10 . The last addition (+10 ) can be done thrice, while the first two (the +10 and the +1 ) can only be done once.
For example, if your settlement design uses 34, 80 and a , the survey time will be 20+10+10+10 , with a price of 90 000 (1500 per for the first 20 , followed by 30 of 2000 per turn).
If you try to find a survey site in a sector that already contains other things, the required survey time is increased by the amount of realspace that is already in use. Furthermore, the sector must have at least 7 realspace available. [ Note: the concept of sector Realspace will be discussed in a later post. For know, now that this means that surveying in a sector with other stuff in it is more expensive. ] [ See Proposal: Sector capacity limits for more information on the realspace concept. ]
- Settlement Infrastructure Setup (ic)
Once the surveying is done, the settlement site is known. The first step of actually setting up a settlement is the setup of intial infrastructure. This includes space docks, communication grids, sensor networks and other things necessary for system-wide development. The costs of the setup are 40 000 + 2000 
.
As soon as the settlement infrastructure setup is completed, the settlement starts requiring upkeep. Each turn, the settlement requires 550, 100 , 100 , 100 , 100 , 100 and 100 .
Settlement upkeep must be paid. If the upkeep is not paid, the settlement does not produce any labour, and can not process any into zones or other things.
- Settlement Development (ic)
Once the settlement is furnished with space docks and basic infrastructure, it is time to start the actual development of the worlds themselves. During this phase it is possible to develop zones on the worlds of the newly settled system.
Because of the difficulty of construction on a new world with only some orbital infrastructure and a basic communication grid, the development of a zone costs an additional +2000, making the normal price of a zone 4000 . This surcharge is only calculated on actual zone development. Any other project is still possible at normal rates.
Of course, this additional zone construction costs is next to the normal upkeep as described in the previous step.
- Settlement Infrastructure Completion (ic)
Finally, when the settlement reaches a certain size and economic prowess, the settlement can be made an independent system by repurposing the settlement infrastructure to become trade infrastructure.
The final project can only be executed if the system has at least: 12 first tier zones, 6 second tier zones, 1 Open Market zone, 1 Power zone, 1 trade fleet of at least 1000, 1 Holonet Relay Base Station in the sector and 2.0 .
This final project takes 40 000 + 2000 
. Upkeep has to be paid until the completion of the final project. Once the final project is completed, the settlement will enjoy the following benefits:- It gets an additional 2 trade fleets of 1000 each,
- It can support those 2 trade fleets without requiring Open Market zones for them,
- The settlement no longer requires upkeep,
- Zones no longer require a +2000 surcharge,
- The settlement enjoys full economic independence from their parent system!
- It gets an additional 2 trade fleets of 1000
, nor any way to actually get this. This is very important, so there will be no technologies to get , nor should we validate any system that does somehow sneak it in.Furthermore, we have removed the requirement for an augmentation zone from the list of required zones. An augmentation zones does not anything in the way of economic independence. The fact that a starting system has one is due to historic reasons mainly -- we do not feel that they are useful or an addition to the starting system.
The upkeep is steep (netting out at 1000
per if products are assumed to be at 12-set value). This is deliberate: an indepent settlement should lean heavily on their parent system, and together with the +2000 surcharge this helps to make the settlement an impressive (not to mention expensive) late game option. In fact, if you want to commit to a settlement, you will have to make sure to meet the upkeep. If you don't, not only does your settlement not produce anything, or grow a single , it will continue costing upkeep for longer periods!Settlement - Cost Justification
Note: this sections has not been updated with new calculations due to increased requirements.Wheh! That was a lot of information in little text. Let's look at the actual costs a little better so we can explain them. To summarize the settlement process:
- System Design & Validation: required
- Surveying: 30 000 (= 20 at 1500 per ), optional additions up to 100 000 a pop (= X * 10 at 2000 per , with X=1..5 times)
- Settlement Infrastructure Setup: 49 000 (= 40 000 + 2000 ) / starts upkeep of 550 , 100 , 100 , 100 , 100 , 100 and 100
- Settlement Development: ~50 250 (=20 * (2000+2000) + 100
+ 400 + 6000 migration) - Settlement Infrastructure Completion: 40 000 + 200
(= 50 * 550 , 100 , 100 , 100 , 100 , 100 and 100 ; we assume that you will be paying upkeep for at least 50 based on a turnly expenditure of 2000 to development)...~269 132
for a 70-zones settlement (with at minimum 40 to independence, of which 20 surveying),~369 132
for a 100-zones settlement (with at minimum 90 to independence, of which 70 surveying)!The first thing to note is that the 'minimum turns to independence' is really the absolute minimum. We don't expect a lot of people to actually make this -- it requires extremely high development speeds at 5000
per turn! During our calculations we assumed that the player could spend 2000 on development next to the upkeep payments.The repayment time calculations are a little tricky, as the generated settlement can have as many as 110 zones. However, this would give a strange and unfair view as the settlement has to be fileld first. Going with only the first 20 zones doesn't give us a good idea of the situation either. So we settled for calculating the repayment time based on half of the available zones in the settlement (with upgrades take into account as they rock on any world that is more expensive than 2000
per zone).A bare settlement with only 20
surveying will repay itself in 334.58 321.64 , while a settlement with everything surveyed in will repay itself in 335 326.48 . There as a trick to squeeze a little shorter repayment time out of the settlement: survey only the and and then use that all to get more zones. This trick nets out at a repayment time of 309.88 301.65 .Settlement - Discussion
This section contains some notes and points on the design of the settlement proposal above.
We would like to point out that, starting the moment the outpost reaches economic independence, the full effect of repayment times of all the possible options in a system is available. This includes specialization through corporations, though because of the prohibition on using
, this will be an expensive proposition as well since terraformation has to be deployed as well.Another interesting point is this: the moment the outpost is economically independent, it would qualify for membership of the Union under the OOCly world requirements, save for the 'Be sovereign over their entire territory' condition. However, the government of the settlement might decide to declare independence from the government of the parent system -- making them eligible to try for Union membership and all the horrible political infighting resulting from it ^_^
I (Brend) would like to note that the above post contains a lot of new information. This also means that there might be small errors or unclarities in the text. Please be so kind as to help us find them by pointing them out and asking questions on any part that you find difficult to follow or understand!
Dragonmaster352 » Mon Apr 14, 2014 12:13 am
-
Dragonmaster352 - Storyteller
Ok a few questions
First, you say a sector you survey for a settlement must have at least 7 realspace available. How many realspace and hyperspace does a settlement take up by itself or has that deliberately been left out for now?
Second, what specific system development options are available after point 3 has been completed? Terraforming, special projects, etc. (If the list of things you can't do is shorter feel free to give those instead.)
Lastly, is the reduction that the Sensor Vessels technology gives done on the total survey time for settlements or or is it given on the base survey time and possible extensions? To take the afore mentioned 100-zone settlement as an example. The difference between 70 and 69 is negligible, which reduces the whole tech in effectiveness and coolness. At least in my opinion.
First, you say a sector you survey for a settlement must have at least 7 realspace available. How many realspace and hyperspace does a settlement take up by itself or has that deliberately been left out for now?
Second, what specific system development options are available after point 3 has been completed? Terraforming, special projects, etc. (If the list of things you can't do is shorter feel free to give those instead.)
Lastly, is the reduction that the Sensor Vessels technology gives done on the total survey time for settlements or or is it given on the base survey time and possible extensions? To take the afore mentioned 100-zone settlement as an example. The difference between 70
and 69 is negligible, which reduces the whole tech in effectiveness and coolness. At least in my opinion.
Chriz » Mon Apr 14, 2014 12:24 am
1:
Since a settlement has the potential of becoming a independent system it will probably be the equivalent of a full system.
2: After completing the setup project the system is counted as a player system under the same faction for the rules and every kind of project you could do on your own system is possible there (if the prerequisites are met!) There is no magical difference between two systems in the normal rules, so there is no magical difference between a settlement and a normale system, unless explicitly noted.
3: It is true that the sensor vessels technology is not created for settlements. To be honest the single turn could mean saving 2000 which means the technology repays itself in less than 2 settlements which is very nice but on the scale of the settlement it won't really matter which is intentional.
We are not planning to rework this technology to have a serious impact on creating settlements since this would literally mean making the technology 50 times more expensive.
Brend wrote:[ Note: the concept of sector Realspace will be discussed in a later post. For know, now that this means that surveying in a sector with other stuff in it is more expensive. ]
Since a settlement has the potential of becoming a independent system it will probably be the equivalent of a full system.
2: After completing the setup project the system is counted as a player system under the same faction for the rules and every kind of project you could do on your own system is possible there (if the prerequisites are met!) There is no magical difference between two systems in the normal rules, so there is no magical difference between a settlement and a normale system, unless explicitly noted.
3: It is true that the sensor vessels technology is not created for settlements. To be honest the single turn could mean saving 2000
which means the technology repays itself in less than 2 settlements which is very nice but on the scale of the settlement it won't really matter which is intentional. We are not planning to rework this technology to have a serious impact on creating settlements since this would literally mean making the technology 50 times more expensive.
Player of the Praetorian Empire
Gerben » Mon Apr 14, 2014 7:04 pm
I must say that i'm genuinly impressed by this proposal.. it seems much better then our previous attempt. I however find it difficult to determine it is on par so to say, but my feeling is that this is probably well suited and well priced as an endgame option.
VO!
VO!
Fedor » Mon Apr 14, 2014 9:42 pm
This looks like a fairly endgame option indeed :)
My only comment would be that under the assumptions of your calculation (minimum surveying, development in 50 the total cost in tax is equal to:
30000+40000+20*4000+6000+40000+50*550=223500 with a special product cost of 2000, 100 , 600 and 5000 of , , , , and which I would estimate at 13500 in special products and 18000 in products.
That does mean that it is a very big sink for just tax, and some other small things you do on the side. Realising that the settlements are meant as a big sink for tax, having just over 6% as special goods means that I see very little of the endgame production revolving around them. Realising that other options might still be made for the lategame, this seems like one that a lot of people will want eventually, and it might make special goods relatively less wanted than they are now and I just want to check if we want that.
My only comment would be that under the assumptions of your calculation (minimum surveying, development in 50
the total cost in tax is equal to:30000+40000+20*4000+6000+40000+50*550=223500 with a special product cost of 2000
, 100 , 600 and 5000 of , , , , and which I would estimate at 13500 in special products and 18000 in products.That does mean that it is a very big sink for just tax, and some other small things you do on the side. Realising that the settlements are meant as a big sink for tax, having just over 6% as special goods means that I see very little of the endgame production revolving around them. Realising that other options might still be made for the lategame, this seems like one that a lot of people will want eventually, and it might make special goods relatively less wanted than they are now and I just want to check if we want that.
Chriz » Mon Apr 14, 2014 10:02 pm
The special goods is actually a good point.
I believe that we could change a portion of tax to super structure components and add some additional in the mix.
I propose to change the additional cost for the first 20 zones from 2000 to 1000 , 200 and 200 .
I believe that we could change a portion of tax to super structure components and add some additional
in the mix.I propose to change the additional cost for the first 20 zones from 2000
to 1000 , 200 and 200 .Player of the Praetorian Empire
Elmer » Mon Apr 14, 2014 10:38 pm
I haven't read the whole think yet, but Chriz, keep in mind that already require 4 , this will increase the demand for more than you might have though of. (Or not of course :). )
already require 4 , this will increase the demand for more than you might have though of. (Or not of course :). )
Chriz » Mon Apr 14, 2014 10:44 pm
Right, it seems I am a little bit off my game today. What other products are logical? What would you propose for an increase in products / special goods, for basic infrastructure?
Player of the Praetorian Empire
Brend » Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:28 am
The thing is: they are called special projects for a reason. I think they need to be assigned to projects that give them meaning. Assigning them to arbitrary zone construction does not give them meaning in my view. Assigning them to setup and completion projects does.
In this case, we have four large chunks of payments: surveying, setup, zone development and completion:
Proposed change: We think that increasing the completion project cost to 2000, and changing the prerequisite for the completion project to 1 trade fleet of 1000 .
No further increase in costs should be done though, as the project is intended as a big fat sink. :P
[ Note: We really think that starting players should start out with 500 per fleet, as the current amount is a very limiting factor on their growth! In fact, we feel so strongly about it that we started a thread about it!]
In this case, we have four large chunks of payments: surveying, setup, zone development and completion:
- Sureying should remain in to maintain symmetry with the other colonization options.
- With a normal expected per of around 200 the setup will take about 10 . We do not want to create an artificial stretch... We could increase the cost to 4000, but that wouldn't really resolve the stated issue.
- Zone deployment should, in my opinion, remain in tax as we do not require special goods for development of zones in home systems; even though not all planets are used at the start. Since we do not require excessive infrastructure costs with the base system, the zone deployment surcharge is best expressed as 'generic effort', which in turn is best expressed as . (Chris remarks: we have had the discussion of goods vs tax earlier, and there we decided that more goods in normal construction is not the best way to go, see Economic gameplay)
- Completion currently costs 40 000 + 200 . Chris and I both agree that this should really cost more , as an independent world with 3 trade fleets of 200 is a good joke. The trade capacity should really be around 1000 per fleet, as ideally a) the settlement should be located away the Bozzy Spine and b) it should have trade routes through non-hyperspace sectors.
Proposed change: We think that increasing the completion project cost to 2000
, and changing the prerequisite for the completion project to 1 trade fleet of 1000 .No further increase in costs should be done though, as the project is intended as a big fat
sink. :P[ Note: We really think that starting players should start out with 500
per fleet, as the current amount is a very limiting factor on their growth! In fact, we feel so strongly about it that we started a thread about it!]
Brend » Sat Apr 19, 2014 4:25 pm
@dragonmaster352: I have posted the Proposal: Sector capacity limits. I will also update the original post to link there.
@all: I found a bug in the calculations. I corrected the return periods in the original post.
@all: I found a bug in the calculations. I corrected the return periods in the original post.
Brend » Thu Jul 24, 2014 1:37 pm
I have updated the original post with the proposed changes.
The topic has been dormant for 3 months and 1 week. Unless there is opposition to this propose I will commit these new rules to the wiki in the weekend of 2-3 august.
The topic has been dormant for 3 months and 1 week. Unless there is opposition to this propose I will commit these new rules to the wiki in the weekend of 2-3 august.
Brend » Sat Aug 02, 2014 4:09 pm
Updated the wiki:
13 posts (analysis)
• Page 1 of 1