Cornflakes_91 wrote:Thats all secondary factors not the actual "repair" time, though.
im talking about the time the ship actually spends being repaired.
The time and cost you cant remove by preparing your own yards.
CSE wrote:This is what counts, at the end. So it is not important what the actual repair time alone is, as it is not relevant to your experience or the economics of the game.
Cornflakes_91 wrote:CSE wrote:This is what counts, at the end. So it is not important what the actual repair time alone is, as it is not relevant to your experience or the economics of the game.
It is very much relevant when you have your fleet repair yards trying to get your fleet up and running again, with the resources already there.
When all that matters to you is to get all the ships working again.
0111narwhalz wrote:The point CSE is making is, I think, that it does not matter how long it takes to hammer out the dents. It matters how long it takes from deposition of the ship until pickup. With self-managed yards, there is less fluff, but you still don't care whether it is paperwork or engines currently being maintained; all that matters is the time you don't have your ship.
Cornflakes_91 wrote:the basic idea of trading speed vs cost i can agree with, but not with the magnitude of the variability.
you can maybe halve the base repair time with a fast job.
at least for the mechanics behind it.
you can do a fast and wasteful job or a slow efficient job.
or you can allocate less repair capacities to the job and it costs you less resources per time unit but with the same efficiency as with just allocating more capacities.
maybe the efficiency is directly a function of the amount of repair capacities allocated
the size of the job defines an "ideal" amount of workforce to do the job, and anything above that gets diminishing returns in terms of speed and material efficiency.
(modified by some variable on the repair systems)
so doing multiple repair jobs at once over multiple ships would be more efficient material and time wise and repair yards dont just throw all their resources at jobs sequentially.
you can rush a repair job with an oversized (compared to the ship to repair) repair yard, but get lower efficiency out of it.
maybe the ideal work allocation also varies with the size of the damage in addition to the size of the ship?
it theres just a dent or two in your shuttle theres not much point to throw the whole yard at it.
this all of course also applies to the NPC repair yards and their service costs are then modified by market forces, them charging you more for hogging all their capacities
Flatfingers wrote:I'm an adherent of the philosophy of Sliderism because I think games are about the player's enjoyment, not the developer's.
But I'm not a zealot about it; I see nothing wrong with providing some default settings for slider-enabled values: Easy RTS, Hardcore Strategy, Ironman Dogfighter, Freelancer 2.0, etc. This way, if you want to play the game as the developer(s) balanced it for you, you absolutely can.
But if you want to optimize the game's behaviors to your taste, including how repair should be paid for, individual sliders allow you to exercise that power and responsibility.
This seems wrong?
Cornflakes_91 wrote:its not 100% applicable, but the idea is. just found it interesting
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests