Emergency Build - Unfair

[Commander G]

I agree that the Emergency builds have improved, but I still use it all the time because 200% + 25% > 100% + 100%.

I'd like to see it be 150% + 25% < 100% + 100%.

[geoschmo]

What about 175% + 25% = 100% + 100%?

That way over the long haul it gives you no benefit or penalty. But as a short term assist, hence the name Emergency build, it is still available.

[Tomgs]

The reason it probably still has a net plus is you can lose some if you emergency build something that takes an odd number of turns. For instance take the good old space yard normal build time 5 turns emergency build time 3 turns you lose that half turn in there because build times don't carry over to the next item. I am not saying it is completely balanced but I don't think its a game killer if used in emergencies not just all the time. That is up to individuals though its an option. I don't use it much but I would hate to have to wait 3 to 4 game years to build those stellar manipulation devices without emergency build.

[Baron Munchausen]

Let me repeat my idea from another thread:

Why doesn't emergency build affect HAPPINESS levels like cranking up production did in SE3? Wouldn't it provide a reasonable disincentive to use emergency build if it costs one or two percent happiness per turn? People do get cranky and difficult when you force them to work 80+ hours a week... I presume that even aliens like to have time to spend with the kids/hatchlings/sprouts and the spousal unit so they can get their nookie. If it cost 20 percent happiness to go into emergency build for a year, you'd also get DIMINISHING RETURNS as the happiness level affected production bonuses. Does this not seem reasonable and realistic?

[This message has been edited by Baron Munchausen (edited 25 January 2001).]

[SunDevil]

Baron, I like your idea a lot.

[LintMan]

I'd rather not see emergency build negatively effect happiness levels.

As I see it: if you want to double production in real life, you'd add a second shift, not make everyone work 80 hrs/week. But even for overtime, that means extra $$$$ for the workers, and I know lots of people that just _LOVE_ working overtime, for the extra cash at a higher rate, so I don't see overtime as a negative happiness thing. Instead, I see a second shift or overtime as cost factors.

I'd like to see emergency build not turn limited at all, just cost-based. So it would cost, say, 50% extra per turn to run in emergency build mode - so you'd pay 3x the cost for 2x the production, but you could do so for as long as you wanted (and could afford). In other words, for a planet with 2000 production per resource, emergency build would produce 4000 per resource, but cost 6000 per resource (with the extra 2000 lost as overhead). In reality, 50% extra cost is way too high, but for game balance, it might be OK or even a bit low. (Maybe 100% overhead would be more balanced in the game?)

To reform the build process further, I wouldn't allow free swapping of in-construction items. Anything currently being built would have to be scrapped (returning a % of it's total paid cost) before a new item could be substituted in. Also, leftover production when an item was completed would be applied to the next item on the queue. Lastly, space yard facilities wouldn't effect the production rate for units or facilities - just ships. Perhaps a new facility could then be made that only effected facils and/or units.



[This message has been edited by LintMan (edited 25 January 2001).]

[Puke]

I like Lint's idea best. i dont see it happening though, so perhaps a setting for emergency build incurs x turns of slow build (could be set for 0) and em-build Lasts for x turns (could be set to infi)

a good add would be a setting for em-build costs x% above the regular resource cost for production, or slow build produces at x%.