FreeOrion

yuck, stockpiles.

First off, the obvious: I believe we can agree that FO should have an “Empire Pool” of resources. Resources are automatically moved to worlds with shortfalls.

1: Should excess resources stockpile (specifically nutrients and minerals)? And if so, what form should the stockpile take?

* No Stockpiles Excess resources are either converted into money or lost

* A local stockpile on each planet in addition to a separate global empire pool. The player decides how much of his excess resources to move to the empire pool, and how much to keep at home.

* Local Stockpile on each planet. The local stockpile can’t be manipulated by the player (except perhaps via Evacuation of a doomed planet). Local stockpiles are summed and used as a global stockpile.

* Global Stockpile. Excess resources are automatically added to a global stockpile.

Global stockpiles are the “empire pool” of available resources—the player doesn’t have to perform voodoo dances to move these resources to worlds with shortfalls.

2: If there is a stockpile, should there be a cap?

* No cap (aside from the upward range of a 32-bit integer) (or we could just let it roll over like high scores in pac-man )

* A static cap (for example, you can have no more than 5000 food empire wide, or you can have no more than 100 minerals on a planet)

* A planet cap based on a supply that will last your population a number of turns (for example, if you can store enough nutrients to feed your population for 4 turns) Only applies to local stockpiles.

* A cap based on empire population, consumption, planet size technology and/or facilities. If this is the case, the exact nature of the cap will have to wait for v.3--have to define technology and buildings before we can start assigning effects to them.

---------------------
In the case of a global stockpile, there may be times when we need to determine how much of the stockpile is located on a planet. (for example, if the planet is under a blockade/siege, or if we allow conquering empires to gain a portion of the loser’s stockpile.) I’m ignoring this aspect until a later date because we won’t need it for the v.2 requirements. When we get around to defining the actual systems for blockading, raiding, and conquest we’ll have to include the effect on stockpiles.

For the record, I’m also ignoring the possibility for resource decay, as I don’t remember anyone suggesting it in the design thread. It’s possible that we might add decay later on for play balancing, or keep it out of the game altogether.

Personaly I think this topic could have stayed in Brainstorming for a bit longer but heres my 2 cents based on the current state of that discussion.

1 - Planetary stockpiles, no seperate "empire" level stockpile

2 - Controled by facilities/population/infastructe, basicaly make it controlable so I can tell a particular planet to have more of something or less of something.

It might be a clever idea as you hinted at to make resorces initialy unmovable from their planet of origin in the early game. Then as your tecnology improves (big space freiters) the amount that can be moved around incresses so in the late game stuff is being shuffled around like we move stuff on the Earth.

_________________
Fear is the Mind Killer - Frank Herbert -Dune

Just make them simple. Any excess resource a planet creates is put into the global stockpile. This stockpile is near infinite or can get that way with technology. Shipping is automatic, and FREE. Its up to the individual planets to hanlde any expenses.

_________________
Aquitaine is my Hero....

I'm for a global stockpile and no local stockpiles. In case of a blockade let's use a very simple system to determine how long a planet can continue to drain the global pile. My arguments for this are in the other thread, no need to repeat everything again.

Let's tie the cap to population. X turns of food per population unit and Y minerals for every guy. Though I do not see why this would only apply to local piles. Works just as well on empire level.

I don't really think we should increase this cap by technology or anything. That's probably because I see the stockpile more as a buffer to soak up accidental excess rather than something incredibly important that is really thrilling to keep track of.

* Global Stockpile. Excess resources are automatically added to a global stockpile.

* A cap based on empire population, consumption, planet size technology and/or facilities. If this is the case, the exact nature of the cap will have to wait for v.3--have to define technology and buildings before we can start assigning effects to them.

Thats an easy way, but leaves development options for the player. So while he might be able to store 3 turns worth of food in the beginning, he will be able to store 20 turns (or infinite) in the end game.

Trading this way can be handled on an empire wide level.

I'm with BB & NF.

K so this seems pretty straightforward.

Only two branches now.
1. A static stockpile to absorb the occasional excess.
2. A stockpile that can increase with tech. And might actually be important for the late-game Super-Scaler-Construction projects (SSDs, artificial planets, MASSIVE fleets etc.

Either can work for our game. It depends on how we will "pay" our minerals. All at once? Or gradually as the structure/ship is constructed. If we do it gradually the static stockpiles will do fine. If we make it all at once then large stockpiles will be necessary.

Personally I prefer option number 2.

_________________
Aquitaine is my Hero....

I hadn't even considered any other method than gradual payment. I don't want to check if I have the necessary amount of minerals all the time. I want to just tell my people to get busy and see results some turns after that.

Something we might want to have is a display showing you the ratio of mineral income to mineral demand. That ought to help you to keep things running smoothly.

Same as BB and NF. Ditto, NF, with the gradual payment.

Edit: cap increases with tech à la BB.

Well, NF has a different opinion then I have concerning technology and the cap. I say tech can change the cap, while NF says NAY.

Theres not really a reason for a HUGE cap. Its very similiar to any other resource in the real world. A coal plant doesn't mine an amount of coal sufficient for the next year and then stop mining. They simply see how much they are using per day and try to match their production to that. And then they sell of the rest. So a static stockpile that is sufficently large to allow us to meter our industry and mining efficiently oughta be good. Of course we can produce/use more per turn than the stockpile can hold and there shouldn't be a problem. But the player needs to know both amount mined and used per turn.

_________________
Aquitaine is my Hero....

I personally favor no stockpiles. Since we have infinite resources on our planets (e.g. mines dont get used up), there's really no need to stockpile anything.

If there are stockpiles, I'd like to see a relatively small cap, say, no more than two or three times your empire's gross per-turn output. Technology might raise this a bit, but It shouldn't be possible for an empire to hoard resources in the early game and get a stockpile so large they can go 100 turns without any mining.

JB

EDIT:

I do favor empire-wide stockpiles of money, assuming we have money.

_________________
Empire Team Lead

i agree with jbarcz1 in that we don't need stockpiles. I don't like the thought of players stockpiling until there is a conflict and then putting everything onto production and churning out ships in no time. I especially think that stockpiles are a way (in single player) for the human to out micromanage the computer.

I also don't like the idea of having to deal with the complexities of planetary blockading...It just seems like too much work to go around and check your blockaded planets to see if there are anymore stockpiles before deciding if it's worth sending ships yet.

Shipbuilding is limited both by minerals and industry....so you can't stockpile to produce insta-ships, as you can't stockpile industry.

Damn, you beat me to it, Drek