Do you want to have licensed stations provide residual payments?

[Vice]

I am considering another significant change for a potential update as part of the game's finalized feature set. Namely, licensed stations providing residual payments over time (both stations built by the player and also selectively licensed manually). This option has been contested over time, but I want to post a poll to gauge feedback on whether or not to consider it again before making a final decision. If you vote in the affirmative, please also be sure to answer the following questions related to this potential addition:

1 - If stations do provide payments over time, how significant should they be (ie 10K per cycle, 100K, more)? Should there be a total cap per payment cycle (either payment amount or station limit)?

2 - Should station payments have a fixed rate per license/station? Or should they kind of be random based on a simulated behavior of varying profits (tied to tech/econ level perhaps)?

3 - Considering values specified in #1, what kind of timeframe would you want the payment cycle to have?

If you'd rather send me your answers/feedback in private, simply send me an e-mail ( starwraith.com > contact ). I'll also be considering feedback and discussions over the last several years on the same topic when formulating design objectives for this system. I plan to have an outline of design goals prepared soon and will likely post it in a reply here.

[DennyMala]

It'll be realistic to have a cut of the profit made by the station so I'm more towards a non fixed solution than a fixed one.

[Marvin]

Yup, Denny beat me to it. Indie pilots are the only ones who pay a docking fee but, say, 20% of that fee should go to the owner of the station. To make it even more complicated, the owner could (a) also get a cut of anything bought, sold or repaired at the station and (b) get a discount on anything they, themselves, buy.

[TraderDan]

Having residual payments would improve the pacing of the game and reduce grindiness of saving up money for upgrades etc. It would also incentivize the player to build stations as well as explore and purchase licenses for every station in the game. In some way there could also be a maco economic / military way to influence territorial control between the 3 factions so different star systems could change affiliation dependent on the war effort. (Playing the Vonari faction might be cool also)

I'm not sure on the $ amount but it's important to have a balanced amount, too little $ and things would be grindy and players may lose interest, too much and the player doesn't feel rewarded for any accomplishments and things become boring because it's too easy and the player could also lose interest

[BlackFox]

Both my wife and my answers...

1 - If stations do provide payments over time, how significant should they be (ie 10K per cycle, 100K, more)? Should there be a total cap per payment cycle (either payment amount or station limit)?

From our perspective, it would depend on how the player "plays" the game. Some like to grind it out while others may not have time to grind out. This "payments" idea would allow some to just build a station and receive some sort of income which in one aspect is good, but if that is all one does then what would be the point of playing. We agree that it would be a benefit to have stations send payments to the owner of the station, and perhaps to those that hold a licence. Meaning if Marvin owns a station I dock at frequently then he by all rights should receive something given he provided the station and all for us to dock at. Those that decide to purchase a licence maybe receive a small fraction. For us, a 1-5K amount for a licence, and perhaps either 50K-100K to the owner. Perhaps also include the docking fees- if I dock at Marvin's station, as an IND we pay 1K fee each time, then he could take a portion of that fee as well. As far as a cap, we think a cap is reasonable. Otherwise this game may turn out to become a "park and build" where nothing happens other than station being built just to get quick cash. Deflects away from the spirit of the game in our opinion.

2 - Should station payments have a fixed rate per license/station? Or should they kind of be random based on a simulated behavior of varying profits (tied to tech/econ level perhaps)?

We believe the payments should be random/vary according to the behavior of the economy. After all, this game does have economics and we have to adjust/adapt our tactics to maximize our profits when we buy and sell. So payments should also follow the same method.

3 - Considering values specified in #1, what kind of timeframe would you want the payment cycle to have?

This was a tough one to decide on. My wife (being an accountant by trade) was concerned as mentioned above that too short of a cycle means people just come in, plop a station somewhere, and get an income. That income based on what you decide and sent out on a timed cycle. Too long and they don't really make much; too short and they make more than we do mining or doing the odd contracts which makes it a "build and sit" game. To us that would steer the game "intention" into a different direction that perhaps what you envisioned. However, what about using a similar cycle used for the crew we have hired, or if that is too short than try doubling that value as a start. If it needs an adjustment later then adjust.

The above answers are just our thoughts on the proposed idea. To be honest, it makes no real difference to us if you do implement this or not. It does not bother us if we have to pay more fees and station owners get credits faster by receiving payments from stations. We are quite happy with what we have and what needs to be done. Does not bother us if my docking fees go straight to Marvin because he owns the station- it's economics and part of the game design. But it does add another dynamic to game play for us where we can find a nice little spot and have a station...

Whatever you decide, we both are good either way.

[Marvin]

Just a note on BlackFox's first comment. Building a station and then sitting fat only works if stations aren't destructible. Which, in this game, would be a false assumption. It's been awhile since I've needed to defend one of my stations from an attacking player (not to mention the AI, which are now also a threat) but the possibility exists. Especially in MP.

[BlackFox]

See we would not know that as we don't attack stations, nor would we. I was more looking at the concept of "we can build a station and do nothing else because we will get credit payments" which kind of defeats the intent and spirit of the game. Not that I care one way or another how people want to play. I have enough on my plate keeping up with my wife.

[Vice]

There is indeed quite a variety of selectable gameplay options available relating to station building, attacking/destroying, and market values. And I'll plan on extending that kind of adjustability into the realm of licensed station payments should it be implemented. So in the same way players can choose to have AI ships attack stations or not, apply simulated market/value changes or not, and build or not... etc, I will also want the player to be able to do things like opt out of receiving payments from stations by simply cancelling any licenses they don't want, change the frequency of payments (with consistent value), or collect more by optionally buying more licenses and/or building command modules. Accessible options that are not forced will likely be part of the overall equation, changeable either by gameplay decisions/actions or settings.

I appreciate the feedback and discussion of such considerations and options. Good points to evaluate and also brings to light some of the points raised in years past over some of the same concerns and requests.

[Marvin]

I have enough on my plate keeping up with my wife.

Me too. Luckily, the best part of what's on my plate is my wife's cooking.

[BlackFox]

So in the same way players can choose to have AI ships attack stations or not, apply simulated market/value changes or not, and build or not... etc, I will also want the player to be able to do things like opt out of receiving payments from stations by simply cancelling any licenses they don't want, change the frequency of payments (with consistent value), or collect more by optionally buying more licenses and/or building command modules. Accessible options that are not forced will likely be part of the overall equation, changeable either by gameplay decisions/actions or settings.

We were discussing the idea of having these features "toggleable" to allow all diverse play styles coexist and you summed up our discussion before we could post it. Seems like a good move forward- gives those of us a chance to expand the economic side if we wish, or keep simple and standard for those that do not.

Curious if you have a thought to the station payments side, where the owner of a station receives their amount and a licence holder might receive a small portion. It might give incentive to having a licence at a station or two, and gives income to those station owners where their stations are frequented. I mean I have no issue even having a higher docking fee as an IND non-licence holder and perhaps by having a licence reduces the fee by a certain amount. Particularly if we establish a trade route between two or more stations.

[Vice]

Yes, I have been reviewing and considering the ownership/license criteria and conditions. There will likely be no distinction between owners and license holders... license holders will be owners (basically a coop, shared ownership investment with returns). It will be the only feasible way to implement some kind of payment system with the existing build and entity framework while also supporting opting in/out, tracking module networks in both SP and MP, not limiting build options for other players (reducing their potential revenue points), and utilizing a consistent payment structure.

[BlackFox]

I can understand that. Hopefully keeping simple for you without causing chaos in other parts of code. Been there many times.

Looking forward to the new dynamic. Even gives us another strategy or two in how we do things.

[TraderDan]

I'm guessing my potential assault on a starbase would go as well as my attempts to being down a capital ship, my weapons are like bee stings it just makes them angry. But I've almost got enough credits for that rail gun *mischievous grin

[Vice]

To float the idea further. How important would the concept of being paid more because you built the station yourself be to the gameplay equation to you? For example, the system would likely already be restricted to only providing license payments for stations that are of the same faction, but an increase could apply for stations personally built by the player (and if the faction and name remain consistent, indicating that the station hasn't been destroyed and rebuilt by someone else). A drawback to this is that it would not apply back toward older stations built by the player already, but could apply to stations built by the player going forward (since a new data/value set would need to be established to keep track of the build history).

So ultimately, the question is, how important is the idea of an added pay benefit to you for stations personally built by the player rather than simply licensed? And if it is important, what kind of pay increase would you want to see applied? There could be something like a base rate for licensed stations and then maybe 2X the payment level for stations built by the player.

[TraderDan]

It makes sense to get paid more for a station you built and to receive payments for allied stations. I usually play as IND so could I collect from both factions or do I have to choose. Doesn't that give IND an advantage in that scenario? If I'm playing as a rival faction can I defeat a faction in another region, flip the allegiance in that area and purchase base licences to increase income?

[Marvin]

Building a station ... doesn't that ally the system with whoever built the station? And, if you're not an Indie, you should then receive payment from both your rival faction and the Indies. And, if only stations built after the update will acquire the payment option, what happens if a player destroys all his old stations and then uses the materials to build new one at the same location?

[Vice]

It makes sense to get paid more for a station you built and to receive payments for allied stations. I usually play as IND so could I collect from both factions or do I have to choose. Doesn't that give IND an advantage in that scenario? If I'm playing as a rival faction can I defeat a faction in another region, flip the allegiance in that area and purchase base licences to increase income?

Yes, that would likely be an unfair advantage for IND. As such, IND would likely remain truly independent. So you could buy licenses for the commodity discount and hangar fee reduction, but payments would not apply as they would only be for matching affiliation. So you would need to build IND specific stations in order to receive payments (same would be true for any faction).

In order to flip a station's allegiance, you will need to destroy it and rebuild your own for your faction.

And, if only stations built after the update will acquire the payment option, what happens if a player destroys all his old stations and then uses the materials to build new one at the same location?

License credit can still apply, only the added build bonus would not. So rebuilding would be required if the full build license credit would be desired (that will be true for any station to get added build credit). However, only the command module itself will be required, so you wouldn't have to rebuild all of the other crew, power, shield, production, or storage modules. Weapon modules, if any, would also likely need to be rebuilt for a new faction as they also stay linked to their founding faction.

[BlackFox]

As an Independent, I agree with the above ideas. Makes perfect sense. Besides, we IND's can travel in both side's space and trade at the stations on either faction already, so that's our advantage. We don't need anything more really to tip the scales.

[Vice]

Thank you for your votes and feedback. The vast majority of those who've provided feedback and comments over the years would be interested in some kind of automatic payment system for stations, but with some limitations/restrictions to help keep it from becoming too much of a game-playing-by-itself prospect. So limits on application/method, payment levels, and time intervals will all be considerations. Based on the results, I've begun work on implementing the system and am using the following checklist as a design framework:

- Payment system will be linked to the license system in such a way that players can co-own stations for payments and also automatically receive payments for stations they build themselves (since licenses are automatically applied). This lets the player control which stations they can collect payments from and provide a two-tier system with higher baseline values for stations built by a player.

- Limited backwards compatibility with existing licensed stations so players can begin to receive payments immediately after updating for any stations they've already built or licensed.

- Going forward, stations built by a player will have an added bonus payment amount per cycle in addition to the license share. Currently considering a 2X increase level.

- Payment amount will not be depleted or split if multiple players are licensed share owners of the same station in multiplayer. Amounts stay at around the same level and are determined by location, tech/econ rating, and varied value established at the time of payment.

- Payment system will (by functional requirement) be linked to stations/licenses in the gameplay mode being used. So payments can only apply for stations built or licensed in either single player or multiplayer. And in the case of multiplayer, any licensed stations must exist on the server in the sector linked to the license for credit to apply.

- Payments will only apply for stations that are of the same faction as the licensed/owning player. IND players can still purchase licenses from ALC or FDN stations, but such mismatched faction licenses will only provide the hangar and commodity price discounts. IND players will have the option of building their own IND stations for payments.

- Initial default payment time interval will be about 15 minutes (gameplay time as indicated on the HUD flight timer). For convenience, a custom text file option will be available to adjust the payment time interval. If the time interval is changed at all using the custom text file option, amounts credited will be pro-rated for any time offset applied (so the final value level will remain the same, only the interval of payment is changed). An option to fully disable the payments will also be available (value of 0 in the text file). Options to enable or disable the payment system as well as adjust the minimum payment time duration will be available in the Create/Modify Pilot menu.

- The 'View Hangar Details' option will be renamed to 'View Station Details' and will now include information about licensed station locations as well as their profit value level rating (a number score ranging from 1 to 10). The message log lines displayed for the option will be revised for improved visual distinction by color with green headers, light blue station listings, and slightly darker blue lists for stored items.

- Station value levels (which will function as kind of a 'health' factor) can change over time and will be linked to the tech/econ level for the region. So a region with a falling rating will reduce the profitability/health of a station while an increasing rating will improve the profitability/health of a linked station. This also means that if the simulation setting for economy/technology rating changes is active, this can impact the overall health of stations in a region over time independent of any player actions.

- Default baseline payment levels will generally be around 10K every 15 minutes for a mid-range rated (5) station with perhaps +/- 20% or so variation. So as an example, a player with 5 mid-range rated licensed stations might receive around 50 per default pay cycle. Additional bonus can be added for stations built by the player.

- Payments should vary randomly a bit in kind of a simulated variable profit approach, but in general, higher rated stations will still usually pay more per cycle than lower rated stations overall.

- Payments will be displayed in the message log and recorded in the flight log, the credit award sound will also play.

- Players can opt out of any such payments for any station(s) by terminating any licenses they don't want to use.

- Current 50% credit toward station hangar fees and 5% commodity discount will continue to apply.

If you'd like to submit any further feedback on any of these or other points, please feel free to reply here or send your thoughts to me via e-mail.

[Marvin]

Payment amount will not be depleted or split if multiple players are licensed share owners of the same station in multiplayer.

Reminds me of an old Perry Mason episode where some guy sold more than 100% of his shares of stock in his company.

[TraderDan]

Thank goodness we don't have a banking system like that in real life

[Vice]

I decided to eliminate the text file setting option for enabling/disabling the payment system and adjusting the time cycle. Instead, the options will be integrated directly into the Create/Modify Pilot menu to make them much more accessible and individually changeable by profile. I've modified the checklist above to reflect the changes.

[Marvin]