Upgrade costs and time too cheap for play balance

from GalCiv3 Forums

I think the upgrade costs for ships is a bit out of balance in being too cheap.

So for instance I can keep upgrading my constructors at 60 credits a pop in space and effectively build countless starbases

Two easy fixes for this. Increase the upgrade cost for constructor module a touch.

I can buy a merc ship with 5 modules for over a 1000 credits but upgrade a used 1 module constructor back up to a 3 module constructor for 60 credits. That shows a imbalance in costs.

So using the merc ship as a guide it should cost 100 -200 credit per replacement constructor module when upgrading spent constructor ships.

If I can mod this by shifting values in an xml file could someone point me to the right xml file to change?

An idea I like to help play balance this could be: Have limit number of times you can upgrade a ship before it wears out for instance, that would reduce this problem.  Or if change fundamental design say a colony ship into a constructor there is an extra cost to that shift in design.

Also I can upgrade in the middle of nowhere for only two turns and at a starbase far form my home bases one turn.
I think upgrade times and costs should be relative to the closest shipyard distance. Being able to upgrade a ship so fast and cheap far  away from any ship yard seem unbalanced.

Likewise if I can mod this myself can anyone point me to the appropriate xml file to shift?


Great game! Just a suggestion in play balancing a touch for both realism and also to close some too cheap and easy exploits.

9,355 views 8 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Upgrade costs in general are already very expensive. I'd guess that upgrading contructors in this fashion is not expected gameplay (a design oversight). Perhaps just make it so that contructors cannot be upgraded?

Reply #2 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

Since the 1.7  patch is all about starbase balancing, tweaking constructor upgrade costs for used constructors to add in the constructor cost back in shouldn't be too hard.

So a double constructor with only one constructor unit should upgrade at the same cost of a single constructor to a double constructor. Or  a spent triple constructor should update at the single to triple cost. Not just a base rate it is currently doing.

I agree that other ship upgrade costs seem to be at a good cost ratio.

But spent constructor upgrade costs being off is an unintended oversight, it allows the human player to steam roller the AI with starbases.

Fences - Organize your desktop icons today!
Reply #3 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

For me, playing single player, this falls under the heading of "Don't do that."

Reply #4 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

I upgrade constructors to restore double constructors. This is a hugely more powerful tactic than you would think at first. What it means is, once you've built a few constructors, you don't need to build anymore constructors as you can keep refreshing your existing constructors. This frees up a huge amount of production at your shipyards, due to the fact you no longer need to constructor spam. If you are playing peacefully, you can then start demolishing your factories on your planets and build research labs instead. You can then build a "bureau of labor" and set the planet to 45% research, 45% income and 10% manufacturing (to avoid coercion penalty), and set "research project" as your production project. This will give you a ridiculous amount of research and enough money to upgrade your constructors indefinitely. Don't get me started on how powerful it is once you can build triple constructors.....

To use this tactic, you will probably need a second constructor design called something like "double constructor reload" to allow upgrading of the constructor to the same design (you cannot upgrade a constructor to the same design template even if you have spent one of its construction modules).

I think a good fix for this is to make ships return to shipyards for upgrades. Or, failing that, prevent upgrading to any ship design that has a construction module.

My personal favorite though, would be to allow the AI to use this tactic too, because upgrading constructors takes much less micromanagement time than managing constructor production at shipyards and star bases.

Reply #5 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

I just did a test.  Upgrade cost seems to be based upon the components added with a small kickback for scrapped components.  That's proper and much better than how it worked 9 months ago when upgrade costs were way too high.  The bc cost seems to be related to the components' manufacturing costs.

I don't see how there's an easy fix to this exploit other than the obvious "just don't use it".  Change the upgrade cost equation and you unbalance the rest of the upgrade system.  Raising the manufacturing cost for constructor modules to raise their upgrade cost won't change the proportion.

Maybe support modules need a separate equation.

Maybe a flat tax on upgrading cargo hulls (which won't stop the same problem from arising with medium hull constructors).

No good answer here.

Reply #6 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

I am against remote upgrades.  It should require a shipyard and it should consume shipyard resources.  And you can cash rush it like any other shipyard build item.

Reply #7 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

I too think returning to a shipyard is the best option. Being able to upgrade anywhere doesn't make sense, because ships don't fly around in deep space with their own personal shipyard onboard. 

Reply #8 from GalCiv3 Forums Top

The idea of returning to shipyards is awesome.