• Posts: 3,366
  • Tag points: 6

Topic: buildings

Both buildings and units cost upkeep but only units disband when you have no upkeep. Why not have buildings disband too or buildings producing nothing during this time.

If you cant pay for droid maintance and soldier wages why are the workers in the mines still producing stuff unpaid. If there are no workers in the buildings then why do they cost upkeep?


Just a thought . Would make bor more competative as people spend far too long on 99 units of each. If you pay upkeep sooner you more likley to fleet up and fight sooner. Not just whos best at infra for 1st week or so

http://www.ic-wiki.com/index.php?title= … rsmostopen

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

1 Tag Point

  • Posts: 2,791
  • Tag points: 185

Re: buildings

good observation.  this can be seen as "operating cost" or something like that.  you're right, if units are disbanding then why wouldn't your general workforce also stop producing?

Got a few bucks?  The Imperial Tip Jar is accepting contributions!

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 5,988
  • Tag points: 241

Re: buildings

I like pie wrote:

you're right, if units are disbanding then why wouldn't your general workforce also stop producing?

I never really like this argument in IC tongue

I mean ...you're comparing IC to real world mechanics?  There's a hell of a lot more in this game that you can get into in this game, that "does not make sense" tongue  ...I prefer to stay away from that tongue

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 6,555
  • Tag points: 90

Re: buildings

Then you shouldn't be able to build over 100% until your Pop maxes on the planet, after that you can build to the stars.... tongue

~*✠ ]PW[ Forever ✠*~

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 2,791
  • Tag points: 185

Re: buildings

Torqez wrote:
I like pie wrote:

you're right, if units are disbanding then why wouldn't your general workforce also stop producing?

I never really like this argument in IC tongue

I mean ...you're comparing IC to real world mechanics?  There's a hell of a lot more in this game that you can get into in this game, that "does not make sense" tongue  ...I prefer to stay away from that tongue

It's a matter of balance, like everything.  You can't make a game 100% realistic without sacrificing gameplay, but if you completely ignore realism then the game world is less engaging.  I wouldn't "stay away" from the nonsensical argument as a rule, but rather approach each situation within the context of the game's balance.

Got a few bucks?  The Imperial Tip Jar is accepting contributions!

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 3,366
  • Tag points: 6

Re: buildings

How about like bankers without food you have half production from your infra when not paying upkeep.

Its not going to be popular but most recent changes are to make the game more easy which has only made the strong fams/players stronger..

http://www.ic-wiki.com/index.php?title= … rsmostopen

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 340
  • Tag points: 3

Re: buildings

tymo? You alive bro? yikes

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 3,366
  • Tag points: 6

Re: buildings

i never died, just went to MW for a year - back in pw

http://www.ic-wiki.com/index.php?title= … rsmostopen

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 131
  • Tag points: 6

Re: buildings

I like pie wrote:

good observation.  this can be seen as "operating cost" or something like that.  you're right, if units are disbanding then why wouldn't your general workforce also stop producing?

And what game purpose would that serve?

No cash = disbanding units

If on top of that also the buildings go on strike:
No food = starving pop
No minerals = nothing to sell on the market to get new cash or food

It's an incentive to log in even more often or, when you weren't able to login for some days, not even to bother to come back because everything is in ruins anyway.

I doubt that this would be a smart change.

Another old bloodstained Harkonnen.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points