9/13/2018 Topic: Cities, markets, politics Iyurrr	I had some thoughts before, but recent fixes (city growth bug) have pushed me to write this post and to share my ideas. They're mostly touches cities and political scopes, with some ingoings to economics. I've seen some information, where political prestige was announced. I'm greeting this idea, but I think it has to be extended a bit and tied with existing city system. What I meaned, now all this political titles have no real impact on your gameplay, just humble ability to enact some votes, to "play" politics virtually. I'm glad, that players are able to cover political side of the game by themselves (see Moon Charter debates and previous wars) but it's not enough in long-term prospects. That is also reflecting the recent fixes to city growth mechanics. DrDread pointed at there was a bug which might lead to a single-city case in the whole galaxy, disbalancing the gameplay. So, cities have to be hardly capped to 100M with a certain changes to growth mechanics. I understand that worries and have nothing against them, but there could be more elegant and flexible approach, being solving not only this issue, but adding new edges to the game. It's natural, that some regions could have their trade superhubs, they are formed considering their location, logistics and active players around. There is a good example in EVE online, the Jita System, enormous superhub, attracting thousands of players from entire galaxy. I understand, that the scales, players' number and concepts are absolutely incomparable, but there is still a reason in such hubs. They reflect real economical situation across the galaxy, contribute to goods' exchange and help new players to accumulate their capitals slightly easier before they're ready to move somewhere else. What I want to suggest. Besides prestige and it's features, political titles might affect cities' size, growth and trade. For example, cities with elected mayors could receive additional cap bonus (i.e., +5%, +10%, +15%... etc) due to the mayor title. We can make an assumption that cities with established administration attracts more people, they're better managed then cities without any elected governors and so on. The higher title is, the bigger bonus city could receive, so in this case it's really natural to extend political system to sector scale (now it ends on system lord). In this case, such trade hubs could be a sweet and valuable point for players and entire guilds, being very profitable (spaceports, taxes, etc) and causing a lot of political tensions. At the same time, achieving such status has to require a lot of efforts - you have to obtain Sector Lord title (from 3 elected star lords, I guess, following the existing mechanics? or a bit strict requirements) which is really hard in current realities. The second - mayors have to have an option to ban/allow buy/sell actions within their cities for different products. There are several approaches, how players develop their cities and this will significantly help them to implement their own ways - i.e. city could be free and open or with regulated economics, disallowing other player to, say, buy specific products. Probably, they have to be vote-based, to lower the power of mayor. Imo, those features could really improve the gameplay onto next level. I hope I was able to explain my thoughts, thanks. edited by Iyurrr on 9/13/2018 edited by Iyurrr on 9/13/2018 edited by Iyurrr on 9/13/2018 edited by Iyurrr on 9/14/2018
9/14/2018 Topic: Cities, markets, politics Iyurrr	Fixed. edited by Iyurrr on 9/14/2018
10/15/2018 Topic: Battleships Bug? Iyurrr	Totaly agree with Neo Tanks. But mostly against some ground forces.
11/4/2018 Topic: A5 Artifact Statistics Iyurrr	I was gathering a stats for all A5 artifacts and decided to share this data with you when I've reached 100 findings. Maybe this will be useful, to set up prices in a contracts or for the roughly estimates of required trials for specific unit/item. Neo Tank 23 23% Gunsuit 16 16% Pirate Marauder 15 15% Space Train 14 14% Ion Gun 12 12% MAK Gunship 10 10% (AX) Dimensional 5 5% (AX) Geotechnical 4 4% (AX) MetaPhysics 2 2% edited by Iyurrr on 11/4/2018
11/14/2018 Topic: Guild assets bug Iyurrr	While upgrading the unit previously set as a guild asset, the game will withdraw money from your wallet and from guild bank at the same time. I guess, it's a bug or a wrong approach.
11/21/2018 Topic: Small qol for cargo gui Iyurrr	When you try to remove some units from fleet/group with cargo onboard, game asks you how much goods you have to put into this unit. You have to input all the values manually, but it'll be good to have a button which automatically put the goods amount into this field.
10/6/2019 Topic: What should we work on next? 10/2019 Iyurrr	Well, I'd like to vote for a several features simultaneously As the number of players has been increased, at least for the start, I guess it's necessary to make a focus on political/social interaction, what could be a huge motivator for playing. So, from my point of view, political score features could be the cool addition to the game and it has some similarity with my thoughts. However, strategic locations and guild banks are not less important. PS: As for UI - what is more important, it's a mobile interface. Website design could wait for a while, but if you have some time - it's better to concentrate on mobile version. edited by Iyurrr on 10/6/2019 edited by Iyurrr on 10/6/2019
7/6/2020 Topic: What should we work on next? 10/2019 Iyurrr	A small QOL suggestion: Add research production types to variables. It's impossible now to set them as a vars, sometimes could be quite bothering.
8/3/2020 Topic: Economical, political & community game drivers Iyurrr	Hi all. I do like this game, for it's slow pace and traction to automatization and optimization of all activities along the supply chain. Even it's very niche. I’ve been there for a couple of years and was a bystander of the last Great Reset. And I've seen the predecessor reasons before these events. They could be divided (very roughly) on two primary things: economy/politics and players. If we ignore these issues, it may lead to similar consequences. I don't want this to happen and I'd like to share some thoughts on how we can improve the situation. Economy & Politics This is a very controversial topic and, for sure, I'm not the first who is attempting to suggest something. But give me a chance. The main issue is a wide distribution (and disruption) of players and their economic capacities around opened systems. But all human experiences proves that is absolutely natural and it's sewn into our minds, so we have to invent how to deal with that instead of trying to block. For now, I see natural hubs formed on such planets like Mars, Uranus, Centauri IIa, Luyten II. Of course, Earth by default. Mercury in the past. They represent itself as an example of the successful collaboration done by the bunch of players or powerful corporations and very important for the entire sector. The social importance is clear, it gives players the reason to continue the game, which are united by a common goal, but it also has huge economical effects. Those hubs, besides all obvious advantages such as a huge markets for goods distribution, allow remote players to have some kind of backup, where they could buy required goods (to save or to reboost their cities) in large numbers without harming the cities economy, especially if to do so at different hubs simultaneously. With time, all minor colonies will disappear and everything will lead to further consolidation. It's natural to use such trends to improve the situation with a combination of economy and a thin layer of politics. I talk about purposeful decision to build starlord seats, one by one, in the opened systems. While establishing this political entity we could extract additional benefits. At first, it involves a minimum of 9 active players per system and they could be at different levels of development, from the newborn mayors to the elder and powerful corporations, separating zone of economical and political activities between each other. Everyone could be interested in this: small and medium corporations will have the local planetary market of the suitable size allowing them to sell goods in large numbers (and, probably, higher demands if they balanced enough) making a profit and working together, bigger corps could take a planetary seat and provide some civil services where the combination of volume and demand could be a really profitable thing and taking part in a high-level politics at the system scale. And we have to go even further. I suppose we should add the last layer of the existing political system and ask Dread to implement sector lord seat with the same principle (minimum of 3 starlord could vote for sector governor). On parallel, we could establish a High Council of planetary lords (like it once was done for Earth) who will represent the will of the entire humanity. To add additional weight for this governing body there could be a public signature procedure, where each member agrees to carry out the will of the Council. From my point, this will heat again the interest in politics and help to convince people to participate and to populate opened systems in a more uniform way. What have I noticed, it's challenging but quite real for powerful corps to support several cities simultaneously if they want to. So, there might be a situation, when those corps are growing their planetary seats and supporting (at least, partly) the system hub at one time. We can try to encourage people to work together. For example, the biggest corporations or guilds could launch a massive campaign to help those who want to resettle to support this idea. There may be credits, structures for deployment, logistics, units, military protection, etc. This won't be a huge issue for them, and in return, they could receive much more. In any case, I guess additional activities help to keep us interested in the game - recently there was a perfect example of intersystem collaboration to fight Dark Star base. Probably, we could launch some sector-wide projects, like fighting hostiles, building the fleet, opening new systems, boosting cities whatever. Players The second (or the third?) part is about the player base. I know, dev won't launch any advertising/marketing campaign to attract more players until he makes some upgrades, but the game really lacks the numbers. We could try to do it by ourselves, to introduce the game in different game communities, publics, forums, etc, focusing on a "good old style". Or even to raise some money to launch some ads. We need this, at least for perspective. That's all. It was only my assumptions and propositions, but I'll be grateful for any feedback or support. Fly safe! edited by Iyurrr on 8/3/2020
8/3/2020 Topic: Economical, political & community game drivers Iyurrr	Thanks. I guess its reasonable for a smaller cities and I can understand mayors who want to compensate a bit their efforts to grow them. If we're talking about the large megapolises like 50m people of more, I suppose there could be room for a several corps providing civilian services.
8/16/2020 Topic: Economical, political & community game drivers Iyurrr	I didnt say about fixed number to start a planet, a was talking about planet emperor, system and potential sector lord.
8/25/2020 Topic: Economical, political & community game drivers Iyurrr	That makes sense.

---