Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

"Power" accumulators

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Surviving Mars 1632 Bug Reports 2627 Suggestions & Feedback 916 Modding & Resources 290 Console Edition 136
H

hromoplast

Private
2 Badges
Mar 13, 2018
10
0
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Stellaris Sign-up
Greetings.

I was following the development of the game and I must say it looks very well done and fun to play. Great job, everyone! More recently, I've been watching videos from Paradox extra and some let's plays of the game and I just can't stay quiet. That's why I came here to complain.

There's no such thing as power accumulators.

It would be nice if you renamed the building into something more adequate. And update the tool tips related to the power system. Here's a list of suggestions:
  • Energy storage
  • Energy accumulator
  • Electric accumulator
  • Accumulator
  • Battery
I want this game to be as good as it can be and I understand that you want to make it scientifically plausible so in my opinion you should at least keep the current (pun intended) terminology straight.

edit: Up to here, nothing changes for the end user except a few descriptions and building names. The game will stay intuitive because most people already make a connection between power and energy.

OPTIONAL GAMEPLAY CHANGE​

Also, I'm not sure what type of battery you had in mind while designing the game but none of them are not 100% efficient at energy storage. Adding a malus on the energy that can be retrieved from batteries might be an interesting option from a gameplay point of view as it would motivate players to balance their power production and demand or lose out on energy efficiency.

edit: I like Turin's idea that batteries could require no maintenance when they're not used to further motivate players to balance their system.
Also this wouldn't change the game for the average user AT ALL while it would provide the sizable population of Paradoxian min-maxers with another thing to play with.

For example: battery needs to store 15 energy (days of power) for you to be able to take 10 energy (days of power) out of it. The maintenance bar is not filling up if the battery isn't in use.

I urge everyone from the Paradox community and the development team to to add their ideas and ask me questions surrounding this proposition. Let's make this game even better.
 
Last edited:
If they were using FES, the trade-off for storage efficiency loss would be a fractional maintenance cost. I'd be good with that.
 
Realism is a luxury in game design. A very very easy to sacrifice luxury that should be sacrificed at the alter of gameplay EVERY SINGLE TIME they come into conflict.
 
hromoplast said:
Thank you. The difference between the two is HUGE and should be remedied.
But if you look carefully, there's a short part at the end about changing the mechanics of how the batteries themselves work.
Click to expand...

No, the difference between the two is completely meaningless for the average layman. We're playing a video game here, not doing physics equations. Power = energy for everyday use. I pay my power bill, I try to figure out how much power that light bulb uses, etc. Or, I could use energy to describ the same thing. Technically the terms are different, but in casual everyday usage they're the same. You're being pedantic.
 
Speed and acceleration are basically the same thing, right? Since they both have to do with motion.

What I'm saying is just because some people are illiterate doesn't mean we should stop writing.
 
hromoplast said:
Speed and acceleration are basically the same thing, right? Since they both have to do with motion.

What I'm saying is just because some people are illiterate doesn't mean we should stop writing.
Click to expand...
They’re not, though. The typical layman understands the difference between speed and acceleration, but not power versus energy.
 
FunkyBigodon said:
What is the difference between power and energy, exactly?
Click to expand...
Put in game terms:
Your small solar panels produces energy at a rate of 2 power, meaning your battery will store 2 power-hours of energy during 1 hour of in-game time.

The only thing that would change for the player is the name and description of the "Power accumulator" building. No changes of game play, art or code are required.
 
So just because I don't know the technical difference between Power and Energy I'm illiterate? Get out of here...
 
FrostflyPrime said:
so you want to complicate the game for...what reason?
Click to expand...
hromoplast said:
The only thing that would change for the player is the name and description of the "Power accumulator" building. No changes of game play, art or code are required.
Click to expand...
Unless you're talking about the diminishing returns from the battery. In that case it's my opinion that it would be a fun new game mechanic that can be easily ignored by players who don't want to bother with it but would offer all the min-maxers out there another thing to work with (production and consumption balancing). As Turin pointed out, one could be motivated by removing maintenance costs for batteries when they're not used.

You are of course free to disagree.
talisman56 said:
So just because I don't know the technical difference between Power and Energy I'm illiterate? Get out of here...
Click to expand...
You just might be if you think that's what my post means. I'm sorry.
 
Focus = quality. what you propose is unneeded for game play and 95% of people would hate it. Why code a feature that people will hate. They have better things to work on. If you want to micro manage I'll send you a spreadsheet to work on.
 
FrostflyPrime said:
Focus = quality. what you propose is unneeded for game play and 95% of people would hate it. Why code a feature that people will hate. They have better things to work on. If you want to micro manage I'll send you a spreadsheet to work on.
Click to expand...
There are many people who play paradox games just for the spreadsheets. It changes nothing in the gameplay of the average player and I could code it in 5 minutes (edit: and I'm not even adept at programming).
 
I get the point, it does add to the calculus but I'm not sure how many people will be open to it. Even if you overtly stated that for every 5 energy you put into the battery you got 4 energy out, I'm not sure people will see that as a positive (game play experience). I'm not one of them, it makes it more interesting--but from what it looks like here, some are not for it.
 
hromoplast said:
Speed and acceleration are basically the same thing, right? Since they both have to do with motion.
Click to expand...

Speed and acceleration are actually quite different. You probably meant speed and velocity, as many people don't understand the difference and easily confuse the two. (In a nutshell, velocity is speed and direction combined.)
 
I usually see "accumulator" used in reference to hydraulics, pneumatics or steam. Although I find it unusual for electrical energy, it doesn't seem unreasonable. Plus this:
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/accumulator
3. British. a storage battery or storage cell.

The thing that bugged me is I think one of the "batteries" is called an "atomic accumulator". What??!? What makes it atomic? o_O

If it produced nuclear power and stored it all in one unit, I guess that would make sense. Otherwise it just sounds wrong.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back