A case for making manufacturing marginally profitable

[TehRic]

An increase in monthly profits would be nice. It's been a while since I played the OG, but I recall netting (roughly, depending on the amount of crash-missions & how well I handled terror missions) 1-2 million during the early months. It was good enough to get the following month moving quicker when compared to the 500,000-ish I get in early-game Xenonauts. At first, I attributed the reduction of income to the fact that we now have infinite missles/ballistics/grenades/medikits/stun-batons/flares, but I still feel like the current monthly payments barely cover my needs, especially if things go sour.

I also feel that loot from missions should be higher than it currently is, by a pinch. The lovely thing about the OG was the fact that nearly every good (and by good, I mean minimum deaths & civilian casualties) mission felt like a giant chunk of change added to your wallet. I recall the plasma weaponry, alone, would be more than enough, sell-wise, to pack your base & soldiers with more goodies. The power sources, navigations, and alien entertainment/food was the icing on the cake in terms of loot. I haven't reached late-game yet, but I've had my fair exchange of terror missions and medium assaults, so I still can't comment on how good the loot is from bases & larger ships, but I do feel like the early & mid-game seems a wee bit on the small-side for money. As pointed out on the tl;dr list thread, the lack of funds makes building extra bases a painful endeavor.

[Sathra]

You get alot of money later in the game with the Reactors (100k each, and they come in groups of 6 or so), and the Cruisers are jam packed with alloy, alenium and weapons-cash (alloy and alenium miiight have to be dialed down, we are talking about hundreds of units of each).

I'd increase funding (by 20-40%) actually since mid game the alenium income from even terror missions can be substantial and is a good source of income (though increasing its sale price to 3k would be very nice).

[TehRic]

Thanks for pointing that out, Sathra. Based on what you've said about the later encounters, loot-wise, I say your funding suggestion would suit perfectly. I've been running a veteran ironman campaign that I'll most likely be restarting due to a sour blunder that cost me my interceptors (bit off more than I could chew); not having enough money to replace them was a bust.

The idea of increasing it by 20-40% would, at the very least, provide me with a reason to save 200-300k in case of accidents.

Edited April 18, 2013 by TehRic

[Assoonasitis]

Wouldn't drastically increasing the funds a player receives from backers early on create a major problem when said funding dies off? If it decreases as the same rate as it does now, players will have a huge system-shock when two months in they're working with very little when once they had a very large sum of money.

[Sathra]

You should be getting to Corvettes and higher around then which are a good supply of cash. It will reduce somewhat but not too much.

And of course the funding won't go down as much if you expand faster which the income increase should allow you to do.

[Gauddlike]

The settings for the funding are in the gameconfig.xml file, including the starting values.

How do you see the balance working out?

Should funding at the start (per area) be roughly equivalent to the upkeep cost of a basic base?

The cash you start with then could possibly be set to be enough to either build a second basic base or to begin building more facilities in your current one, balanced against the construction cost of a few buildings.

You then have a choice of how to start off.

If you choose to build up your current base you will have a more solid start in one area but if you choose to expand then you will be able to start building up your relations with two areas, each of which will be providing enough cash to keep their own base running.

The other nations will still be paying out at the start as well so you should also be getting enough cash in to work on upgrades for your gear.

I would like to see the funding balanced before deciding if you need bonus cash from manufacturing.

[Belmakor]

I am undecided on the topic of manufacturing. My gut feeling is that it should probably be profitable for some items. I wonder if there would be any way to make the first sale of something worth more with every additional sale of that same item giving you less cash. I'm not proposing any sort of dynamic market. It could just follow some sort of linear or exponential relationship so that even from laser sales for example you could perhaps only net a maximum profit of $100k in the whole game.

I would certainly agree that I prefer if the main source of funding is nations. This certainly needs to be balance as it is too low just now. I wondered if making the increase for successfully defending a nation much larger than the rating decreases. So if you defend Europe, Asia and Africa well in one month the change might be $1m instead of (typical in my case) $400k. It may already do this but i've never played past October since v14

[Assoonasitis]

I think Belmakor is on the right track, but it might be difficult to implement in the game. I'm not sure, but I like his thinking.

[Belmakor]

The only way that someone could mod it in without being on the dev team would be to (using laser rifle as an example)...

* Make the first production of laser rifle the equivalent of capturing alien tech such that it unlocks a new laser rifle.

* The new laser rifle replaces the old one, has exactly the same stats but has lower value. It would need to be called laser.rifle1 etc.

* Repeat ad infinitum (well until the profit is close to zero which might be 10 iterations or something).

The problem;

Calling laser.riflex might cause all sorts of bugs in ground combat. You would need this to be a local variable in weapons.xml that is pointed to by laser.rifle in weapons_gc.

If set to manufacture 200 of these off the bat, does the production of the first one make the second more expensive? Or would this only apply to the second batch?

I suppose you could argue that this would be like getting a contract for 200 pcs of the US for example and them guaranteeing a price. Then subsequent batches are priced against (likely) US copies that would also be on the market (justifying the price decrease) and so on and so forth.

However you could exploit this by setting up a project to 2000 or something but never assigning any engineers until you needed the cash.

You would have to put a hard limit on the maximum number you can assign to a production batch

or

make it so that cash comes out when you assign the project - not actually produce the goods (like the OG). But that throws up that nasty mechanic.

Edited April 18, 2013 by Belmakor

[Okim]

I always thoug of X-COM being not just the shield of the world, but some kind of care-taker that`s goal also contains development and production of new technological prototypes for the whole world.

Seems that Xenonauts are something completely different. Probably 1970th have some heavy impact on this

I remember a discussion of some requests that funding nations do from time to time (like asking for laser rifles, for example). This idea for Xenonauts appeared long before it was shown in XCOM: EU (the new one), but i feel that it might have been abandoned due to this.

Edited April 20, 2013 by Okim

[Sathra]

Maximum you can assign to production is 99 anyways. Not sure if you can have multiple queues of the same item though, should check that.

I've been thinking though if instead of making manufacturing profitable, why not increase the cash from the sale of alien weapons? Upping plasma pistols to 25k would net 100k per light scout. 5 light scouts would be a new base. Other weapons could also be increased between 5-10k. It would have the downside that later in the game you could end up rolling in cash but most of that would likely end up going into base maintenance though.

I still say Alenium should be increased to 3k though. You end up rolling in the stuff and I currently mostly sell it for cash.

[Waladil]

So I actually registered a forum account to weigh in on this topic. I've been meaning to for a while but only just got around to it. (Yes, I've got a copy of the game and have played it, just never got around to talking with y'all.)

I like, at least conceptually, there being room for the Xenonauts to find alternate sources of income. And manufacturing especially makes sense from a flavor standpoint: The nations give you your monthly funding, and that's your "salary" with which you defend Earth from the aliens. However, you can go above and beyond that, and craft higher-quality weapons who you sell to those same nations. People have said here that (let's just quote Belmakor): "I prefer if the main source of funding is nations." To that I point out that the main source of income remains the nations, because who else is buying these weapons and armor? They aren't just going "away," they're being sold to someone, who would logically be the nations. In exchange for this material support from the Xenonaut forces, they grant you some additional money.

Obviously they shouldn't be saleable for ridiculous profits, but they should make something. At the very least the sale price of all manufactured goods should be increased to: creation cost + (monthly engineer salary * (engineer-days needed to create it / 30)) + sale value of alenium and alloy materials. That'd make all manufacturing break-even, and I suppose you could make a little short-term profit, but that'd be wiped away come the next month and paychecks are due. And you'd make some profit in months with 31 days but at this point we're discussing values far too small to be ever worthwhile (hurr hurr I just spent 50,000 in salaries, 40,000 in creation costs, and used 110,000 in alenium/alloys and sold it all for 201,000! I'm so good at this game durrrr.)

It seems generally silly that these super-high-grade, technologically-advanced weapons and equipment, the best tools humanity has to fight the aliens, are being "sold" at less than one-fifth the price of the common materials needed to create them. IIRC, Jackal armor costs 5,000 to make and sells for 1,000 -- that just doesn't make sense. Let's assume that the 5,000 represents "common" materials, things that are available here on Earth in plenty. Metals, fabrics, ceramics, fuel, stuff like that. Where do the Xenonauts get these materials? Their host country, no doubt. Going through government supply chains would be cheaper and more reliable than private-sector, so 5,000 represents the price the local government offers the Xenonauts for these materials. Why would we offer them something forged from those materials for one-fifth that price? Any "save the world" discount that government is giving us, we're giving them, plus an extra 80% off to boot. That just doesn't make sense. So even if making the prices profitable doesn't make people happy, they should definitely be upped to a break-even point.

[Sathra]

Welp, I tried the game with all the alien weapons being sold for 10k more. I still run out of money all the time but I can do more, and managed my second base in the 3rd month (old save, so roughly a month, with Light and normal scouts ).

Am playing with increased alloy and alenium prices (3k) and Assoonasitis' balance mod (though I changed laser cells to 3k and increased manufacture time to 0.5. It would produce them instantly at 0.25 for some reason, and lock into a 'no more funds' loop if I tried to build more than I could afford.)

Most I've gotten from a mission so far was 275k, and that was an Andron Corvette with a few plasma cannons and sniper rifles. Most would be lower.

[Gauddlike]

I suppose the question then is how many missions should it take to equip a standard squad fully?

Or tighten the question to an individual soldier.

Once you have an idea on that number you could work out how many weapons and materials each ship needs, compare it to the ticker level that ship appears at and what research could be unlocked and what alien types you would be facing and then start to balance it!

Hmm that sounds difficult

IIRC, Jackal armor costs 5,000 to make and sells for 1,000 -- that just doesn't make sense. Let's assume that the 5,000 represents "common" materials, things that are available here on Earth in plenty. Metals, fabrics, ceramics, fuel, stuff like that.

To make a profit you would need a marketable product.

The Jackal armour may be very similar in protection against human weapons as an already available and mass produced (hence cheaper) alternative.

If its only advantage is against alien weaponry then only those who are facing aliens regularly would have any interest.

In the game world that is pretty much just Xenonauts.

If they were offered at a reasonable price then others might take your old ones off your hands though.

The price in the game could be looked at as the value of those items that your squad no longer needs rather than the recommended retail price of a line of consumer products.

Accepting $1000 is better than throwing them away and offsets some of the production costs.

I am not suggesting that is the balance to aim for, I personally prefer to sell items to for the production cost as the start of the balance process, just that it is not as entirely unrealistic as you assume

[TrashMan]

Last time I checked the aliens are attacking everyone - meaning everyone would be interested in armor that's usefull against alien weaponry.

[Gauddlike]

That would depend on how much better it was than the alternatives and the difference in cost.

For example a standard bullet proof vest may provide 90% of the protection for $900 so it would be difficult to justify spending $5000 for a minor upgrade.

As an example look up current body armour in use by modern armed forces and then look up the best available armour.

They are unlikely to match, in large part due to cost differences.

[GizmoGomez]

Well, like the game said, a standard bullet proof vest does nothing against alien weaponry. Only the armors made by the Xenonauts can help with that.

[Sathra]

Everyone can manufacture the armour so they'd be unwilling to actually buy it. In the background the various Earth governments are slowly gaining the ability to shoot down the alien ships (which is why the smaller ones stop showing up to attack) so they're gaining resources that way. The Xenonaut initiative isn't as secretive as X-com was/is.

Their gear might be somewhat inferior since they have to shepherd the limited supply more than the Xenonauts, but it'd be enough since they have the Xenonauts' experience with the lower ranking crews and such.

Though by that logic they'd be willing to pay for Xenonaut alien-derived gear at manufacture cost at the very least.

[Gauddlike]

Yeah assuming the governments of the world aren't also making their own versions of lasers and so on you would expect to get your money back at least.

I always assumed that part of the funding contract would state that any technology produced by the organisation I was funding would be available to me without me having to pay through the nose for it.

I am already paying the staff wages as well as providing the facilities they use so the only thing I would expect to be charged for would be materials.

I wouldn't sign the contract otherwise!

This isn't a pharmaceutical company where I pay for all of their research, testing and production costs just so I can start paying 1000% profit prices to them as well.

In other words selling for no loss to start, then adjust pricing in small increments if the balance is wrong.

Remembering of course that not everyone will have the same idea of balance.

I might feel that a new, fully equipped, base in the first month is optimal balance while Sathra may feel the second month is better, someone else may feel that you should barely be able to have a radar/interceptor base by the end of the third month.

Maybe finding the spot where the game should be balanced is the real starting point and I don't think that has been done yet.

[Sathra]

Oh, fully equipped base? End of Month 2 to the middle of Month 3 would be my idea of balance. Strike base, so dropship, 3 fighters and troops. Enough to deal with the Scouts and Corvette's that spawn around that point by itself.

Good point though, finding some kind of middle ground where most can agree its balanced.

[Gauddlike]

Is that with no additions to your starting base?

[Sathra]

Nah. If you didn't add anything to the starting base it'd be up and running by early month 2. Mine would be some additions to the starting base at least (varies on how lucky you are with UFO spawns and success in ground combat i.e. minimal losses). More manufacturing/research and personnel to fill it, the required living quarters, a hangar or 2, stuff like that.

[Gauddlike]

Maybe look at how much that would cost you to get a sort of baseline starting and monthly income?

Mission income can be a bit hit and miss but if you can get a good start on funding alone then the mission income can be a nice little bonus, or missing out on something non-essential that would have just been nice to have.

[Sathra]

$2,120,000 to build a strike base with 3 fighters (2 condors and 1 Mig built at the first base), a Chinook, 4 hangars, living quarters, storeroom, radar and 12 rookies. Basic self-sufficient base for corvette-era.

$425,000 to upgrade main base with 2 workshops, fill all 3 with techs and 5 scientists and the extra living quarters. Would need another living quarters to hire more soldiers though so that's another 100k (but we'll add that to mission income bonus).

So about 2.5 million in income over a month or two. The new base would require a bit less than a month to become operational (for the last 2 hangars) if all the building was started as soon as possible. 60 k per light scout, say about 7 in that time and that's 420k.

That still leaves about 2 million that has to come from somewhere. Maybe cut room costs in half? (so most would be 50k and new bases would be 250k). That'd leave about 750k (1 million if new bases are same cost as now) to come from funding and the current first month is about 350k after maintenance.

[Gauddlike]

If the Chinook can only carry 8 why do you need 12 rookies out of curiosity?

Would being able to upgrade your starting base, fill the spare lab/workshop AND set up a new one be a bit much for the first month or so?

I would probably aim a bit lower.

Either enough for the 'full' second base and a start on the upgrades or the upgrades and the basic new base.

Say the interceptors/hangars x3, stores, and radar plus in your first base you get your living quarters and fill up your staff.