QGamer wrote: ↑
Thu Feb 18, 2021 6:27 am
One of the challenges with finding a place for efficiency modules is that their only effects are to reduce energy consumption and pollution production. Both issues can alternatively be dealt with by building more power plants and more defenses. The only situation in which I see efficiency modules being a viable lategame alternative is if power plant space is limited, so the player must make the best use of available power...which realistically only happens in scenarios.
There already is a place for using efficiency modules: Reducing power consumption. Sure, you can always build more powerplants instead, but at cap (-80%), you would need 5x as big a powerplant to achieve that effect.
Currently higher tier effs are simply too weak and their mechanics are bad. If a machine is sitting at 500+ % energy consumption -50% from an eff3 is a drop on a hot cooking plate.
In order to make effs worthwhile (apart from early eff1 spam), you would need to change their formula. E.g. instead of -X% energy consumption (added to all other modifiers), calculate consumption from increases (speed, prod) first and then divide that consumption based on the effs affecting the building. May need a change in how the numbers of effs are represented.
E.g.: Power = (base*(1+sum(speed modifier, prod modifier)) / (1+sum(eff modifier))
eff modifier = 0.5 (eff1) , 1 (eff2) , 1.5 (eff3)
So with an assembler with 4 prod3 and 4 beacons with 6 speed3 and 2 eff3 you get: (1+4*0.8+3*0.7) / (1+1.5) = 2.52 -> 252% of base energy consumption
Compare against using the 4th beacon for speed3 as well: 700% of base energy consumption
Also, the eff1 spam will get nerfed a bit (2 eff1 -> 50% of base energy consumption, 3 eff1 -> 40% of bec). Still good but less OP.
Also you can scratch the hard-cap. The return from additional effs or higher tiers would be properly diminishing (like the return from adding more and more speeds).