How large initial storage should be on Speed ?

Poll ended at Tue Mar 15, 2011 4:36 pm You may select 1 option

Current (100k)
Total votes: 1 (2%)
250k
Total votes: 5 (9%)
500k
Total votes: 14 (24%)
1000k
Total votes: 38 (66%)
Total votes: 58

[Implemented] Resource storage in Speed.

#1
I suggest raising resource storage in Speed by about 400% at least. So 250k base storage and scaling from that.

50k base storage for a speed universe where the first level of storage costs 30-40k... well that's just not living up to the universes name. Not to mention a lot of the universe economy later game comes from inactives, at this rate inactives wont be worth looking at later game.. which in turn will slow down progress even further.

To put the storage in perspective of the speed: you can build enough mines in the first few hours of gameplay that when you go to sleep your storage will cap out and you will lose res, and that is without boosting your start with rubies. Production is too fast for the storage to handle. Combine that with the new planet size cap and you got some pretty pissed off miners.
Image
When people ask me plz because it's shorter than please, i feel inclined to respond no because it's shorter than yes...

Re: Resource storage in Speed.

#2
I agree, 50k storage is way too low.

Miners will have to use about 20-25 fields for storage to keep up with their production at a cost of about 5-6 million in res and that's just in the early stages.
Not to mention that a level 10 storage (for metal storage at a total cost of 2.2 mill metal) will have a max of about 2.8 mill (assumption made: each storage level increases the max by 1.5)

Raiders will have to put out a lot of raids to get only a few resources, 10 raids at 10 inactives with every res at the 50k max will only get you 250k of each res.. which will be nothing once the uni progresses from the beginning stages.

All in all, please raise the resource storage to at least 250k as suggested by Istalris
"Turtling in a speed universe is like spreading air on toast" Istalris 2010

Re: Resource storage in Speed.

#8
love2scoobysnack wrote:250K at least however, I would rather see 500k
500k is probably the most sensible base choice yes, but 250k at least is required. 50k is simply ridiculous with such speed and economy.
Image
When people ask me plz because it's shorter than please, i feel inclined to respond no because it's shorter than yes...
cron