Espionage spending, I think you should check it often

Yeah, I noticed that too. I believe it's a carry over from Dread Lords in that, as you met more races, the espionage spending went up. However, in DA it seems more to do with your growing economy. The more you grow, the more BC is diverted to espionage. The slider just sets a percentage and that's why it continues to grow, I think.

The slider just sets a percentage and that's why it continues to grow, I think.

The espionage slider is a means to set a percentage of income to spend on espionage.  Most races can only spend up to 25% of income with the slider maxed.  The Krynn or a custom race with the super ability "Super Spy" is allowed to spend up to 35% of their income when the slider is maxed.  The higher your income, the more money goes towards espionage if the slider stays in the same position.  But it will always be 35% of income or less, never 400%.

I was able to keep the one per 5 weeks rate

Each agent gets progressively more expensive, so after you get a few, you will not be able to keep the same rate, unless you leave the slider maxed and have growing income.

That scant 200 BC raised my weekly income about 400%.

Since the money you can spend on espionage is a percent of your income, (up to 25% or 35% depending on your Super Ability), there is no way, even if you turned the slider down to zero, to increase your income by 400%.  I think you've made a mis-calculation somewhere.

I think he meant that his budget surplus went from 50 BC/week to 250 BC/week.

Since the money you can spend on espionage is a percent of your income, (up to 25% or 35% depending on your Super Ability), there is no way, even if you turned the slider down to zero, to increase your income by 400%. I think you've made a mis-calculation somewhere.

I suspect there's some miscommunication. My income went from around 50 BC to around 250 BC.

Maybe this is a problem with semi-numerate folks talking to folks who stayed awake and kept taking advanced maths. CrazyCO330's response about the slider seemed off to me as well b/c I read JonSarik to mean "if you leave the slider alone and your economy grows, you'll be spending more BC."

Something I read recently about starting to carry over espionage spending in DA might make this at least half-moot (meaning it's still valid for hardcore income maximizers).

I read JonSarik to mean "if you leave the slider alone and your economy grows, you'll be spending more BC."

Yeah, that's how I took it as well.  In fact, that's almost exactly what my wording means: "The higher your income, the more money goes towards espionage if the slider stays in the same position."  I was simply confirming and offering a further explanation of why, since he said "he thinks" that was how it worked.  Perhaps my wording seemed like I was claiming he was wrong, but I assure you that was not the case.

I suspect there's some miscommunication. My income went from around 50 BC to around 250 BC.

  I must confess, I'm still a little confused about what you are saying here.  I'd like to be enlightened.  Are you saying that by tweaking your espionage slider, you increased your income by 400 percent?  If so, then I stand by my original post (which I intended to be informative, not condescending), that since espionage is only capable of using up to 35% of your income at max, turning it down to zero would only return that percentage back to your income, and would in no way be 4 times as much.

As an example, if your income was 50 BC, and you had the espionage slider up all the way, (so 25% or 35% depending on your race), that would only cost you 12.5 BC or 17.5 BC towards espionage.  Turning the slider down all the way to 0% would mean you are not spending 12.5 or 17.5 of your 50 BC.

In any rate, I am only meaning to be informative and was only curious about where the 400% came from.


As always, the dev. team appreciates all the thoughts, ideas, questions, and bugs that are found by our users.  Keep up the good work.

~Charles

Does the slider work off gross or net income?

It would have to be gross income, I believe. Basing it off net would make a non-0% slider setting result in negative spending on espionage if your net was negative (or, at least, you couldn't spend a dime on espionage if you had a negative net).

So if it is calculated from the gross income, it would be quite possible to gain a 400% increase in net income if that spending were reduced.

And it sounds like G.W. is talking about a net income increase.

Yes, that makes sense particularly with his original post. He dropped espionage spending from 1158 to 956 and quite naturally saw a net income increase of 202. If his net income had been +50 (which it was), that's a +400% increase. If his net income had been +1000, it would have only been a +20% increase.

Yeah, it turns out that the problem was with termonology.  We were talking about two different things.  I was talking about income before expenses (gross income), and G. W. was talking about income or loss after expenses (net).  I had realized this after I had left work yesterday, but was unable to get to a computer until just now.  I see several of you have pointed it out now.

Espionage is a percentage of your gross income and counts as an expense.  Naturally, if you can get rid of some of your expenses, you'll see an increase in your net income.

I think that the point of the original post wasn't the value of gain at all, but rather the fact that it was possible to still gain agents in the same number of weeks if you play with the slider's position a little.  This is true.  But for those of you who leave it maxed out all the time just know that any money left over will NOT go towards the cost of your next agent.  I just coded in the other day a way for that extra money to be put back into the treasury, so you don't lose it.  But obviously that is not in the build you guys are playing.  Hence G.W.'s post.

In the mean time, as I think G.W. was pointing out originally, there is some micromanagement involved to ensure you don't lose any money during espionage spending.

As an example of how I play when I need some agents:
I turn the slider up to the max and see how many turns it will take to get an agent, (let's say it's 5 in this case).  I will then keep the slider maxed for 4 turns, which brings me to having 1 turn left to earn the agent.  I then turn the slider down as much as I can while still being able to get the agent in one turn.  This saves any leftover money from being spent on an agent when it doesn't need to be.

The need for this style of play will go away once the build with the new code is up on SDC, but in the meantime, if you care about the extra money, there's a bit of micromanagement to be had.


Again, thanks to all of you for your input in regard to not only this topic, but all of the topics on this forurm.  The dev. team does read each post, and talk amoungst ourselves about what to do when certain issues arise.  We highly value the thoughts, suggestions, opinions, and bug reports we get from our users.  Because of you guys, we're able to receive awards like Turn-Based Strategy Game of the Year, which Dread Lords just got.

Here's hoping the expansion does equally as well.

Cheers!

~Charles

Gross vs. net. I knew there were words I should've been using.

Charles, thanks for the kind words to the beta crowd.

No prob. GW.

~C