hey devs could we not have on big portals the posibility to add same amount off running time as small once
having it cut in half doesnt add to gameplay
and its easy to forget fuel now for the big ones
11 Likes
+1 for more shard slots!
7 Likes
+1 and some extra textâŚ
i think thats a good thing that the smaller ones have an adventage over the bigger ones. the fuel kost isnt that of a problem but the amount of fule shows how active you are as a player / community is. and makes it so more importand to cunstruct a system that works the way you want do you want a bigg portal or you want servral smal ones.
1 Like
Right now the portal fuel is not efficiently set up, by which I mean efficient for our servers and costs. Right now in the game, it is more expensive to have 1 portal that makes 5 jumps, than it is to have 5 portals each making 1 jump, encouraging chains of portals.
But for âusâ it is the opposite and it is much better for our servers if there is a single portal making a big jump than lots of smaller ones (And it is also better for clients in terms of cache and network usage).
So I would be not be surprised if the fuel curve is tweaked to encourage more larger portals and fewer small ones.
16 Likes
I think it would be better that way anyway 
1 Like
Well i dont agree, you see you are trying to make a local portal hub that means less exploaring and less visiting diffrant planets. also it means less effort in crating a portal to diffrant planets. for me it feal a grate trade off mecanic where you ether invest more fules and time to refuel it or you do smaller portals in a chain. that means that its you have. think before doining it not just build a and it also means.
this also means that the city want a planetary portal network which some part of the comunity are creating togeather. so that alos means there is somting ells than just cities that community can build to geather. and that encurage is there for the endgame and also to bring players more togeather. so either build you own portal network or get the city in to one or just connect to one your self.
1 Like
Yeah i just want bigger fuelslot the cost is fine by me
2 Likes
i think it is fine how it is 
if you want futher jumbs 
you just have to be more active! use a spreadsheat or something to keep track of it
I am 100% in favor of larger portals being cheaper. Iâve always been a fan of portal networks which have the fewest portals to travel through to get where Iâm going. Thatâs part of the reason I thought the Fire Caverns Portal Network was so amazing, as all you needed to do was enter from one place, then exit pretty much anywhere.
The âsubwayâ-like portal networks are great for connecting all places, but they always feel like Iâm on the local train, making a stop at every town along the way, and requiring a ton of portal loading. Making âexpressâ portals cheaper would be super helpful, especially once we get many more planets! 
Either way, less cost, more fuel slots, or both, all sound great to me! 
2 Likes
it makes sense that larger direct jumps are cheaper - its not the case now but hopefully will be;
networks will exist anyway I think, but at the same time we can see those big-ass 60-80 blocks portals on regular basis and jumping to a distant planet in one go can be a good thing;
I used to have direct portal therka-solum but even though it wasnt the biggest possible, it was costing me crazy amount of fuel and I destroyed it.
I disagree with your disagreement While I assume this will take a hit on some of the portal hubs traffic, it should still see many travelers daily. The portal seekers hub makes travel streamlined and efficient. Not everyone will live on one single city with centralized links across the universe. Portal hubs like the ones we have now will still be used often with a host of new planets. At the same time players who use portal hubs specifically for traveling to their home settlement are doing it just for that; to get to another city and not to visiting a new planet for exploration.
In the end, portals are not permanent, they are meant to be consumed over time. Cost effectiveness in larger sizes is something that we see already in the game. It makes sense that bigger portals with more hops would cost less otherwise the most efficient solution would be to use tiny portals all throughout the game. Alternatives (bigger portals for large hops) are not viable at the moment when it feels like they really should be.
I think what @lucadeltodecso is trying to emphasize is the train of single portals, particularly as a single playerâs method of travel to another settlement of theirs as an inneficient design. Recently I met a player who had 4 small portals from therka the Elop Portas because itâs cheaper to run but this becomes a force that the user feels like they have to fight against more than one that compliments the game.
2 Likes
i think you should see the portals as layed down cables (network ). to get from therka to solum you have to lay down the cable true munteen and vulpto. it isnt shorter, it isnt longer. it is the same
Soo i suppose the costs should be the same
1 Like
Warps are supposed to be main mean of short range travel (within a world and 1 hop I suppose could preferably be made through warps more than portals).
So, adjusting large portals efficiency would also add up to features encouraging players to use warps more (others being temporary buffs upon warping and cheaper cost in coins comparing to sanctum).
I completely agree! And they should be most certainly. The issue is smaller portals costing less seems like just a way to get around the large portals cost more mechanic, which is why Iâm saying that it feels like the player is working against the game rather than with it. I think that your comment was to piggyback off of mine, but let me know if it seems like something got lost in translation.
1 Like
This is how it currently works with the way the planets are connected and hop distances
EDIT2: thought he was making a suggestion⌠my bad hehehe
well it is indeed how it works now⌠longer distance = more costs⌠bigger in and output = more costs. It makes sense that a kable of 2x2 blocks is cheaper then a cable of 5x5 blocks?
And warps are cheaper XD
use a warp = 100 each time.
but we prefer conduits since they are permanent. and other people can use them!
The portal seekers fuel atm around the 15 portals⌠t hats 15 oorthshards an hour. 30 each means 450 coin each our the hole week. plust the spark costs of conduits are alot 2
Accidentally linked my post with yours. I didnât mean it as a direct reply to yours.
Nevertheless, I was trying to complement what you said.
1 Like
Yup, I read it through the first time correctly. Donât know what I was thinking the second time. Doh!
I also didnât realize it was you @SePras! I thought it was somebody making a suggestion 
my bad.
I donât think anyone said that warps were more expensive. I hope it didnât seem like I meant that the portal network isnât expensive either. Like I mentioned in my last comment, the portal networks are great! They do their job and they streamline travel. But in terms of design, if you can put up single portals in a chain to reach planet 40 from 0 when you designed a game to be able to handle more hops it is kinda silly that you would design it in a way that wouldnât punish the player for doing it that way.
well i guess you can see it as one highway of maybe 10 planets, and side roads of 4 planets. or in other numbers.
if you need to walk true 40 portals XD damn that takes a long time
If you look at solum, in 3 hops you can visit Therka, Berlyn and alternik!