funez1 wrote:37 threads? Why not 38?
We've always wanted to allow a lot of diversity to exist between networks, and will always set the maximum number of nodes to be lower than the total number of nodes that could feasilbly be allowed. "37" nodes is where this is at for the moment, as it means that players have to make choices between more resources at the cost of security, more scanners at the cost of resources etc, but the number is not set in stone.
funez1 wrote:9 threads away from net connection? Why not 10?
The early versions of Hackers didn't have a limit on reach at all! We tried really, *really* hard to avoid it, because it seemed like an arbitrary rule with no thematic meaning or overlap into real world mechanics as to "why" it's there. We held on for quite a while and tried not to implement it, trying to fight against it somehow, but in the end it was needed.
As for the specific question of "why 9 and not 10", it's there as a compromise, to allow as much network building flexibility as possible, while preventing players from building single-track networks in a worm-like fashion. This was done mainly because its no fun fighting against them, (click 1 node, install programs, wait etc,) but at the same time testing showed it was the best defensive choice purely because of the 3 minute time limit. We didn't want the "best way to build" to be something to be as boring as "can my single target beam cannons/Krakens take this network down fast enough", but also wanted players to visually experience and learn from "what was going on during hacks" - something that a 6-reach maelstrom doesn't permit to new players.
funez1 wrote:I feel limited of what I can do anymore for my network. Just not enough room to explore.
As a follow on to 37/38 above, as future nodes are added this number will increase, allowing for more network permutations, and potentially allowing changes to reach (possibly limited to higher level Cores to prevent snake networks mentioned above etc.)