Hey folks.
I’m having a little trouble seeing that the price plan is exonomical enough for us developers. I would like Ansca to do some number crunching on an example game match to demonstrate how fast API calls can be used up. Here’s my try at it using chess as an example. Keep in mind, chess will use up relatively few API calls compared to non-board game type strategy games. Im thinking the following per game:
-
60 API calls - 40 moves on average per game. This must be multiplied by say 3 since the move has to be sent to the server for legal confirmation, and then out to both players. Divide this by 2 players = 120/2=60
-
20 API calls - behind the scenes setup and shutdown of game
-
10 API calls - user setup choices
-
probably lots of other things I just havent thought of.
Thats 90 calls/game per player. If the game is at all interesting for the player so that he/she plays it more than once, then say the player plays it roughly 30 times. 30*90 = 2700 API calls
So - the first tier has a limit at 500,000 calls before you have to start paying. Which means you have ca 500,000 / 2,700 = 200 active players before you the developer have to start pitching in. Then its about 0.09 USD per 1000 API calls which converts to roughly 0.01 USD per game. PER GAME. Is this affordable considering most games sell for a dollar and you get only a portion of that? This means you will actively be trying to find ways to cut down the API calls if it is at all possible. What if you are doing something more API intensive than chess?
Can anyone provide any insight to make this plan seem more economical? I want it to be. Corona Cloud is what I’ve been waiting for. Perhaps I have misunderstood. If so, enlighten me please.