Forged Alliance Forever Forged Alliance Forever Forums 2013-07-13T08:01:02+02:00 /feed.php?f=57&t=4237 2013-07-13T08:01:02+02:00 2013-07-13T08:01:02+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=4237&p=48312#p48312 <![CDATA[Re: Naval Factories]]> Statistics: Posted by Mycen — 13 Jul 2013, 08:01


]]>
2013-07-12T18:01:17+02:00 2013-07-12T18:01:17+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=4237&p=48262#p48262 <![CDATA[Re: Naval Factories]]> Statistics: Posted by Astrofoo — 12 Jul 2013, 18:01


]]>
2013-07-12T17:45:46+02:00 2013-07-12T17:45:46+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=4237&p=48261#p48261 <![CDATA[Re: Naval Factories]]>
I can't help being a troll myself from times to times, so I sympathise with you.
T2 navy, being slow on big multiplayer maps? When did that happen? I always thought it is too fast, it cannibalises t1.
T2 navy is already unnecessarily fast and viable on smallish 5v5 maps!(As a sidenote, how can one participate in games with big water maps and complain about slowness? Their beginning is slow anyway and you can't do anything about it. By the time there is some action the cpu slows down... :roll: ) And don't start me with your awesomely "fast" cpu, I am old enough to know that a fast cpu for supcom, is a fast joke.
As for the "1v1 stinks", how can one begin to counter this argument? It's like you insist smoking is good to your health, me trying to change your mind.

Statistics: Posted by prodromos — 12 Jul 2013, 17:45


]]>
2013-07-10T14:19:39+02:00 2013-07-10T14:19:39+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=4237&p=48105#p48105 <![CDATA[Re: Naval Factories]]>
Ionic wrote:
1v1 stinks,

That comment will be appreciated! :lol:

Statistics: Posted by -_V_- — 10 Jul 2013, 14:19


]]>
2013-07-09T19:13:36+02:00 2013-07-09T19:13:36+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=4237&p=48045#p48045 <![CDATA[Re: Naval Factories]]> Statistics: Posted by NuclearStorm — 09 Jul 2013, 19:13


]]>
2013-06-20T22:32:14+02:00 2013-06-20T22:32:14+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=4237&p=46651#p46651 <![CDATA[Re: Naval Factories]]> Statistics: Posted by Ionic — 20 Jun 2013, 22:32


]]>
2013-06-20T20:53:59+02:00 2013-06-20T20:53:59+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=4237&p=46648#p46648 <![CDATA[Re: Naval Factories]]> Statistics: Posted by ColonelSheppard — 20 Jun 2013, 20:53


]]>
2013-06-20T19:49:33+02:00 2013-06-20T19:49:33+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=4237&p=46645#p46645 <![CDATA[Re: Naval Factories]]>

That sounds like a reasonable figure. However, there is one side effect with reducing the build time. In that the assisting engineers would be made more effective, in proportion to the factory itself.


Thats not true, the factory keeps the same cost per buildpower as before. Reducing the buildtime on ships has no effect on the fac/engy balance.

Statistics: Posted by Zock — 20 Jun 2013, 19:49


]]>
2013-06-20T19:40:02+02:00 2013-06-20T19:40:02+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=4237&p=46644#p46644 <![CDATA[Re: Naval Factories]]>
BRNKoINSANITY wrote:
If you look st exactly what I proposed, it was an increase the tier 2 naval factories only due to the ridiculously long build times and low mass draw. Some one else suggested simply lowering tier 2 naval built times across the board and I think that is a better option. At this time building a tier 2 destroyer only draws 9 mass and takes over 4 minutes to build. T3 tanks draw around 16 mass, and I think that should be the target area for build time/power adjustments.


That sounds like a reasonable figure. However, there is one side effect with reducing the build time. In that the assisting engineers would be made more effective, in proportion to the factory itself.

Statistics: Posted by Hawkei — 20 Jun 2013, 19:40


]]>
2013-06-20T18:41:46+02:00 2013-06-20T18:41:46+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=4237&p=46640#p46640 <![CDATA[Re: Naval Factories]]> Statistics: Posted by BRNKoINSANITY — 20 Jun 2013, 18:41


]]>
2013-06-20T09:03:14+02:00 2013-06-20T09:03:14+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=4237&p=46608#p46608 <![CDATA[Re: Naval Factories]]>
Alpharius wrote:
If the factory then has allot of build power - won't it compete with some engi spam you got going elsewhere?


Yes, it will. According to the game engine, all construction activities compete for resources. In a stalled economy construction is slowed down, such that consumption = production.
Alpharius wrote:
the assisting engies doesn't just increase the build power it also focuses it.


Also correct. In an economy stall, resources are rationed between the projects proportional to the resource consumption. If we were to scale up the build power of factories, then that factory would have a direct equivalence with engy spam around a conventional factory. So resources would be divided evenly between the projects.

Where this could become an issue is with T4 construction. Which is typically done by diverting engineers from assisting the factory to building T4... In this regard, engineers are a more flexible way of investing build power. It is a tradeoff within the mod. Something which needs to be carefully balanced and considered. Which is why a BP increase, if applied to HQ's in engie mod, would probably be something less than stated above and only applied to the HQ; not the slave factories.

Statistics: Posted by Hawkei — 20 Jun 2013, 09:03


]]>
2013-06-19T13:51:06+02:00 2013-06-19T13:51:06+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=4237&p=46550#p46550 <![CDATA[Re: Naval Factories]]> Statistics: Posted by Cuddles — 19 Jun 2013, 13:51


]]>
2013-06-19T12:46:43+02:00 2013-06-19T12:46:43+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=4237&p=46546#p46546 <![CDATA[Re: Naval Factories]]>

But that way your factory takes forever to build vs building the factory and adding engies as they come out and you build a ship all the time.


That is true. Whether or not it is quicker depends on exactly how the factory is constructed and assisted. The BP+ factories would be upgraded slower than a factory that is assisted by engineers spammed from a nearby factory. They are also 2 minutes slower than a stock standard factory unassisted. It is only 0.5 min slower than a factory that builds its own assisting engineers.

The disadvantage comes from not getting the build power until the upgrade is completed (just like a mex). But there is a build time advantage, because there is no down time caused by unit roll off.

Here are the stock standard statistics for factories:
T1 = 300bt + 20bp
T2 = 1800bt + 40bp
T3 = 7200bt + 60bp
T1Engie = 260bt + 5bp

Here are example figures from my mod:
T1 = 300bt + 20bp
T2 = 4720bt + 100bp
T3 = 12480bt + 300bp

Standard Upgrade Time T1 >> T2 >> T3
= (1800-300)/20 + (7200-1800)/40
= 210 s = 3.5 min

Modified Upgrade Time T1 >> T2 >> T3
= (4720-300)/20 + (12480-4720)/100
= 299 s = 5 min

Standard Upgrade Time (with assist) T1 >> 48 T1 Engineers >> T2 >> T3
= n(EngieBT/(FacBP+EngieBP*n/2)+Roll off) + (FacT2BT-FacBT)/(FacBP+48*EngieBP) + (FacT3BT-FacT2BT)/(FacT2BP+48*EngieBP)
= 48*(260/(20+5*48/2)+3) + (1800-300)/(20+48*5) + (7200+1800)/(40+48*5)
= 271 s = 4.5 min

So there is a 30 second difference. However, considering all the added benefits, and the reduced micro. I would say this might be worth it. If it were assisted to T2 by the engineers that built it, it would actually be faster. As shown below.

Modified Upgrade Time (with 1 builder assisting to T2) T1 >> T2 >> T3
= (4720-300)/25 + (12480-4720)/100
= 254 s = 4.2 min
With only 1 T1 engineer assisting the first upgrade, it is now quicker than the conventional factory that must build assisting engineers! ;)

However, with all this, it still cannot compete with the exponential increase of a nearby factory spamming T1 engies. It does however have significantly less clutter, less micro, is not so easily sniped. It has less units for your graphics card to render.

Statistics: Posted by Hawkei — 19 Jun 2013, 12:46


]]>
2013-06-19T09:16:50+02:00 2013-06-19T09:16:50+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=4237&p=46543#p46543 <![CDATA[Re: Naval Factories]]>
Firewall wrote:
I would rather increase the build power of the factory; rather then the build time of the unit. In which case, the build time, mass cost and energy cost of the factory itself should be increased - prorata on a T1 engineer basis. Essentially what you would do is put the engineers "inside" the factory, and increase the cost of the factory by that same ammount. 8-)

Which means:
T1 engineer = 52m + 260e + 260bt + 5bp + 120hp

* (bp = build power, m = mass, e = energy, bt = build time, hp = hit points)

To account for the different build times at T2 and T3, and have them pumping out at a similar rate to a T1 sea factory. We need a build power of 100 at T2 and a whopping 300 At T3!

New stats would therefore be as follows:
T2 Sea fac = 1794m + 8520e + 4920bt + 100bp + 17440hp (Aeon)
T3 Sea fac = 7750m + 36400e + 20200bt + 300bp + 43500hp (Aeon)

I have actually been developing a mod, on my own, which has a secondary upgrade path for build power. Essentially, in my mod, you add build power with another upgrade... A similar adjustment could be made to the factories in engie mod - because lets face it. 40 Build power for a T2 factory, or 60 for T3 is pretty pathetic. Similar adjustments can also be made for land and air factories as well. I can post the figures if anyone is interested.

Note - of course there are upsides and downsides vs engineer assisting.
Pros: Your build power is less suceptible to raiding. You also get the advantage of adjacency applied to the full build power.
Cons: Your build power is less flexible, and cannot be used for Experimentals and special projects.

PS: This is what is required to pump units out at the same rate to T1. If a slightly lower rate were desired, the changes could be made less drastic. But still: Cost needs to be factored into the factories build power change. To make it balance with T1 engie spam. The exact build powers would be a matter for in game testing.


But that way your factory takes forever to build vs building the factory and adding engies as they come out and you build a ship all the time.

Statistics: Posted by Cuddles — 19 Jun 2013, 09:16


]]>
2013-06-19T07:19:03+02:00 2013-06-19T07:19:03+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=4237&p=46535#p46535 <![CDATA[Re: Naval Factories]]>

Which means:
T1 engineer = 52m + 260e + 260bt + 5bp + 120hp

* (bp = build power, m = mass, e = energy, bt = build time, hp = hit points)

To account for the different build times at T2 and T3, and have them pumping out at a similar rate to a T1 sea factory. We need a build power of 100 at T2 and a whopping 300 At T3!

New stats would therefore be as follows:
T2 Sea fac = 1794m + 8520e + 4920bt + 100bp + 17440hp (Aeon)
T3 Sea fac = 7750m + 36400e + 20200bt + 300bp + 43500hp (Aeon)

I have actually been developing a mod, on my own, which has a secondary upgrade path for build power. Essentially, in my mod, you add build power with another upgrade... A similar adjustment could be made to the factories in engie mod - because lets face it. 40 Build power for a T2 factory, or 60 for T3 is pretty pathetic. Similar adjustments can also be made for land and air factories as well. I can post the figures if anyone is interested.

Note - of course there are upsides and downsides vs engineer assisting.
Pros: Your build power is less suceptible to raiding. You also get the advantage of adjacency applied to the full build power.
Cons: Your build power is less flexible, and cannot be used for Experimentals and special projects.

PS: This is what is required to pump units out at the same rate to T1. If a slightly lower rate were desired, the changes could be made less drastic. But still: Cost needs to be factored into the factories build power change. To make it balance with T1 engie spam. The exact build powers would be a matter for in game testing.

Statistics: Posted by Hawkei — 19 Jun 2013, 07:19


]]>