Ithilis Quo`s uber mega huge pack of suggestions

[Ithilis_Quo]

Suprem FAF - suggestion by Ithil Quo

Supreme play since its inception with a two year break after disconnecting GPG net, the FAF play about 4 months. Actualy has Elo somtwhere about 1450, but normaly play with 1700+elo players. During that time I noticed several things for which I think that could be improved and how. Because now is such a time of change (Engy mod) so i bring my view of the changes that could be made and which I think would have made the game more complex - better. It's a number of proposals, and they are just suggestions for discussion, since I'm not good at programing, I do not know how what extent would have been difficult to program it, but I think it would not be in most cases too big problem to made in . Sort them according to how much priority I believe it would help the game and why a potential chance that would be liked by others and thus qualify for one of the other patchs. Sorry for my english, most many parth of text translate by google translator


- Veterancy system: veterancy went very well change one of the last patch, when the ratio changed according to tech level units, which in part helped the game, before that, however, I thought about another conversion and, on the basis of the percentage values ​​expressed in mass units. Since there is a large difference of destroy batleship T3 or T3 scout, since their value and difficulty of destruction is 40-fold, veterancy receive the same level.
My suggestion: let the level necessary to achieve veterancy as is, but change the aspect ratio as evaluated at 2% of the mass of the unit. The experimental units to 1 mass%.
Example: kill a striker 56x0.02 = 1.12 veterancy point; kill T2 havy tank 200x0.02 = 4 point; kill T1 Land Scout 8x0.02 = 0.16 point, T2 = destroyer 2250x0.02 = 45 points; T4 GC = 22500x0.01 = 225
Reason: In the early stages of the game would veterancy levels were about the same as now, the difference would be seen particularly in T2+ level at which the current veterancy system is not optimal balancing. When push with experimentals it pays to focus on weak units to increase veteranci, but what is the rationale, since the difficulty of their destruction is minimal, so I think that veterancy should increase proportionally with dificulty their destruction, which best represents the unit cost expenses. The difference would be more justice, and also in a more logical strategy that would focus on a strong drive and not to faint. Also, if the ACU snipe experimental with OC reached by pass the full veterancy, but what I do not blame you since it is a fair reward for the risk to which they embark.[/i]
programing difficulty: easy. I think there would be enough just interject conversion and implement recognition not tech level, but the price mount.


- Veterancy system 2: My second proposal to change veterancy system is HP increase after receiving veterancy, how many do you get it draws less state, what would the battlefield occurred. This proposal would but partially influenced the game and change the strategy with which it has had to play in the late stages of the game approached, so I expect them to not everyone will agree.
My proposal: the abolition of getting the insta HP nasty when reaching veterancy. When it reaches a given unit veterancy and only gets + max hp, but hp is kept at present levels, that will have to max heal/repair. This did not apply to the ACU, which would remain as usual.
Example: T1 = aurora gets veteranci gets +14 max hp to 154 +1 regen thus veteranci after receiving the 140/154 hp and it will take 14 seconds it reaches full HP, GC run in enemy base gets veterancy gets +9990 max hp, and so while the HP 78 455/109998, not 88454/109998 as it had before, it will have to recover / repair.
Reason: Today experimentl when it comes to ride and kills everything it comes in the way and happens many times that after destroying me has more HP than had while start and it came to it defense firing. That is wrong. Since the unit to attack if it was atacking should have less hp. This would mean that experimental units you'll have to be more careful, I need more tactics, and suport by other units more than ever before. Also on the other side, it will mean that the unit will not run away from the enemy experimental to idea “dont feed them”, and T1 units will have in defending its place as damage it, not much but still, today, T1 / 2 units make experimental only stronger, which makes no sense and it degrades their tal for quick escape or destruct. And when the defense which is more spectacular in itself destroy so something is wrong and this improvement would be resolved. The ACU would this not because ACU is a pillar of the game and when dies the game end., this restruction the ACU would have made the game less fluentnov faster would expire, which would be less fun, which is not really good.
Dificult of programing: easy. it would be necessary to abolish insta heal only at max HP, draped one thing in code, I think the difficulty is minimal.


- 3 veterancy system: for this I'm not sure this is a wider debate, but I find that some units that are equipped with the shield of veteranci disadvantage, since that's max hp, but do not get + max shield. shild has its specifics and advantages, but again also a downside to it need for its existance energy and the unit being more expensive. Therefore, it comes to me a little unfair when you get only + HP but shield consisting of 2/3 of their lives remain unchanged.
My suggestion: add veterancy increase in hp and the shield.
Dificulky to programing: I do not have to guess if the shield is not bound to other things, what is possible, it would be necessary to enter the same piece of code that adds HP WHEN veterancy and incorporated into the shields.


Mass fabrikator T2/T3: mass fakrikators are present in almost unused and set to its high price, explosiveness and extremely energy intensity almost unusable. And that makes this building unique building unusable and it is wrong. FA is thus unlike the original supcomu preparing for a building that would also be able faf in place. The main change that occurred between the FA and supreme comander not add seraphim, but the change in mass distribution, which has doubled increase Mass extractors, extractors doubled energy consumption and production rate dropped to half what mean that their effectiveness is 8 times lower than previously. The purpose of this change was to make the game more fluent, was crucial to filling maps, movement and action. That is correct. However, in the original supcome was perhaps strategia which today is no longer possible and that is defense. On defense, it is necessary to get as well as other revenue of wrecks that sends enemy and are adopted by enought mass fabrikators. Mass fabrikátors would also change the very expensive and inefficient, they would be very susceptible to destruction whereas one blast do more damage than his hp, but gave the opportunity that now exists (although this option would still be ineffective, but it would be) and the game by offering more strategies and become more complex, more beautiful. This is probably the biggest change that would most potentially changed the game.
My suggestion: change the mass intake of T2 extractor from 1 -> 2, change the energy intensity of the 150 -> 100; raise the price from 100 -> 200, increase the blast damage from 370 to 500; mass reception at T3: 12 -> 18, Energy intensity from 3500 -> 2310, price from 3000 -> 4500 dmg for destruction 5000 -> 7000 dmg radius 14 -> 15
Reason: Should be strengthened fabrikator it would be possible to win even when active defense when your opponent controls a majority of maps. Fabrikátors would be more expensive but at the entrance, causing greater damage to the destruction of which would have made the primary object of the attack. Since it would be larger and would damage was to their status outside the main base for prevention iterative effect and therefore would born eco bases somewhere on the outskirts of the protected areas, which would add another element to the game, which is absent today.
Programing difuculty: that would throw variables in the code of buiding, the minimum dificulty.


Air crash damage: This is marginal parth of game but i think That in some parth its actualy non balanced. It is cosmetic ubgrade That make game more logic = better. For example UEF T3 transport continental who is big like cow take crash damage same like T1 interceptor, thats crazy
suggestion: do distinguish the plane crash in dmgu according to type and technical standards.
T1 scout 25dmg 1aoe,
T1 interceptor 50 dmg 1aoe
T1 bomber 100 dmg aoe 1.5
T1 gunship 100dmg aoe 1
T1 transport 100dmg aoe 2
T2 = T1 x 2dmg/aoe (mercy, corsar... = bomber)
T3 = T2x2 = T1 x 4dmg/aoe
Difficulty of programing: easy. that would just need play around with the parameters and rewrite them


T3 wall: On the chanell was in past roiled a funny debate whether it would be meaningful have T3 wall, I think it would. The function of this wall would prevent overshooting up through ACU, if above could only shoot artillery and experimentálky. Experimentals through it would not pass over but would have to destroy it, and would not be extremely fast or make it more difficult to build. I can imagin how but when in 2007 i read preview on supcom Tailor say that tower would be build in wall, and this would be that wall where on top of the wall would be build a turret(similar like the turret on hill).
My suggestion: add T3 building wall, size 2x2, height = height ACU, hp = 8000, build time = 125 + 500e price 100mass
Rationale: This would strengthen the possibilities defensive players defense, experimental where in the wall would only gained a few seconds of time who would be straining to cut through (6-8sec) gave there would also build a factory for a similar purpose, but wall would be more expensive and had more HP and function wall should be wall, we are not in Starcraft.
Difficulty of programing: medium, it would be recoded civilian building what is in campain. And dont make this building imune to freindli fire (when you would build T2 turet beyond T3wall it would be master OP, so it cant happend)


Template: FA when he came out and I read that in it will has templates, horrible I became so excited, I had to have my idea but it was done a it was a little differently like i mean that it be. Today templates are great, but my idea was better, looks like:
my suggestion: template binds to the unit that built it and As long as the entity / unit to the ASIS live Albee get another job, will be given a template to repair and build new if you will destroy some of its parts.
Reason: The game would put a little more emphasis on architecture, which has the SUPCOM irreplaceable place where well-built base is better than a poorly built. Zatomatizovalo it to perform activities and greater attention should focus on the event itself, which would not suffer at the expense of potencílna defense. Today it can be done so that when it comes to the destruction of the template with the new enginer give it rebuilt, my suggestion would be done automatically with the enginer team that would babysiter the template and it does not show as idle.
Example: I clicked on a template shield wall and 2 pd and 1 AA flak. I give it two enginermy and let them figure it protects. The enemy attacked enginer repair damaged tower to the tower by destroed and after start it a new to build, not destroy until enginery. This would mean that it would be focusovalo primarily enginer, which they built everything anew
Difficulty of programing: hight, I can not quite imagine how it could be do, that would be need buildings would bind file from a template on the role enginer to me in my passport to build that would automatically check whether all the buildings are still in it and built should not again be put to build the belt. It would add to repair the building.


Carier / air shild: Air Force now has a supporting role and existence although units that have aviation keep it running efficiently and in practice do not work at all. This proposal would be more streamlined and adding a temporary shield for aircraft under jedho protection (Carrier, czar, atlantis, T2 air staging facility, Cybran T2 cruiser). There is a slight inspiration by Starcraft Protoss Carrier, which is a very effective unit although supcome is more units of its features are virtually useless for that purpose.
My suggestion: if the aircraft were based on those units should and leave the Carrier has 10second living shield with strength of 50% hp of the unit, which every second lost 10% of his shild life. This shield would cost energy that showed the unit from which fly out and encompassing. The amount of this enerigie would be worth about 25% dmg to shield the unit will vanish by attacks.
Example: Atlantis emerges when the enemy fleet and launched aircraft. T2 torpedo bomber Stork gets 860x0, 5 = 430shild, three sconds later flown over over aeon Cruiser has 430x0, 6 = 258 shild, gets hit aeon T2cruiser zealot missle got for 375dmg, lose 258shild +117 hp and flies farther. Atlantis recognize a loss - 64.5 energy for this one torp bomber.
T3 strat bomber fly out from Atlantis gets +2000 shild after 3 seconds has 2000x0, 7 = 1400 shild, gets hit for losing 2x375 dmg = 750shild dmg, shild hp is now 650 it remains a second to lose time due shild 200, actual shild is 450shild it remains to be further to lose.
Atlantis loss recognized 750x0, 25 = 187.5 power for this unit. If the squadron were only these two units for this atlantis would attack lost 187.5 +64.5 = 252 energy. They would be in the squadron but more so the shield would be very expensive and would need for a large supply of energy for its use. A carier would have to include a toggle to turn off this feature. If it were a T2 air Stating facility, add the ability to connect to power.
Reason: It would mean that when the aircraft carier near would be less dying because there was carier provide protection, but it would cost a lot of this protection and should used them wisely. Carrier acquired by Carrier sense and not just the factory units as it is today. Slightly should strengthen the function of aircraft that could be more effective fighters hired to water / land, and failed to comply would only support function.
Dificulty of programing: high, I can not quite imagine how this could be done. Thats would need add an automatic shield units that are associated with carier. Already exists function which unites them, having all Carriere, this feature would need link with a shield. Its energy consumption is to be linked to the parent unit and received damage. In absolutely perfect for the maternity unit in a realistic case the unit shield wearers. On calculation consumption energy could build damage algorithm adoption.


T2 air staging: Air staging could act as a defensive position, but the way the tower to aviation. It's a bit unconventional idea, but it will try to logically explain and justify.
My suggestion: Add air staging active radius, similar to have defense tower, which would be 100. The radius would be operated aircraft that are contained in it and would operate on the same principle as today provide genuine Carrieri = takes damage => go on repair. Aircraft should be landed, it could be their max number of pins that can provide opinion and operovli by itself if it went into an active enemy unit radius. Air staging would be able to build units T1/T2 (whitout mercy, transport) and Engy Power 20 is the same as T1 air facility. Posted could toggle which automarizoval production as well as in the factory, the fact that the max limit how many can embrace (like in TML). If the destruction of the aircraft should be automatically started to produce and after production began on the action.
Example: the air staging are 1 interceptor and 4 T1 bomber. To the action radius of the enemy comes to take wing aircraft drop bombs, 2 bombers are damaged from anti Air, returns to repair the other circled above goals, the next 2 bombers are destroyed and thus begin to automatically produce, because the player has-checked this option, the manufacture of aircraft added to others that circled over the target.
Reason: It would do another tactical building that exists today but this would have made it more efficient, since an automated process would be. The sky flew by fewer units, which would accelerate the game as they would not have to fly in defensive positions above the city which slows down the weaker PC. The game would be a little more air batleffield linking with land batleffield. With the addition of carrier design would be given to building a more efficient, but what would the increased energy expenditure.
Dificulty of programing: medium, that would link the active radius at which there is ability towers with air staging -> flunk on the site. Consequently need add feature air production units as is the case with Carrier reduced Engy performance. Setting limits production to limit who can handle a maximum air staging.

[Gorton]

About the template one:
You can do that, sort of. Not with engineers, but with sACUs. If you order them to assist a bunch of buildings they should rebuild them if they're destroyed. Even if they're not from the same faction. They also fully rebuild things; like a Cybran shield generator at the 4th upgrade would be rebuilt at the fourth upgrade, not as a ED1.

[Ithilis_Quo]

Ouh that i dont know, thx for info. I try it. Then we can stroke this one, or make that function same for engy.

And what do you think about another suggestion?

[AwarE]

I like your suggestions as they are logical and fair.... but I do not expect this community to agree.
If you had not noticed they have weakened shields and lowered LRC cost ...so i do not think better metal makers or higher veterancy shields will be changed.... as they have told me... 'this would only help people to "Turtle" and delay the outcome.'
There is a push to remove staunch defense from the game ...attack is the lore ....go ask ZePilot

I think you are talking common sense ...well thought out ideas

roj

[Gorton]

AwarE: Are you aware (lol pun) of the difficulty in breaking proper defenses? It's hard enough as is; it doesn't need to be harder.

[vongratz]

About the more tight defenses I dont agreed. The game movement is a must.
Otherwise, the very good idea of air pads building planes, could be developed into AIRBASES, Not with 2/4/8 pads, but as stationary carriers, with the same capabilities , except of couse, movement.They only will built interceptors and light defense pplanes for self-defense.

[Ithilis_Quo]

AwarE: thx for suport, yes i know that they dont like defense becase its not to funny, and not so popular to see on that on replays. I dont wana make from this turtle game but know maybe this suggestion are on that way, but its somthing that i think is quite unlogical and unfair what deform game system for higher "fun". Problem of this suggestion i thing is that i write it all in one status, it is about 4xA4 full text no so many peaple would read it:)

vongratz: its not about turtling, its about logick, mass veterancy vs tech lvl veterancy tahat mass is better for agresive player. more you destroy more you has rise your exp/T3 units. thats nothing in T1/t2 tanks. And this veterancy make rise faster, but in 80% game dont change nothing becase T1 is the primary wepon and it is on same valuable. T2 increas 35%, T3 increas 250%. but when today its unbalance that it is corect make it more responsibile tomorow.

veterancy about dont rise hp after veterancy system, thats absurd like its today when you can has 500T1bots = 26000mass and this mounth of mass vs land exp is that 26000mass die and exp would has more hp on end like in start. But i think that is would be fair and logick when that 26K mass take some normal dmg no kill them becase they need teching but take that 50-70% of dmg and not take him +30-50% hp like bonus (130-150%hp)

[Mycen]

Several ideas, which I'm pretty sure all have seen before. If I'm misunderstanding anything let me know, some of it was hard to read, but I tried!

- Veterancy system:

You talk about 'logic' and so forth, but to begin with, the units in SupCom are all automated robots. They are not going to improve their skills or any such thing as they fight because they do not have 'skills' in the first place - only programming that is already set.

So with that in mind, before I comment on your ideas about veterancy, I would like you to answer a question for me: What do you think is the point of veterancy in the first place?

Mass fabrikator T2/T3:

I think your proposal exaggerates the characteristics of fabricators too much. The damage that fabs do upon death is already quite enough to cause chain reactions and cripple anyone who was taking advantage of adjacency. There is no reason to move things to a point where a player need only get a few shots through an opponent's shields in order to have their entire base self-destruct in a massive chain reaction. That wouldn't make the game more fun and certainly wouldn't be useful to a defensive player - it would just be annoying.

You talk about players having to build resource farms separate from their main base, but I fail to see how that adds strategies or complexity. If anything it removes strategies, because as things are now players are taking a risk integrating fabs into their main base complex. With your changes it would only be done by an idiot with a death wish.

I suggest we get more information on how engymod changes the popularity of fabs before we suggest changes anyway. With the engymod's new emphasis on factories, I suspect we might see more players building fabs to take advantage of adjacency. If you build several factories instead of assisting, and they all have mexes and fabs for adjacency, a half-price army is not unrealistic.

Air crash damage:

Since aircraft are so lightly constructed, even the 'heavy' aircraft shouldn't be doing a lot of damage upon their destruction anyway, and certainly not with such a massive area of effect. It's just wreckage falling from the sky, the planes don't explode upon impact. There's no reason that a T3 transport's crash should have the same blast radius as T4 artillery.

This seems like a very trivial change, like making walls not count against the unit limit. Waste of time.

T3 wall:

Walls that stop experimentals? They would have to be mighty large to do that, considering how huge most experimentals are. Unreasonably large, even.

My problem with this idea is that I don't think players should be able to build walls capable of hindering an experimental's movement - they're just too big. So, since non-experimental units already have their movement blocked by regular walls, the primary purpose of a T3 wall would be to limit the ability of T1/T2/T3 direct fire units to shoot inside a base. This is a purpose already accomplished by shields. So T3 walls seem largely redundant, hardly worth adding a whole new unit.

Template:

As pointed out, this already exists. I don't think it should be added to regular engineers though, they're just drones, and it's one of the benefits of building an SCU in the first place.

I would like to know if there's an easier way to use it though - having to shift+click on every building you want replaced becomes very tedious very quickly.

Carier / air shild:

No no no no no. The way to fix carriers, as I've said many times, is to allow them to build as they move. (Or even better, although unlikely, to allow them to perform air staging functions as they move.)

Planes do not have shields. If you had to answer the question of why they would suddenly have shields when they're by a carrier the only answer you could give is "because I wanted to make carriers better." This is a terrible answer. There is only one unit in the game that provides invisible bonuses to units around it, and that is the restoration field - an appropriately unique upgrade. SupCom is about each unit having its own abilities and the player using them in conjunction to maximize the abilities of each. It is not about one unit providing indirect buffs to another by way of its simple proximity. Start down this path and before you know it players will simply have to have carriers all around for any naval/air combat - a 'solution' as undesirable as the situation you're trying to change.

Also, the system as you seem to have envisioned it seems quite tedious. You have to manually assign planes to each carrier in order to receive this shield? Ugh. But if you have them automatically be assigned that will play havoc with your economy as planes fly in and out of the radius.

[b][u]T2 air staging:

Again, no. Why not have naval or land units units be deployed automatically too? Because part of the game of SupCom is commanding the units you construct. Aside from how this would obviously make T1 air factories obsolete, I find your point about how it would remove the need for planes to "fly in defensive positions above the city" exemplary of how this idea is bad. So it removes the ability of your opponent to see where your air fleet is and avoid it or shoot it down before a bombing run? It removes any need for players to put some thought into where they are going to position their aircraft for optimal defense? No thanks.

Because some people do not have the hardware to play a game is almost never a reason to change its core mechanics. A better solution to that problem would be to have the contrail effect removed when the quality settings are on low.

[Gorton]

You talk about 'logic' and so forth, but to begin with, the units in SupCom are all automated robots. They are not going to improve their skills or any such thing as they fight because they do not have 'skills' in the first place - only programming that is already set.

So with that in mind, before I comment on your ideas about veterancy, I would like you to answer a question for me: What do you think is the point of veterancy in the first place?

I am of the opinion that they aren't unthinking; I believe they have limited AI, enough to learn at least somewhat.
Of course we must consider that the vet right now doesn't make too much sense; why does killing some units make a unit tougher?

[Ithilis_Quo]

Mycen;
thx for answer, all reaction is great, as well as bad reaction is welcom, it make discusion about what people mean about game. I try argue you all what you say, why think that you dont has true or its irelevant.

veterancy-
I think that veterancy is about that peaple like veterancy. Thtas the pripary funkcion of that, of course all is bot, but when you wana argue on that styl that we can say what the f*** is in 21K century ship looking like from 21 century? And why is war in galaxy when aeons developed PARAGON ? thats no sense, so we must calcul with that what is it, and veterancy is goint more about how hard units it destroy. Of course still it will be better make veterancy about how many dmg it take not only to kill but it is hard to program, and its quite ussles... So when we has veterancy about tech lvl what is about dificulty, that about mass its the same like it is now only better.

Mass fabricator
Be honest, how many players in ranked game do you see to build mass fabricators?
im quite sure that it would not be more like 5, and one of that would be I.
I actualy has 300 games in faf and dont see nobody to make it. so it mean that with this building is somthing wrong, and i try to say what makes it better. Dont wana make it owepovered that higher dmg on +130dmg and higher cost, becase dont wana make a litle paragon on T2. Its more risky but it is usefull. At now its ussles, when you take energy aroud T2 fabricator it take you discount only 37energy from 150 thats you must have 662,5 mass to get +1mass thats ussles why dont change it?
And why its the strategy on building separete bases? Thats the strategy, not make all on one places when in can take big boom. Why you build power planes in bases it has biger dmg, T3 take you 8000dmg, and can change your bases on ruin very easily. This is the same only it has less dmg and biger radius. More thinks you make diferent you has biger complexity, you has more wayst to win. Why do you think that Chesse is playing today when it has 1500 years?

Air crash
aircraft is light construct and thats a reason why it take so less dmg, today T3 bomber take 500dmg, and T3 transport 25dmg, do you think that T3 transport is so light construck? its big as czar, only its not circle. When air crash that is take dmg aboud not by explosion but by impact, look on asteroid, its small and take it dmg as hell and how big radius it has. That sugesstion is about easy logic how big planes are that more dmg it take and it dont change game play only it bring logic and predictibality.
btw make wall agaist uit limit is wery good idea.

T3 wall
Not that stop experimental but what slows experimental, 8000hp is nothing aganst spider its 2sec against colosus its 2,5sec. not so muth. I know they are gaint, but styll can cros moutain, why? becase they are not able heave theyr foot so hight , ask faty what he think about mountains. But know it can be hard to program it.

Template
about thats enginer or human it dont make sense. When you program him to make this in circle that he make it, that must be human? When you argue about make game easyir to play and remove skills, thats not true, when you look on supcom thats so great game becase there is many and more thinks automatick, Can you imagin when it would be full of skill and you can build only one tanks in factory and then click for another. Or make it like old duna, when you can control only one unit in time. that not about skill this game is not about control units. Or not only. I hope that ist and wana be about taktics and strategy, where move army, and how make your side stronger, thats rasom why here istn micro like in starcraft/ft but macro.

Carier/shild
Alow build them on move dont solve problems, problem abotu carrier is the same like is with fabricators, how many players you see that build it and use it like carrier. Not like fast air factory? I dont remember on many games where i see that. On this time carrier is air factory not a carrier, my suggestion bring carrier on battlefield. What is bad to brign carrier on all air warfers, look on navy of earth, carrier is the strongest ship in all navys, becase has air, and can handle it, navy whitout carrier is weak navy.
And when here is only one thing that you can anser yourself why is here only one thin with buf, its a posible to be here when is alone? (Its not alone, shild radar, stelth its same)

Air staging
You argue by engy mods, but the primary reason for engy mods is the same like you are saying here, that make game more fluent and dont lagy it, becase not all has strong pc (I has). And why must your oponent see your air planes when its in building, thats building is for straging airplanes thats a funcion about it this only make it automatick, whats make game faster and you dont must think about it, and has more time for real strategy. You can look how many air staging he has in base and about that calcul, the same it is with antinuke defense, why you dont see how many rocket he has? beacse it unlogical, thats the funkcion of that building.

only suggestion what change core mechanic is mass fabricators, that realy can change game, another are only improvments thinks what is today. dont be angry im not dictator and isnt in my force make this change whitout people who would wana it, at this its only for discus that it dont make game better, i think that make.