Forged Alliance Forever

Re: Collision box changes?

2012-04-26T21:41:20+02:00

But the t2 facs could easily repay that added cost with adjacency bonuses to mexes and this would not buff T2 too much as you get a cost increase to the factories so you need more initial mass in the first place. I think your mass fab idea is too volatile as one well placed bomb will lose you the game end of. Once your build power is gone they will just kill you. you cant recover fast and the mass dies with the fab. The game will become a "who can snipe that T2 massfab first" and even more shield dependant

Statistics: Posted by noobymcnoobcake — 26 Apr 2012, 21:41

Re: Collision box changes?

2012-04-26T20:34:36+02:00

noobymcnoobcake wrote:
T2 factories
mass cost from 800 to 1000(1.25x)
energy cost from 7200 to 9000(1.25x)
build power from 40 to 80 (2x)

T3 factories
mass cost from 3150 to 4725 (1.5x)
energy cost from 28530 to 35450(1.25x)
build power from 60 to 240 (4x)

You're going about this the wrong way.

Look at your numbers for T2 factories:
You want +200 mass cost and +40 build power. That's 5 mass per build power, so this would be an enormous buff to T2 factories against T1 engineers. (But this is essentially the same plan as adding build power adjacency to massfabs, 2 massfabs would cost 200 mass and gives +40 build power.)

Then look at the numbers for T3 factories: +1475 mass cost for +180 build power. That's 8.2 mass per build power, still a buff for factories vs engineers. (But this is essentially the same plan as adding build power adjacency to massfabs, 15 massfabs would cost 1500 mass and gives +300 build power.)

The big difference between your idea and massfabs, however, is that massfabs incentivizes MULTIPLE factories, whereas your idea still incentivizes only one. Look at your total mass cost/build rate ratio for your adjusted T2 and T3 factories: 15.5 for T2 factories and 24.9 for T3 factories. This means that, at 10.4, T1 engineers still yield more build power per mass, so it makes sense to build more of them RATHER THAN building additional teched factories.

But consider the idea of massfabs, you don't need new massfabs when you tech a new factory, because adjacency allows a line of 4 massfabs to simultaneously buff 2 factories. This means that if you tech a second factory, you get the additional build power without the additional cost your proposed.... so under your idea, 2 T2 factories would cost 2480 mass for 160 build power, or 15.5 mass per build power, whereas under my idea, 2 T2 factories + 4 T2 massfabs would be 2480 mass for 240 build power (40 from each of 2 factories, 20 from each fab for each fac), or 10.3 mass per build power, which is so close to T1 engineer efficiency that the benefits of adjacency actually make it more efficient.

Statistics: Posted by FunkOff — 26 Apr 2012, 20:34

Re: Collision box changes?

2012-04-26T19:53:15+02:00

wrong thread bros.

Statistics: Posted by Pavese — 26 Apr 2012, 19:53

Re: Collision box changes?

2012-04-26T18:32:49+02:00

why not cut out the need for so many assist stations in the first place by increasing factory buildpower in the first place? X2 for T2 and X4 for T3 this would cut out the first 36 engineers assisting a T3 fac and every t3 fac has more than 36 t1 engineers assisting it. there would still be a bit of engineer spam and drone use but just not nearly as much.

see article I made on buildpower costs
http://supcom.wikia.com/wiki/Build_rate

T2 factories
mass cost from 800 to 1000(1.25x)
energy cost from 7200 to 9000(1.25x)
build power from 40 to 80 (2x)

This would then mean it cost 15.5 mass per build power, only slightly more than a T1 engineer and T2 fac spam would be seen yet so would mass fac assist, so it keeps the old options open. I had to increase the fac costs because otherwise teching up could become too cheap because you dont have the additional cost of the engineers. You could have a pillar every 11 seconds instead of 22.

T3 factories
mass cost from 3150 to 4725 (1.5x)
energy cost from 28530 to 35450(1.25x)
build power from 60 to 240 (4x)

Increase the original factory cost so you are kind of paying for the engineers build power in the factory instead of a percy in 1:20 you are getting one every 20 seconds. MUCH more like it. it is still more economical to spam engineers because it cost 25 mass per build rate.

The T3 factory cost increase is the same as 31.5 T1 engineers yet it provides the same amount of build power as 36 of them. the T2 factory cost an extra 200 mass and has an extra 40 build power. at the price of 2 t1 engineers at 20 build power it gives you 40.

These changes are not meant to stop engineer spam completely but just reduce it by including the cost of the original engineers that are always there in the factory. Spamming T2 factory is now an option and you now can either have engineers that cause path finding issues and can get bombed but are cheaper or more T2 factory that are more expensive (1.5x) yet have high health no path finding issues and take up more space yet the increased cost could be gained back by adjacency bonuses. it would add more options to the game and improve the almost useless adjacency system that is only used for mex. It would increase faction balance for those who don't have engineering stations and it would decrease game lag.

can anyone argue against this?

posted this in another form but it can also apply here

Statistics: Posted by noobymcnoobcake — 26 Apr 2012, 18:32

Re: Collision box changes?

2012-04-26T15:38:22+02:00

Karottenrambo wrote:
OR the higher tech factories get finally increased builpower to fix the origin of "engis everywhere bumping each other to death".
The landfac for example:
T2: from 40 to 60
T3: from 60 to 180

Of course this could create new problems like super fast t2/t3 land rush, but there are ways to prevent that.

You will still have to spam Engineers. This would only mean that you don't need them for factorys anymore, you still need to spam them for EXPs, Artys, bigger buildings, .... you still need the buildpower.

Statistics: Posted by Jace — 26 Apr 2012, 15:38

Re: Collision box changes?

2012-04-26T15:31:02+02:00

OR the higher tech factories get finally increased builpower to fix the origin of "engis everywhere bumping each other to death".
The landfac for example:
T2: from 40 to 60
T3: from 60 to 180

Of course this could create new problems like super fast t2/t3 land rush, but there are ways to prevent that.

Statistics: Posted by Karottenrambo — 26 Apr 2012, 15:31

Re: Collision box changes?

2012-04-26T15:28:25+02:00

Then buff assist stations. Because buffing factorys wont stop the engi-spam. You will still spam them for building EXPs, T3Arty, Nukes,.......

Statistics: Posted by Jace — 26 Apr 2012, 15:28

Re: Collision box changes?

2012-04-26T15:24:45+02:00

Are attributes hard-coded into the engine?

Statistics: Posted by Pavese — 26 Apr 2012, 15:24

Re: Collision box changes?

2012-04-26T15:19:18+02:00

as this would be actually a buff to engineer spam somehow, im against it anyway

i would prefer to not have engineers at all. Only acu and factories, and 2 scus that gate in with the acu at the beginning.

Statistics: Posted by Kryo — 26 Apr 2012, 15:19

Re: Collision box changes?

2012-04-26T15:15:17+02:00

Wouldn't it be worth a shot to test that? Maybe they walk through each other with a move command?

Statistics: Posted by Jace — 26 Apr 2012, 15:15

Re: Collision box changes?

2012-04-26T15:06:38+02:00

they have the attribut "massive" that has this effect.

If you would give engineers the attribute "massive" they would travel right through everything, but nothing would travel through them if I recall correctly. Or test it, will a unit walk through an experimental? i dont think so, only the experimental walks through buildings and units.

Statistics: Posted by Kryo — 26 Apr 2012, 15:06

Re: Collision box changes?

2012-04-26T14:41:40+02:00

Kryo wrote:
you can make pgens have no coll. box and they still wont be stackable, if I recall correctly when I experimented with those things.

For engineers it could actually be worth a try, but no collision box also means, not hittable by projectiles

How do exp travel through bases and everything without bumping?

Statistics: Posted by Pavese — 26 Apr 2012, 14:41

Re: Collision box changes?

2012-04-26T14:37:47+02:00

Kryo wrote:
not hittable by projectiles

Thats a *no go* then.

Statistics: Posted by Jace — 26 Apr 2012, 14:37

Re: Collision box changes?

2012-04-26T14:21:57+02:00

you can make pgens have no coll. box and they still wont be stackable, if I recall correctly when I experimented with those things.

For engineers it could actually be worth a try, but no collision box also means, not hittable by projectiles

Statistics: Posted by Kryo — 26 Apr 2012, 14:21

Collision box changes?

2012-04-26T13:24:59+02:00

So i got another thing that is realy bothering me in late game. Collision Boxes.

Engis block everything, getting adjacency bonus on a t3 land fab is a big nogo as they block every unit that may come out of it etc.

So what if there wouldnt be an engi or T1 PGen collision box and every unit could simply travel through. It would reduce the bumpage and improve pathfinding in bases. I dont know if this has any unwanted side effects (i.e. building multiple pgens in the same spot) but stacking engis are more easy to kill so theres the biggest no go out of the way

Statistics: Posted by Pavese — 26 Apr 2012, 13:24