Forged Alliance Forever

Re: Massfabs

2012-06-01T14:52:37+02:00

I think all T2 massfabs need is a build time decrease of around 30% and a death damage decrease to half. That way you need to kill 2 to start a chain reaction.

Statistics: Posted by noobymcnoobcake — 01 Jun 2012, 14:52

Re: Massfabs

2011-09-17T17:00:00+02:00

Moving massfabs to T1 is a bad idea from a user-friendliness point of view.
I'm convinced that one of the reasons massfabs were moved to T2, was so newer players did not get confused and try to use them.

I dont think moving them to T1 "but hey theyre not useful at T1 so noone will build them" will offer enough benefits to make the additional complexity worthwhile.

Statistics: Posted by AdmiralZeech — 17 Sep 2011, 17:00

Re: Massfabs

2011-09-14T12:13:29+02:00

I never loved Supcom Vanilla...too much ecospam, too much turtle, it was simcity all the way.
I love FA because its the exact opposite.
BUT

Now in FA mapcontrol is too important. If you lose the mapcontrol, you lose the ecowar and if your opponent is of equal strength it means you have already lost the game.
I strongly hated Massfab spam in Vanilla but now it's nerfed beyond usefulness.
A T2 Massfab with T3 energy repay itself in 5 minutes...and a T3 massfab need 10 minutes !!
It's way too much and everything is better than this (T1-T2-T3 mexes - ACU res upgrade).

One way or another we should buff massfabs.
More viable options are always better than fake ones (going massfab with the current balance is a huge mistake).

Statistics: Posted by Kekouse — 14 Sep 2011, 12:13

Re: Massfabs

2011-09-06T07:22:48+02:00

I agree with Zock, I'd love an option to use them at T2 even if it was very risky. More options = more fun. I don't want them to be the "better" option though. I'd like them to be like the T1 air rush. It's risky but it might pay off if you do it right.

Statistics: Posted by Gunseng — 06 Sep 2011, 07:22

Re: Massfabs

2011-09-03T16:33:25+02:00

We need to game to be about map control, really.
I would be for the idea of removing fabs completely. However, currently they are viable as emergency mass generation, which is fine. I think a lot of the problem is their stigma. People just go "f*** those mass fabs" and ignore them, when really you should be able to use them whenever you have excess energy.
If it were up to me I would ditch t3 mass fabs completely, and have the t2 ones cost about 10 mass to build, leaving everything else the same. They pay for their mass cost in 10 seconds but require a lot of micro to use properly (especially if we can cut out any UI mods that manage them for you)

Statistics: Posted by Gowerly — 03 Sep 2011, 16:33

Re: Massfabs

2011-09-03T13:02:43+02:00

I like your idea Zock. More targets

Statistics: Posted by TAG_ROCK — 03 Sep 2011, 13:02

Re: Massfabs

2011-09-03T10:28:03+02:00

Whats about a massfab with 3x3 place needed, explode dmg 20k, giving 4 mass and arround 4 x my suggested costs above? You wont be able to spam theese while a few can still be a interessting choice in mid and lategame.

Making them as a little cheaper but with other disatcantages then t3 mex would work too imo, but i dont really see a point there. At t2 it would add a new strategic feature and alternative, at t3 its just spamming eco.

Statistics: Posted by Zock — 03 Sep 2011, 10:28

Re: Massfabs

2011-09-03T10:02:47+02:00

We tried to address this issue in 3603v6 but we never came round to it as we definately dont want what raging is saying. Our idea was just to make the mass fab drain 135 instead of 150, this way T3 mex are still more viable than mass fabs, but mass fabs are good after all mex upgrades are made. (t3 mass fabs was more expensive than equilvalent in t2 mass fabs)

Conclusion was that t3 mex is 1498.8 mass cheaper than equivalent in t2 mass fabs so a slight change was welcome, but nothing drastic.

I am in favour of putting the mass fab to a slightly better use than it currently is, but care must be taken, maybe we can beta test a change.

Statistics: Posted by TAG_ROCK — 03 Sep 2011, 10:02

Re: Massfabs

2011-09-01T13:01:48+02:00

Zock wrote:
To make them worth building in 1v1 they need to be at least cheaper then a t2 mex.

you should have stopped here and had a thought: "what would it make to teamgames?"
I'll tell you, it would turn them into simcity
A LOT of building shit, just spam fabs like you spam t1 tanks in ranked matches.
And I'm really afraid of seeing this one day

Statistics: Posted by Raging_Squirrel — 01 Sep 2011, 13:01

Re: Massfabs

2011-09-01T00:34:50+02:00

i did calculate with +6 mass per t2 mex, not with +4, youre right. I also didn't know the power bonus is still so high. So we just gonna make them more expensive so it evens out, like i said the values above are not the final ones. It was more about the idea of massfabs beeing viable again.

(right mex rentabiliy)
T1: T1: 18 mass, 1800 energy
T1 > T2: 225 mass, 1350 energy
T2 > T3: 383,3 mass, 2635 energy

So try it with:

-Back to t1
-Space needed 2x2
-Healthpoints: 100
-build time: 300 (like a land factory)
-Mass: 75, energy: 2000 mass gain: 1 energy drain: 60
(With T1 power: 300 mass, 4250 energy; With T2 power: 219 mass, 3440 energy; With T3 Power: 152,7 mass, 3382 energy)

you could also increase energy drain, but like it said its not about the values. Its about the idea and if you think if its possible, because i think it is and i feel like many ppl dont

Statistics: Posted by Zock — 01 Sep 2011, 00:34

Re: Massfabs

2011-09-01T00:08:45+02:00

You want them to cost only 30 mass and have -40 energy drain for 1 mass? <_<

You're also forgetting adjacency greatly increases efficiency, up to 75% reduction in power consumption.

1 fab + 2 pgens would cost 180 mass, 4500 energy and produce +1M and +12.5E. It would pay itself back in only three minutes for mass, and 6 minutes in energy cost (but energy is less important.)

To compare, a tech 2 mex produces +4 (+6 - the +2 a T1 mex makes), so that is 225 mass per, and it never even pays back the energy and, in fact, consumes energy the whole time.

Your suggested changes would bring back the T1 pgen/fab spam that was a blight to the original supcom. I think they are an absolutely terrible idea.

Statistics: Posted by FunkOff — 01 Sep 2011, 00:08

Massfabs

2011-08-31T23:58:04+02:00

Anyone misses the old SupCom gameplay sometimes? I do. While FA gameplay is great without them, it would be mutch more fun if they are a viable strategy again. No necessary one like in vanilla, you should be able to win any game without them, just like you can win without building TMLs or T2, but i would like to see them as an option just like theese. So my plan is to make them worth building again without disabling the need for gaining mapcontrol.

Some facts (skip this if you want, its not necessary):
one T2 massfab costs 100 mass (giving 1), 4000 energy (draining 150), 500 build time, 360 hp with a death nuke of 370 demage with radius 5 (like 1,5 powergenerators)

For one massfab you need additional 7,5 T1 powergens (i know you cant build a half one, but its just for the math, you will need to build 2 massfab-powergen arrangements) for 562,5 mass and 5625 energy.

with t2 power you need 0,3 powergens wich would be 360 mass and 3600 energy.

So one massfab costs:
With T1 power: 662,5 mass and 9625 energy
With T2 power: 460 mass and 7600 energy
With T3 power: 294,4 mass and 7456 energy

let's compare that with the mass extractors (costs per 1 mass point gained):
T1: 18 mass, 1800 energy
T2: 150 mass, 900 energy
T3: 255,5 mass, 1757 energy

as you can see they arent worth building in until you got any mex on t3, and in general you dont need mass anymore or if you do, you make a paragon or t3 massfabs.

To make them worth building in 1v1 they need to be at least cheaper then a t2 mex. They still have other disadvantage like space needed, explosion risk, buildpower needed (big point imo, build power is expensive too) and more attention needed (you need to build them in balance of power and care more about your energy stability, maybe turning them off and on etc). You could increase theese if wanted by giving them less hp or more space needed (2x2 instead of 1x1).

I also would put them back on t1, you still can't spam them early on due you will lose easy because of you mapcontrol loss. Just like teching an t2 mex asap, its cheaper but you need more buildpower so its nearly the same. Buildpower is very rare early on. There is no real reason for me why they should be t2, they are made for t2 anyway since they get only good with t2 power, so why cutting the possible option doing them on t1 if you want to? There may be some situation where they are usefull on t1, but i cant imagine one where they will be too strong.

So i would change them to something like this:
-Back to t1
-Healthpoints: 100
-build time: 300 (like a land factory)
-Mass: 30, energy: 2000 mass gain: 1 energy drain: 40
(With T1 power: 180 mass, 3500 energy; With T2 power: 126 mass, 2960 energy; With T3 Power: 81,8 mass, 2921 energy)

Mex costs again:
T1: 18 mass, 1800 energy
T2: 150 mass, 900 energy
T3: 255,5 mass, 1757 energy

This may not be the final values, but it should be somewhere arround this. They are of course cheaper then a t3 mex, but like said above, they will take a lot space, additional shields wich costs too, 10800 build time vs 2875 from a t3 mex etc. Both, massfab farm and mex tech get their pro and cons. If you dont want them to be an alternative to t3 mex, it should be possible to make them need 2x2 space instead of 1v1 and you can maybe use them instead of one t3 mex, but then you will be out of space.

So what do you think?

Statistics: Posted by Zock — 31 Aug 2011, 23:58