Forged Alliance Forever Forged Alliance Forever Forums 2014-04-30T08:37:08+02:00 /feed.php?f=2&t=7290 2014-04-30T08:37:08+02:00 2014-04-30T08:37:08+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=7290&p=71986#p71986 <![CDATA[Re: Effects of stalling]]>
EDIT: Anaryl's work in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=42&t=3759&start=20 for those interested

Statistics: Posted by Nombringer — 30 Apr 2014, 08:37


]]>
2014-04-30T07:36:38+02:00 2014-04-30T07:36:38+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=7290&p=71983#p71983 <![CDATA[Re: Effects of stalling]]> Statistics: Posted by Plasma_Wolf — 30 Apr 2014, 07:36


]]>
2014-04-30T07:00:44+02:00 2014-04-30T07:00:44+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=7290&p=71981#p71981 <![CDATA[Re: Effects of stalling]]> then this percentage simply decides how much of my eco income is used.
not sure about assisting but for direct building i thought it was this simple.
do these things just happen with upgrades and missiles or is this totally wrong...

Statistics: Posted by Golol — 30 Apr 2014, 07:00


]]>
2014-04-30T06:00:04+02:00 2014-04-30T06:00:04+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=7290&p=71980#p71980 <![CDATA[Re: Effects of stalling]]>
I always overbuild power. How else do you spend sudden increases in mass? (Say; from reclaim)

It kinda stinks that half the team goes E stalling because one guy with aRAS died...

Statistics: Posted by E8400-CV — 30 Apr 2014, 06:00


]]>
2014-04-30T02:13:22+02:00 2014-04-30T02:13:22+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=7290&p=71977#p71977 <![CDATA[Re: Effects of stalling]]> Statistics: Posted by Aulex — 30 Apr 2014, 02:13


]]>
2014-04-30T02:07:04+02:00 2014-04-30T02:07:04+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=7290&p=71976#p71976 <![CDATA[Re: Effects of stalling]]>
Tac - 30 seconds to build.
Tac with 3 mass income (requires 6) - 1 minute to build.

That was the control. Following are the times to build tacs when there are three naval factories building at a constant 97 mass expended, I had zero storage, and could effectively control the mass amounts by spawning exact numbers of fabricators.

at -1 --- 34 seconds.
at -3 --- 1 minute.
at -4 --- 1 minute.
at -5 --- 1 minute.
at -6 --- 2 minutes.
at -11 --- 5 minutes.


That series of numbers makes no sense to me..... past -11 it just got exponentially longer wait times, and I didn't feel like sitting with a timer that long. What really trips me up is that there was the exact same build time for -3 through -5. It is not a priority of building one before the other either, as the time was the same whether I started facs first or started tacs first.

I am thoroughly stumped. I am thinking that the TML build times are more manageable being shorter and all, but the same principles should apply to the nukes in theory.

Statistics: Posted by BRNKoINSANITY — 30 Apr 2014, 02:07


]]>
2014-04-30T00:25:49+02:00 2014-04-30T00:25:49+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=7290&p=71972#p71972 <![CDATA[Re: Effects of stalling]]>
Looks like I have a project tonight!

Statistics: Posted by BRNKoINSANITY — 30 Apr 2014, 00:25


]]>
2014-04-29T23:24:30+02:00 2014-04-29T23:24:30+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=7290&p=71970#p71970 <![CDATA[Re: Effects of stalling]]>
Blackster wrote:
Hi,

is there anywhere an overview of what effect energy and mass stalling have and how it effects various loading/building processes?

For example regarding the loading process of SMD:

Mass and energy green -> loading speed = 100 % (optimum [even faster when assisted by engis])
Mass and energy yellow -> loading speed = 80 %
Mass and energy red -> loading speed = 10 %
Mass red, energy green -> loading time = 40 %

etc. (numbers are made up)

Thanks


Well I don't know if my method is right but I generally do the following:

Early game: Although I stall when upgrading mexes to t2 or making t2 power I ignore it so long as it doesn't drop below 80%. It generally doesn't as I upgrade or build 1 at a time (assisted of course!).

ACU RAS, t2 upgrade, t3 upgrade: It stalls like mad but I ignore it.

Late game: I let my stall go worse because even if I have +300 mass and a 50% stall its still +150 coming in every second. I bascially prefer to use everything and experience some stall rather then waste any of it with overflow.

Herbert

Statistics: Posted by Herbert — 29 Apr 2014, 23:24


]]>
2014-04-29T22:43:43+02:00 2014-04-29T22:43:43+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=7290&p=71965#p71965 <![CDATA[Re: Effects of stalling]]>
I don't want to jump into an academic debate, but that's actually technology we are working on right now -systems that dynamically alter their output based of energy available. IRL, we are looking at things like having wifi generators do this so we can stick a bunch of them in a city (or wherever), hook'em to solar panels, and have them expand/contract their radius based off energy available to itself and nearby routers.

Anywho, that's not the point. It makes more sense than it is now and it's not hard to do assumed radius isn't hard coded for buildings.

But yea, stealth gen, shields, radar.... everything can just scale the energy. (And we could add some UI to allow you to do this manually...)

Really don't like how stalling works in this game.

Statistics: Posted by errorblankfield — 29 Apr 2014, 22:43


]]>
2014-04-29T19:00:46+02:00 2014-04-29T19:00:46+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=7290&p=71963#p71963 <![CDATA[Re: Effects of stalling]]>
I have also noticed that sometimes, you stick with 1 energy in storage and the things keep working for a couple of seconds, or just for a very long time, despite stalling on energy. Again, this has to be tested because I can't remember correctly and as I said in my previous post, the switching on/off seems random (The 1 energy case just adds to that confusion).
rootbeer23 wrote:
my hypothesis: the nuke builds at pw_gen/pw_used speed and the shield and radar are only active pw_gen/pw_used of the time.


This would be a nice hypothesis, however, Iszh already mentioned that it's wrong (on how it actually happens) for the nuke and nuke def. It should happen that way though, but it simply doesn't :(

Your hypothesis would not only be the right way for the nuke, but also for the radar, stealth, jamming and shield generators in terms of switching on/off. It is what the stalling idea describes. You come with a problem though. The game is continuous, by how much speed you actually build, so how are you going to decide when a radar should switch off and for how long?

Clearly, when you have 70% E income w.r.t. the output, at 30% of the time, the radar should be off. How are you going to do this? One second is 10 ticks in SupCom so clearly, you would want it off 3 ticks and on 7, in one second. This isn't going to be a problem for anyone playing (so it's a balance issue). You can continuously see the units (maybe no longer what they are, but certainly where they are). It's completely the other way around with shields. Having it off for 3 ticks and then charge, means that is actually off for 10 seconds, 3 ticks (number 10 made up, but that's no problem), then on for 7 ticks and then off again. So 70% energy income/output actually means 6% shield efficiency.

If take the intervals by seconds, it's a completely different picture. The problem with the radar is really starting to count by now, but 70% energy income/output still means 35% shield efficiency. There's a bigger problem when you make the intervals even longer. At for example intervals of 10 seconds, your shield would be off for the first 30 seconds and on for the next 70, but you're very likely to have solved your little energy crisis far earlier, then during the 70% E i/o problem, you've actually had your radar off the whole time.

So a better method is, rather than having the radar on/off time at 70% in a 70% E crisis, is to have the radar on all the time (apart from when you've shut it down manually, obviously), is this:

The radar has a certain range. If you are stalling energy, the radar range could drop. 70% i/o would lead to having the radar work at 70% range of its normal range. I know that the effective area then becomes 49% (70% squared) of its normal effective area (But I think that that isn't so bad, if you consider that electromagnetic waves drop in strength squared when the distance to their source increases linearly).

For the shields, you could do something similar. Have the generator give 70% of its usual SP to the shield and have the regen rate (both when the shield is up and when its down) drop to 70%.

I have no solution for the personal stealth and personal jamming.

This seems to be a much fairer and consistent solution than having things flicker on and off again, no matter how you put it (the current system, how it works, or how I think it should work, intended by the game makers). However, I'm not sure how changing it to what I just proposed will be taken by the rest of the community.

Statistics: Posted by Plasma_Wolf — 29 Apr 2014, 19:00


]]>
2014-04-29T14:49:49+02:00 2014-04-29T14:49:49+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=7290&p=71952#p71952 <![CDATA[Re: Effects of stalling]]> Statistics: Posted by ZLO_RD — 29 Apr 2014, 14:49


]]>
2014-04-29T14:31:52+02:00 2014-04-29T14:31:52+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=7290&p=71951#p71951 <![CDATA[Re: Effects of stalling]]>
I tested then lower numbers i made 150 mass income 0 storage and -50 overall the nuke def started to built but so slow you could not even see a movement it needs endless built time. Now i have finally no idea how this works at all anymore and i would really like a lot to know WTF is the code behind because thats important.

people posted this
viewtopic.php?f=42&t=3759&start=10

Statistics: Posted by Iszh — 29 Apr 2014, 14:31


]]>
2014-04-29T14:12:22+02:00 2014-04-29T14:12:22+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=7290&p=71950#p71950 <![CDATA[Re: Effects of stalling]]>
ZLO_RD wrote:
Can anyone explain what happens when I stall power by building a nuke missile (for example) and have t3 omni or shield or stealth or mass tabs or any other power-consuming thing which is not based on build power?


my hypothesis: the nuke builds at pw_gen/pw_used speed and the shield and radar are only active pw_gen/pw_used of the time.

Statistics: Posted by rootbeer23 — 29 Apr 2014, 14:12


]]>
2014-04-29T14:04:21+02:00 2014-04-29T14:04:21+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=7290&p=71949#p71949 <![CDATA[Re: Effects of stalling]]> Statistics: Posted by ZLO_RD — 29 Apr 2014, 14:04


]]>
2014-04-29T14:02:31+02:00 2014-04-29T14:02:31+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=7290&p=71948#p71948 <![CDATA[Re: Effects of stalling]]> Statistics: Posted by --- — 29 Apr 2014, 14:02


]]>