ASF turbo (mod/balance/feature)

[whootle]

Hi guys,

I have a new idea regarding ASFs that I think would be quite cool. This arose from playing a game with a mod that reduced ASF's fuel capacity overall.

The thing with ASFs is that, while useful, a lot of the time they can be outrun by spy planes, and can take too long to get where they are needed in emergencies. This can necessitate a lot of SAM spam.

My idea is to add a toggle for a "turbo" mode. Essentially, when enabled, ASFs can fly faster BUT will burn fuel at a *much* faster rate, essentially needing to refuel after it is used. It is meant to be useful for situations like chasing down spy planes, moving to stop strats, or running away from enemy ASFs if needed...but once used, the ASFs are taken out of the equation for a while.

So something like full fuel capacity can support, say, 45 secs of turbo is what I am thinking. (certainly no more than that. Maybe even less, like 20 secs). And I'm certainly not suggesting teleporting ASFs (positioning is still important), but maybe something like a 25% speed increase during turbo. (Numbers, of course, can be tweaked.)

Not sure if this is possible or not, but:
1. What do you guys think?
2. If it's good, can it be implemented?
3. How can it be implemented? (FAF patch, mod, etc.)

Thanks.

[rootbeer23]

good luck trying to change game mechanics just because it would be cool.
catching spy planes, catching bombers... that all not really a problem.

[Cuddles]

I think the technical term would be an afterburner.

An afterburner (or a reheat) is an additional component present on some jet engines, mostly military supersonic aircraft. Its purpose is to provide an increase in thrust, usually for supersonic flight, takeoff and for combat situations. Afterburning is achieved by injecting additional fuel into the jet pipe downstream of (i.e. after) the turbine. The advantage of afterburning is significantly increased thrust; the disadvantage is its very high fuel consumption and inefficiency, though this is often regarded as acceptable for the short periods during which it is usually used.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afterburner

[tdrqwako]

How about maiking them overall slower, allowing them to get a bit more speed then they have now in afterburner on mode.
Plus increase fuel consume drasticly, so infrastructure like aircraftcarriers and staging platforms would be needed

[whootle]

I don't mind tweaking the "cruise" speed as well to slower than what it currently is. More wanting thoughts on the concept and how it could be implemented.

But definitely, the:
- cruise speed
- afterburner enabled speed
- total fuel
- fuel consumption with afterburner
are all things that can be tweaked.

[Mycen]

I remember a discussion that touched on this a while back where I didn't think afterburners were a very good idea. The issues with increasing the necessary micromanagement for very little clear improvement of gameplay seem relevant here as well.

Your idea is a little bit different than the one proposed there, but there are still some things I don't understand. If the full fuel capacity can support 45 sec of afterburning, does that mean that, assuming you're fresh out of a staging facility (or have been landed for a while) once you use the extra speed for less than a minute your plane is at zero fuel?

running away from enemy ASFs if needed...

It seems worse than useless for escaping from engagements, you'll just drop down to one speed after a few seconds and the pursuers will catch up to and destroy you utterly.

moving to stop strats,

If you have no fuel left after use, how will it be useful for quickly intercepting things? You'll either not quite catch up to them and be useless or overshoot them and still be useless after the one pass. Seems like it would require very precise control to be effective.

chasing down spy planes,

The whole point of spy planes is that they can outrun pretty much anything, right? Why do we want to make it easier to neutralize what is some factions' only late-game intel-gathering device?

Obviously, as you said, the numbers would have to be tweaked, but I think you're likely to find that, once the tweaking is all said and done, in order for it to be balanced, it's really just not worth the trouble. I would be interested to see what you do find if you test it though, maybe it would work out.

[whootle]

If the full fuel capacity can support 45 sec of afterburning, does that mean that, assuming you're fresh out of a staging facility (or have been landed for a while) once you use the extra speed for less than a minute your plane is at zero fuel?

Exactly. The point is, you're not meant to use it except in emergencies or where that extra speed is needed/gives strategic value.

It seems worse than useless for escaping from engagements, you'll just drop down to one speed after a few seconds and the pursuers will catch up to and destroy you utterly.

Agreed that you will be destroyed if you run out of fuel, but I would imagine 20 secs is more than enough to run back to back. It helps you run to cruisers/SAM/flak. And how will the pursuers catch you? If they afterburn, they run out over enemy airspace (not a good idea.) If they don't, they won't catch you (until later.) And if you have nowhere to run to, why are you afterburning?

If you have no fuel left after use, how will it be useful for quickly intercepting things? You'll either not quite catch up to them and be useless or overshoot them and still be useless after the one pass.

Er, 45 secs should be more than enough to catch up to them (if you're not on the other side of the map). Anyway, whatever the value is, The idea is it IS enough to catch up to them (unless your ASF are just WAY out of position) but not for much else after. I Would expect 45 secs is more than enough to catch up and do a pass or three, but then you have to refuel.

The whole point of spy planes is that they can outrun pretty much anything, right? Why do we want to make it easier to neutralize what is some factions' only late-game intel-gathering device?

That depends on your point of view (and you could be right.) For me, I could argue - the point of ASFs is to intercept everything, right? (And depending on your point of view, that could either be right/wrong.) As it stands, I don't like how a SINGLE spy plane can fly around with impunity if ASFs dont get it on the first pass (if you don't have ASFs behind the line/SAMs etc.) The ASFs can chase it all it wants but a single spy plane can pretty much fly around without problems until it stuffs up or gets cornered. With a 20-25% speed increase, I'm making an afterburning ASF roughly the same speed as a spy plane, so that it STILL can fly around, but there is a risk of getting shot down since ASFs can track it at approximately the same speed for a short time.

And if you want to counter it, send more spy planes. I think it's ridiculous how a single spy plane can cover everything if there are no SAMs and the ASFs didnt get it on the first pass.

As for increase in micro, for lack of gameplay benefits, my view is that this is increasing options available to players, a bit like having a stealth mode on the gemini, or surface/dive on subs. The improvement I'm seeking is essentially, apart from adding more options to gameplay, also reduce need for SAMs when you have air supp to prevent spy planes/strats and adds more options to air fights. (Currently, running almost never makes sense from an air fight.)

[Mycen]

And if you want to counter it, send more spy planes. I think it's ridiculous how a single spy plane can cover everything if there are no SAMs and the ASFs didnt get it on the first pass.

You think it it "ridiculous" that a unit at the highest tech tier can evade poorly managed fighters, when all the defender needs to do it build ONE missile launcher in the center of his base to nail the spy plane on the first pass? Is that really ridiculous?

Your base is of limited size. If the spy plane wants to fly circles around your base it cannot do so without eventually reaching the same point. Intercepting it should be extremely easy, unless you are simply giving your planes an attack order and allowing them to chase automatically.

You yourself said "if there are no SAMs." So why not just build some SAMs! In a T1 land battle you wouldn't think it ridiculous to have stray tanks get through to your main base if you only defended only with other tanks and no PD or walls at all. So why is it ridiculous that you can have stray air units get into your base when you choose not to build a single static defense?

Agreed that you will be destroyed if you run out of fuel, but I would imagine 20 secs is more than enough to run back to back. It helps you run to cruisers/SAM/flak. And how will the pursuers catch you? If they afterburn, they run out over enemy airspace (not a good idea.) If they don't, they won't catch you (until later.) And if you have nowhere to run to, why are you afterburning?

On what kind of map do you imagine that twenty seconds is more than enough to run back to base? A 5x5? 10x10? 20x20? 40x40? 81x81? You talk about how it's meant only for "where that extra speed is needed/gives strategic value", but you seem to have a very limited idea of when that refers to. What do you envision when you think of this idea? Not every map involves large T3 air battles over fortified bases that are far enough away from to have to engage out of air cover range but small enough that you can just dash back to base in an emergency, even at super speed. Why make a special ability that has very limited use?

If you think about what units require and benefit from lots of attention to their special abilities, what comes to mind? The ACU, of course, and some SCUs sometimes... certain submarines that do different things above and below water (Tempest, Atlantis, Yathsou, etc.), and transports. Otherwise, units pretty much just do what they're designed to do, all you have to do is tell them where to go. It's an intentional design feature - it keeps gameplay streamlined so it's fun and intuitive, and it leaves the player's attention free to manipulate his economy and oversee a massive field of play.

You conclude by talking about how players should have more options, but more options is not always better. Look at your own examples - how many players wish their Geminis would just always have the damn stealth field turned on? How often do you surface your sub hunters or missile subs? If a unit's special ability makes it do something unusual or important then sure, keep it. But if a unit doesn't even have a special ability and you just want to add one that makes it do the same thing it already does, just better, so errors in planning aren't as harsh... If I wanted to constantly have to stim pack my marines I could go play StarCraft.

Why even bother with something like that? Just put your planes in the right place next time and build a few SAMs. That's my philosophy anyway - after seeing what happened with Total Annihilation I dislike adding new things to the game without a lot of scrutiny because before you know it you're playing a whole different game.

[whootle]

You're entitled to your opinion, and I respect it. That said, this thread seems to be losing its focus with posts of increasing lengths, so I will respond to your post and then try to focus on the thread's purpose.

Is that really ridiculous?

Essentially, I think it is ridiculous because unless you have SAMs already built, or ASFs back there (or other high tier AA such as Cybran SACU/Restorers etc.) then the spy plane is pretty free to do whatever it likes, and accomplishes everything it was meant to. You have no recourse.

As an aside, most SAMs aren't fast enough to stop the spy plane for its first pass (since it takes time for the missile to hit the spy plane, so unless the SAMs are placed quite far out from where you wanted to deny the spy plane, the death vision + time delay means the spy plane gets the necessary intel anway.)

If the spy plane wants to fly circles around your base it cannot do so without eventually reaching the same point. Intercepting it should be extremely easy, unless you are simply giving your planes an attack order and allowing them to chase automatically.

Agreed that if the spy plane is covering the same ground, then it should be easy to intercept. My point is that if it somehow got past your ASFs, it is virtually impossible to stop the first pass (which gives you all the intel you need if you pay attention) and THAT is what I want to make harder to achieve.

So why not just build some SAMs! In a T1 land battle

I actually do (as you may have noticed I mentioned this in earlier posts. But I also feel that they shouldn't be the ONLY way to stop it, if you have ASFs and air superiority. I did think of the T1 land battle scenario myself, but I thought someone might bring it up, and I'm glad you did. The scenarios are similar, as you pointed out, BUT:
- if ONE tank/LAB gets through, it can indeed wreck havoc (without the appropriate t1 pd or tanks in place) BUT it is limited by dps. (And probably can't take out a mex if there is enemy chasing it, and it wants to stay alive.) For real damage, you should sneak more in. Once 1 spy plane is in, the intel it gathers is the same as if you sent 10 spy planes (assuming same location and path)
- you shouldn't lack t1 pd/tanks, BUT if you did, you could still go t1 bomber and deal with it that way (for example.) OR gunships. Or airdrop troops. In other words, there are alternatives.

On what kind of map do you imagine that twenty seconds is more than enough to run back to base

As mentioned before, I do not consider this a get out of jail free card if your ASFs are completely out of position, or if you have not been paying attention to radar. This is NOT designed for times when you suddenly realise your base at the SE corner is getting strat bombed when your ASFs are in the NW corner of the map. It is for when your ASFs are in the right area/vicinity, but not in the right position (if you get the drift.) I have not played on 81x81 maps (though I would like to - they are rarely hosted) but I have played on 40x40 and smaller.

I believe I have made very clear what sort of situations are of strategic value for activating an afterburner. Please read prior posts. Maybe others can come up with more. And just because you consider the scenarios "limited", it doesn't change how "limited" any toggle is, such as surfacing a sub/changing cybran t1 aa to fire at ground/ or turning on/off stealth/cloak/radar jamming/mass fabs/radar on any of the respective units.

but more options is not always better.

That I do agree with - and hence this post, to see if it is a good idea. I obviously think it is, and you obviously don't think it is. And I respect that.

In response to your examples, gemini stealth costs e so if there is no strategic value in the stealth, they are just wasting a lot of e (which could be used for mass fabs, for example). And I actually surface my subs a lot, depending on the situation. Stim pack, in Starcraft, does indeed help with positioning, but the main reason it is needed so much there is because it also greatly increases dps. Not to mention medics/medivacs are mobile and healing costs no resources (as in minerals/gas). Or that you can heal during combat (but you can't refuel in flight in FA). Again, I have not suggested increasing dps - I only suggested increasing top speed, which can come with disadvantages of its own (other than fuel) such as larger turning radius.

Why even bother with something like that?

I believe I've made my point quite clearly, and I also think perhaps you have a different idea of what my suggestion is. Please re-read. If we are on the same page, then please be more specific with your question as I'm not sure what you are trying to ask.

Just put your planes in the right place next time and build a few SAMs.

Again, I generally don't have problems stopping spy planes/strats etc., and I do build SAMs. But I think this idea is good in adding more flexibility to the air game, and it means you don't have to have defending ASFs just for the stray spy planes/strats that got past your ASF cloud even when you have air superiority in that area and ASFs in the vicinity.

I hope that has addressed your questions. Trying to focus the thread a bit more though:

1. What do you think of the idea? Good/bad, and why?
2. Can it be implemented?
3. If so, how?