Forged Alliance Forever

Re: More interesting adjacencies

2012-05-06T11:47:48+02:00

Doompants wrote:
It's been said many times, but halving, or otherwise reducing the detonation damage of massfabs when they are turned off would really make the risk manageable, without negating it. Get sniped, or attack someone without that level of attention and everything blows. But if you can manage a shutdown, and then beat back the attack, you are rewarded by possibly being able to walk away with heavy damage, but operable factories.

This is an awesome idea and should definitely be implemented (as well as described in the tooltip for noobs)

To Crayfish:
The reason mass storage isn't viable is because it just doesn't make sense, the whole ONLY USE STORAGE ADJACENCIES thing could be addressed by just buffing/tweaking/adding different viable adjacencies (like buffing the pgen mex adjacency or mex factory adjacency, etc).

The idea is to add options so players can develop different builds/strategies they're comfortable with. "Oh you don't mind paying extra attention to your mass fabricators and turning them off during assaults? use the awesome massfab/power adjacency then! Oh you hate micromanaging your economy? Don't use the awesome adjacency bonus!"

Statistics: Posted by Veta — 06 May 2012, 11:47

Re: More interesting adjacencies

2012-05-02T22:39:16+02:00

exactly, it can never be more efficient to use massfabs than mex and never should be

Statistics: Posted by noobymcnoobcake — 02 May 2012, 22:39

Re: More interesting adjacencies

2012-05-02T17:55:04+02:00

Yes my post was not aimed at you, i was clarifiying my general stance to people who may think Im making a case for sim city turtling as a viable option against getting map control.

Statistics: Posted by Crayfish — 02 May 2012, 17:55

Re: More interesting adjacencies

2012-05-02T15:33:20+02:00

Crayfish wrote:
High mass income setups should be a risk (volatile), because the greatest reward should be for going out and capturing mass points not sitting in ur base sim citying

if you don't change the cost of massfabs, it will always be better to get mapcontrol. It takes over two minutes for a t2massfab to get its cost alone back, so it will gain you profit only if it lives longer than two minutes. a mex gives you profit within a matter of seconds.
none of the sugestions would have changed that.

Statistics: Posted by Jace — 02 May 2012, 15:33

Re: More interesting adjacencies

2012-05-02T14:47:51+02:00

For me, volatility is a fantastic trade off balance mechanic for adjacency, even if the numbers need a little tweaking. I think they went a little overboard on massfabs after the massfarming episode in Vanilla.
Going back to my original post example, I really think that mass storage around mass fabs should be more volatile, coming more inline with massfab setups. Part of the reason u never see mass fabs or anything except storage-mass adjacencys is because they are so good and so safe, it actualy makes killing the mex harder not easier in alot of cases (especially with ground units). Generally people only invest in mass storage around 'upgraded' mexes that are within thier base / safe - controlled areas (like mass fabs), and thier reward is vast (much better investment than mass fabs), so I think they really should be volatile (if not as much as the current mas fab setups).
High mass income setups should be a risk (volatile), because the greatest reward should be for going out and capturing mass points not sitting in ur base sim citying, but the playing field need to be more level so that the adjacency system's potential for all the interesting build options is more fleshed out.

Statistics: Posted by Crayfish — 02 May 2012, 14:47

Re: More interesting adjacencies

2012-05-02T04:16:04+02:00

It's been said many times, but halving, or otherwise reducing the detonation damage of massfabs when they are turned off would really make the risk manageable, without negating it. Get sniped, or attack someone without that level of attention and everything blows. But if you can manage a shutdown, and then beat back the attack, you are rewarded by possibly being able to walk away with heavy damage, but operable factories.

Statistics: Posted by Doompants — 02 May 2012, 04:16

Re: More interesting adjacencies

2012-05-01T22:19:26+02:00

The risk is obviously too big, because no decent player does it. You ever seen someone building adjacency massfabs recently? When i see someone i laugh when it blows up soon afterwards.
There is no point in making the game deeper if it isn't used.

In my opinion its more than enough risk to have to build his so close together as well as having them do decent damage on death. There don't have to be chain reactions nor death damage that leaves the other buildings as one hits.

Close stacked buildings are easy fodder for any kind of arty,bomber,tml,ml,nuke..... its enough risk.

Statistics: Posted by Jace — 01 May 2012, 22:19

Re: More interesting adjacencies

2012-05-01T21:40:49+02:00

It adds a risk/reward factor as you have to invest more mass in to get more mass out. It makes the game deeper and gives you more options. Do you use adjacency to get more efficiency or is it not worth the risk? it is different in every situation and this is what makes supreme commander supreme commander. You see it with everything. It is risky to surround a mex because you are investing mass that could be destroyed yet are getting more out. It is the same with putting T1pgens all round a factory. They reduce power costs yet chain react when killed. With massfabs it has been taken too far but with other units it is rather balanced. T1 massfabs should leave each other with 10HP not kill each other instantly. Also the massfab explosion damage should be halved when they are turned off.

Statistics: Posted by noobymcnoobcake — 01 May 2012, 21:40

Re: More interesting adjacencies

2012-05-01T18:44:49+02:00

When did i say that the game should be balanced for my playing style? You have some problems with english? Pls don't lay words into others mouths.

The conclusion you have to draw from my argumentation is that the game has to be balanced for medium maps which neither favor rush nor make a rush impossible or too weak. Hence maps that force a rush or simcity are out of consideration. Hence the example that was brought about a nukelauncher surroundet by T3Massfabs is a irrelevant one. Because such a situation will only occur in a simcity game.
Your wish to be able to have the game balanced through all game-phases is unrealistic and impossible to accomplish. Simcity games have a fundamental different play-style as other game-modes, as you dont have to care as much about mapcontrol and spamming EXPs ist the way to win. While all previous stuff is more or less useless.

Anyway, the essence of the discussion is if adjacency is worthwhile or not? I say surrounding a nukelauncher with T3massfabs is not worthwhile, because the game should end most likely with the first or second nuke. Moreover the deathexplosions of most buildings make adjacency bonus a too big risk, because a small precision strike will cost you most likely multiple buildings. Killing one building of that Nuke-T3mass-structure will result in the loss of more mass than most cheap EXPs cost. And destroying a massfab or a nuke with a drop or a snipe isnt that hard.

i have the opinion that it would give a better gameplay and a more widespread use of adjacency if you wouldn't have to fear that small hits can take out multiple buildings because they chain react. its not possible to ignore that better players hardly use adjacency because its too much of a risk against other good players. every expierenced player who scouts a big adjacency structure with massfabs,energyfabs,nukes and so on will organize a cheap hit against it, blowing it up while investing much less into the snipe than he destroys.
i dont think its a good game mechanic that if you would properly use adjacency and the enemy hits just a single building, half your base blows up in your face.
its completely countering the purpose of adjacency

Statistics: Posted by Jace — 01 May 2012, 18:44

Re: More interesting adjacencies

2012-05-01T17:00:21+02:00

Jace wrote:
Its a realistic attitude.

You have to choose what you balance the game for. Either you balance for rush-only maps, for rush,mid and maybe lategame maps, or lategame simcity map.

Extremes on each end of this can't and shouldn't be considered for balancing. Because the farer a game-mode is away from the one the game is balanced for, the less balanced it becomes.

the situation you described can occur only in ultra lategame. Lets call it a simcity game ^^. Its definitely on the far end of a gametype, hence can't be considered to balance the game for.

I dont agree with that mentality at all.
The focus should not be on a one specific type of game mode or gameplay.
It should be balanced as best as possible for everyone who wants to play.

I'm not saying to balance the game in favour of the type of games I play. I'm saying balance as best as possible for as many people as possible.

I dont understand why you are saying it should be balanced to suit just how you play it?

Statistics: Posted by Stin — 01 May 2012, 17:00

Re: More interesting adjacencies

2012-05-01T15:35:27+02:00

Its a realistic attitude.

You have to choose what you balance the game for. Either you balance for rush-only maps, for rush,mid and maybe lategame maps, or lategame simcity map.

Extremes on each end of this can't and shouldn't be considered for balancing. Because the farer a game-mode is away from the one the game is balanced for, the less balanced it becomes.

the situation you described can occur only in ultra lategame. Lets call it a simcity game ^^. Its definitely on the far end of a gametype, hence can't be considered to balance the game for.

Statistics: Posted by Jace — 01 May 2012, 15:35

Re: More interesting adjacencies

2012-05-01T14:58:47+02:00

Jace wrote:
But the nuke is a game ending device in a real game almost for sure. there is no point in building stuff around the launcher that costs more than the nuke itself.

and dont take me wrong: but i think nobody here is really interested in balancing and improving the game for those maps you seem to play. House rule games and simcity-maps are be the last thing the devs should care about.

Thats not a very sporting attitude to have.

Why should any particular game mode have priority over another?

Just because you dont like to play in that particular way, doesnt mean any other aspect of the game shouldnt get attention.

Statistics: Posted by Stin — 01 May 2012, 14:58

Re: More interesting adjacencies

2012-05-01T12:38:31+02:00

But the nuke is a game ending device in a real game almost for sure. there is no point in building stuff around the launcher that costs more than the nuke itself.

and dont take me wrong: but i think nobody here is really interested in balancing and improving the game for those maps you seem to play. House rule games and simcity-maps are be the last thing the devs should care about.

Statistics: Posted by Jace — 01 May 2012, 12:38

Re: More interesting adjacencies

2012-05-01T10:44:56+02:00

Jace wrote:
So you get one nuke for free after building 4 nukes? woowww......

I guess i never had a game real game when i build 4 nukes with one launcher. I think the 12.000 mass for the extractors could be used better anywhere else ^^. And when you hit one extractor you kill the whole adjacency structure.

Actually buy 4 and get 1 free is a fairly decent bonus.
It would make a huge difference if you bought 4 bricks and you got the 5th free. I think it would even make a big difference if you built 4 Mantis and got the 5th free.

I play 8 player games on big maps where nukes can be used.

And I think that even when you are negative mass the 12 mass/second is contributed to the building of the missile which is why I thought it would build quicker (because I am usually negative mass )

Statistics: Posted by Stin — 01 May 2012, 10:44

Re: More interesting adjacencies

2012-05-01T09:01:12+02:00

So you get one nuke for free after building 4 nukes? woowww......

I guess i never had a game real game when i build 4 nukes with one launcher. I think the 12.000 mass for the extractors could be used better anywhere else ^^. And when you hit one extractor you kill the whole adjacency structure.

Statistics: Posted by Jace — 01 May 2012, 09:01