Hi!

I reinstalled SupCom the other day. Going through the SP campaign, and I am having a blast with it.
After I am done with SupCom I will repeat with FA.
And then: skirmish.

Maybe also multiplayer. I was never too good at this game, although -after the initial streak of defeats- I could beat the computer consistently.
Probably a human player would hand my own butt to me in short time. But anyway...



I have been reading about this Forged Alliance Forever.
But I am not sure I get everything correctly.

Do I need FA patch 3603 installed for it?
I remember that the patch 3603 would fix some bad engine bugs that no mod could otherwise tackle. But I do not remember the details of it. I may be hallucinating about this last bit of info. Do not beat me too harsh.


I see that FAF brings lots of balance changes.
And I see that the one change I have always hatred the most is standing:

This I could never digest. I *LIKE* to build lots of Energy (and Mass) storage structures. And I *WANT* to do it. And I like to surround my Pgens with them, for adjacency. But this change here makes the whole not practical.
Less than half my usual quantity, and I have already a ridiculous storage capacity.
And it is extremely risky to build them for adjacency, since now they are more fragile than eggs and explode for more damage than a case of H bombs, surely sending to grave whatever is nearby.
Energy Storage structures were not tough before, but they could stow some hits - One would expect, according to any military design, that such delicate equipment would be *armored* to some extent... instead noo, they make it barely able to withstand gravity. IMHO common sense got murdered in the process with that 3603 change.
Of course I tend to protect the delicate equipment under a shield dome, but that is no excuse to willingly make it extra-fragile and extra-volatile. Such a design would not be fielded in the first place.


At least as an option, can I have the old Energy (and Mass, if they too have been changed) Storage structures back patch 3599-like?

I got nothing to say about the other balance changes. Actually I like them. But I will know more once I play with them and get a feel.


Thanks.

You might enjoy building lots of energy structures, but even in normal FA, you're playing the game suboptimally. With the change in FAF, you're playing it even more suboptimally.

Adjacency doesnt really have a strong effect, so its not that important to build stuff next to each other. Unless its an absolutely safe position, its probably not worth the risk.

Having large amounts of pgens and pstorage is a waste, as well. You should be devoting all your mass to improving your forces (either more units or more tech) or your mass economy (more mexes, upgrade mexes). With that in mind, build only the minimum pgens required to power your stuff, leaving a modest buffer.

In the past, energy storage was never built at all by most players. The last few patches made it impossible to overcharge without some storage, so build enough to allow for overcharge. Otherwise energy storage is usually pointless.

You say you're not a good player. Whether you decide to learn how the game works and play more efficiently, or continue doing what you like despite being useless, will determine whether you improve or not.

Oh, and Im no expert. But i think what i just posted are the basics of basics in FA.

And dont try to apply fake real life logic to a video game. Because in real life, there is rarely any armor that can withstand an equivalent class of weapon. Tank shells kill tanks in one hit. Bombs take out buildings in one hit, etc. If you think of energy storage as an fuel tank, I doubt there is any way you can prevent it from blowing up in one shot. You could say that HP in the game is an abstraction of the unit's ability to withstand internal damage, rather than representing how much armour they have. (since there has never been a weapon that needs to whittle away all of a targets armour before it can kill - weapon either pierce the armour or they dont.)

Anyways, thats just an extreme generalisation, but the point is that your logic has nothing to do with a video game. I cant remember the gameplay rationale for the pstorage change, maybe someone else can answer that? But so far FAF has been pretty conservative with balance changes, so they generally have a reason.

Hello.


Thank you for the reply.
Now do not take it in the wrong way... I just disagree where you say:

But it is not a fuel tank. I mean, it is not as fragile as a fuel tank. No, I must express myself better...
A civilian gas tank is not expected to take bullets. Ever. And so it is not built for [that kind of] punishment. That is fine.
But a military storage unit, to house volatile material, that is to be fielded into an objectively dangerous environment, well: that is another pair of sleeves.
It is expected to come under enemy fire. Not because it *has* to happen, but because it *can* happen. More so later (in the game), when the air force starts roaming and there is no virtually-unreachable spot anymore.

It is no fake logic to think that such an object should possess some measure of armor. The 1200 hp were okay.
But with 500 hp and 2000 dmg on a radius 5, patch 3603's Energy Storage structure is no less than a big bomb ready to explode. And it harms none other than you when it does.
No wonder that people have come to make no use of it. Why not mod it off the game entirely, since we are there?

Granted, there is no amount of armor that can keep such thing safe throughout the game. But at least in the early stages of play, when you could use the extra storage but still can not afford a shield, the former armor of 1200 hp could save you from rebuilding a patch of structures because one of them took a stray shot.



You make a point. Totally agree there.
Still, I like the idea of adjacency. Even if not adeguately rewarding. It is part of the game, it makes a base look somewhat cuter, and some people (like me) enjoy the aspect of Base layout planning . And it is one of the innovations introduced by SupCom. Have not seen it in other RTS games (then again I have not played too many different titles, so I do not know how original SupCom is in this). Regardless, should not we do something to preserve it instead of tossing it away?

Perhaps the Energy adjacency bonus could be modified?
(Mass adjacency bonus is fine as-is)
If a full ring of Energy Storage structures could *double* the output of a Pgen (+100% output instead of +50%), it would make the Energy Storage structure more useful. For starters it would help save some building space (true for T2 and T3 Pgens, not for T1).

For example:
Two T2 (or also T3) Pgens next to each other do take 6x3 grid slots.

If Energy adjacency is promoted to +100%, then one T2 (or T3) Pgen surrounded by storage, takes 5x5 space and produces the same energy output of two Pgens taking 6x3.

Not much of a change (space wise), but there is the substantial increase in Energy Storage available, countered by the number of units you had to devote to it (a ring of storage around a T2/T3 Pgen counts 12 units) - not to mention the increased chances of unwanted explosions by having such things around.
You know, the gain something/lose something phylosophy.
Possibly, gain something *more* than what you actually trade for it - else where is the incentive?
To this end I would promote the adjacency bonus to +130%, instead of only +100%
Would it not make you think more seriously to a Pgen ringed with storage, that way?

I believe it would not change the gameplay any much.
But it would make two pieces of this game (Energy Storage and Adjacency) useful again.




Was there ever one?
Now you made me curious. Can anybody answer that, please?


Thanks.

It's simple. Before 3603, each building has his own energy storage. Meaning that you are able to increase your energy storage without building energy storage.


Now, the only way to increase it is to build it, logic no ?

So, the change that you dislike is actually going in the way you want : Making energy storage useable (except in niche cache of the aeon RAS upgrade, they were NEVER profitable in 3599).

I agree that as E are most dangerous to build next to pgen, the adjacency bonus should be more profitable.

Feel free to find me an example of a military fuel tank, that can withstand military weapons. Being protected from infantry firearms is irrelevant. Im sure theyd love to have fuel storage that can withstand a bomb, but the point is, such magical armour doesnt exist. Anyways, like i said, its pointless. Maybe the energy can only be stored in an ultra dense, ultra volatile form that blows up even from shockwaves travelling through armour. Its a sci-fi scenario, we have no idea what kind of properties and materials will exist in the future.

There has been discussions throughout the life of FA on how to make adjacency more viable. But so far the decision has been to preserve the existing balance, which has good gameplay even if some things are unused, rather than risk messing it up with changes, since patches were so limited.

Once FAF gets fully mature, maybe theyll take another look at it along with other useless things, dunno. Shrug, you could always learn how to mod. The changes you desire are pretty much trivial to implement, just some number tweaking. You can enjoy your own personal version of the game.

Hello.



Googling around, I found this:
(excerpt from 3603 changelog)



That last point is what you refer to. Am I correct?
For some reason I recall that it would not accurately counter the super gain of +3000E per storage unit. Bah, maybe I am not remembering correctly. I will take a better look at the patched FA once I am done with vanilla.



@ AdmiralZeech :
Are you not putting too much importance on the fact that a container of whatever-volatile is not supposed to resist more than 1 bullet shot?
Earlier in the thread you did point out how, in real-life, a Tank can one-shot kill another Tank (and you are right)... but then you do not mention that your Tanks in-game do *not* kill each other in 1 shot (note: so long they are same tech).
Is this not a little bit convenient?

On the same premise, I ask: why can not the Energy Storage building survive more than a few stray shots in this game?
If the caliber is big, okay, nothing to argue there. 1200 hp were not so many in the first place.
But since the Energy Storage structure is not exactly a small thing to look at, it is plausible to have some armored casing in all that volume it occupies, especially given the nature of its contents and the unpleasant effects that are observed in case of detonation. I am applying the same logic observed in other parts of the very same game. Why should Energy Storage units be different and turned into highly explosive eggs?

That is just how I see it.
Not trying to start an argument.

I find adjacency is not that important for factories when you have engies assisting as they don't benefit from the bonus. It is great to build around artillery as it speeds up reload time, and around shields as it makes their energy consumption much lower. That being said, every RTS fan has OCD and has to make their base look perfectly symmetrical (ever restart a level because your factory wasn't perfectly flush against a Hydrocarbon plant )

The mass storage always pissed me off b/c my units attack the storage first! and it's stronger than a T1 MEX. This is especially irritating with units you can't control, like a T1 ghetto gunship.

Energy storage is worthless, except if you’re doing something really special. Brainsteel’s UEF tech to ACU shield on that 5x5 little red map (jeez, can’t even remember the names!) was truly awesome.

3603 requires one storage in order to use overcharge IIRC. Other than that, flat out don’t build it. and ignore adjacency. Other than with mass storage around mexes, it’s worthless.

none of that first paragraph meant anything to me.

I find energy stores around T3 Fusion reactors increase its output. The thing is mass is, IMO, far more important than energy, so I always end up with a surplus of energy and hardly any mass.

Basically, except in the 3603 patch, every factory and engineer had energy storage. Building energy storage was useless in every situation except for the super elite player ladder.

The 3603 changed most of that, and made it important to have energy storage for Overcharge.

it does, but in the scheme of things its not worth worrying about. it makes more sense just to build more power structures rather than storage to boost output.



surplus energy is normal, but mass and energy are equally important. remember, mexes require energy to run. an energy stall is normally more painful strategically than a mass stall.

16 energy stores on all sides of a P3 fusion reactor costs 2,400 * 16 = 38,400 energy and 120 * 16 = 1,920 mass and increases energy output by 0.25 * 2,500 = 625 units

16 T1 power generators cost -750 * 16 = 12,000 energy and 75 * 16 = 1,200 mass and produce 20 * 16 = 320 units of energy.

They're about the same. You spend less than half the energy on T1 PGs but get more than half the energy boost of P stores. However, you spend more than half the mass on T1 PGs to get that same greater than half energy boost.

At the end of the day you're probably right b/c T1 PGs build faster.

at that stage of the game you'd probably ignore t1 pgens and just build another T3 fusion. its less than twice the cost of 16x storage, and produces 4x the energy.

I find late in the game Fusion reactors are a means to an end not a necessity. I just need more juice to quickly build my fatboys or strat bombers, so I build a few more, then afterwards I have +15,000 energy so I feel bad on account of there being starving supreme commanders in the world so I start building mass fabs, shields, UEF Residential Buildings...