I like the changes in the recent PTE-build 76843, especially the ones regarding Energy Plants! It allows two new thoughts: 1. As it´s now possible to push Tier I energy quite fast, it would be interesting to see more things actually require energy! 2. As it´s now possible to destroy energy generators with medium effort (as they aren´t tanky structures anymore), it would be interesting to see how a tactical energy-wipeout instead of a fab-wipeout or a commander-wipeout could play off! Both aspects do lead to one result: (at least in my eyes) Give every defense structure energy costs! There are already two that got some, named Pelter and Holkins (this one had WAYYYS to high consumption in the previous builds but is now pretty balanced!) and it would add a lot of tactical options to the combat! Wiping away energy plants while attacking an enemy base will directly influence his defense power if he hasn´t build enough production/ storage elsewhere on the map! It will give the attacker great visual WYSIWYG-feedback (as the attack speed of defense structures will fall while you´re on an energy shortage) and will reassemble the effect SHIELDS ( ) brought to the gameplay of the SupCom-Games... (I dislike shields in PA, but I like the tactical aspekt behind them! ) Oh, and in return to this "tactical debuff" for defense structures I´d generally suggest buffing all defense structures attack speed! (few of them could also need more damage, but most of them do already cause massive overkill!) In general, there are two ways to implement this energy drain: Constant energy consumption like radars got or consumption per shot, like Pelter and Holkins got. I´d suggest the second one, as it´s already in and sounds more logical to me. But I let you choose your preference, of course! (poll is open for two weeks... )
I think that it's a good idea, especially if the max fire rate/energy consumption for advanced defences was very, very high, as well as their destructive potential. Gives energy storage more of a purpose too. Or, if changing existing units is a no go, add a turret type with a high damage direct fire weapon primarily limited by energy supply.
I hadn't considered buffing towers, but really... How would you suppose buffing works? Especially in the case that static defense requires energy to fire, and then gets a buff when it fires. Isn't that simply saying static defense now costs energy to fire, and we're gonna bump up power from vanilla stats? I posted on this exact topic earlier, but I can't be bothered finding it now. Basically it was me saying look, we have energy, only really fabricator arms use it. I want more stuff to use it. Static defense, units, ubercannon again, super weapons like planetary engines and annihilaser. Particularly the annihilaser. So yes, I'm in agreement that we need bigger diversity in power requirements and I'm glad someone other than me wants it too
First of all, for any of this to work there really needs to be energy drain prioritization. Factories get first dibs on power, then fabbers, then weapons (or something like that). Otherwise, you HAVE to build enough power for everything to avoid total eco stall when you come under attack, removing the element of choice. I think that in the case of a buff, if you just build a tower, it should function about the same as it does now, except that if you go to the extra effort of supplying lots and lots of excess power for them, they should get very scary.
Well, I think I understand your point clearly. But I think that's exactly the gameplay challenge people need to have. If people make storage, then they have spare energy for when there is a big attack. So ideally, you have positive income for all your construction, and then storage has a double use for when you need to power build something, or do that you have storage when you're under attack. This will minimise any extraneous need to play with power consumptions/production. In short, I think that playing with more energy storage circumvents the problem that you've outlined. Edit: Here is my original post. it's okay if nothing happens to it. So I demand nobody feel obliged to do anything more than casually skim through my reasoning and peoples responses. https://forums.uberent.com/threads/energy-consumption-and-balance.65870/
The more important question to ask is this: Does it add depth to player interaction, both with the game and with other players. Or does this mechanic constitute just another 'busy number' that is not easily communicated to the player via interface feedback, leading to unnecessary complication and sometimes frustration. Is the benefit worth the increase in the accessibility barrier? I lean towards the latter view and think it's a 'flavour' mechanic best used in moderation, not a 'core' mechanic. There are better more transparent ways to balance the game if this is the goal.
I HOPE that this will add more forms of player interaction, mainly I hope for heavy energy snipes BEFORE the real attack starts. As it´s a feature that would be completely passive (you don´t have to hit a button for it, it´s just running!) I don´t believe it´ll become a new busy number, it just makes it even more crucial to have enough energy production AND storage! Which would be really good in my eyes!
If it reduces turtling, I'd like to see it. But Not sure if this would be a good way to balance out power, considering how delicate power structures are now. Get a group of bolos into a base and target power=Knocked out Eco. Where as with Mexs, since they're so spread out, its easier to keep metal alive.
Wiping out power already blinds the enemy and wipes out production. If wiping out power stalled defense structures too... that would be just too much. Energy is already incredibly important.
I would be down for this idea if Tier 1 defensive structures such as the AA gun and single laser got a slight buff to RoF. As for tier 2 i don't get to see it as much but i would feel the same way. Small buffs for energy consumption. Would make for more energy but cool payoff. Would be nice to feel a tad safer with them around for the cost of some energy lost. on a related topic i wish the would raise the base energy level by like 1.5 or 2 and reduce the regen of it a tad. This way players have slightly more time early to react to it!
it could kill turtling entirely, that´s the problem ... sooo no i am against it ... powercost for some defenses yes ... for all ... nope!
