Adjacency bonuses, Build templates

Are thee making a come back...any news?
I quite liked the way you could pre build your base, and drop down the template in one go.

this has been discussed a few times, but the basic opinion of the potential players seems to be that adjacency, while being a new and different mechanic when it was added to supcom just doesn't light any fires of excitement in anyone when they hear about it in regards to PA

build templates on the other hand are sure to make a return, the issue came up out of lengthy discussion about Assisting AI which was eventually resolved by understanding that the desires of player who supported it could be more realistically supported by improving upon the basic templating system from supcom, the general opinion being that players would like more support in this area and more ability to customize, design, categorize, and position their templates and build queues prior to construction.

Adjacency was really a half assed concept from the get go. It didn't give any strategic benefit. It didn't provide much of an economic bonus, either. It basically didn't do anything for the game.

Adjacency should have been a real choice with real consequences. For example, a factory hooked up to an extractor shouldn't stall. It has a direct connection to metal! A shield shouldn't shut down when power goes out. It's hooked directly to a generator! If adjacency was used to set priorities on your economy, it would have been used much more often. Players could design bases that didn't simply die when resources run low.

I can confirm there are no plans for adjacency bonuses.

Aww. I hope there will still be deep strategy to base building and layout.

Awesome news. I truly did not care for the adjacency bonuses. They limited the scope of structural positioning and only made bases more compact. They were not much of a great game mechanic IMO.

They did however make people build their very unstable power generators (that tend to explode and destroy or damage everything near) near factories. Il miss that.

When I tell people about SC I make two selling points. 1 Adjacency bonuses 2 Build templates. I'm very disappointed that this interesting mechanic is not being considered.
I play competitively and have awesome templates that make full use of adjacency bonuses. The comment that they do not provide much of a bonus is utter nonsense. Tech 3 Mass surrounded by mass storage gives a massive boost to the economy and makes bunkering down possible. Hydro plant surrounded by power storage is also very good early game. A wall of alternating tech 2 power and shields works very well. 4 tech 3 power in formation then building a nuke or artillery in the middle builds much faster and cheaper.

SC had a bit of a learning curve because players did not use the adjacency bonus to its full potential. This could be avoided with a tutorial that rubs the bonus in a bit better. When I show players how to use AB they have more resources then they can spend and have to adjust the way they play to utilize the boost to their economy. This gives the game depth!

I love SC / FA because it has so much more then other RTS games. Sequels should have more not less. Adjacency bonuses, build templates, experimental units, shields, upgradable commander and ferry transport are fantastic mechanics that keep me playing the best RTS.

SC didn't make adjacency bonuses worth the risk, so that's why most people here didn't bother with them.

Hey, you must be new to the forums. Welcome!

There are a great many features that can be added to PA. Some of them are paradoxes, conflicting with other mechanics. Some of them are pure numbers, creating no significant change in gameplay. Adjacency is the latter.

City building is already an important skill for good base design, but it is not the point of the game.

Hi guys.

igncom1, What risk are you referring too?

I played daily and my opponents and I make use of adjacency bonuses. People on the net that did not, got thumped. A tech 3 mass extractor gives + 18 mass and when surrounded by storage gives + 27 mass (at no risk and this is a significant difference)

I am shocked that people do not like them. I can only assume they have not mastered them (no offence).

AB give players something else to consider when building therefore adding depth to the game, once you have your templates then you're good to go. Yes they could be better, I should be writing on what additional bonuses they should give instead of convincing people they are a good idea. What bobucles was saying about using the AB to set priorities on your economy is a great idea. However I feel the ABs significance is mainly for an economic, shield and artillery fire rate boost. All the other AB are week and are only useful around tech 1.

I'll be honest I love micromanagement, base building is a large part of the fun for me (60%) and that is why I like AB as a mechanic. If base building does not do for you what it does for me then that is probably why you do not like AB or see the significance as much as I do. If AB are not in the main game, I bet my mothers reproductive organs they will be in one of the first mods along with any other element the designers (who I love and worship) decide to leave out.

Its funny the most popular mods for SC / FA adds some of the elements from TA, with flying build units, size of tech 2 artillery, original tech tree extra. The lesson here is making a sequel and removing elements that people love and work is not the end of the world for the die hard fans. All you got to do is make it pretty and make it mod friendly we will do the rest. X

You are confusing complexity for depth. Complexity is something that makes the game harder to learn or harder to play. Adjacency Bonus does this in SupCom.
Depth is something that gives the players viable options and different viable strategies.
Surrounding T3 mexes with mass storage in FA does not give you more options because surrounding it is the optimal choice. Not surrounding a t3 mex is in most cases simply a mistake and bad play.

Each power storage increase the production of the hydrocarbon by 4. Surrounding the hydro with 12 power storages gives you a measly +50 production on the hydrocarbon. The same mass spent in t1 power generators gives you +800 energy production. You might not be the one who have mastered the game.

You can play SimCity where you fight the economy and against the mechanics of the game. I prefer to play against my opponent.

I did not like SC at first, but as soon as I was shown how to build a base utilizing the added complexity of the AB, I realized that I can find creative ways to layout my base to make full use of the mechanic better than others. This got me interested in the game and added depth and enjoyment for me because of that competitive edge. This may not be your case and I can respect that, you should try respecting my opinion too.

Dude I said ‘early game’ This mean before tech 2. Perhaps you have not played on enough 5km maps with No Rush turned off. And check what you said, I think you mean tech 2 power not tech 1 gives + 800 with storage. My early storage allows me to ride the economy wave (a sight to behold) better so that I waist less, get more score and have more to spend then you when it’s needed.

Sim City hey? I can also recommend many other RTS games without the AB that you can go play.
All of them!

AB was an interesting mechanic but it had little to no effect on the strategies and tactics available. Not using AB means that your economy grew X % slower than an opponent who uses AB. Once both players have perfected their use of AB bonuses the battle play out the same with little to no effect on the battle.
I say skip it since it doesn't add any strategic value to the game. It just increases the learning curve.

12 energy storages cost 3000 mass. For the same price you can get 3000/75=40 t1 pgens producing 800 energy per second. Getting 1 or 2 storages for overcharge can be good but saving up 60000 energy early game seems pointless.

You can make an advanced strategy game ontop of SimCity or Civilization. But an advanced economical model is likely to detract from the strategical gameplay. Having to do the math to figure out that surrounding t3 mexes with storages is more effective than upgrading mexes to t3 or that you should pause t2 mexes when you are upgrading simply doesn't add to the strategic value of the game.

Adjacency bonuses as straight money? No. There's no point. Just design the economy the way it's needed from the get go.

Adjacency bonuses as ways to enhance structures? Maybe. A power booster might increase a weapon's range, or provide extra build speed to a factory. Not terribly sexy, though.

Adjacency bonuses as a way of merging structures? Ooh. Two radars next to each other might act as a single larger radar. Packed factories might use a single queue. Laser towers might boost each other in a manner similar to the Temple of Nod. Zero-K allowed units with shields to support other nearby shields. Some things could help cut out the middlemen, by having low tech structures easily merge into higher end stuff. Others could just be broken. Might be cool.

I actually really enjoy base building myself. This is why I don't like AB, because it forces you to build your base in a particular way to make optimal use of your economy. I want to be able to take more things into account when building my base and not be at an economy disadvantage because of it. It's just not a good feature IMHO.

Wish I had been here earlier, but it seems godde has this one covered.

Suffice to say, lanthis is wrong, godde is right, and I am content to let godde's word stand without adding paragraphs of largely the same argument.

Adjacency bonuses are boring, mostly marginal gains in SupCom, and are only interesting to people with sim-base OCD.

And for the record, I would wager lots of money that godde would beat lanthis at SupCom any day of the week. While lanthis is meticulously arranging his energy storages around his hydrocarbon, his opponent is expanding everywhere, line-dragging factories and t1 pgens, and just going to kill him. Learn more about the game before saying who has and who hasn't "mastered" the game lanthis- your comments indicate you aren't very strong.

Yeah, AB is a part of a boring gameplay. Same as the upgrade of MEX. The game is more dynamic when you have to conquer the map and defend the maximum of MEX on the map than to stay in your little base and up your economy to... build an experimental. That's why it is a good news than PA draws from TA instead of SupCom

Two words; Forged Alliance.

Mike

^Yep

Considering what neutrino was referencing in his post above, then it is safe to assume that many games are being used and considering as inspirations for the game.