Factory Complex

Hmm I don't like it, I'd prefer if this game keeps the tendency that it does atm.
But that's alright, people can have different opionions after all.

I'm all for specialized units, but not for some of the other stuff you said.

Also I think I talked enough for a day.

Tendency of what?

Following in the (arguably incorrect and wasteful) footsteps of those games that came before it?
Squandering potential in favour of comfort and familiarity?

Thing is you kind of need mexes and pgens that provide more metal and more power respectively. The game cannot function as it stands without an upgraded source of income. You'd starve for both power and metal regularly in the lategame.

It's what makro games are all about...

sry, but I want to upgrade my stuff.
And I'm out of here

Only because of the frankly ludicrous costs of the upgraded T2 tanks, bots and Orbital units.

Bring those down in both power and cost, and you'd be fine.

Also, having to allocate your economy wisely, rather than just sh!tting out units constantly without thought isn't exactly what I'd call a deep strategic experience either.

But you're saying that you don't like it.

I think the problem is that you're looking at all this in a very 1-dimensional manner.

That's assuming we don't add something back in after taking out the raw upgrades. Imagine if Basic Extractors were tough, but had the lowest income, Advanced extractors could have higher income, but literally made out ff cardboard. Basic Extractors are great at first because they're robust and accessible, and later on they're great in contested areas because they're tough and the Advanced Extractors are good in safe areas, but they're still a risk as to they're so weak even a small raiding for could take out several.

Also the differences don't need to be huge either, Basic could produce 7 and Advanced produce 12 for example.

Exactly, obviously in a game like PA everything ins interconnected and changing one thing can have a domino effect on other things, but that doesn't mean you can't make changes, just that you need to account for what 'side-effects' a change will have and make other changes accordingly.

In PA, if you need more Metal, go take it from your enemy, don't sit in your lazy boy and wait it out.

Mike

Can't you just place fabs to assist factories to make them build faster?
I don't really see the reason for "Complex's"

Yes, but it terms of efficiency more factories is better.

Mike

No, I don't see it in a one-dimensional manner. I just don't like it. I want T2 to be "better" than T1. I want it to be exceedingly better, but cost more ressources. I also want to upgrade my stuff. Sure specialized units are awesome, but that doesn't mean that everything has to be specialized instead of better. If I want to build Levelers with the power of 5+ ants then I should very well be able to do so.


So if you don't want to be forced into building anything, why not take away all pgens and mexes, even the t1 ones, because you'd always be forced in building them? I'm telling you, you're turning this into an arcade game. Something very different from what it is today. I think that your system won't work, and that it will be a significant step backwards.
But please, this is not the thread to talk about it. So stop hijacking it and take it elsewhere, please.

Have you ever played Total Annihilation?
I'm guessing that you haven't, or you wouldn't be saying that this system 'won't work'.

I'm sorry to say it, but what you want is not good for interesting and, more importantly, deep strategic gameplay. You're looking to play a game about logistics management, not strategy.

Take it elsewhere, this is off-topic.
Stop hijacking my thread, please.

It is very much on topic. You're wilfully ignoring counterarguments in favour of just blindly stating what you want. That's not a discussion. Threads within a forum structure are primarily about discussion, not just fanciful wishlisting.

This has nothing to do with the OP anymore. The premise here is that we're talking about the game as it exists today. And not speculate about what it could be in the future if you guys would sit behind the wheel. Because that would be quite a different game we'd be talking about.

As long as there's no official statement from the devs that approve your ideas to 100%, then this discussion will be meaningless, because I have no reason to adjust my idea to anything else but this game in it's current state. I have also no reason to adjust my idea to wild suggestions to which I don't have a reason to believe that they'll ever get implemented.

If you want to change the fundamental game mechanics, then make a thread about it, or get back to the thread that's already been made for it.

You want upgrades. They're not within the scope of the game. Neutrino has stated that he dislikes 'Upgrades' multiple times and adjacency bonuses like those found in SupCom are provably bad for diverse base configurations.

You have your opinion. It is wrong if your intent is for a deep strategic experience.
If your intent is to lessen the strategic depth and breadth of choice of a strategy game then I politely suggest that a game concerned primarily with Strategy might not be the game for you.

What you state you like in your OP is not strategy. You like logistic efficiency. They are two totally different things.

Take it elsewhere please. Now you're just assuming things. It's ok if you think that your idea is better than anyone elses. But simply saying it over and over makes it neither true nor better.

Also we have evolved from the upgrade thing and were getting to the point that factory complexes might be a separate building from T1 factories. Which we wanted to discuss till you came and hijacked the thread with your fancy ideas.

You just have to accept that T2 mexes and pgens are upgrades to T1 ones. And that this will not change, at least we have no reason to believe that it will. And as long as you can't prove the opposite, then we'll have a meaningless discussion based on your ideas, which are probably never getting implemented.

And I don't want to discuss this based on your ideas, I want to discuss based on what the game is now, and what the devs want to do with it. Are you a dev? No you are not. So why should I assume that the changes you want are going to be implemented? I shouldn't.

And the longer we talk about your ideas, the more we will get off-topic, because this thread never assumed that your ideas were necessary for it. They don't even have a role in here, not the slightest bit of importance, none.

Did I get that across?

What I would love for factories and to make them even easier to control when you have 30+ of them is to form factory complexes with them, but they do not have any benefit, it is just the same factory but you can select them with one click. Basically grouping them but without putting them on any number on your keyboard, just making them easier to select from the strategic view.

Very amusing. In point of fact I do not have to accept that T2 will always be an upgrade to T1 and I plan to at the very least, attempt to sway the Devs away from their mistakes. If however I prove to be unsuccessful in that venture I can assure you that I am still under no obligation to accept the Devs' vision as correct. The name of the game is Mods, or at least it will be at some point in the future. You can bet money on the fact that I will rip this game apart and supplant my own ideals should this game fail to become strategically stimulating.

That you don't want to discuss my ideas is no concern of mine. As long as they are on topic you have no right to bar my entry into this discussion. Thankfully you included T1, T2, Upgrades, Adjacency and planned obsolescence in your OP and have continued to post that you think that this obsolescence is a positive aspect in your subsequent posts. Not only is that in direct opposition to what the Devs have posted in their (admittedly) sketchy plans at this point, but also runs counter to some basic strategic principles.

What you posit is an increase in logistic complexity without any increase in strategic depth. You are defending your idea, which is admirable. However your idea is flawed at a fundamental level, as many others have pointed out in this thread.

You are incapable of a detached appraisal of your own idea. If you are unable to handle criticism of it then you're not fostering a healthy discussion. You are only seeking some form of gratification and acceptance of your idea rather than an intellectual discussion of its merits.

If the only ammunition you have to rebuttal my idea is that you don't like my tone and think I lack the authority to post it, rather than an actual counterpoint argument... then I guess that just shows the difference in the quality of our two ideas.

You are correct, I'm not a developer. I'm not even one of their friends or family. That is a great asset because it allows me to appraise their work without such a close attachment to it.

---

I'm not attacking you personally Arachnis, so please do not take this as such, but your idea is flawed. You are basing your argument on personal desires rather than what is best for the strategic richness of the game.

And it's fine if you want to introduce your ideas in a mod, but we're not talking about a mod here. And we have no reason to discuss this based on a mod of some kind. We need to discuss this based on what we think will be the final game.

I never said that obsolescence is a good thing, and this idea was to prevent obsolecence in an indirect way.
I also took my time to carefully reject every criticism here with well founded arguments. So again, you're just assuming things.

Now you come along and tell me, that this game is flawed and that you don't like the way it takes.
That's good for you, but none of our concern.

If someone comes along and says: "Well this game really needs a unit called Santa Claus, which orbits a planet and throws big bombs in form of presents. And your idea is pulling away from the Santa Claus-unit."
Then I say: "But the devs never said that they'd implement a Santa Claus unit, so why should we discuss it here?"
You say: "But most people in the community want a Santa Claus unit in the game, also we know for certain that some devs like Santa Claus."

It still doesn't change the fact that we have no reason to believe that a Santa Claus unit will ever be implemented into the game, so discussing an idea based on the implementation of a Santa Claus unit is meaningless. Not worth my time, and certainly without justification here.

You have no reason to assume that your idea is anything other than mod-fodder.
Oh, and I'm going to quote snipe you, just so you stop lying:

You like obsolescence. There it is in black and white, as plain as day.

So what I gather from the original topic, is that we "currently" have flawed gameplay, and that OP wants to solve it by something which was specifically mentioned not to be in the game. I don't even think this necessarily needs solving.

This issue resolves itself if the game is properly balanced as making the right decisions of what to build and when to build it will hold a much greater significance than it does now. So what's the point of this topic?