I thought the new patch would balance combat fabs

Discussion in 'Planetary Annihilation General Discussion' started by killerkiwijuice, May 30, 2014.

  1. killerkiwijuice

    killerkiwijuice Post Master General

    Messages:
    3,879
    Likes Received:
    3,597
    The patch, whatever you want to call it was supposed to fix things right? Well it doesn't look like it. Combat fabs are still significantly overpowered, i would rather just remove them. When will balance happen? Not even fun :( I guess i should put this in the balance page but this really needs more attention. Thanks for the bugfixes, though.
    phantomtom likes this.
  2. mered4

    mered4 Post Master General

    Messages:
    4,083
    Likes Received:
    3,149
    Cm'on Garat.....

    We know you know....does Scathis know?

    I know Brad knows.

    So, two down, six to go.

    It's a long journey to fix this mess lol
  3. brianpurkiss

    brianpurkiss Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,879
    Likes Received:
    7,438
    Whenever something gets majorly broken balance wise like this, it often takes Uber weeks to change it. Even when it's a simple numbers change. Even when it's abundantly clear what is broken, and Uber even acknowledges its broken.

    So don't expect a fix for at least another 2 weeks if Uber keeps with their trend.

    I've given up on playing the game because the balance is always broken. It gets boring and frustrating having to re-learn the new build's broken mechanic and then exploit the broken mechanic until the next broken mechanic.
    ace63 likes this.
  4. tehtrekd

    tehtrekd Post Master General

    Messages:
    2,996
    Likes Received:
    2,772
    Oh god, it's the turrets fiasco all over again.
    Players: This is so broken
    Uber: Yeah, I see your point.
    *months later*
    Players: This is still broken
    Uber: Hm? Oh, right. We'll fix it next patch.
    PeggleFrank and brianpurkiss like this.
  5. killerkiwijuice

    killerkiwijuice Post Master General

    Messages:
    3,879
    Likes Received:
    3,597
    haha that sounds so ridiculous but so true
    squishypon3 and brianpurkiss like this.
  6. cola_colin

    cola_colin Moderator Alumni

    Messages:
    12,074
    Likes Received:
    16,221
    Just removing combat fabbers would throw players back into the t1 energy hell. Does anyone really want that?
    Also it seems like Uber is rather first actually fixing crashes and the like after gw was released.
  7. tehtrekd

    tehtrekd Post Master General

    Messages:
    2,996
    Likes Received:
    2,772
    No one's saying remove them, just balance them.
    Make them less efficient, or make them output less metal (because 60 m/s for a T1 unit is kinda crazy.)
  8. cola_colin

    cola_colin Moderator Alumni

    Messages:
    12,074
    Likes Received:
    16,221
    If you make them as bad as normal engineers you would end up with the same energy issues as before.
    I guess a possible fix would be to half all their attributes and rename them to assistive engineers. But I don't like the idea of having assisitive engineers like this tbh. I'd rather have a working energy/metal balance with normal workers.
  9. brianpurkiss

    brianpurkiss Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,879
    Likes Received:
    7,438
    Or make it so they can't assist in construction. That way they can remain efficient and effective in repairing, while not being broken for building.
  10. cola_colin

    cola_colin Moderator Alumni

    Messages:
    12,074
    Likes Received:
    16,221
    and you would create the whole horrible energy thing again I was talking about. We NEED workers that are that effective or we need better t1 pgens. Otherwise t1 will amount not to mass expansion but to mass energy stalls.
    PeggleFrank, Jaedrik and bastian0483 like this.
  11. brianpurkiss

    brianpurkiss Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,879
    Likes Received:
    7,438
    I think we should get more effective T1 power gens. Which a lot of people have been advocating for that for a while.

    I want fabricators to be inefficient while factories are efficient. That way players are encouraged to build lots of factories and massive bases. Rather than 2 factories with a bunch of combat fabbers assisting them.
    PeggleFrank, stuart98 and cola_colin like this.
  12. BradNicholson

    BradNicholson Uber Employee Uber Alumni

    Messages:
    1,073
    Likes Received:
    4,589
    Yep, we're working on separating building versus healing now. It might already be on deck for the next build. Not 100-percent sure.
  13. tehtrekd

    tehtrekd Post Master General

    Messages:
    2,996
    Likes Received:
    2,772
    Whoo!! Word on the subject!!
  14. BradNicholson

    BradNicholson Uber Employee Uber Alumni

    Messages:
    1,073
    Likes Received:
    4,589
    It's definitely a discussion worth having. Being OP isn't necessarily a bad thing, by the way. I don't really get why it's such a no-no word.
  15. brianpurkiss

    brianpurkiss Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,879
    Likes Received:
    7,438
    OP is definitely a bad thing.

    If it's over powered, then it means it's a lot more powerful than anything else, which means that one unit is the best thing to use.

    Having an OP unit/building means there's no variety. Use that one unit/building or you lose.

    That's not good for a strategy game. Or pretty much any game for that matter.
    stuart98 and cptconundrum like this.
  16. BradNicholson

    BradNicholson Uber Employee Uber Alumni

    Messages:
    1,073
    Likes Received:
    4,589
    OPness isn't a bad thing because it tends to enhance other elements or introduce interesting choices to overcome it. See the two biggest games in the world: DOTA and League.
  17. tehtrekd

    tehtrekd Post Master General

    Messages:
    2,996
    Likes Received:
    2,772
    It's not really a no-no word, so long as things are OP in a good way.
    Nukes, for example, are OP in a good way.
    This is because though they are very powerful they aren't required for victory.

    Combat fabbers are OP in a bad way, because they are needed for victory, which creates a dominant strategy. You don't follow the combat fabber strategy, you're good as annihilated.

    And as I've said 3 times now, RTS games NEED to avoid dominant strategies like the black death.
    Alphasite and brianpurkiss like this.
  18. brianpurkiss

    brianpurkiss Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,879
    Likes Received:
    7,438
    "Combat fabbers are OP in a bad way, because they are needed for victory, which creates a dominant strategy. You don't follow the combat fabber strategy, you're good as annihilated."

    That is exactly what I was trying to convey. Thank you.
  19. brianpurkiss

    brianpurkiss Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,879
    Likes Received:
    7,438
  20. squishypon3

    squishypon3 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,971
    Likes Received:
    4,357
    I've won a game against someone using combat fabs to speed build stuff before, you just need to make the best strategic choices to win. The problem is its just TOO hard to combat, like how T2 was before- you could win with T1 but it was extremely hard.

Share This Page