Access to early resources - SupCom's four mass points

In TA, metal deposits were scattered around, on some maps there would be lots close to the starting point, on others you would have to travel much further.

In SupCom with few exceptions, there were (at least) four mass points within spitting distance of the commander.

Which system is better?

Four mexes a la SupCom:
It's easy to learn a basic build order that will more or less work on most maps
Less chance of stalling mass and losing the game very early on
May promote turtling
Encourages players to have a tightly-defined base

Now I haven't played TA online so it's difficult for me to tell exactly how differently the two ways of doing it play, but I did recently play a game of Forged Alliance on Painted Desert (classic TA map converted for FA) and I was struck by how much more frenetic the game was.

We played a 3v3 team game and in Forged Alliance that normally means frontlines are established and the game is ultimately won by the first experimental.

By contrast Painted Desert did not allow any players the luxury of teching up with impunity, and there was no way to ensure the safety of every mex, given how spread out they were. It felt as hectic as a 1v1 on Open Palms and was to my mind a more enjoyable way of playing the game than the usual team paradigm.

So I'm inclined to think that it is better not to have a large concentration of mass/metal points at the starting position. However I have very little experience of the more TA-style way of doing it so I'd be very interested to hear what others think.

The 4 Startmex have not much to do with how the game plays out on painted desert imho.
I would like to see the 4 startmex in PA again and the other mex spread out over all planets.
That way you can plan your first few steps based on reliable starting resources and you still have to fight for mapcontrol after that.

You can't base the gameplay of two completely different games on the starting mex positions. There are a ridiculously large number of factors between the starting mexes and end game, so I think you're making a false argument.

I feel the supcom's starting 4 mexes were a good idea. It allowed every a even balanced start. The problem was that the spread of mexes over the rest of the map were usually grouped in clumps (like at empty starting points), or just all together too sparse. So basically, equal starting mexes should stay (the number to start with should be chosen by play testing), but there need to be more mexes in between bases.

I think you make a very good point insanityoo, the "problem" with SupCom is indeed more to do with mass points across the map being clumped together, and it would be better if each one was quite far from any others. I still think that four starting mexes is perhaps too many. The game is very different when played on maps that don't follow the four-mex convention, I would say that it promotes more creative thinking (although that could be just due to its relative unfamiliarity).

Certainly on the Painted Desert game I played, two or three of the players were completely thrown by the difference in starting mexes. I tend to think that forcing players out of their comfort zones is a good thing because it does force you to think about what you're doing instead of just going through the motions.

Four mexes and a bit of reclaim can be enough for a player to feel happy staying in their base, teching and turtling up. It's not good practise but perhaps the best way to teach them that is to make them unable to do it in the first place?

Something I liked from some custom maps was that even on maps with 8 players, the Starting Mexes only spawned if there was a player starting there, so there there were 4 players on an 8 player map there would only be half the starting zones, I guess the procedural nature kinda takes care of this thought.

As far as "Outer" Mex point being clumped up, well it should happen sometimes, clumped up Mexes and Spread out Mexes aren't bad, they just lead to slightly different gameplay and a good mix/variety is important.

Mike

I'd like variety in metal spot placement, with reasonably even spreads, but clumps occasionally.

I'd like options in the procedural planet generator for metal spot density and "clumpiness".

I think procedurally created galaxies will have a good variety of planet types and resource distribution based simply on the fact that these guys have worked on so many games that they know the really basic stuff like this already.

It's already been said somewhere here that it promotes different types of gameplay and variety can only be good for the game's longevity.

I think having each player start next to a pre-determined and more importantly, equal quantity of resources and within reason, build area. This can be done quite easily without all maps ending up "the same".

:shock:
ooooh, that is really smart!
I never thought of that before.

A 'nomad' mode could be awesome... :3

As far as the very early mex layout is concerned, I don't think there should be just one standardised way of doing it. 2 mexes, 4 mexes, 6 mexes at the start, all should be sensible if the overall map is designed to accommodate it. Mex size should be also able to vary.

I think having locations with large amounts of mass desposits similar to a start location and/or super deposits scattered through out a map adds strategic depth similar to geothermal sites. Please add things like this.

I rather humbly submit that every map having close to equal value to all space held to be boring and that some maps need some spicing up a bit.

I suppose one solution would be to just procedurally create the same pattern of mex no matter where you start. This would avoid the empty startspot issue without having to worry about map topology at all.

On a side note I'm still liking the idea of a game mode where all of the players choose their spawn location. Your commander has just entered the system and you get some time to examine the generated layout. All of the players then select a touchdown location and the game proceeds from there. This adds a layer of strategy to the beginning of the game that seems satisfying to me and takes advantage of the procedural generation.

That being said standard disclaimers apply. I can think of a million ways this could go wrong, it's just something I want to try as a type of game option.

Don't worry, I'm fairly confident that we love it just as much as you do

Just need to be careful about 2 commanders too close to each other. A com rush 5 seconds into the game seems just a bit ridiculous.

An interesting feature of this sort of mode would be that you have no idea where your opponent is. Sounds fun to me.

I dont know if this is even possible (or practical). But what about the ability to have a toggle-able "overlay" that shows almost a "heatmap" of concentrations of mass? This could allow for flexibility of placing of the mass extractors so they are not constrained to specific points; although they are still going to be concentrated around more efficient locations.

You can then bring up the overlay and choose where you want to land. Only issue i see is the perhaps annoyance of bringing it up every time you want to build a mass extractor.

If this is a retarded idea, let me know; I got thick skin.

I don't Know, one thing I liked from TA that had no presence in supcom is that in TA a Metal patch has quality. in supcom, a mass point is a mass point, period. some TA maps placed you near six patches, but only two were high yield, and the other four were lower grades, forcing you to expend more resources (time, metal, and energy/second) to extract the same amount of metal.

I love how this was done in Zero-K. You might have a small map, but 8 vs 8 players, with only 6 spawn points a side. There is a limited region (roughly 1/4 of the map) that players can spawn in.

The best players choose to spawn on the frontlines, noobie economy spammers on the back, and the last players have to spawn in a place with no metal spots. But that's okay! All the economy is shared amongst their teammates completely, so not having metal deposits doesn't matter so much.