Energy mass storage, or infinite storage

Again, a question I haven't seen answered in any definitive manner.
Are we going to have a limit to how much energy and mass we can hold at any time?
If so, are we going to be able to build extra storage so we don't waste it?

Again, a subject that -probably more than once- has come up in discussion that you have failed to find. Unfortunately.

go easy on yx, he's really really old and just playing catch up.

i cant be bothered linking the thread. i dont think there has been a definitive statment on the existence (or not) of storage. i for one don't see the point, as spending resources is almost always better than saving it (in supcom).

There should definitely be a limit on energy storage (increasable by building storage buildings), or energy will become irrelevant by mid-game. Also this would allow the very interesting mechanic that is now in FA that forces you to build storage before you can use the commander overcharge/D-Gun.

I felt it was neat that your treasury was represented as objects on the game map that could be taken out; It was made into a visible feature rather than just being an imaginary vault.

If energy works anything like in TA and Supcom a storage limit will be a must, or energy will be meaningless after a little while.

I don't really understand the thinking behind these "will they remove game-defining feature X" threads. Is there any reason to think that PA won't use the resource model that worked so well in TA and SupCom? What would PA gain by ditching the resource storage mechanic? Are you similarly worried about the lack of official confirmation of other completely uncontentious features like multi-unit selection, keyboard shortcuts, and hovercraft?

Best point.

My thoughts exactly! It opens up so many possibilities for harassment and even game balance. I would love to have it back.

Could the game call itself a TotalA successor without storage? Probably not.

Storage played a good role in multiplayer games. The limit is fairly low, and players that spilled over had the excess donated to friends. Energy storage helped limit the ability to "flash build" things somewhat, since there was never enough storage to completely build most things. It also made energy crashes immensely damaging, since the delay between loss of power and total blackout was a matter of seconds at best.

I think not-infinite storage would be a fun thing in attacking a different planet when combined with planetary economy, having to deploy some storage facilities to start your economy on a planet.

If PA will have storages, at least make them more useful than in TA or SupCom, perhaps interplanetary transporting should cost a hell of a lot energy, and the metal storages should be fast mobile units so you won't usually lose them together with build power in your base.

Well I personally expect storage to do one job and one job only: store resources.

Making storage into mobile units doesn't make any more or less sense than making power plants into mobile units.

That'd be kinda interested if you took it to the extreme....MOBILE EVERYTHING!

Mike

One of the major potential uses of the metal storages is to buy you more time to not waste metal if your factories or constructors just got destoryed and your metal income exceeded the build power you have. I believe this use would be more practical if the metal storages are mobile.

How.

Mike

True enough. Although that's not the context qwerty3w is thinking off.

qwerty3w, it would be more practical if everything was mobile, so I fail to see your point.

Normally the most build power is in the player's base, and usually securing the mobile units is easier than securing the structures if the enemy units are about to break into the player's base, you could move them to a safer place.

Mobile storage still isn't quite as mobile as not caring where it is at all. With a galactic bank, storage facilities can be built on any world and used in any place, effectively shipping it instantly across the galaxy. The only limit in mobility is tied to where your engineers can physically be. It is a simple and effective way to manage metal, and all the extra game depth already revolves around securing and using it effectively, so it's probably the best solution right now.

Energy storage is up for debate, mostly because there is a poor consensus on what role it should play in base building and war. Infinite storage is pretty much out of the question, though. It's been attempted in Supcom2(plus TotalA/supcom mods), and it made energy lose a lot of its meaning as a fluid and volatile resource. IMO, energy should be something that makes you suffer bitter short term losses when it screws up(battles, planets). However an energy loss shouldn't cost the war, as metal already performs that role in the long term.

That being said, energy storage wouldn't be something you worry about. It's really more of a capacitor; the only real purpose is to absorb sudden loads(big guns, 9001 engis, etc.) to prevent eco stuttering and keep the grid stable. The best solution is to have enough power for all your needs.

Mobile factories could be very useful as an invasion tool. but it might be easier to take a handful of engineers and build a base on site, yada yada endless theorycraft. The entire idea of an invasion is obviously something that will have to be fleshed out and given proper tools, something for a different thread.

In a game balanced to accommodate the two, powerplants would be expensive. In any intermediate to professional match where players need all their resources working for them, building all the power plants you need right away to cover every energy shortfall wouldn't be so feasible.