Should metal extractors consume energy :

I know we agree, but I was just saying that a complicated proof of why it doesn't make sense to power down mexes isn't really necessary. You're absolutely right, but an exhaustive proof of the fact isn't really necessary when the basic idea that it is better to extract the metal than to spend energy trying to produce using metal you don't have, should suffice.

Mexes costing energy just means you have to micromanage your construction rate to avoid an energy stall by toggling usage. Even if mexes generate metal for free, you should still manage your economy to avoid an energy stall because it makes your economy less efficient. You can still never build faster than your energy rate because construction costs energy anyway. If you think things should cost more energy to build, just apply that cost there instead of double-taxing on extraction and production. Extraction cost changes nothing in terms of strategic options or even basic economic management.

The only difference is that a new player who energy stalls will be completely unable to do anything. They have no energy, no metal, and haven't the resources to build anything to get them out of the stall.

Yeah agreed IT was just because people were fixated on the idea that you would disable mexes to speed up production, when that isn't the case. I agree, I kind of derailed the thread.

That sums up the issue perfectly. thank you.

The problem of mex stalling has already been solved. There isn't much for the defender to consider on this matter- there is a correct way to handle an energy stall, and it's not to give up on your extractors. Under all conditions, you want to maximize your income and restore energy to normal asap.

The attacker has a lot more to gain. An energy mex creates another point of weakness to exploit, because the attacker no longer has to destroy ALL energy structures to gain a significant edge. He only needs to take down the "flex" energy, and gets a much greater return on his damage.

If energy was tied to gravity wells, the decision would be even more significant and would create more vulnerable points of attack.

Mexes provide a resource. Energy mexes provide that same resource, but in a different way. Energy is a tool to control PACING, which defines HOW and WHEN strategic choices become available. That makes it more important than nearly anything else.

Yeesh. It's like "why do I even bother" with these forums.

We all do this every couple of months bro.

But worry not,the infinite forum war will still be here when you return.

Yes, destroying the enemy's energy slows down their production because even if they have enough metal, they still can't use it.

If you think I am saying that energy should not be a valuable target, you are completely wrong. I am even in favor of mex overdrive, which literally gives you more metal because of excess energy. Losing energy production directly hurts your economy because you get less metal.

However the hard stall is just not a fun mechanic, and is not strategically interesting in any way. In order to justify causing a player to lose metal when they energy stall, you have to explain why hard stalling is an advantageous mechanic, not just losing metal when you lose energy.

Under overdrive, losing a fusion literally reduces your metal income. But since mexes always yield at least a certain flat amount for free, you can never hard stall. This, I think, is the simplest and best solution to having a metal and energy economy that both encourages expansion and also expands vertically with energy investment.

You don't need overdrive to make energy important.

PA uses a 2 step extractor. The T1 base makes metal without upkeep. The T2 shell makes more metal, again without upkeep. However, you can take the T2 shell and add an energy upkeep. All of a sudden energy => metal, but you can still function quite well in a stall.

As interesting as overdrive was, logarithmic economic returns don't belong in standard play. Costs shouldn't change, and income should be clearly understood. The tactical intent should be resolved in game design, not with a dual screen and excel.

Besides, wasted energy should be just that. Wasted. It states a clear and simple rule to understanding the game.

The economic HARD stall was a Supcom failure. It turns out that negative extractors CAN break the game. This problem did not exist in similar titles, for reasons that would be very cruel and rude to explain.