Should resources be tracked per planet/moon

And people wonder why im so fvcking grumpy all the time!

listen kid. supcomFA is my favourite game of all time. and I’ve been playing games for 30 years. I’ve played hundreds of matches and watched thousands of replays and devoured forums with the best players the game had to offer (even beat a few of them myself). If I say something about FA, you go and write it down like moses did with his tablets

a) saving like 8 energy (from memory that’s approx. what you save by having 1 side of t1 pgens on an air factor. Someone with a better memory can correct me) per second when in all likelihood you’re running an economy of +50 energy anyway, is completely worthless.
b) putting a factory adjacent to a mex point will tell you you’re saving 1 mass per second. this value is not correct. reclaiming trees, which provided fvck all mass, is more advantageous than putting your factory on a mex.

What? no that scales as well. The only time that the adjacency is beneficial is when you dont have much space to lay out your base (i can't think of an official map where this is a problem though)

She's got a point there, we got so caught up in the logistics of a single planet economy we forgot about the rest of the system and the Galactic War parts of it. Maybe just do away with most micro-ing for the sake of ease to keep the game from being too intimidating.

Edit: please excuse me as I inferred, however many years of gaming doesn't make you an expert, especially on a particular game has only been around for a few years, after balance changes.

8 energy per second might not be much, but every little bit adds up, and over the couse of a hour or so 8 energy per second could be building units and building that otherwise would be delayed.

Its not much I will give you that, but it still adds up over time, as I was trying to point out.

Considering that i am *never* short of power, and late game I have thousands spare, no a little energy saving is not a big deal.

Now it it were a mass saving....

You do get that as well from factory's and other buildings next to extractors and mass fabricators.

well i cant exactly put a row of extractors next to my factory, and anything vital next to a mass fab is a stupid idea.

As is the risk with the adjacency bonus.

But I just couldn't understand why people were saying it wasn't important, when it can be and over time can become quite important when your strapped for resources.

A factory is surrounded by t1 pgens. Because of the way adjacency works this confers, lets say, 10% saving on energy production for this factory. You're producing something which uses 100 energy, so the end result is 90 energy per tick. A saving of 10 energy.

A t1 pgen costs 750 energy to build and provides 20 energy. This is paid off in 37.5 seconds. At which point you're able to build another pgen. Because you now have 2 pgens it only takes 18.75 seconds until the seconds cost has been covered, at which point you can build a third. This one is paid off in only 12.5 seconds. I think you'll notice how the economy is growing exponentially if you allocate resources to it. This is what makes a linear saving from adjacency irrelevant.

note: actual numbers may vary. It doesn't actually matter what they were. The point remains the same.

I would like to thank you for proving my argument, as the same can be applied to the linear saving over a longer period of time.

i wasn't saying 3 decades of gaming makes me an expert, i was pointing out that out of the thousands of games i've played during this period, FA is my #1.

AND YOU'RE STILL WRONG. it doesn't "add up" over time. energy is wasted in the TENS OF THOUSANDS. you don;'t need to be saving any.

likewise, the mass doesn't "add up" to anything significant at all. indeed, what you actually do by putting a fac next to a mex, is lose yourself mass because you can't put a storage unit there (i forget the maths though).

you are a moron and you suck at supcom.

Maybe I am saying it the wrong way, but if your spending less due to the adjacency bonus then that means you have more to spend else where, because you really should have resources to waste that's....wasteful.

The result is essentially a bonus that you can use elsewhere, I really don't know how else to say it, but if your not spending as much energy then the energy left over can be spent in other places.

I think I should try an example.

Factory drains 10 mass per second by itself, and mass extractor generates 10 mass a second, so no profit.

But if the extractor gives a 10% reduction in expenditure from adjacency then you get +1 mass as a profit.

I don't see the confusion here :|

:lol: really?

Post maths about adjacency, or GTFO.

All of you.

oh come on man, i stopped playing a while ago now. i can't remember. the number i did recall was about an 8 energy/second for 1 side of an air factory (coz i used to build them with the template like that).

youre the uber nerd, remind us of some figures

In a week. Got my final exams ever in seven days. When I am doing maths, it's for that. When I'm not, I'm procrastinating on here.

yes, really. your comments throughout this forum shows you really sucked at supcom.

the numbers for mass are worthless. and you always waste energy (unless you seriously suck at supcom like you do, or you're a mad pro which you aren't).

wrong wrong wrong. instead of having +50 energy you might have +60 (or whatever). which is worthless.

hey, i like to make up nonsense with numbers too. having a mex on a factory doesn't provide anything near a 10% reduction.

if by tracked you it shows you the total income from particular planet/moon/asteroid, then i would be dumbfounded if its not in