Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Defence build times are inconsistent #16250

Open
Punsho opened this Issue Mar 1, 2019 · 7 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
6 participants
@Punsho
Copy link

Punsho commented Mar 1, 2019

Flame tower, turret, SAM site all have longer build times then the rest. Defences open fire almost at the instance they are built and one needs to nail down the exact time to control those shots. The problem is that It's hard to switch between controlling a pillbox and a ft as ft has around double it's build time.

I personally think that it's best to fix it by allowing structures to queue up attacks while they are building (you currently can not target anything). It is also possible to fix it by making all build times the same

pill
cpill
flame
tesla
turret
aagun
sam
gap

@matjaeck

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

matjaeck commented Mar 1, 2019

I am not a fan of the ideal that is brought up in many recent issues to make the game flat and standardise the differences - IMO these "inconsistencies" are factors that should be used to balance a game instead of eliminating them by making them "consistent".

@Smittytron

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

Smittytron commented Mar 1, 2019

I've never once had a problem controlling my flametowers on construction. I just don't see an issue here.

@Punsho

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Author

Punsho commented Mar 1, 2019

I've never once had a problem controlling my flametowers on construction. I just don't see an issue here.

Spamming attack orders help but I don't think that should ever be a good solution.

I am not a fan of the ideal that is brought up in many recent issues to make the game flat and standardise the differences - IMO these "inconsistencies" are factors that should be used to balance a game instead of eliminating them by making them "consistent".

I agree that they are part of balance but I as I previously mentioned, I think it's best just to let them queue up attacks while they are building instead of blocking player control

@pchote

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

pchote commented Mar 1, 2019

I personally think that it's best to fix it by allowing structures to queue up attacks while they are building

This is covered by a followup that I had planned to do after #15743 - going through all the mods and implementing consistent behaviour for pausing or disabling structure functionality until the buildup is complete. So power plants would only start giving power once they are properly built, defenses could target but would only fire once fully built, production would be queued but only actually start ticking once fully built, and so on...

In the end, I realized that this was going to cause more grief and complaints (from players who had built their micro around the current behaviours) than it was really worth, so shelved the idea.

@Punsho

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Author

Punsho commented Mar 1, 2019

@pchote Did you try gathering feedback from players? I'd be highly positive if these changes were implemented

@MustaphaTR

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

MustaphaTR commented Mar 1, 2019

I am not a fan of the ideal that is brought up in many recent issues to make the game flat and standardise the differences - IMO these "inconsistencies" are factors that should be used to balance a game instead of eliminating them by making them "consistent".

Altho the idea here makes sense, i disagree for this case. This is just a complately unnecessary inconsistency that should be fixed.

I've never once had a problem controlling my flametowers on construction.

Effect of this to balancing would be a little to none, but imo this is just an unnecessary inconsistency. If fixed can be fixed under the name of polishing instead of balance.

@matjaeck

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

matjaeck commented Mar 2, 2019

This is just a complately unnecessary inconsistency that should be fixed.

Flametowers deal more damage per attack then pillboxes do, but pillboxes have higher rate of fire. We can balance the initial dps when placing the structure by allowing the pillbox to attack earlier than the flametower can.

IMO some building animations also look better at a specific speed than others (pb vs ft).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.
You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session. You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.