Petition to revert mex cost to 50

Petition to revert mex cost to 50

A dynamic game undergoing constant development and refinement, that attempts to balance playability with fresh and innovative features.

Moderator: Content Developer

luckywaldo7
Posts: 1398
Joined: 17 Sep 2008, 04:36

Petition to revert mex cost to 50

Post by luckywaldo7 »

1. If you are stalling metal, trying to put up more mexes is extremely frustrating.

2. Raiding is generally less rewarding because mexes are harder to kill (especially with jeffy, weasel, blastwing).

3. Mexes cost more then llt's O_o

I preferred it back when we had two mex choices: a paper mex that was easy to put up but died easily, and a more expensive but safer mex. Its these kinds of choices that bring depth to the game. You need to make choices, and then make that choice effective, and then learn how to combat the choices your opponent makes.
User avatar
Otherside
Posts: 2296
Joined: 21 Feb 2006, 14:09

Re: Petition to revert mex cost to 50

Post by Otherside »

+1
User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Re: Petition to revert mex cost to 50

Post by Pxtl »

I find raiding with expensive mexes is _better_. After all, I know that I can pick off a mex and really cost him some money.
luckywaldo7
Posts: 1398
Joined: 17 Sep 2008, 04:36

Re: Petition to revert mex cost to 50

Post by luckywaldo7 »

Pxtl wrote:I find raiding with expensive mexes is _better_. After all, I know that I can pick off a mex and really cost him some money.
I forgot to add, the price was increased from 50 to 100 because the hp was increased from 170 to 525. So raiding really is much less effective. I campaign to revert the hp boost along with the price.

*quick edit*
Something I noticed when the mex was first changed was that while gameplay was slower on most maps, the change was perfect for CCR. Before, everyone would always stall energy and excess metal but the price increase forced people to get metal slower, so there was more time to build energy. This could be why comet is just about the only map that anyway plays CA on anymore. The mex change killed the team game on most maps but works beautifully on comet.
Google_Frog
Moderator
Posts: 2450
Joined: 12 Oct 2007, 09:24

Re: Petition to revert mex cost to 50

Post by Google_Frog »

2. Raiding is generally less rewarding because mexes are harder to kill (especially with jeffy, weasel, blastwing).
Wrong. If you're raiding with any kind of force(eg 2 flash) then you'll kill mexes regardless of them having 500 hp. The difference is that the enemy has to spend an extra 50 to rebuild them. Actually it's just an extra 20 because they leave 60% M wrecks.

Through years of 1v1s it was decided that cheap mexes make raiding worthless as it costs barely anything to rebuild the mexes and cost is usually made many times over reclaiming the few dead raiders. There was no point defending expansion as it could be quickly and cheaply rebuilt once the raiders have left.
3. Mexes cost more then llt's O_o
Mexes are the most powerful unit in the game. They're so Overpowered that we've got to restrict how many you can build and where they can be built. A very large number of games are won by mex spam and games mostly consist of trying to stop the enemy from spamming so much of this OP unit while spamming lots of your own. LLT on the other hand is nowhere near as powerful
Saktoth
Zero-K Developer
Posts: 2665
Joined: 28 Nov 2006, 13:22

Re: Petition to revert mex cost to 50

Post by Saktoth »

You'll have to make an argument better than that im afraid.

1. You should be able to cut a bit of your production to get out of a stall. If you mean that you stall metal too hard early on, that may be a problem. I do find myself stalling metal before i get up enough mexes for good production, and having to cut my factory production or such. A smooth start to the game is important.

2. Mex raiding is not a problem with most stuff, you get much better returns, but you're right about weasel, jeffy and flea. They could do with more DPS (the higher HP mex has made them a bit UP and it wouldnt hurt), or cut the mex HP a bit.

3. Its better, too.

You're right that this change was made partly for CCR. Naked expansion is too good, returns too steep, but thats true on most maps. The higher mex cost makes expansion a more considered choice vs other forms of investment.

Whats killed team games is Licho not advertising and seeding games so much anymore. That always kills CA in general, and it leaves Det, Google and i to seed, we are 1v1'ers.
User avatar
Neddie
Community Lead
Posts: 9406
Joined: 10 Apr 2006, 05:05

Re: Petition to revert mex cost to 50

Post by Neddie »

Why petition? If you have the energy to put up with the argument and the inevitable filibuster, you have the energy to change a few numbers and commit.
User avatar
Otherside
Posts: 2296
Joined: 21 Feb 2006, 14:09

Re: Petition to revert mex cost to 50

Post by Otherside »

on a seperate matter Springlobby(faillobby) killed CA team games because of no autoreload mod and the extra hassle to join CA games
Saktoth
Zero-K Developer
Posts: 2665
Joined: 28 Nov 2006, 13:22

Re: Petition to revert mex cost to 50

Post by Saktoth »

neddiedrow wrote:Why petition? If you have the energy to put up with the argument and the inevitable filibuster, you have the energy to change a few numbers and commit.
Such a change without consultation would be instantly reverted and would probably go a long way towards getting someones rights revoked.

Here is a good place to bring it up.
User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Re: Petition to revert mex cost to 50

Post by Pxtl »

Personally I like CA's expensive extractors, but I may be in the minority - they both have their advantages. I'd say put it to a vote.
User avatar
Neddie
Community Lead
Posts: 9406
Joined: 10 Apr 2006, 05:05

Re: Petition to revert mex cost to 50

Post by Neddie »

It all depends on who would dare make such a change, some are more equal than others, and all.

I prefer the present extractor.

I've played at least forty team games in the last two weeks, Otherside. It isn't difficult to get them going as long as people are not doing something else - it perhaps a minor problem for Test, but Stable is fine. Not to mention - Dave, Journier and I regularly organize and play dozens of hours a week. We seed when possible since as Saktoth says, the remaining LCC players are more interested in 1v1.
luckywaldo7
Posts: 1398
Joined: 17 Sep 2008, 04:36

Re: Petition to revert mex cost to 50

Post by luckywaldo7 »

neddiedrow wrote:Why petition? If you have the energy to put up with the argument and the inevitable filibuster...
Filibuster is op. The only counter is filibuster of my own.
Saktoth wrote:You'll have to make an argument better than that im afraid.

1. You should be able to cut a bit of your production to get out of a stall. If you mean that you stall metal too hard early on, that may be a problem. I do find myself stalling metal before i get up enough mexes for good production, and having to cut my factory production or such. A smooth start to the game is important.
Well yes, before Licho created priorities my early game was usually spent spamming wait commands to try to get those few more mexes up. Priorities helped tremendously; in fact, with the way the economy is at early game you are almost unable to do without it. Early game economy just sucks.
Saktoth wrote:2. Mex raiding is not a problem with most stuff, you get much better returns, but you're right about weasel, jeffy and flea. They could do with more DPS (the higher HP mex has made them a bit UP and it wouldnt hurt), or cut the mex HP a bit.
Well, right now it take 525 damage to kill a 100m mex while it used to take 170 damage to kill a 50m mex. So you are getting less out of your damage.

Also, you could kill one mex in about the some amount of time that it took to kill an old mex, run to another mex, and kill it too. In each case your opponent loses 100m worth. On the other hand, if he intercepts and kills you about 80% of the way through, you will not have managed to kill the new mex, but it would have been enough time to kill at least one of the old mexes. The old mexes meant you got your returns sooner so you were more guaranteed to get returns.
Google Frog wrote:Wrong. If you're raiding with any kind of force(eg 2 flash) then you'll kill mexes regardless of them having 500 hp. The difference is that the enemy has to spend an extra 50 to rebuild them. Actually it's just an extra 20 because they leave 60% M wrecks.
Like I said above, you can kill 2 old mex for every 1 new one. So it averages out to the same. Except you have a better chance of killing one instead of just getting it to 80%.
Saktoth wrote:3. Its better, too.

You're right that this change was made partly for CCR. Naked expansion is too good, returns too steep, but thats true on most maps. The higher mex cost makes expansion a more considered choice vs other forms of investment.

Whats killed team games is Licho not advertising and seeding games so much anymore. That always kills CA in general, and it leaves Det, Google and i to seed, we are 1v1'ers.
Nah, we still play team games. I'm usually around as well as a few other regulars that Neddie pointed out. Its just that nothing gets played other then comet. I've heard more then once that comet is the only map that is good with CA, and I rather agree with that.

And llts are great. They almost always make cost. And if you have two mexes close to each other, that is a 200m investment, so you really shouldn't have any trouble putting down 3 llt's to guard them. For crying out loud, we have BA players complaining about how porcy CA is.

And if you dont put down lllt's at all, the mexes are so beefy that its not hard to counter raiding with your own units. Naked expansion just isn't as vulnerable as it was before.
Google Frog wrote:Mexes are the most powerful unit in the game. They're so Overpowered that we've got to restrict how many you can build and where they can be built. A very large number of games are won by mex spam and games mostly consist of trying to stop the enemy from spamming so much of this OP unit while spamming lots of your own. LLT on the other hand is nowhere near as powerful
Yes you are right, mexes should be restricted. But their restriction was their vulnerability. You needed to protect them so a heroic jeffy or two wouldn't kill a whole bunch of them. It was really easy to put up a bunch of mexes undefended but it was also easy to kill them. It made the game very dynamic.

I'm not coming at this from nowhere, I've hated the new mexes from day1. I much preferred the old 2 mex system. I thought the economy flowed smoother, the game was more dynamic and interesting, and generally less porcy. I played a bit of BA again recently for the first time in ages, and I was surprised by how effective the early game raiding was. It was a beautiful thing.
Neddie wrote:some are more equal than others, and all
Yeah, I can't get even close to pushing this revert against Saktoth or Google Frog alone, much less both of them together. I hope you guys will at least continue to consider my points.
User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Re: Petition to revert mex cost to 50

Post by Pxtl »

I prefer the current model - It encourages raiding the periphery. You find an undefended mex, you pound it with your raiders. You cost him a bunch of metal, but you have to take a minute to do it.

That's my point - taking down a few mexes becomes a worthwhile mission, instead of focussing on complete and utter raep.

The old BA-style approach of fragile/cheap metal extractors encourages plunging right into the home base - you can blast the mexes as you pass by and go right for his heart. "spam out raiders and rape his whole base" may be fun for the hardcores, but for newbies it makes for an unforgiving and miserable game.
User avatar
Otherside
Posts: 2296
Joined: 21 Feb 2006, 14:09

Re: Petition to revert mex cost to 50

Post by Otherside »

even thought i +1'd im not to fussed about this subject there are other things of more importance to resolve :P.
User avatar
DavetheBrave
Posts: 281
Joined: 22 Jun 2005, 02:52

Re: Petition to revert mex cost to 50

Post by DavetheBrave »

Google_Frog wrote:
2. Raiding is generally less rewarding because mexes are harder to kill (especially with jeffy, weasel, blastwing).
Wrong. If you're raiding with any kind of force(eg 2 flash) then you'll kill mexes regardless of them having 500 hp. The difference is that the enemy has to spend an extra 50 to rebuild them. Actually it's just an extra 20 because they leave 60% M wrecks.
This is a valid point, BUT you forgot to follow the line of reasoning all the way! BECAUSE it is so rewarding to raid each one, all the more expensive mex does in reality is make it extremely important to defend each one of your mex. This is why you see huge turretspam in so many CA 1v1s. CA becomes extremely porcy if someone does not win in the first 3 minutes.
You're right that this change was made partly for CCR. Naked expansion is too good, returns too steep, but thats true on most maps. The higher mex cost makes expansion a more considered choice vs other forms of investment.
Your right in that it really needs to be considered vs other investment (boostrush, fusion). But again, this usually just shapes the first 3 minutes as quite random, and very RPS (1v1s). While this can be fun, it also gets very annoying very quickly. And, like I say, before long it just becomes turret spam.

Finally, the higher hp really makes the micro in raiding much more tedius. Suddenly, I have to make sure my units target the llt before the mex every time, where it wouldn't have mattered so much. Thats a real pain because you cant give attack and move orders at the same time. And No, I wont use the swarmer widget. It breaks the whole hiding behind buildings when attacking an enemy base.

And like waldo said, raiding really takes far too long and takes the possibly the most important resource in the game away: TIME.

I do agree that it works WELL ENOUGH for CCR but I'd have to say that it really breaks on other maps.
Google_Frog
Moderator
Posts: 2450
Joined: 12 Oct 2007, 09:24

Re: Petition to revert mex cost to 50

Post by Google_Frog »

How exactly is this ruining teamgames? It costs a little extra to expand and you can no longer isntantly re-expand after being raided. I don't get it.
luckywaldo7 wrote:Well, right now it take 525 damage to kill a 100m mex while it used to take 170 damage to kill a 50m mex. So you are getting less out of your damage.

Also, you could kill one mex in about the some amount of time that it took to kill an old mex, run to another mex, and kill it too. In each case your opponent loses 100m worth. On the other hand, if he intercepts and kills you about 80% of the way through, you will not have managed to kill the new mex, but it would have been enough time to kill at least one of the old mexes. The old mexes meant you got your returns sooner so you were more guaranteed to get returns.
Google Frog wrote:Wrong. If you're raiding with any kind of force(eg 2 flash) then you'll kill mexes regardless of them having 500 hp. The difference is that the enemy has to spend an extra 50 to rebuild them. Actually it's just an extra 20 because they leave 60% M wrecks.
Like I said above, you can kill 2 old mex for every 1 new one. So it averages out to the same. Except you have a better chance of killing one instead of just getting it to 80%.
Mexes don't work like that. For the attacker the most important thing is to reach the mex. You can't just compare their hp/cost and say raiding is worse because there is more cost around to kill as well due to their limited nature.
And llts are great. They almost always make cost. And if you have two mexes close to each other, that is a 200m investment, so you really shouldn't have any trouble putting down 3 llt's to guard them. For crying out loud, we have BA players complaining about how porcy CA is.
You don't have to make that many LLTs. The mex might never be attacked so it could be wasted M that could be spent expanding more.
Your right in that it really needs to be considered vs other investment (boostrush, fusion). But again, this usually just shapes the first 3 minutes as quite random, and very RPS (1v1s). While this can be fun, it also gets very annoying very quickly. And, like I say, before long it just becomes turret spam.
This is one of the reasons I don't like comet. The other is that there are so few viable units and all comet games are just slight variations on each other.
luckywaldo7
Posts: 1398
Joined: 17 Sep 2008, 04:36

Re: Petition to revert mex cost to 50

Post by luckywaldo7 »

Google Frog wrote:How exactly is this ruining teamgames? It costs a little extra to expand and you can no longer isntantly re-expand after being raided. I don't get it.
It's not like teamgames are entirely ruined. I still play and will continue to, it's just that the awkward start discourages people, especially new players, to continue to play. You have a super fast boost start, then usually end up in an awkward stall as you try to put up your next couple mexes.

Right now, the best start seems to be to put up 3 mexes (or 4 if you can manage it), llt or two, bunch of winds, and a nano. Start your factory and let the nano finish the factory while you walk your com up and take a couple more mexes along the way. Doing any start that isn't an eco start will kill you because you won't be able to put more mexes up.
Google Frog wrote:Mexes don't work like that. For the attacker the most important thing is to reach the mex. You can't just compare their hp/cost and say raiding is worse because there is more cost around to kill as well due to their limited nature.
It is most important to reach the mex because your opponent is going to try to stop you. It is easier to stop you if your units are bogged down trying to finish the mex off.

Granted, this isn't much of a problem if you have a couple flash or gators. But jeffies or weasels are barely useful for raiding mexes now.
Google Frog wrote:You don't have to make that many LLTs. The mex might never be attacked so it could be wasted M that could be spent expanding more.
You could also not worry about expanding either. Who knows, you opponent might not try to fight at all and just want to be friends with you.

Seriously though, that is a very valid point, although I'm not talking about splurging on tons of llt's for every mex spot. You would place them strategically of course to cover areas with higher metal concentration or where they could block access to your base or possibly use them aggressively. Not that any of that is any different then before. The higher cost mexes just encourages it.





Its not that I am a brick wall that refuses to understand any of your points. I think your reasoning for a more expensive mex is valid and that a more expensive mex is strategically better. My issue is that the current game is not balanced around the expensive mex, it was balanced around the old one. The old mex, imho, just played better with everything else.
Google_Frog
Moderator
Posts: 2450
Joined: 12 Oct 2007, 09:24

Re: Petition to revert mex cost to 50

Post by Google_Frog »

It's not like teamgames are entirely ruined. I still play and will continue to, it's just that the awkward start discourages people, especially new players, to continue to play. You have a super fast boost start, then usually end up in an awkward stall as you try to put up your next couple mexes.

Right now, the best start seems to be to put up 3 mexes (or 4 if you can manage it), llt or two, bunch of winds, and a nano. Start your factory and let the nano finish the factory while you walk your com up and take a couple more mexes along the way. Doing any start that isn't an eco start will kill you because you won't be able to put more mexes up.
Any problem with the start due to expensive mexes can be fixed by increasing start boost.
luckywaldo7
Posts: 1398
Joined: 17 Sep 2008, 04:36

Re: Petition to revert mex cost to 50

Post by luckywaldo7 »

Google_Frog wrote:
It's not like teamgames are entirely ruined. I still play and will continue to, it's just that the awkward start discourages people, especially new players, to continue to play. You have a super fast boost start, then usually end up in an awkward stall as you try to put up your next couple mexes.

Right now, the best start seems to be to put up 3 mexes (or 4 if you can manage it), llt or two, bunch of winds, and a nano. Start your factory and let the nano finish the factory while you walk your com up and take a couple more mexes along the way. Doing any start that isn't an eco start will kill you because you won't be able to put more mexes up.
Any problem with the start due to expensive mexes can be fixed by increasing start boost.
Er, I think that could really help but I wouldn't call it a cure-all to any start problem. I think a lot of the problem actually derives from the 1:1:1 cost.

Energy stall has always been brutal in CA because you can't just put up a few metal-only solars. You need the energy to get the energy that you need. You can't get energy because you don't have energy. IIRC, this is why solars used to be so cheap; so you could get a little bit energy relatively quickly, so you had more energy to get the next one a bit quicker, etc. After wind was overridden on maps, it wasn't so necessary because the wind was cheap and averages better income then solar anywhere anyway. To add to those cheap winds you have your com, which produces 7.2 energy, and facs and cons which each produce 0.3 energy. Its not much but it adds up to help.

Metal doesn't have quite so many sources early game. You can't put up mexes cheaply like wind (therefore our discussion). Your com does produce 3 metal, which is something I guess, although maybe it could be increased to match with energy. I'm not sure about making factories and cons as metal makers though, even if it is a pittance of a metal income.

Funnily enough, come late game the roles are swapped if you need to rebuild. If your com is dead trying to rebuild energy is crazy frustrating, while there is usually plenty of wrecks to suck metal from.

I dunno, maybe the economy just needs to be gutted and rethought. 1:1:1 is imho one of the best things CA did but it really makes for a brutally unforgiving economy sometimes.
User avatar
CarRepairer
Cursed Zero-K Developer
Posts: 3359
Joined: 07 Nov 2007, 21:48

Re: Petition to revert mex cost to 50

Post by CarRepairer »

One thing I didn't like about 2 old mexes (170 HP and 1500 HP - vast difference!) is it's irritating to know that you should upgrade weak ones to strong ones but it's pain-in-the-ass micro which begs for a widget. I know BA has such widgets. Morphing was an option at one point but other devs didn't want it anymore.
Post Reply

Return to “Zero-K”