On/Off mex

On/Off mex

Classic game design, maintained to please you...

Moderator: Content Developer

User avatar
AF
AI Developer
Posts: 20687
Joined: 14 Sep 2004, 11:32

On/Off mex

Post by AF »

The level 1 metal extractor can be turned on and off, isnt this a bit pointless? It should always be turned on!! The switch should be removed
User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Re: On/Off mex

Post by Pxtl »

When you're really, really e-stalling, it makes sense to just select-all and turn off _everything_.
YokoZar
Posts: 883
Joined: 15 Jul 2007, 22:02

Re: On/Off mex

Post by YokoZar »

e-stalling should turn off all construction before it starts shutting down mexes though.

Maybe mexes should just have their energy cost removed entirely, I'm not quite sure it adds anything to the game.
User avatar
lurker
Posts: 3842
Joined: 08 Jan 2007, 06:13

Re: On/Off mex

Post by lurker »

I removed it from CA. 1 solar per 7 mexes does what exactly to add to the game?
User avatar
Niobium
Posts: 456
Joined: 07 Dec 2008, 02:35

Re: On/Off mex

Post by Niobium »

YokoZar wrote:Maybe mexes should just have their energy cost removed entirely, I'm not quite sure it adds anything to the game.
+1, is nothing but an annoyance.
Regret
Posts: 2086
Joined: 18 Aug 2007, 19:04

Re: On/Off mex

Post by Regret »

Clueless people are clueless.

Mex needing e means you have to actually watch out for e stalling as then you lose on metal income from mexes.

It's very logical, and adds depth to the game.

You don't have power = shit doesn't work.
Nonoce
Posts: 8
Joined: 31 Aug 2009, 17:34

Re: On/Off mex

Post by Nonoce »

That's one of the 1000 things that add up to give you the edge in ba if you care about them.
==Troy==
Posts: 376
Joined: 29 Oct 2008, 15:55

Re: On/Off mex

Post by ==Troy== »

To be honest, E-stalling the mexes is fair, but the general queue for the resources should get a complete overhaul.

Energy "consumption" queue :
1) energy independent buildings/units (with an exception to antinuke)
2) Low-E (HLT/LLT/etc) consuming defensive buildings
3) mexes
4) High-E consumption building/units (including nuke)
5) Construction units
6) MetalMakers.


That way you dont have to spend your precious time on microing the nanos on-off. And sorry, passive nanos give away too much energy to metal makers and rest of not so improtant stuff.

Having to micro the 1000 inconsistencies in BA to get an edge over the enemy is similar to using the exploits to comnap. (yes, there is a widget for that, but you could do it with microing and a bit of luck too).
Regret
Posts: 2086
Joined: 18 Aug 2007, 19:04

Re: On/Off mex

Post by Regret »

==Troy== wrote:Having to micro the 1000 inconsistencies in BA to get an edge over the enemy is similar to using the exploits to comnap. (yes, there is a widget for that, but you could do it with microing and a bit of luck too).
You better be trolling.
User avatar
1v0ry_k1ng
Posts: 4656
Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 10:24

Re: On/Off mex

Post by 1v0ry_k1ng »

If it didnt have the ability to turn on and off, mex would be able to continue extracting metal during an e-stall, which is bad

/thread
User avatar
JohannesH
Posts: 1793
Joined: 07 Apr 2009, 12:43

Re: On/Off mex

Post by JohannesH »

Not having to micro the 1000 inconsistencies in BA to get an edge over the enemy is similar to not having to micro to comnap?

Also turning them off will make them not show on the metalmap, which can be useful
User avatar
lurker
Posts: 3842
Joined: 08 Jan 2007, 06:13

Re: On/Off mex

Post by lurker »

Regret wrote:Mex needing e means you have to actually watch out for e stalling as then you lose on metal income from mexes.
In effect I have to give wait commands to my constructors when my energy reserves bottom out instead of things prioritizing by themselves. How does this add depth? Mexes take so little power that turning them off doesn't let anything else of note run, so it's less a matter of choices and more a mandatory button push.

But I think it would add notable depth if mexes took maybe 10 energy.
User avatar
bartvbl
Posts: 346
Joined: 21 Mar 2009, 15:55

Re: On/Off mex

Post by bartvbl »

What would the gain be of removing it?
If you dont bother in the first place to be able to turn it on or off, and 1 or two people might use it now and then, then leave it.
Sure, you will save some bytes of compiled COB, but that's all. So I really can't see any reason for taking it out :P
User avatar
lurker
Posts: 3842
Joined: 08 Jan 2007, 06:13

Re: On/Off mex

Post by lurker »

An extra button hurts the UI.

You might turn mexes off accidentally.
==Troy==
Posts: 376
Joined: 29 Oct 2008, 15:55

Re: On/Off mex

Post by ==Troy== »

lurker wrote:
Regret wrote:Mex needing e means you have to actually watch out for e stalling as then you lose on metal income from mexes.
In effect I have to give wait commands to my constructors when my energy reserves bottom out instead of things prioritizing by themselves. How does this add depth? Mexes take so little power that turning them off doesn't let anything else of note run, so it's less a matter of choices and more a mandatory button push.

But I think it would add notable depth if mexes took maybe 10 energy.

Sorry for my previous statement, but in general I meant this ^.

And moho metal extractors take up 15 E, although with t2 E production it really is as tiny as the t1 mex.

BA is not the only mod which misses out a sane priority queue


Edit :

And ideally, tbh, it would be best if you could set up the queue yourself. I.E.

MMs : On at 80 and above %
Mexes : On at 5 and above %
Builders : On at 40 and above %

etc.
User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Re: On/Off mex

Post by Pxtl »

You could make a widget that would turn on/off/wait things in layers in the bottom 20% of the energy bar, and even let the notches be manual. For example, I never, ever, ever want my jammers to turn off. I would put the jammers below even the metal-extractors.
YokoZar
Posts: 883
Joined: 15 Jul 2007, 22:02

Re: On/Off mex

Post by YokoZar »

Regret wrote:Clueless people are clueless.

Mex needing e means you have to actually watch out for e stalling as then you lose on metal income from mexes.

It's very logical, and adds depth to the game.

You don't have power = shit doesn't work.
This isn't depth, it's frustration. Yes, there's some skill in knowing the fine details about how dumb the game's built-in priorities are, and you can gain a small advantage by working around them (manually waiting a constructor or having an e-stall widget), but this is a huge distraction from what makes BA actually fun.
JohannesH wrote:Also turning them off will make them not show on the metalmap, which can be useful
This is just an engine bug honestly. Metal map should respect line of sight.
YokoZar
Posts: 883
Joined: 15 Jul 2007, 22:02

Re: On/Off mex

Post by YokoZar »

While we're on the subject: metal extractors should turn off when a moho mine is built next to them.

This is something that's way too micro-management intensive for most players to do manually when they hit T2 since the game is way busier with more interesting decisions. But someone could easily write a widget, and then they'd have yet another advantage due to better widgets.

This issue goes away entirely if we remove the mex energy usage.
User avatar
TheFatController
Balanced Annihilation Developer
Posts: 1177
Joined: 10 Dec 2006, 18:46

Re: On/Off mex

Post by TheFatController »

I support the energy cost for mex's as it means you need to properly manage your energy economy early on and can lose all important starting metal by not doing so.

The on/off button is required to disable mex's when you stall so this can't be removed.

Players are free to write or download a widget to manage this or block off commands should they wish.
User avatar
JohannesH
Posts: 1793
Joined: 07 Apr 2009, 12:43

Re: On/Off mex

Post by JohannesH »

YokoZar wrote:
Regret wrote:Clueless people are clueless.

Mex needing e means you have to actually watch out for e stalling as then you lose on metal income from mexes.

It's very logical, and adds depth to the game.

You don't have power = shit doesn't work.
This isn't depth, it's frustration. Yes, there's some skill in knowing the fine details about how dumb the game's built-in priorities are, and you can gain a small advantage by working around them (manually waiting a constructor or having an e-stall widget), but this is a huge distraction from what makes BA actually fun.
Different people like different things in the game, and are good at different things. If you like econ management, it is arguably more fun to try and handle more complex econ. If you dont like econ management, playing CA is an option.
JohannesH wrote:Also turning them off will make them not show on the metalmap, which can be useful
This is just an engine bug honestly. Metal map should respect line of sight.
It does...
Post Reply

Return to “Balanced Annihilation”