| 1 |
[q]Can the nanoframe fade out like in classic TA? I can't think of many good reasons for a nanoframe to hang out.[/q]
|
1 |
[q]Can the nanoframe fade out like in classic TA? I can't think of many good reasons for a nanoframe to hang out.[/q]
|
| 2 |
Nanoframes hang around for two reasons:
|
2 |
Nanoframes hang around for two reasons:
|
| 3 |
* Avoiding free BP.
|
3 |
* Avoiding free BP.
|
| 4 |
* Decay seems to just introduce UI issues, rather than reduce the power of the worst nanoframe spam.
|
4 |
* Decay seems to just introduce UI issues, rather than reduce the power of the worst nanoframe spam.
|
| 5 |
\n
|
5 |
\n
|
| 6 |
Decay was initially removed due to an aversion to the free buildpower implied by decay. The free BP comes from the fact that decay returned metal to the players storage, so the nanoframe was essentially reclaiming itself without requiring any constructor. I like this approach, it's neat, but it was @Saktoth that really pushed it. He generally wanted BP to be quite limited, to reduce the size of "forced stalls", while I thought having 20 BP and 6 metal income at the start of the game was fine as it makes construction prioritisation starker. But I generally think constructor-like logistics abilities should be mostly limited to constructors. The exceptions (morph, Puppy) have the ability to stand in for constructor BP as a central ability, not just an extra bonus.
|
6 |
Decay was initially removed due to an aversion to the free buildpower implied by decay. The free BP comes from the fact that decay returned metal to the players storage, so the nanoframe was essentially reclaiming itself without requiring any constructor. I like this approach, it's neat, but it was @Saktoth that really pushed it. He generally wanted BP to be quite limited, to reduce the size of "forced stalls", while I thought having 20 BP and 6 metal income at the start of the game was fine as it makes construction prioritisation starker. But I generally think constructor-like logistics abilities should be mostly limited to constructors. The exceptions (morph, Puppy) have the ability to stand in for constructor BP as a central ability, not just an extra bonus.
|
| 7 |
\n
|
7 |
\n
|
| 8 |
The UI issues come from a conflict between the principal of smart units and the goal of using decay to prevent nanoframe spam. This is due to the abilities implied by the existence of decay. The way decay worked is that nanoframes would hang around for 10 or so seconds, then start reclaiming themselves, with the reclaim rate (maybe) ramping up over time (not sure about the ramp up, it was a while ago). Constructors working on a nanoframe would reset the decay timer. But here's the thing, the constructor just has to be "working", it doesn't actually have to spend any resources. If the constructor had to spend resources then manual priorities via 'Wait' would lead to unwanted decay, and full ZK construction priorities wouldn't work either. Anyway, the implication is that constructors have the ability to reset a decay timer just by being close to a nanoframe and looking at it for 1/30th of a second. In theory a single Caretaker could negate decay for dozens of nanoframes in its range and still have plenty of time left over to build or repair at a slightly reduced rate. Not giving all constructors such an innate ability would be a case of stupid units. In short, adding decay does nothing to:
|
8 |
The UI issues come from a conflict between the principal of smart units and the goal of using decay to prevent nanoframe spam. This is due to the abilities implied by the existence of decay. The way decay worked is that nanoframes would hang around for 10 or so seconds, then start reclaiming themselves, with the reclaim rate (maybe) ramping up over time (not sure about the ramp up, it was a while ago). Constructors working on a nanoframe would reset the decay timer. But here's the thing, the constructor just has to be "working", it doesn't actually have to spend any resources. If the constructor had to spend resources then manual priorities via 'Wait' would lead to unwanted decay, and full ZK construction priorities wouldn't work either. Anyway, the implication is that constructors have the ability to reset a decay timer just by being close to a nanoframe and looking at it for 1/30th of a second. In theory a single Caretaker could negate decay for dozens of nanoframes in its range and still have plenty of time left over to build or repair at a slightly reduced rate. Not giving all constructors such an innate ability would be a case of stupid units. In short, adding decay does nothing to:
|
| 9 |
*
Nanoframes
that
were
created
in
the
last
10
or
second
seconds.
|
9 |
*
Nanoframes
that
were
created
in
the
last
10
or
so
seconds.
|
| 10 |
* Nanoframes within range of a constructor.
|
10 |
* Nanoframes within range of a constructor.
|
| 11 |
I very rarely see nanoframe spam that doesn't fall into at least one of these categories.
|
11 |
I very rarely see nanoframe spam that doesn't fall into at least one of these categories.
|
| 12 |
\n
|
12 |
\n
|
| 13 |
On top of all this, I consider combat nanoframe spam mostly "solved" by the following systems:
|
13 |
On top of all this, I consider combat nanoframe spam mostly "solved" by the following systems:
|
| 14 |
* Nanoframes start off very flat, making them unable to block projectiles.
|
14 |
* Nanoframes start off very flat, making them unable to block projectiles.
|
| 15 |
* The Avoid Bad Targets state include anti-nanoframe spam measures at one of its lower settings, for nanoframes below some cost threshold.
|
15 |
* The Avoid Bad Targets state include anti-nanoframe spam measures at one of its lower settings, for nanoframes below some cost threshold.
|
| 16 |
Finally, not decaying just seems convenient. Accidentally moving a constructor away isn't so punishing. New players who do so can see the partially constructed building, instead of having the building disappear confusingly so that they can't find it when they look back.
|
16 |
Finally, not decaying just seems convenient. Accidentally moving a constructor away isn't so punishing. New players who do so can see the partially constructed building, instead of having the building disappear confusingly so that they can't find it when they look back.
|
the friendly war of ninja mex