Defence economy balance

Place to discuss the game balance, recipes, health, enemies mining etc.
User avatar
AmericanPatriot
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 259
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:47 am
Contact:

Re: Defence economy balance

Post by AmericanPatriot »

Qon wrote:
Mon Aug 24, 2020 7:11 pm
[...]
+1
:D

SirSmuggler
Inserter
Inserter
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue May 24, 2016 1:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Defence economy balance

Post by SirSmuggler »

When it comes to power usage, isn't continuous fire a bit misleading?

Considering my own experience (biased as it might be) my turrets spends most of their time doing nothing, and firing only a small portion of them time. Where does the energy consumption calculation end up if we factor in turrets firing say 10% of the time? If I'm not missing something here, lasers will drain energy (even if a small amount) even while not firing? Granted the same is true for the assembly machines producing ammo, they also draw a small amount of energy while idle, but is it comparable to what laser turrets draw?

Qon
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1523
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2016 6:27 am
Contact:

Re: Defence economy balance

Post by Qon »

mmmPI wrote:
Tue Aug 25, 2020 1:59 am
And maybe the opposite for laser turret energy consumption should increase with research scaling with their damage, make them cheaper to fire at first but with even less damage,
Well, there is laser turret shooting speed research, which does just that.

Hannu
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 803
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 6:27 am
Contact:

Re: Defence economy balance

Post by Hannu »

netmand wrote:
Mon Aug 24, 2020 4:08 pm
Have you considered that your defensive strategies just need improvement?
There is no need for improving at default settings.
At Chemical (blue) science I'm still using Firearm magazines.
I use gun turrets through the whole game. In my opinion they are relatively interestingly balanced. They are not massive but somewhat significant resource sink even in endgame (I make my vanilla bases usually 100-150 SPM level without beacons).

Lasers are no brainers. Yes, you can blackout your electricity once at first game, but with a little planning it is easily avoidable. Few extra rows of steam engines does not cost anything (at default settings). Flame throwers seem to be specially for deathworlds, at least one order of magnitude overpowered for normal games.

In my opinion it would be good to increase cost of lasers significantly. They had relatively large power drain, which was good, but I think they removed it. Gun turrets could be basic defense for long walls and lasers or flame throwers powerful but expensive special guns for most attacked targets.

I never have any turret firing constantly; and your analysis doesn't factor in bonuses and logistics.
I have had situation when full blue belt of copper in ammo production was not enough. It was previous version (before uranium ammo came), but very probably average was more than one turret continuously. I make intentionally my end game mines near borders and do not clear nests with cannons, so it was far from optimal defense (that's why I wrote that improvements or optimality is not needed), but I like to get more interesting resource flow than just to one product.

All I wrote refers to default settings. I know that it not valid with very high biter settings or poor resource settings.

Hannu
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 803
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 6:27 am
Contact:

Re: Defence economy balance

Post by Hannu »

Qon wrote:
Tue Aug 25, 2020 7:30 am
Well, there is laser turret shooting speed research, which does just that.
It increases laser power. Both damage per second and energy consumption. It is very much like bullet shooting speed, you produce more damage at certain time but keep damage per used stuff constant.

Nefrums
Long Handed Inserter
Long Handed Inserter
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 12:57 am
Contact:

Re: Defence economy balance

Post by Nefrums »

Qon wrote:
Mon Aug 24, 2020 7:11 pm
Nefrums wrote:
Mon Aug 24, 2020 11:29 am
Here is an example on what infrastructure you need to have to keep three turrets firing constantly.

To me it feels wrong that gun turrets require 8x the power as laser turrets do.
All research up to pre utility and production:

DPS for gun turrets with red ammo:
(10 + 11) * (8 + 17.92) = 544.32

DPS for laser turret:
(20 + 22) * (1.5 + 1.35) = 119.7

544.32 / 119.7 = 4.5474

So while gun turrets require 8x the power, they only have to fire for 4.5 times shorter to kill an enemy (resistances ignored) which also means less repair and less risk of getting overrun. You don't launch a rocket from earth with an Ion drive even though they are much more efficient than chemical rockets. The goal is not to minmax resources, it's to protect the base. And that's what bullets do here.

So taking DPS into account, now lasers are no longer 8x more efficient. They are 1.76 times more energy efficient (damage/joule). But they also have energy drain which will dwarf the actual firing cost if you have a thick and long wall of them around your base. And to get enough DPS you need much more laser turrets than gun turrets, which means more energy drain and much more turrets to produce. And the time it takes to recoup the energy that is used to produce all those laser turrets is going to take a while.

I made a 0~ drain laser turret blueprint. But basically no one is using it so it doesn't really affet calculations. Also drain is only really an issue for a big base. For a chemical science base the amount of laser turrets you have is going to be limited by your production of laser turrets enough that you can't even get high drain. Which also tells us that they are expensive.
You have to give context to your dps calculations.
Example: blue sci upgrades vs big biter:

rof * damage

gun turret with yellow ammo:
10*2 * ((5*1.8^2)-8)*0.9 = 147,6

gun turret with red ammo:
10*2 * ((8*1.8^2)-8)*0.9 = 322.56

laser turret:
1.5*1.9 * 20*2.1 = 119,7

Flamer turret, is a bit special as it has 3 damage effects:
(3*30 +13 +100) * 1.6 = 324.8

If you use yellow or red ammo does not have significant impact on the balance point i was making. yellow costs 4 plates, red cost 14 plates.
So with the example above red ammo costs 3.5x as much and do 2.2x the damage. not insignificantly more expensive per damage, but does not affect my point. that the gap is to wide.

Also gun turrets (and laser turrets) get damaged in attacks as they do not out range spitters. Flame turrets are completly safe as long as the walls hold.

mmmPI
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 542
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:10 pm
Contact:

Re: Defence economy balance

Post by mmmPI »

Hannu wrote:
Tue Aug 25, 2020 10:46 am
Qon wrote:
Tue Aug 25, 2020 7:30 am
Well, there is laser turret shooting speed research, which does just that.
It increases laser power. Both damage per second and energy consumption. It is very much like bullet shooting speed, you produce more damage at certain time but keep damage per used stuff constant.
What i suggested was to factor in even more increase in power cost as time goes. You shoot more, you use more power.( what's true actually). But also each shot dealing more damage individually, you use more power per shot.( what i suggest is added as a "nerf"). a shot cost 800kj of energy, make it less at first, more at the end.

In my mind this change is supposed to discourage players to try and feed their increasing amount of laser turret with steam engines. If the 2 different sources of cost-increase are multiplicative with each other (you shoot more, each shot cost more). Then the power consumption per damage goes from linear to exponential. Giving strong indications that nuclear or solar power are needed at this stage.

I assumed power consumption late game to be "easy" once you just have to plop down another solar array , or when you have a functionning nuclear reactor design.

Roughly you could have laser turret cost 100% more energy once you hit the first infinite science ( and the cap at which the cost increase goes back from multiplicative to linear) but stays unchanged with pre-purple-and-yellow-science tech, and are 50% cheaper to fire but also 50% less effective before any research.


Then you would need to compare the production of ammo needed for gun turrets versus :

1) early game cheaper-to-fire-lower-damage laser turret. => stressing the fact that laser turrets themselves are expensive to make, you would need more of them if they are weaker, so overall the size/requirement for "gun turrets and ammo productions", would find itself looks comparatively not so bad compared to the size/requirement of producing "many weak laser turrets " for same defense potential. make player think : " this will be good later with more science, but it's still too early i can't build enough". ( adressing the "gap" )


2) mid game (all blue research done) , unchanged compared to now, same thing for everyone. Laser turrets are far superior. giving player incentive to rely on them rather than the gun turrets for the main defense, i think that's how the game is envisionned.

Only thing changing is that you would be told laser turret will have a decreasing amount of energy/damage ratio when looking at the tech tree. Which is the same mentality as when you use speed module or red ammo. You consume 50% more energy for 20% more speed, but it's a price you are ok to pay for saving on numbers of machine providing you consider energy cheap, and it gives you incentive to plan for making energy cheap , like automating solar or setting up nuclear reactor. Turrets be less energy efficient, but capable of delivering more damage per turret hence reducing the amount of turrets per area you cover instead switching clearly the focus on the energy source. => "discouraging player from using even more steam engine."


3) late game, laser turrets cost 2x as much energy for the same thing as now. not much of a change once you are late game and everything is automated. The way to get there is made a bit longer though since you would need more energy for the same thing, the infrastructure for "energy for laser" would be slightly less irrelevant compared to "ammo production" but not so slightly beforehand.

This alongside with more ammo in each or some magazine, and a higher at start but decreasing with research oil consumption for flameturrets; each or all three could potentially adress the point made about the defence economy balance. Changing a bit the pace of the game, but only indirectly the overall late-game equilibrium.

Yoyobuae
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 421
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 11:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Defence economy balance

Post by Yoyobuae »

A research that's supposed to be an upgrade SHOULD NOT put the player in a (irreversible) situation of where energy consumption increases exponentially. That really risks the situation where a player "paints themselves into a corner" without any means to escape. Technologies cannot be unresearched, bonuses cannot be temporarily disabled.

Theikkru
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 280
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 2:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Defence economy balance

Post by Theikkru »

I'm going to throw in with nefrums here. I do think there is a rather large disparity in the 3 defense methods, but I'd like to throw my 2¢ about gun turrets into the ring:
halve the recipe costs for at least the yellow and red mags.
I bring this up due to turret creep. (Don't worry, I'm not trying to derail the thread.) I know a lot of people, myself included, feel that turret creep cheapens early-game combat due to its overwhelming effectiveness. The problem with adding more damage or bullets to the magazines in order to reduce running costs is that it would make turret creep feel even more overpowered, since in those cases the limiting factor isn't resources or base logistics, but what can be crammed into one's backpack or brandished at the end of the mouse cursor. Reducing the production costs of magazines, on the other hand, would reduce the running costs of gun turrets in a logistics-limited context (such as base defense) without buffing turrets "in the wild" as a side effect.

Post Reply

Return to “Balancing”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: vrikrentom