How to fix the problem with oil-denying half-built derricks?

[Emdek]

JDW, more realism plus improved behavior can't be bad?

[JDW]

JDW, more realism plus improved behavior can't be bad?

Not bad at all

[Iluvalar]

Interesting, five people think that it's better if a half-built derrick never burned at all after it's destroyed. Even if it was built to near 99%

I think you are overestimating the time it take to build. It's not a marvel of the world like in civ . If you build it in a position you dont have time to end it, too bad for you.

[JDW]

I think you are overestimating the time it take to build. It's not a marvel of the world like in civ . If you build it in a position you dont have time to end it, too bad for you.

There's no harm in looking at things from as many different angles as possible. There's always something that we may have missed out.

I am on the border when it comes to deciding between burn being removed entirely or it being made proportional to it''s HP. The reason I see burn being left proportional is because it has always been in the game since the game was released, and some of the old players would not be very happy about it, it would indeed be a new feel for them. There's another reason, if a truck has spent some time to build a derrick, then it would be fair to delay the opponent for some proprtional time. But perhaps trying to kill out that amount of hp is delay enough.

And the reason I see why burn needs to be removed completely is that it is penalty enough that you have to destroy a structure with free hp, so there would be no reason to have it burning after that as well and increase the delay.

[Iluvalar]

Berg gave me another idea that will rejoin many other ideas already suggested :
Add a 2 stats to the structure that can be positive or negative. And that would be a direct power production per seconds.

This way we could introduce that nuclear reactor the easy way. And the same time add a maintenance cost to the derricks.

It is not my favorite option, but it is one that I conceive and that could be easy implemented.

2 stats because : finished and unfinished would be required. We could add the same for unfinished pgens.

[Iluvalar]

And the reason I see why burn needs to be removed completely is that it is penalty enough that you have to destroy a structure with free hp, so there would be no reason to have it burning after that as well and increase the delay.

You dont get it, the burning is to favour attackers when they are raiding deep inside the enemy base.

That make the derricks even if they are free (or nearly free) a target of choice. In other word, the burning is there for when the owner of the derrick is still in possession of the zone at the end. Not when a dumb truck tried to screw you on your own side.

[JDW]

You dont get it, the burning is to favour attackers when they are raiding deep inside the enemy base.

So far my views have been about early truck rushes, but it's good to see you looking at things differently and more towards the endgame.

That make the derricks even if they are free (or nearly free) a target of choice. In other word, the burning is there for when the owner of the derrick is still in possession of the zone at the end. Not when a dumb truck tried to screw you on your own side.

Unfortunately, i didn't really understand what you are trying to say here. Could you please elaborate a little on the matter?

[Shadow Wolf TJC]

@Iluvalar: I don't think anyone who voted to reduce and/or eliminate oil fires for destroying incomplete derricks also wanted to remove burning for completed derricks.

[Iluvalar]

Unfortunately, i didn't really understand what you are trying to say here. Could you please elaborate a little on the matter?

Yeah of course.

The oil, is one of the particularity of the game. That's a "resource" that is intentionality given by the map maker to the players.

The principle of them is that you dont pay a fair price for that, it's mainly given to you. Last time I checked, the fair price for an oil derrick was ~300$ . That's the point where you would consider to spend your power elsewhere instead .

So when the designers tried to make the derrick a target for an infiltration attack. They realised that as long as it was so cheap, there was no reason to target them at all. That's why they made the oil burn. So the owner "pay" for the lost of his derricks long enough to be worthy as a target.

[Cyp]

...

The principle of them is that you dont pay a fair price for that, it's mainly given to you. Last time I checked, the fair price for an oil derrick was ~300$ . That's the point where you would consider to spend your power elsewhere instead .

...

Does that mean that if derricks costed 400 power, that you wouldn't build any, because they're more than the fair price?

[Iluvalar]

in NRS, yep absolutely, you'd build civilian, financial center, you'd keep interest and you'd research reactors with more emphasis.

But in standard... I'm not sure... but I suppose we would simply crash on each others viper wheel mg with the starting power. Nobody would take time to build a derrick at that price.

[JDW]

You dont get it, the burning is to favour attackers when they are raiding deep inside the enemy base.

The principle of them is that you dont pay a fair price for that, it's mainly given to you. Last time I checked, the fair price for an oil derrick was ~300$ . That's the point where you would consider to spend your power elsewhere instead .

So when the designers tried to make the derrick a target for an infiltration attack. They realised that as long as it was so cheap, there was no reason to target them at all. That's why they made the oil burn. So the owner "pay" for the lost of his derricks long enough to be worthy as a target.

I'm sorry but I believe burning wells were mainly designed to favor the player who lost the derrick. It's pretty simple really. When a player's derrick is lost to an opponent, the opponent will have to wait for the burning to stop before he can build his own derrick on the well he just captured. This delay for the opponent should give the attacked player enough time to gather up an army so as to allow hm to fight back and try and recapture his lost resource before the opponent get too strong for him to handle. That's all. No rocket science involved here. Anything else that you may see is only a result of how this dynamic was made to work. And I can say this confidently without making any claims that I may have obtained this information from the game designers themselves.

[Shadow Wolf TJC]

@Iluvalar and JDW: I believe that the burning wells are meant to deny the resource to both players. It delays the attacker's ability to take over the oil field, and it delays the victim's ability to recapture the oil field.

[JDW]

and it delays the victim's ability to recapture the oil field.

Even if the one minute of burn time never existed, the victim would most likely not be able to recapture the oil well within a minute of the well being destroyed. He would be too weak to fight off the stronger opponent, which made him the victim to begin with. He would more likely regroup/upgrade his units, form a bigger army, or retreat for repair and come back fighting harder with probably more strength in numbers.

[zany]

I picked all options because I can
do a real poll with only one option allowed