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

[NoQ]

Nope, I still don't understand.
You want to distinguish neutral oil derricks from scavenger oil derricks? Why?

[Emdek]

NoQ, in this idea I would disallow of taking over of extra derricks by putting neutral structures on them (if there are no Scavengers), but this might be overkill...

[NoQ]

So you want only *some* of the extra oil derricks to be pre-captured?

[Emdek]

Yes, only those really "extra" ones, as iap stated earlier.

[NoQ]

Let me try again. You want to say that there should be three sorts of derricks: the ones belonging to advanced bases, the extra derricks and the "really" extra derricks? And you want to re-make all maps to distinguish between extra derricks and "really" extra derricks?

[Emdek]

NoQ, since I don't exactly know concept of derricks of advanced bases (but I guess that they are those which exists on power sources when beginning game with advanced bases) I'll use "primitive" description.
Extra derricks is a concept from iap, for me those would be selected using some algorithm, first mark "core" ones (intended for use for specific player on start), this might use data about those belonging to player in "advanced bases" mode and if that data is not available then calculate that giving player (as leaving them without neutral building on top) four closest ones (there might be additional checks for cases when there is for example less than four sources per player).
Those which wouldn't be marked as "core" for players would be marked as "extra" and if there would be no Scavengers then those would have neutral derricks structures to destroy to gain access to power source.

Clearer now?

[NoQ]

Hmm probably

Well, i think that trusting pre-built bases is the simpliest way, though getting four closest ones is nice too (high-oil fans will bury us though). In fact, the standard way of pre-built derricks, free derricks and derricks in scavenger bases is three-way enough, so this can be used for anything more complicated.

Alternatively, we could only cap the derricks that are capped in scavenger mode, which are usually the central derricks, that is, the hottest ones. This will make capped derricks mode intermediate between scavengers mode and no scavengers mode.

[Emdek]

Alternatively, we could only cap the derricks that are capped in scavenger mode, which are usually the central derricks, that is, the hottest ones. This will make capped derricks mode intermediate between scavengers mode and no scavengers mode.

That would also improve situation.

[bendib]

Adding cost to derricks is one of my votes

NOOOOOO!!!!!

Effigy has gone over to the noob side!!!!!!!!

[Iluvalar]

You complain because YOU are the noob. You are scared to lose an advantage because you are unable to win with pure skill. Face it

[zany]

Adding cost to derricks is one of my votes

NOOOOOO!!!!!

Effigy has gone over to the noob side!!!!!!!!

make them cost 50 would solve this problem

[iap]

NoQ, since I don't exactly know concept of derricks of advanced bases (but I guess that they are those which exists on power sources when beginning game with advanced bases) I'll use "primitive" description.
Extra derricks is a concept from iap, for me those would be selected using some algorithm, first mark "core" ones (intended for use for specific player on start), this might use data about those belonging to player in "advanced bases" mode and if that data is not available then calculate that giving player (as leaving them without neutral building on top) four closest ones (there might be additional checks for cases when there is for example less than four sources per player).
Those which wouldn't be marked as "core" for players would be marked as "extra" and if there would be no Scavengers then those would have neutral derricks structures to destroy to gain access to power source.

Clearer now?

Actually what I meant (I'm saying it just to clarify, and not to force my opinion) is that the "extra" would be individual and will depend on how much generators the player has built. The reasoning behind this is to make the player consider a "trade off" when he decide to rush and build derricks. So instead of forcing a fee on each derrick or trying to find the best balanced formula of how to classify core and extra, the player will know that unassigned derricks might just be captured by his enemy, so he can either build more extra generators before building more derricks or guard each half built derrick or just not rush.

Assigning derricks to scavengers could be random, or based on distance. And making neutral derricks that the player must destroy (and wait for it to cool) is a good idea.

However you choose is fine for me, most of the time I'm loosing anyway...

[effigy]

It's appears to me NoQ and Emdek misunderstood iap and came up with an alternate idea? If I'm understanding them correctly it's an interesting idea... wz adding neutral derricks to any oil resource that wasn't given a derrick (player or scavenger) in a map editor? It's interesting, but for that matter we could just start making maps with scavenger derricks on any unclaimed derrick.

I voted for 4 optoins: 1) shouldn't be "fixed" 2) Reduce burn time 3) no burn time unless derrick was finished and 4) add cost.

I think $50 sounds a bit much per derrick... ~$20 makes as much sense as possible to me.

I ultimately think we're misusing our resources on this non-issue, but that reducing burn time is the best compromise.

@reg312, you can all ready beat me with greater APM in this RTS... if you make the game too noob friendly that might change :O lol

[NoQ]

but for that matter we could just start making maps with scavenger derricks on any unclaimed derrick.

What if we want to play without scavengers even though they are added, but still decrease oil rush? On Startup, for example.
We have only two scavenger modes, so we have room for one more (:

[effigy]

Yes, like you said, 3 modes... forgot to reiterate that