[b4t3m4n]

Lately I have been really scrutinizing my base layout. For starters, I never do the same thing every time in the beginning on any map which is probably a mistake. There is only so many right ways to start a match so I found my constant deviations sort of lazy.

This brought me back to playing with mass fabricators. Most people, myself included, waste loads of energy mid and late game mostly because its just really easy to get. Two mass fabricators are just like having a tech 1 mex minus the power reqs, which would be a great use for that power.

Chris Taylor and company were really clever in coming up with all these cool adjacency bonuses as well. Finally, just randomly throwing crap anywhere in your base wasn't the best way to do things. A factory surrounded by fab's and power gens, alternating, is an awesome way to generate mass, and get nice reduction bonuses for the factory.

Of course no one does this because a single bomber can wipe it all out. This means you can't really guarantee their safety until you can build shields. Now I understand this is in place so mass points don't lose their value, but perhaps the uber mega chain reaction death bomb <_< should be nerfed a little bit. Maybe only taking out the things next to it in the matrix, not the entire power gen, mass fab network its connected too. Maybe this will get people away from just slapping down a line of power gens in some arbitrary place on the map or dotting an open field with mass fabs because they can't risk them touching eachother.

Thoughts?

[GuTs]

I kind of agree with that. It's quite impressive how destroying one mass fabricator linked to another building (even worst if there are more than one mass fab...) can really blow up everything around it.
I understand that mass fab are a maybe too easy way to generate mass so should somehow be vulnerable but as it stands now it might be just too weak.

[hitspace]

well rts doesnt tend to be purely realistic but if you start making mass with energy its like having a nuclear power plant next to your buildings .

[blueshift]

I like it as a risk vs reward thing. It encourages you to learn what layouts are dangerous and which safe. You can spread out and be harder to defend in terms of shielding, aa cover, anti-missile cover, or bunch up under shields and get adjacency bonuses but be vulnerable to chain-reaction.

The whole system seem well-thought-out to me.

[NexXus_]

I am in complete agreeance with Blueshift on this one guys. I like the worry of losing a huge fab farm and having to be "intelligent" on how I design, place, and protect it. In fact I have a replay up on GPGNet on Syrtis Major (I believe it's my most recent or 2nd most recent game) in which my play is based quite a bit on this situation.

[vilm]

its true that these risks should stay, but as they are now, they are too big if you ask me. they either have to increase the health of the mass fabricators, or nerve their explosion, because you now can't afford to lose a single one, because then you'l lose a lot at once

[Ender]

I like the fact that they are a risky strategy to use, it means that players have to think more about what they are building and where. I agree sometimes it seems a bit drastic to lose so many buildings because one got hit but because each generator adds so little to your economy on its own it wouldn't be worth taking one out and this way it makes them a worthwhile target.

[NexXus_]

Honestly you are better off upgrading your MEXs than getting fabs until T3 when you need the big ones. By then you have enough base defense to prevent something from just coming in and dropping a single bomb on one, not to mention the vast amount of health on the T3 fabs.