Long time since we've talked about real gameplay here.
I think people often overestimate the importance of a deficit in mid and end-game positions.
Granted, when you are starting out and your production is 1.2, you don't ant to run a 50-deficit construction spree. Especially not if you also have to fight off creeper.
On the other hand, if you have energy production of 20 or more, 7 blasters and a couple of mortars, you can easily sustain that 50 deficit, since it may simply be that the reserve ammo for your weapons are not at 100%. You may not be impacting construction or firing rate. In those situations is is not, IMHO, a problem running a deficit - you need to be careful though, it can easily balloon out of control, and then it can be an issue.
So deficits at different points in time in the game is a completely different story. Also, a brief dip into deficit territory early on, provided it is just one or two units sometimes ensures optimal packet dispatch without really slowing down overall construction speed.
Thoughts?
I think that deficit doesn't really matter if you can sustain your units, or are in a large buildout
deficit is just packets that are requested, but not sent
I often found during many custom maps, that I worked with a deficit. Sometimes I wonder if that is the best tactic to use, but it works for me. I rarely use it for chronum maps, probally because most maps are short.
I never care about the deficit anymore, instead I just watch my collection rate and see what I'm builing and which weapons are up and with that I know what I can and can't build. But sometimes working in a small deficit is handy when building something, as if you've got enough energy and your buildings were half build in a deficit the other half will compensate that deficit and OC will send two times (or even three times) as much packets.
I consider running a deficit, as being close to "the edge", the imaginary line thats seperates slow people, from the fast.
If you know how to run a deficit though most of the mission without it getting out of control, your pro
Quote from: Echo51 on September 30, 2010, 02:48:34 AM
If you know how to run a deficit though most of the mission without it getting out of control, your pro
so, (sounds like me as I run a deficit constantly through almosdt all missions)
There should'nt be an unknown thing that you use more time to finnish an map when you have an Deficit .
You can still finnish most maps with an Deficit , but you should improve your best time if you dont have an Deficit .
Now the city has the option to stop sending stuff , so if you use that enought ,
it should help alot on your Deficit .
Turning something off for some secs might matter more that you think =P
Having a deficit is bad, but not having a deficit is just as bad (because you're not using your energy). Optimal is having zero energy in storage without having a deficit. A slight deficit is not too bad, but 'slight' is relative as Karsten already mentioned.
When I play I use this rule of thumb: my deficit should never be more than 3 times my energy collection. So when I collect just 1 unit of energy per second, I allow myself to play with a deficit of 3, but when I collect 5 I allow a deficit of 15. This way Odin City will catch up within 3 seconds most of the time so my weapons don't starve completely and I use all energy available.
Another advantage is what Sqaz mentions: units that are behind on schedule will catch up when more energy is available again.
Playing with a deficit is only beneficial when you know you'll be able to get out of it soon (otherwise there will be no catching up). When building multiple energy sources (collectors & reactors) it's really bad and I always try to prevent it.
I think you hit the nail on the head. Going into deficit in early stages when one is concentrating on energy build-up is a bad idea. Later on when using energy to fire, it's not such a problem, providing the deficit is manageable. Weapons can fire at full speed even if not fully supplied and sometimes it may even be beneficial to have mortars, for instance, firing slower, since they may be more efficient then.
I don't know why but whenever I play I always run a perfect deficit.
Just like what Upper said, never more then 3x Collection, if I ever run it that high.
It's always just over 1 and it jumps to 10 back to 0 and again.
Again, I don't know what I'm doing right.
it's an interesting topic you've started karsten, personally i'm not speed orientated enough to worry if i go into a deficit or a bit of energy storage sometimes, however i have found on certain special occasions that it can be detrimental to run at a deficit, at least in the following example:
if you have little room to work with and there's spore waves with more than say 3 or 4 spores it's sometimes useful to keep a small amount of energy stored because with enough speed the SAMs can fire 3 or 4 times due to the quick resupply (again this is in only a few cases and when space is limited and therefore your SAMs are near the city) and therefore you only need 1 or 2 SAMs to protect you if your positioning is good as opposed to say 3 or 4, the energy and time you save building those extra SAMs has on occasion allowed me to push ahead against the creeper and secure more room easier than if if had built more SAMs
i know i've gone a little off point here but i'll try to sum up by saying that on rare occasions it can be detrimental to run 'on the edge' but then i'm someone who's deficit and energy storage jump around quite a bit heh
Yeah, a deficit when spores arrive isn't very good, especially when they arrive in dense clusters and 1 or 2 SAMs have to take all of them out. Temporarily deactivating mortars and/or drones at that moment can be useful, just like having some storage. Storage pays off for most maps that last longer than about 4 minutes, because you often don't use all energy when moving weapons (like a group of blasters). When the storage fills up just once it already paid back its own costs (moving 4 blasters for 5 seconds).
You can also deactivate the SAMs right after they are done being used and reactivate them when you have energy. Or, depending how many spores there are and your current state, pushing the red button (on odin city) right before the SAMs start shooting and then deactivate all SAMs and push the red button after all the spores were taken down.
i never deactivte my SAMs unless its a big emergency because i tend to forget about them, the same goes for building them in the first place ;)
I do and yes, I sometimes forget about them as well. When you hear the siren just disable the build packets and activate the SAMs and most likely you'll still have them charged in time.
unless you're too spread out, but hopefully by then you can leave them on with no problem
I've wondered about the whole deficit issue for some time. Having heard from some players, I wonder how it was designed to be the most efficient. Virgil?
because if you're not running a deficit (or on the line) then they're storing energy, that's energy that could be used building something else/stocking ammo/powering a totem, therefore since it's nearly impossible to run with 0 stored energy and 0 deficit there's a small margin of deficit that people allow themselves, not too big to cause a problem but just enough to ensure that every bit of energy is used up
Aurzel, as long as you dont have a full energy storage, your not wasting energy yet
Quote from: Echo51 on October 13, 2010, 08:44:34 AM
Aurzel, as long as you dont have a full energy storage, your not wasting energy yet
Unless you are anticipating a sudden drain of energy (eg. fending off incoming spores) stored energy is wasted energy that could have gone into construction. About as wasteful as firing into a pool of creeper without advancing into it or needing to keep it away from your units.
its not wasted energy still, as you can output all those units in storage, if its needed
i simply feel more comfortable when i have some stored energy, allows me to make up for an overbuild
Quote from: Echo51 on October 13, 2010, 09:00:13 AM
its not wasted energy still, as you can output all those units in storage, if its needed
Aurzel and Karsten are right that stored energy is 'kind of' wasted. When you would have invested it in more energy generating units you would gain this back later on. When you for instance build 2 collectors that each collect 0.125 energy per second (which is about average) these collectors will return their costs of 20 units of energy in about 80 seconds.
Quote from: ontheworld on October 13, 2010, 10:23:19 AM
i simply feel more comfortable when i have some stored energy, allows me to make up for an overbuild
Why make up for an overbuild anyway? That's planning for something badly planned. ;)
It's much better to keep some space in your storage so you won't ever lose a single unit of energy.
Quote from: UpperKEES on October 13, 2010, 12:14:47 PM
Quote from: ontheworld on October 13, 2010, 10:23:19 AM
i simply feel more comfortable when i have some stored energy, allows me to make up for an overbuild
Why make up for an overbuild anyway? That's planning for something badly planned. ;)
It's much better to keep some space in your storage so you won't ever lose a single unit of energy.
i'm not a good plannner, and i find that if you don't hit the maximum energy, nothing is wasted yet
Quote from: ontheworld on October 13, 2010, 12:22:48 PM
i'm not a good plannner, and i find that if you don't hit the maximum energy, nothing is wasted yet
In that case keep in mind that when you are collecting and using for instance 6 units of energy per second, you already start losing energy with 14 units in storage.
When you move an tower and it starts to fire more often , it's nice to have some storage =P
Then you might have time to correct it before you get an huge deficit =)
Building a unit (without +20% build speed) and firing a unit (a blaster or mortar without +15% firing rate) at full speed will always cost you about 1 unit of energy per second, so it's very easy to take that into account. When moving a firing unit you actually need some room in your storage because you save energy while moving it.
stored energy isnt wasted but it's a waste because it's not being used
an analogy might be keeping a percentage of some money that you plan to invest behind just in case, that money could have been used to invest in something worthwhile (the only difference being that there's no bad investments in creeper world you'll either get more energy or more firepower)
Quote from: Aurzel on October 15, 2010, 04:10:41 PM
the only difference being that there's no bad investments in creeper world you'll either get more energy or more firepower
It's still a bad investment if you don't need more energy or fire power. Besides that you can also invest in storage or speed, which can be redundant too.
there's no such thing as not needing more energy production it's always good to have more energy unless you have more energy than odin city can produce packets but in that case i think you should be worrying about being able to play not your energy
It's always nice to have more energy, but investing in more can be a bad choice when you already have enough to finish the map. In that case better use it for fire power, speed or charging the totems.
I believe that it is a balance between a couple factors:
1. How much time you have until the Creeper overflows you.
2. How much energy (in blaster/mortars/drones) it takes to get past the Creeper to the totems.
3. How much energy you need for your power grid + bonuses (speed/storage)
If you find a balance between these three factors, you can complete any map with a decent time.
Quote from: UpperKEES on October 15, 2010, 08:39:35 PM
It's always nice to have more energy, but investing in more can be a bad choice when you already have enough to finish the map. In that case better use it for fire power, speed or charging the totems.
There are so many perfect examples of this when you're playing one of KEE'S maps.
Unless you have just an enormous amount of Creeper to fight back, you usually
don't need more than about 17 energy with about 160 in storage. The 160 in storage
usually handles
most short term deficit problems (charging totems/building/drones recharging).
Quote from: Colin on November 19, 2010, 04:14:45 AM
Unless you have just an enormous amount of Creeper to fight back, you usually
don't need more than about 17 energy with about 160 in storage. The 160 in storage
usually handles most short term deficit problems (charging totems/building/drones recharging).
That borders on the absurd. I can't recall many maps where I have *ever* needed 160 energy in storage. The exception that stands out in my brain is Alwego's map (http://knucklecracker.com/creeperworld/mapcomments.php?id=1161&page=).
If you disagree: Pick a map (with the exception of the one I mention above) and we'll both play it. At the end post a near-completion screenie, you with 160 in energy and me with no more than 40-60 in energy storage and we 'll compare completion times.
160 energy in storage is indeed quite a lot and a bit of a waste (especially considering this topic is about playing as efficient as possible).
Quote from: Karsten75 on November 24, 2010, 01:48:24 AM
Pick a map (with the exception of the one I mention above) and we'll both play it. At the end post a near-completion screenie, you with 160 in energy and me with no more than 40-60 in energy storage and we 'll compare completion times.
Okay!
Nice Job 1: The Hydraulic Engineer (http://knucklecracker.com/creeperworld/mapcomments.php?id=1294&page=). ;D You already played it, so you should know....
I think there are some more maps out there that require some energy in store, like mthw2vc's Deception, but usually 20-40 is enough to handle the peaks.
@ UpperKEES Well, I was thinking of that map when I posted that. :P
@ Karsten, You are probably right in general for most maps though. However,
there is a certain amount of logic there. As far as how much energy storage
is really needed (other than the extra 20 to get past 20 energy usage).
For example:
You have a energy production: 12
You have 20 energy in storage
You have energy usage of: 11
You just sent 4 your drone bombers (the 11 energy usage is without them
charging). You have a constant flow of packets to several blasters capping
emitters, if the flow of packets is interrupted the emitter will become uncapped.
At this point you have a choice, nearly make 1 reactor, build an energy storage,
or do nothing.
What is the charge rate of a drone? 2 or 3? If its 2 that means when they
get back. you run up 8 energy usage which means you have a deficit of 7
or 11 if its 3.
Anyway, when the drones come back do you only charge 1 at a time? Because if you let
all four of them charge up, it would cause a deficit before your 20 energy ran out, but
would it cause a deficit if you have 40, 60, 80, or 100?
It all depends how closely you play a map, (having 100 energy storage to help with the
deficit of the drones when they come back only costs 80 more energy, where-as another
5-6 reactors. . . 100-140.
Some maps, like KEES' map: Nice Job 1: The Hydraulic Engineer require a certain amount of
storage because you cannot make reactors. Do you see my point? ;)
Quote from: UpperKEES on November 24, 2010, 05:53:46 AM
Okay! Nice Job 1: The Hydraulic Engineer (http://knucklecracker.com/creeperworld/mapcomments.php?id=1294&page=). ;D You already played it, so you should know....
I think there are some more maps out there that require some energy in store, like mthw2vc's Deception, but usually 20-40 is enough to handle the peaks.
Quote from: Colin on November 24, 2010, 12:36:26 PM
Some maps, like KEES' map: Nice Job 1: The Hydraulic Engineer require a certain amount of
storage because you cannot make reactors. Do you see my point? ;)
While I mentioned another map, it is specifically for maps in this category that I mentioned as an exception, but that is NOT the rule. the original statement was that in general 160 energy should be in reserve.
And as for that map, I played it, but I have no recollection anymore. So I will decline. :)
Quote from: Colin on November 24, 2010, 12:36:26 PM
It all depends how closely you play a map, (having 100 energy storage to help with the
deficit of the drones when they come back only costs 80 more energy, where-as another
5-6 reactors. . . 100-140.
ya know, I never thought of that... economically that is. Ive always created more reactors or speed and never let my storage get above about 2 or 3, although i do end up pausing a lot in order to do that...
Quote from: BigBird on December 25, 2010, 10:41:29 PM
Quote from: Colin on November 24, 2010, 12:36:26 PM
It all depends how closely you play a map, (having 100 energy storage to help with the
deficit of the drones when they come back only costs 80 more energy, where-as another
5-6 reactors. . . 100-140.
ya know, I never thought of that... economically that is. Ive always created more reactors or speed and never let my storage get above about 2 or 3, although i do end up pausing a lot in order to do that...
Well doing something like that would be important if you
had blasters that were barely able to hold the Creeper
back at full power, thus if they lost any amount of power,
the Creeper would begin to overrun them. ;)
Deficits arent much of a problem as long as you can quickly get more energy but it easily decreases you time on a map if you dont go into a deficit.
Also has anyone else been in a deficit beacause they're supplying too many weapon but still are producing more energy than is being drained? I do that alot.
that is probably because you are over 20 energy and you have not built any storages. Since odin city only has a self storage of 20, the maximum it can produce every second without a storage unit is 20. If you build a storage the maximum is then 32.