5 replies to this topic

[englocked]

And nerf them a little bit so players won't be able to get much more lumber than now. The point would be to increase frames per second when lots of lumber mills have been built.

[Waffle(est)]

its the tiny lvl-1-4 mills that actually have perf impact, (they are habndled very efficciently in the current lumber system so the number of mills only effects perf via the number of units shown on screen)

changing limit of lvl7 mills effectively wont have any effect on this.

 

lvl5 mills are quite decent and you dont really mass them,..

 

if we would like to reduce lag further we would essentially need to come up with some solution to make there only be 1-10 units total..

 

lvl5 to lvl7 mills all have a production bonus.. (10-30% bonus over the corresponding lvl4 mills)

 

im sure theres a lot more effective optimisation that can be done over reducing mills count at this moment.. but finding them is difficult in war3..

[12th Archivist]

We could add a lvl-8 lumber mill that's made by putting four tiny lvl-7s together in a square. It could be shrunk down to the size of a normal-sized lvl-7 mill, and would produce 55 lumber per second (125% of what four lvl-7s combined would produce). I don't think this would help the problem in the slightest, but you never know.

[Ethaw]

Removing the limit on lvl 7 would actually be a significant boost of the lumber production for experienced players, so most of the late game content would need rebalancing.
So I'm strongly against that, in addition to the fact it removes a healthy constraint on players (the 4 lvl 7 limit) that gives more meaning to the lumberer role at lower levels.

Nevertheless, there would be another way to reduce the number of building on the map without changing the current game balancing: introduce a quad lvl 5 mill with the same production as 4 lvl 5 (but which can't be transmuted smaller), which could be the new lvl 6. The old lvl 6 has currently no reason to exist.
Waffle is right about this probably not having a huge impact, especially since only experienced players stack lvl 5, but even if the performance boost is very small, it would still be there. And it's quite easy to implement.

 

---

Some basic maths about level 7 lumber mills and why the limit shouldn't be changed:

• a lvl 5 gives 1.1 wps
• a lvl 7 gives 11 wps with 8 lvl 5 (that would alone give 8.8 wps)
• >> you gain 11/8.8 - 1 = +25% wps (which is already significant, since it's completely free)

However a lvl 7 transmuted takes 4 lvl 5 (so 4.4 wps) in space... and that's where there is the biggest impact:

• >> you gain 11/4.4 - 1 = +150% wps !

Of course this last number doesn't consider all the lvl 1 you have to produce, but it gives an idea of how important the limit on lvl 7 is, particularly concerning bases with limited space. And for basically the same reasons, this lvl 8 idea would destabilize the game if it can be shrunk (but the same idea without being able to reduce the size is a good one concerning fps, it still removes 3 buildings from the screen).

 

---

TLDR:

• Don't touch the lvl 7 limit, it would destabilize the current game balance;
• Introduce a lvl 8 from 4 lvl 7 and a quad lvl 5 from 4 lvl 5, which both can't be shrunk, because space is a resource as well and allowing them to be shrunk would change the balance of the game for small bases in particular.

[englocked]

I'm aware they have a production bonus. That's why I said they should be nerfed a little bit to make up for it, maybe 10.5 wps instead of 11.

 

It would actually make lumber production lower until 6 level 7 mills are built. I guess if the performance boost would be minor, this is a bit pointless considering it would slightly upset the game balance.

[Waffle(est)]

nerfing lvl7-s might... be a good idea in general but it would leave tiny bases virtually unplayable since the wood requirements are so riddiculously high..