Smol ACU Adjustment

Saying a “strategy” is involved presupposes a choice is being made. That choice is between manual and auto-oc. Saying a unit should attack automatically (therefore arguing manual might as well as be removed) actively removes the largest strategic element of OC.

It removes """"strategic"""" element of choosing between "microing ACU to have it act at baseline value" and "playing the rest of the game", thus allowing you to freely play the rest of the game where you can utilize real strategy involving units/buildings/economy/intel instead of looking at 1 unit constantly so it doesn't trip over a rock, because with auto-oc you know your ACU isn't going to "forget it has OC unless you choose to sacrifice playing the rest of the game for manually shooting its oc every second", it may still be better OCing manually (which it already is, that you keep failing to remember with your "may as well remove manual", which I never even hinted) but at least it will still use OC at all, like every other unit uses all its weapons at all.

To ad absurdum your post as well, tanks shooting their guns automatically also actively removes the strategic element of manually telling tanks to shoot every individual shot.

You could say having option to micro something to have far greater effect than on its own in fact removes strategic options from the game because now you have to manually do said micro as enemy, who does, will otherwise have physically better units than your own. Is strategy to you merely "who can micro more units at same time and thus have same units but physically stronger"? I prefer it being about coming up with a better plan than the enemy and then having the units do it as I ordered them to. It's supreme commander, not supreme micromanager.

Also your original post was about making t2 get used more in game, which according to you is due to specifically auto-oc and nothing else, have you still not considered buffing t2 in some other way to make that happen instead of nerfing ACU's "anti-t2 superpowers" so they "only exist if and only if you are manually shooting it"?

Obligatory reminder that this same thing already and still exists with battleships groundfiring submarines, where they also gain a schrodinger weapon, as it only exists while you are looking (manually telling them to groundfire) and never otherwise.

ThomasHiatt

Why are you still trying to change FtXCommando's mind on the forum? The balance team already said they are just considering a range nerf. Nobody changes their mind on the internet in 2023.

FtXCommando

One day mach gonna realize attention is a resource in this game and game design is about spending your attention on the fun parts of the game. If OC isn’t fun for you go play eu4 or sins.

Nerfing gun range is insanely residentsleeper btw, worst change suggested in this thread. I’d rather nothing at all be done.

Like nerf every ACU by 3 range and now percies function as new age sniper bots. That sucks brutally, ACUs don’t need to be nerfed in t3 stage.

Cyborg16

That sucks brutally, ACUs don’t need to be nerfed in t3 stage.

Right. I wonder about adding a second level range upgrade? But it's still a nerf vs T2 PD.

Mach

Not trying to change anyone's mind, just state my own take on the topic properly.

I thought game design is about making meaningful decisions and not picking the most optimal use of apm on menial tasks. Still trying to figure out what is "fun" in manual reclaim.

Also on topic but forgot to say, changing the gun range will also effect things like dealing with t1 pd, mobile arty, aurora, experimentals and telesnipes.

Blade_Walker

Back to the OP - I think gun is the more common choice just it feels more 'fun' rather than having a major advantage over T2.

I mean we have another thread running about how good tml is, and if you can use a few pd's to control more mexes they can start paying for themselves, as well as covering reclaims fields, etc. gun still needs e store and more power built to support it.

Recent balance increased t2 land speed and also added hotkeys for splitting units by tiers, so potential to divert your t1 spam vs gun ACU while your t2 units try flanking. Nerfing ACU range would be way too harsh at late game stage.

What would be a meaningful nerf to gun, would be to reduce the reclaim left by overcharging units, say half normal, then it is less punishing to lose your T2 units vs it

MazorNoob

I'd argue that there are more cases of a unit performing much better when babysat other than the ACU. Tryharding with early raiding tanks and bombers is one. Getting the most out of your first strat is another, and a very impactful one. Hoplites and Mongoose. Beetles, by definition. Corsairs. ASF obviously. All differ from ACU with that you don't press 'O' before you micro. Singling out the ACU which you'll never have more than one of is silly. Nerfing the ACU and moving away from the original balance instead of removing auto OC (which moves us closer to the original) is sillier.

FtXCommando

Nah, none of those units entirely end 1.5 (up to 2.5 if ur aeon) stages of game interaction in teamgames.

advena

@ftxcommando

About nerfing damage of ACU:
I did some math for current state of game
Used UEF units as example stats. No regen, overkill, range, veterancy and unit loss taken in account.
Assumed 5s OC cooldown, 2 units killed by OC average.

Calculated price of ACU in units

ACU vs T1:
** No OC, No Gun: ~13
** No OC, Gun: ~18
** OC, No Gun: ~19
** OC, Gun: ~23
ACU vs T2:
** No OC, No Gun: ~3,7
** No OC, Gun: ~5,2
** OC, No Gun: ~9
** OC, Gun: ~9,8

So against T1 units Gun upgrade have almost same strength as enabling OC
Nerfing damage will impact T1 vs ACU
But against T2 units Gun upgrade is negligible compared to OC
Nerfing damage will NOT impact T2 vs ACU

What can be done to nerf ACU against T2 (without removing one kill OC and buffing it against T1):

Limit OC splash damage to only one shot T1
increase OC cooldown based on latest OC strength
Increase ACU damage AND increase OC cooldown

Lorem_Ipsum

@black_wriggler Oc mostly already kills reclaim, with its aoe even that of units that were not killed by it, Oc will never leave reclaim from t1 units and usually not from t2 either

FtXCommando

Why assume 5 second cooldown when that’s only for auto-oc that I want removed?

These stats also don’t really showcase the reality that a gun ACU has continuous free value because the only time your calculation comes into play is if you have so many units that you can swarm ACU+its units. Most of the time, there is a very high margin of error that makes that infeasible and so ACUs get free value shooting at stuff. The point of the gun change is to make the margin of error tighter for keeping your ACU in an aggressive position.

advena

@ftxcommando for simplicity. I needed some average value. Properly microed OC will be even stronger against T2 compared to T1

So to buff T2 against ACU we actually should keep auto-OC and remove non-auto-OC instead.

advena

I don't try to solve problem of making use of ACU riskier.
I try to solve problem of making T2 stronger against ACU without changing ACU vs T1 balance too much.
Free kills by ACU apply to T1 and T2 equally. OC and base gun have big difference.

FtXCommando

The game isn’t a sandbox of 1 ACU against 20 tanks. Even then, I don’t understand why you did this via calculation and removed a variety of variables that obviously matter in game. You’re not killing an ACU with 13 tanks in a real game. An ACU is about equivalent to 20 tanks prior to OC or gun.

You can’t touch ACU hp without directly buffing every snipe tool with many already being powerful. So you touch ACU damage to make margins more punishing for keeping ACU idle at front unless you’re also willing to expend the time to micro it with OC rather than freely gain value by hitting the auto-cast spell button.

Your last statement makes zero sense. By making t2 stronger against an ACU you are by definition making usage of an ACU riskier.