The Last Thread about RAS SACU Balance

Blodir

RAS SCUs aren't strong, lategame aggression is just super weak. Same thing for t3 arty. It's a massive mass investment, but it's not like you can just mount a land attack lategame. Navy situation is a bit better, but it's a bit too slow paced too imo. Balance team might want to consider playing around with some stat changes for all of t2+ (scale change magnitude by tech level) to provide more mid/lategame aggression opportunities

reduce cost, reduce strength
increase movement speed, reduce strength
increase dps, reduce hp
reduce reclaim % (scale % inversely with tech level, like 60%, 40%, 20%, 10%, for t1, t2, t3, t4 respectively)

arma473

@Blodir said in The Last Thread about RAS SACU Balance:

reduce reclaim % (scale % inversely with tech level, like 60%, 40%, 20%, 10%, for t1, t2, t3, t4 respectively)

This I think is needed. People are punished too much for using T3 units and so much of the meta around the use of T4 units is about where the reclaim ends up. Reduce the reclaim that is left and attacks become a lot more economically viable. This would also be an incentive to tech up (so you don't give so much mass to your opponent). We would see a lot more aggression I think.

I don't like the other suggestions. Watering down T3 or boosting its DPS isn't going to solve the problem.

Apart from land units, air/navy/buildings should probably keep leaving the same amount of reclaim. No reduction based on tech level.

techmind_

Strats are the only 'usefull' t3 land/air unit cause they can sort of damage something ('snipe') if this stuff is not protected by asfs sort of 'fast'. We need way faster t3 units, so they could 'outrun' t4 and harass/get around them. t4's alread have more hp/dps, so they should be slowert than regular t3 units. Then you have to invest in your own t3 OR mobile arty/radiding forces will just wreck your base.

Edit: also planet annihilatino have 'teleporation gates' so you can deploy your forces fast to needed point. This could solve the problem of 'slow land units'.

Blodir

While this is going wildly offtopic I also can't be bothered to start a new topic. In this post I give some justification for my suggestions

The two main goals are to increase the amount of interaction between players during t2-t4 stage, and to fix the volatility curve. Imo the game should be least volatile in the t1 stage and most volatile in the game-ender stage and gradually transition inbetween. Currently the volatility evolves something like this: from most volatile to least: game-ender > t4 > t1 > t2 > t3

(just to remind: all points are talking about t3 phase units and to a lesser extent t2 phase units)

reduce cost, reduce strength

small runby's are more justifiable since their cost is reduced while they can still be effective even with reduced strength
reclaim is more spread out with bigger armies, making reclaiming slower, and sometimes allowing both players to get their piece of the pile (as we see in t1 fights)
player's reach significant numbers of t3 more quickly, and no longer need to wait for t3 mex. The transition to a t3 army is extremely slow currently

increase movement speed, reduce strength

units get to the frontline faster so defenders advantage is reduced
game becomes faster paced, it's easier to out-multitask your opponent like in the earlygame

increase dps, reduce hp

battles become more volatile, easier to out-multitask opponent with aggression since each mistake is more punishing
raiding is significantly more effective
certain slow paced matchups could be sped up slightly (very long battleship wars on seton... don't get me wrong they are cool, they just take a bit too long right now imo)

reduce reclaim % for high tech units

significantly reduce defender's advantage in the lategame. This would allow you to take favorable fights on the enemy side of the map (whereas currently even a significantly unfavorable fight is better for the defender due to reclaim)

There's certainly much more that could be said, and probably a lot of important things I forgot to mention as well...

TheWeakie

changing reclaim values will change sentons mid reclaim.

i rest my case

Dragun101

I have said this in other posts, but we already have a model or method to enable faster deployment of higher tech land:
Support Factories. They just take so long to build, and even more to maintain a consistent rate of production given how BP with EngiMod has worked out.

Why not make Support Factories take less time to build/reduce mass cost and maybe reduce their BP. (If we reduce there cost cost and BP by 33% you keep the same mass to BP relationship. But previously where you could only maintain 2 Factories you can now maintain 3 Factories. 2 Factories will finish 4 units admittedly in the time it takes 3 factories to finish).

This additionally could add reclaim that decreases as you tech, from 80% to 60% to 40% if the controller/owner/army NotCivilian which wouldn’t as such mess with any reclaim on a map.

IceDreamer

OP is 100% correct and any arguments against him are flawed. The correct move for the good of the game is to remove the upgrade entirely, and to remove the static resource generation from the base body as well.

Mobile, build-capable, self-defending units should not be able to produce resources, period.

The only, read, ABSOLUTELY ONLY reason it is even slightly acceptable on the ACU is that you only have 1, and if it dies, the game is over. That's the downside to a mobile, build capable, self-defending unit. Oh. No, there we go. There's the balance guys. If you want to keep the RAS SCU upgrade, the way to balance it is that when it dies, you lose the game. That might, maaaaybe, make it doable.

Anything else is not enough.

Remove the upgrade.

Ithilis

The big problem is late game economics where is simply too much mass in-game, and all is concentrate in core mexes that are super easy to defend. Nerf this will overall help the game to be more aggressivee.

Deribus

@FtXCommando said in The Last Thread about RAS SACU Balance:

They should just be nerfed into irrelevancy or even removed just for the sake of promoting a healthier game.

I'm curious why you've always been incredibly against adding units (see T3 MAA) but are so chill with straight up removing one.

FtXCommando

Doesn’t need to be removed, just nerfed to irrelevancy. Functionally removed if that makes you feel better. Why? Same reasons beetles faced the same sentence. They’re just not good for gameplay in their current role and would be better off reinvented.

Azraaa

You literally cant use T3 or T4, because if you lose the attack you basically lose the game. Which is dumb because it promotes cancer gameplay. I'd drop reclaim to 25% of the original unit across the board. That would fix late game right there. Another reason the game lags so bad late game is because nobody is fighting so this buildup leads to more and more lag theres no grind or nothing.

Late game shouldnt devolve into artillery and 5000 exps

TheWeakie

what is your vision of what lategame should look like then

Lapkee

If this topic is about meme... alt text

Azraaa

@TheWheelie

Late game should have options... Right now your kind of forced into this standoff late game where the middle of the map is a wasteland with tons of reclaim your just licking your lips at and I understand reclaim is very vital to the Game of course.

I'm not saying remove but it's so important to the game in some many aspects its hurting more then helping. Every T3 you lose is basically 1k mass on the enemy's doorstep which may look good but it's really not good, because you end up rewarding certain bad behaviors and punishing certain gameplay styles.

This is where stuff like turtling and being aggressive diverge Because reclaim will always lend in favor of the defender but late game it lends so hard into that said defenders favor your basically forced to play like him even if you have 80% of the map, you cant attack with your large useless army too risky too punishing especially if he has lots of pd and his own big base. You lose 20 pervicals there goes 20k mass to the enemy for example.

By late game theres so much reclaim you might as well not even have mexes. What I'm stressing is this is just one step towards creating a healthier playing environment. Where you can be proactive late game instead of it being almost a 100% chance of mass economical artillery/experimental spam.

If the game wasnt so stalematey you could play 20km more proactively, because you could actually attack, you could invest into these larger pushes without having to worrying if you lose this single reclaim field the game is just cooked. 20km is a prime example of economy being extremely out of hand. Most of the time theres simply too many mexes, too much early game reclaim which turns into a super quick stalemate because you reach t3 and t4 so quick that reclaim is pretty much out of control, everyone has these large bases full of ras coms, Sams, Pd, And Armie. That any push any proactive gameplay is immediately shut down because even if you gain ground it's done nothing to the enemy in fact you've probably done more dmg to yourself given the enemy more reclaim and demoralized yourself into this slog fest of a game.

Azraaa

In reality late game without even talking about stuff like T3 Mex income or ras income or mass fabs. Theres just core issues like too many mex points theres too much natural reclaim things like that which flood the FAF Vault, and of course you cant do anything but I hope we get a clean selection of maps for TMM, that will address these issues.

I just dont want my late game to turn into this slog every game.... I want active, productivity and proactivity. Late game feels like map control just doesnt matter at all theres just so much mass everywhere quick and easy ways to get mass like RAS Boys and things like T2 Mex being 9 income and then t3 mex being 27 things like this which just make the economy go wack late game contributing more and more into this late game slog and disgusting lag fest of a game where nothing is fun or active or anything

Lapkee

@Azraeel said in The Last Thread about RAS SACU Balance:

because you end up rewarding certain bad behaviors and punishing certain gameplay styles.

I have your point here. Not like it's really matter, but... My 2 cents Its not only about mass, but about APM and other stuff like this, but you need to have more resurses, one way or another to crush opponent. If you attack and units die - its mass gift, and if you defend and happens the same, you can have almost all mass + mass from enemy units if you are not crached by superior forse. So - attack and crush and you are good, defend and cruch - you are good. But - attack and do some damage and you are in in trouble if damage aren't sigininficant. Exchange 1:1 allways good for defender.

A problem with RAS - is that they are much, much more
easier to pay off. If you make rambo, you have to move it to the front, and control for long time for profit. If you make RAS, you need just not suiside it, and wait for some time.

If, other things being equal, one player attacks, and the other makes the economy, then it is the aggressor who is "on the counter". He needs to crush before he completely falls behind.

But I don't thing that lowering reclaim value is good fix, because then attack will become mindless suiside of unint's.

Azraaa

Reducing Reclaim wont make it exactly mindless attacking. You'll still be able to lose if you literally gift mass.

Reducing reclaim will give more options, I didnt say dump it down to 5% of original or anything. I saying like 40% of orginal. You'll still get punished but not as nearly as hard, if you didnt know navy reclaim was changed to 40% of original.

RAS and T3 Mex income are really side problems not a super serious issue so I wont get into that topic. The main topic is reclaim

Lapkee

ASF reclaim was redused even more, and we still have seton air meta. Because if you are attack and lost - there no way to comeback. And if you have t4 and enemy have t4, and you attack and lost it, he can have mass, and if you attack and kill it, but your exp is wonded and you not cruch his base or com, you have to go back. Low hp exp can be used for defens almos as good as full, attack is different story.
The problem with turtle gameplay is that all comeback mechanisms only work for the defender. If any comeback is posible - its will be from defending side. There the way to rebuild after successful but not fatal attack, using reclaime mass, and no way for redo unsuccessful. Nefing reclaim will also nerf strategy "attack, secure, reclaime, repeat". 6 ravs can kill ML on blockpost. If you have ML and exchange It for 6 ravagers, you have 80% or 40% but of ~6-10k of mass, and if you have 6 ravagers and exchange for ML you will have 80% or 40% but of ~20k of mass. That woks for mantis and t1 pd with small numbers.
So even if you have full map control vs one turtle base, but equal eco you better to siege it. If you have more mass, you better eco on it, and only them attack. Because "have mass, eco, attack and fail" means - "give chase to comeback", and have mass, ~~eco~~, attack and fail" means - "gg wp better luck next time". So every agression becames siege.
If there was a way to, convert mass in somethig, that will be not a siege weapon, that but bunkerbuster, hmmm....

ThomasHiatt

@Azraeel said in The Last Thread about RAS SACU Balance:

RAS and T3 Mex income are really side problems not a super serious issue so I wont get into that topic. The main topic is reclaim

Actually, the title of the thread is "The Last Thread aboud RAS SACU Balance."

Lapkee

Ok, it can be as simple as this: You can counter the exp or \ and t3 spam with your exp, or t3 spam, or turrets maded by RAS SACU, ok? Exp bp was nerfed, t3 spam was nerfed. Was PD nerfed even once?