Proposal: Cybran ACU upgrades

0

@mozy said in Proposal: Cybran ACU upgrades:

Idk, playing cybran I dont like it that much. Sure its great if your opponent is making shields, but when people adjust to it and stop making shields vs cybran then its back to useless upgrades in the slot again.

FTX is completely correct on this one. If they were going to build shields, it's because they were a good idea, right?? So if you [essentially] take away this option from them, they are worse off, hence, it is not a useless upgrade. Hell, even just the potential of getting the upgrade would be a significant boost by seriously diminishing the expected value of them building any shields before you get the upgrade. So you could expect opponents to build far fewer shields without even having to get the upgrade, and if they do, you can punish them for it by nullifying that investment.

0

Yeah just go ahead and propose the stats. Dragun said he would help and make a mod, else I will look into it myself next week when I have time. Can have all the changes there but someone would need to test it too.

Im not saying the idea is shit but its still quite a niche thing. Sera dont have shields at t2 or as an acu upgrade, and upgraded acu is a complete rape machine. Other factions, its kinda the same too, its been an issue fighting their army+com, not an hp wall like ftx is saying. I would only use the shield disruptor vs com shield upgrade. Fighting against mobile shields is pretty situational while stun gives you great proficiency fighting against both shields and armies, which is way more useful overall. Also creates nice diversity that everyone on faf is dying for where cybran would use their acu to fight armies rather than other acus.

0

At the very least I think the engineering upgrades should move to the left arm, or a new upgrade could be added to that slot. The upgrades on left arm are very niche.

0

I am still not sure if buffing cybran ACU is the right way to fix current balance issues, after all it's supposed to be their weak spot, both ACU and t2 land all ins. Yes, after the mantis nerf cybran is not as dominant on land maps during t1 stage but they still have arguably the best t1 tank in most situations (eg. most land based maps) and good t2 units that work great together with medusas and their stun. The whole idea for cybran gameplay is that you get an advantage during t1 stage, keep it during t2 stage where you try to take away map control from your enemy using previously acquired advantages and quick strikes, preferably with stealth field while avoiding an all out com battle in the middle. You also have corsairs so your t2 air transition is very powerful and is something that enemy ACU needs to very much consider if they are planning on being very agressive and pushing down the middle with ACU + units. The truth is that if you don't feed enemy ACU a lot of vet cybran can stand their ground during t2 stage as long as it : Attacks on the sides, got an advantage during t1 as they should, in the middle get a pd + shield to asssit their ACU. Then you switch to t3 and you have the best t3 mobile arty which absolutely annihilates any t2 army.

2

One risk I see in giving cybran a significantly better rambo ACU is the synergy with corsairs. It can lead to situations where the opponent, to stop the cybran ACU+army, has to use his own ACU. After a bit of ACU on ACU fighting there is allways the thread of cybran going full corsair and snipeing the opponent 6-7k hp com, which ironically might become most obnoxious in cyb vs cyb.

Forumpros doing balance https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wTcguJZh3A .
When a canis player remembers to build more than 3 units https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hjp8xJHuyA .

1

No real idea what would be good stats for a Cybran absolver ACU tbh.

Default Absolver:
Range - 75
Fires - 2 times a second
Does - 1300 damage to shields

I'd put shield disrupter in the same current upgrade tier as chrono, so around early-mid t2 stage.
So: 1500 mass cost, 50k e cost, 1200 bt cost

I'm not sure if it's better served as a back or right arm upgrade. If it's on the back it means you remove the stealth + gun + disruptor combo. I feel like having it on the right arm would be alright, gives it more utility as its the least used upgrade arm for Cybran and stealth isn't such a huge advantage that you cannot allow the ACU to keep the combo.

Then I'd say the gun itself should do:
Range - 35
Fires - 1 time a second
Does - 1500 damage to shields

Mainly chose 35 as I don't really see why it should have less range than something like an Aeon ACU with chrono. The gun itself doesn't actually directly harm units so it can't really be abused for more damage. This also allows Cybran to put damage on either Aeon ACU or shields directly near it.

Damage I don't know, just chose round numbers that didn't seem too OP 4head

0

@ftxcommando How can you hate on my idea to change Aeon ACU upgrades but then love this idea?!

At any rate, I find the OP to be interesting, and I agree with adding some mid-level buffs to the Cybran ACU. The ideas presented are not bad, honestly.

0

What are we going to take away from Cybran to balance out having a strong ACU in mid-game?

We could remove Corsairs.

Or we could give mobile stealth field generators to the other 3 factions.

0

@arma473 I agree to buffing other faction stealth. Cybran has the best stationary stealth gen (double range), so all factions should get that.

Or give free stealth to individual units. Maybe stealth to Uef air scout, Aeon land scout, and Seraphim walls/mex.

0

Thought of something off the cuff.

Have stealth - stealth field - cloak

Then on the other slot where t2 and t3 is put another option for

T1 land fabricator - t2 land fab - t3 land fab

This would remove the structure blueprints and make the acu a mobile factory similar to how the mega builds units. Combine with stealth field and the acu can run around building raiders. A complete opposite of the t2 uef com building strike bases.

0

I like the idea but removing the structure blueprints would be a massive nerf to the ACU.

0

@archsimkat Not if the "land fab" ACU can make engineers. Those would have to be disallowed. For a "land fab" ACU to have value, you'd need it to be better in some way than just using a T3 ACU make a t3 factory and making units that way. But it couldn't be able to make T2/T3 engineers or it would be too good.

Instead of having a separate upgrade path, maybe just allow a Cybran T2/T3 ACU to also make certain units that would be useful for raiding or breaking enemy PD.

For example: T2 ACU could make moles, mantis, medusa. T3 ACU could also make deceivers, wagners, hoplites, vipers.

It could be implemented by making something like "crab egg" for those units.

0

@funkoff said in Proposal: Cybran ACU upgrades:

@arma473 I agree to buffing other faction stealth. Cybran has the best stationary stealth gen (double range), so all factions should get that.

While we're at it, let's buff non-UEF HP across the board to UEF levels, it's always been an unfair advantage. Also, give more hover to non-Aeon units, if Aeon have so many, then UEF and Cybran should also have more.

0

Regarding the cybran being balanced by having a weak acu: i dont agree with this and think its plain stupid. When every other faction has something to put on the board, cybran are straight up unable to compete there. That would be fine if they had something else to make up for it, and some of you think they have on paper, but in real games that is not true at all. When the enemy is pushing a choke with an army and stocked acu, your options are pretty limited: pull back and lose ground but gain defender's advantage; move your units away and push elsewhere, losing that position (which is not even available on some maps); rally all of your units from other position(s) to defend the push (leaving you open from where your units are pulled); invest into a snipe.

Neither of the options seem favorable for me, and i dont see anything else that cybran could do. To support my pov, i can put up my recent game VS Tex in ladder on Diversity (#14296539). The reason i didnt use my acu there was it being a far too dangerous investment for potential gains. I had a massive advantage in that game but still could do nothing VS uef acu and army.

What im offering wont Come close to the beast acus like uef or sera can make, it is more of a crowd control instead. Other acus are still gonna be more powerful than cybran one, but cybran can at least be not utterly fucked and helpless.

0

The T2 stage is lacking, and it's a big part of our ladder games, so i think it's legit to buff their ACU for the T2-T3 phase to make this stage less painfull. Both upgrade ideas are nice, original and not just "buff rhino stats".

But in general : i think it's cool to have a general patern of cybra/aeon having weak t2 but strong t1/t3 and uef/sera having the big t2 push. I understand the will to polish the rough angles, but if we go too hoverboard in that direction, it makes gameplay a little less exciting, since all faction will play pretty much the same. I like the idea of "you have weak t2, just don't play too much into it, and tech into your strenghts" just like aeon used to have useless t2 so you would ignore this phase and rush t3. It bring games where you see big t2 army vs few t3 units rather than "big ball of t2 fights similar ball of t2".

Don't be so negative about your faction ! 🙂 Despite all the weak points, cybran still have a few godlike things you can play around ...

  • Superior T1 tank
  • Superior frigate and annoying stealthed units
  • Superior T3 air with very annoying stealth
  • Great T3 land units despite the lack of shields and snipers (but try to use snipers against a stealthed brick/treb army ... )
    You can't say "cybran have nothing to put on the board".
0

@mazornoob Nobody builds stationary stealth generators because they suck. Could use a buff. More importantly, I'm just tossing out ideas.

0

@auricocorico Yeah, I just watched Nexus beat the shit out of Tagada with Cybran. He didnt even use stealth gens, just bricks and trebs.

1

@funkoff said in Proposal: Cybran ACU upgrades:

@mazornoob Nobody builds stationary stealth generators because they suck. Could use a buff. More importantly, I'm just tossing out ideas.

Mass cost price reduction for stationary stealth gens makes a lot of sense.

A deceiver only costs 160 mass. Stationary stealth field gens for other factions cost 360+ and basically have less range. (A deceiver has 20 range, the stationary gens have 24, but being able to move the deceiver around gives it effectively much more range.)

Stealth field gens already take up a lot of space if you're making a "shields & arty" base. Reducing their mass cost wouldn't affect that. It would just make them more viable to use if you have some percivals or demolishers at the front line.

Or maybe we just aren't playing smart. If a stealth field gen costs 360 mass and percivals are 3x the price, maybe we should just make more stealth field gens where we're keeping our percivals. Buffing the gens by reducing their price would encourage people to do this. If this turns out to be OP, we could restore the original price (but people's behavior will have changed) . . . kind of like how mongoose were buffed and then nerfed, but they're still used more than in the past.

0

Agreed. Stealth is barely ever used, even in high level games (such as in the Spring invitational finals, with Nexus and Tagada). Making stealth fields easier to have and potentially more powerful could result in much more interesting plays all around, and would indirectly buff cybran because theyre the ones who are supposed to be good at it.

2

I would love to have more stealth play but not with the current engine and how vision works, it would be just total cancer. It's already insanely annoying to play vs a cybran army with deceiver + aa because vision is laggy and refreshes slowly and having high enough frequence air scout stream is very costly. Would not like to deal with such things in every match up.