The Last Thread about RAS SACU Balance
-
Make them either generate only mass, so that people have to still build explosive pgens, or make them only generate power, so that people still have to build explosive massfabs. Im in favor of giving them only power, so RAS simply become an expensive way to migitate power snipes.
-
What about massively increasing their death explosion radius and damage? That way they're a lot more dangerous to chill in your base, and if you keep them clustered together they'll chain
-
if u lose 1 boy ur losing all of them already
-
Yes, if you have them packed as close together as possible, and you take a mavor shell to the center of the group, many of them will explode. I'm saying lean into that behavior. Make losing even one guarantee to kill RAS coms in a wider radius, as well as having a mini-nuke detonate in your base.
-
That doesn't change anything. You will still put all boys under 1 shield and assisting it to keep infinite eco safe under 1 shield. If 1 mavor kills them all or only kills 1/3 of them doesn't impact anything other than game length.
-
RAS SACU have 2 problems:
- Exponential growth
- No sane limit of there number
№1 means that them is impossible to balance without making hard limit. №2 nuff said
They will be either complete trash or OP. Middle ground is possible but thin and different for different maps and players.I personally prefer a simple solution of this case: remove them for good and put balance effort to something more exiting
-
some long time ago someone suggested making gateway unassistable
completely removing them will make some people angry i beleave
-
everything else can be assisted why shouldnt gateways be, maybe if you increase its build power and sacu build cost massively instead tho (like nuke launchers/defenses) so assisting it doesnt speed it up massively
-
@ZLO said in The Last Thread about RAS SACU Balance:
some long time ago someone suggested making gateway unassistable
This will nerf many other options like Rambo SACU, Eng SACU, and any other use of SACU
completely removing them will make some people angry i beleave
"No matter what you do there will be whine. No exceptions"
-
@Mach said in The Last Thread about RAS SACU Balance:
everything else can be assisted why shouldnt gateways be
Because everything else is built on the battlefield, which should be sped up by assisting engineers; whereas, lorewise, the quantum gateway actually teleports the SACUs into the theatre of war. Why would a "quantum teleportation" device be sped up by assisting engineers?
-
Quantum teleportation devices just transmit information and the object still needs to reassembled with mass and energy on the other side. It is the same as building anything else.
-
If quantum teleportation devices just transmitted information, they wouldn't be called quantum teleportation devices, they would be called phones.
-
@archsimkat said in The Last Thread about RAS SACU Balance:
Because everything else is built on the battlefield, which should be sped up by assisting engineers; whereas, lorewise, the quantum gateway actually teleports the SACUs into the theatre of war. Why would a "quantum teleportation" device be sped up by assisting engineers?
I thought that was so too, but then I dont see why gateways should use any mass or energy if they were teleporting SACUs that were already finished, after all when ACUs and SACUs teleport in using a gateway in some missions, they dont cost any mass or energy to do so, the only explanation is that SACUs are not being teleported in but instead are being built by the gateway itself, it not only being gateway but a factory as well
-
The simplest option is to just nerf the mass/power output or increase the upgrade cost and buildtime. Maybe a combination of both.
I don't think Ras SACUs are a bad concept, they help with managing buildpower and eco, while saving space and unit cap. They're just too strong and prevalent in larger games because they have zero risk and they are guranteed to at least pay back their mass investment. At the very least they should take much longer to pay back their cost
-
I am quite sure that the biggest reason people build bois over massfabs is ease of use. You don't need to queue up a shit ton of stuff, make sure it is somewhat shielded and also scale powergenerators in an appropriate amount. Instead you just spam a bit of buildpower and repeatbuild the preset. Removing the preset would throw a decent apm hurdle in the path to infinite bois. If I remember correctly they only got that much because the preset was introduced.
-
For whatever this is worth, I never make them. They take time to pay for themselves, so if you start spamming them you actually lose mass for something like 10-12 minutes (the first SCU will pay for itself long before then, but by then you have several more produced that put you into debt more than the first SCU benefits you so it takes longer than the time for the first one to pay for itself for the SCUs + Gateway to start helping your economy).
If someone starts spamming them, they're effectively giving you a 10-12 minute window where you will have more available mass to punish them with. Rather than trying to outeco them during this period, just make a big ass army and crush them.
I play 10x10s though, so this may not make sense on say, Seton's where there is a significant travel time component for your forces.
So, if you want to be able to play like a high rated elite 700 on 1v1, or 1200 in global... you know not to build RAS SCUs =P
-
@harzer99 said in The Last Thread about RAS SACU Balance:
I am quite sure that the biggest reason people build bois over massfabs is ease of use. You don't need to queue up a shit ton of stuff, make sure it is somewhat shielded and also scale powergenerators in an appropriate amount. Instead you just spam a bit of buildpower and repeatbuild the preset. Removing the preset would throw a decent apm hurdle in the path to infinite bois. If I remember correctly they only got that much because the preset was introduced.
I haven't done the math recently, and am too lazy to now, but don't RAS SCUs pay for themselves slighly faster than the combination of fabs, power and shields? Something like 6.5 minutes rather than 7-7.5 minutes?
If that's true, and I think it is, then it shouldn't be any wonder that people would pursue the simpler, more efficient option that has the side effect of producing a decent combatant.
It also means an APM penalty isn't likely to be enough to discourage their use.
Ras SCUs should be significantly less efficient than Mass fab structures since they get such significant advantages over those structures.
-
People sometimes forget to consider in their paper napkin calculations for mass cost/mass generated benefit, that this is a unit that can also build shit, and in a pinch, fight. IMO that's part of the reason it works AND its difficult to punish if implemented well. You are scaling eco and buildpower at the same time, and have a unit that can be upgraded in a pinch to serve as a fairly mass efficient combat unit. So in reality, it pays for itself WAY sooner then you think it does, if you also factor in the ~2k mass of combat unit, 800 mass of build power, just out of the gate.
That and its stupid convenient to spam on repeat.
I think I remember a few years back Icy made a mass fab/gateway template and the mass cost for a RAS SCU can be stupid low if you pack enough mass fab/mex adjacency on it. Problem is spamming multiple gateways and producing unassisted. Takes too long to pay for itself, but was cool in concept.
-
How about just removing RAS from ACUs all together. With the ACU investing in RAS has a clear trade off, economic benefit for a decrease in ACU survivability. For an SCU there is no such trade off, ultimately it makes little difference whether an SCU lives or dies to the outcome of the game.
The SCU is far too useful. It can run your economy, duplicate itself (via a quantum game), snipe your opponent via teleportation (particularly for Aeon), build point defences, shoot things, reclaim a base, whip up an experimental, wander over to help shore up an ally etc. The truth is it has far too many benefits which have no real trade off. The whole concept of a payout time is totally moot as a consequence. You'd never talk about the "payoff time" of a monkeylord because the unit has inherent benefits which are totally unrelated to time. I don't see why an SCU should be considered differently in that regard.
I think one of the following would be reasonable solutions:
- Turn RAS into a mobile mass fab, power for mass or power but not both
- Increase the volatility of a RAS ACU (lower hit points, bigger bang, makes it less useful in its other roles)
- Increase the cost substantially
- Increase build time and increase quantum gate build power so assisting becomes pointless
- Remove RAS preset
- Remove RAS entirely
-
@Tex said in The Last Thread about RAS SACU Balance:
People sometimes forget to consider in their paper napkin calculations for mass cost/mass generated benefit, that this is a unit that can also build shit, and in a pinch, fight. IMO that's part of the reason it works AND its difficult to punish if implemented well. You are scaling eco and buildpower at the same time, and have a unit that can be upgraded in a pinch to serve as a fairly mass efficient combat unit. So in reality, it pays for itself WAY sooner then you think it does, if you also factor in the ~2k mass of combat unit, 800 mass of build power, just out of the gate.
That and its stupid convenient to spam on repeat.
I think I remember a few years back Icy made a mass fab/gateway template and the mass cost for a RAS SCU can be stupid low if you pack enough mass fab/mex adjacency on it. Problem is spamming multiple gateways and producing unassisted. Takes too long to pay for itself, but was cool in concept.
Can't argue any of that, they're definitely a great value, even if they don't necessarily pay for themselves as quickly as people probably think.
