• Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
  • Login
FAForever Forums
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
  • Login

The Last Thread about RAS SACU Balance

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Balance Discussion
140 Posts 50 Posters 20.4k Views
Loading More Posts
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • P
    Psions Banned
    last edited by 26 Nov 2020, 04:34

    I think his complaint would still be the case if you build a normal sacu then upgrade ras on it.

    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
    • W
      WhenDayBreaks @Psions
      last edited by WhenDayBreaks 26 Nov 2020, 06:10

      @Psions said in [The Last Thread about RAS SACU Balance:

      @Tex Yes, but then people also don't calculate the payback time properly either.

      @Psions said in [The Last Thread about RAS SACU Balance:

      and the people complaining about them don't understand how to do excel tables properly,

      @Psions said in [The Last Thread about RAS SACU Balance:

      6500/11 = 640

      The irony is off the charts

      T 1 Reply Last reply 26 Nov 2020, 15:00 Reply Quote 7
      • E
        epic-bennis Banned
        last edited by 26 Nov 2020, 12:31

        For once I have to agree with thau. Math in its simplest form has finally defeated psions.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 5
        • T
          techmind_ Banned @WhenDayBreaks
          last edited by 26 Nov 2020, 15:00

          @Psions said in [The Last Thread about RAS SACU Balance:

          6500/11 = 640

          The irony is off the charts

          And +1k energy which equals 10 mass in fabricators.
          So payback time is actually halved, 5.3 minutes is not that long to pay for itself.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • D
            Deribus Global Moderator
            last edited by 26 Nov 2020, 16:34

            Hey guys we've been getting quite a few reports from this thread. Play nice and stay on topic

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
            • A
              Azraaa @FtXCommando
              last edited by 27 Nov 2020, 15:25

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

              They aren't "OP" in the sense of being a dominant strategy but they promote inherently toxic gameplay. The only thing that should combine mass + e + flexible BP is the ACU itself. When other units do it, you open up the ability to do things like protecting infinite eco in a single, condensed area. Lategame eco should be about factoring in the risk/reward of additional eco adjacency efficiency and additional risk of exploding mass fabs. Not make boys and forget.

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

              100% Agreed.

              Developer for LOUD Project | https://discord.gg/DfWXMg9
              AI Development FAF Discord | https://discord.gg/ChRfhB3
              AI Developer for FAF

              Community Manager for FAF
              Member of the FAF Association
              FAF Developer

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 4
              • P
                Printer
                last edited by 28 Nov 2020, 07:24

                What about the suggestion about incorporating diminishing returns? Did I miss a response to that suggestion?

                Seems like that would be easy to tune by the balance team and keeping RAS SCUs useful.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                • F
                  FtXCommando
                  last edited by 28 Nov 2020, 11:51

                  Incredibly incoherent with the rest of the game. We don’t need units with additional exceptions that break the core rules of how things work.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 4
                  • B
                    Blodir
                    last edited by Blodir 28 Nov 2020, 13:23

                    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)
                    A B 2 Replies Last reply 28 Nov 2020, 14:50 Reply Quote 9
                    • A
                      arma473 @Blodir
                      last edited by 28 Nov 2020, 14:50

                      @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.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • T
                        techmind_ Banned
                        last edited by techmind_ 28 Nov 2020, 14:52

                        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'.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • B
                          Blodir @Blodir
                          last edited by Blodir 28 Nov 2020, 16:37

                          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...

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 3
                          • T
                            TheWeakie
                            last edited by 28 Nov 2020, 16:49

                            changing reclaim values will change sentons mid reclaim.

                            i rest my case

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • D
                              Dragun101
                              last edited by 28 Nov 2020, 17:36

                              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.

                              I’m a shitty 1k Global. Any balance or gameplay suggestions should be understood or taken as such.

                              Project Head and current Owner/Manager of SCTA Project

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • I
                                IceDreamer Banned
                                last edited by 28 Nov 2020, 19:15

                                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.

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 3
                                • I
                                  Ithilis
                                  last edited by 28 Nov 2020, 20:05

                                  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.

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                  • D
                                    Deribus Global Moderator @FtXCommando
                                    last edited by 28 Nov 2020, 20:06

                                    @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.

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • F
                                      FtXCommando
                                      last edited by FtXCommando 29 Nov 2020, 01:19

                                      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.

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                      • A
                                        Azraaa
                                        last edited by 30 Nov 2020, 14:12

                                        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

                                        Developer for LOUD Project | https://discord.gg/DfWXMg9
                                        AI Development FAF Discord | https://discord.gg/ChRfhB3
                                        AI Developer for FAF

                                        Community Manager for FAF
                                        Member of the FAF Association
                                        FAF Developer

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                        • T
                                          TheWeakie
                                          last edited by 30 Nov 2020, 17:13

                                          what is your vision of what lategame should look like then

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          93 out of 140
                                          • First post
                                            93/140
                                            Last post