Smol ACU Adjustment
-
The other option is to look at energy cost for OC. OCing an Ilshovah already requires more than one Estor.
-
Nah OC is actually fun and a skill mechanic. If the gun damage is lowered to give ACUS less passive value then it requires more attention paid at the front to properly manage using OC which in turn makes it harder to scale properly while being aggressive and you will also begin to feel the OC e cost when you need that OC to do any real damage to t2 the same way you need it for t3 units.
If I'm being honest I think such a change is going to be a huge improvement for teamgames, it's more 1v1 (and 2v2) that will be more uncertain for me.
-
Removing Auto OC will probably just make everyone play better since they will actually target the right units with OC and get some multi-kills. Plus manual OC has a quicker cooldown. There's almost no circumstance where I ever use auto OC, and think it is a mistake for other people to be using it. I'd be happy to see it removed though.
I don't think halving ACU gun damage would affect T2 land usage much, it already takes like 10 seconds for a gun ACU to kill a T2 unit without overcharge. It would drastically reduce the ACU's effectiveness against T1 spam, which is probably not desirable. Most likely I would hate this change since I like powerful, offensive ACUs, and I'm afraid of what 1v1 T1 spam gameplay might look like. It might make auroras OP too. I'm not opposed to trying it though.
I don't like making T2 units in general because the game is very unlikely to end on the T2 stage, especially so in teamgames, so all the T2 units will be obsolete. T3 units never become obsolete, so it is never bad to make them. By the time you invest enough in a T2 army that can easily start crushing T1 spam, you could have made a T3 HQ and just countered the T1 spam with your own T1 spam. Unless there's some coordinated T2 push across the entire team, going T3 quickly seems like the much safer play.
Way back in 3655 T2 HQ and support facs received big nerfs because apparently T2 rush was too common. The HQ nerfs have since been slightly rolled back. Since then the range bots have been nerfed, T1 bombers made cheaper, Aeon T2 made decent, and other T2 rebalanced, I think it would probably be okay to bring T2 HQ costs back down a bit. I think the T2 movement speed changes were good, and I've always felt a nerf to T1 movement speed would be nice as well. Slowing down the somewhat frantic pace of the T1 stage and giving you more time to react and not get shift-g'd. These changes would let you have T2 units a bit earlier and make it harder to hold them off with just T1 spam, meaning you would need to actually participate in the T2 stage.
-
I think a reduction to gun ACU range would be a more reasonable nerf, if ACUs need to be nerfed.
-
I definitely do think needing 15 shots to kill a pillar vs 7 will make a difference (UEF moment), it also punishes you less for not keeping a clump of units because you aren't as worried about acus doing free passive damage. It makes it more of a question to keep a concentrated dps ball that is at risk of OC vs safer but more likely to get caught out of position units. This is, again, mainly a teamgame approach since I'm not factoring in blobs of units without ACUs or ACUs without blobs of units.
-
100 DPS is already nothing for T2 units, you need OC to be able to safely handle more than 2-3 T2 tanks. Halving ACU DPS will just make it comically easy for T1 spam to kill it. If you wanted to make T2 stronger you should nerf OC not base shot damage
-
Correct. That's why I said this is just looking at how decent it's going to be for teamgames. The reason t1 stage is fully irrelevant in teamgames is because ACUs stop any spam below 20 tanks even before OC is accounted for and by the time you set up the proper spam to overrun an ACU, t2 is already out and ready. Then t2 spam has a hard time breaking past a gun ACU for the exact same dynamic aside from an insane all in where you either get a snowball that cascades through the map or you lose.
-
I vote killing auto oc (or perhaps it's possible to reduce dmg from auto-oc shots vs manual ones?)
As much as agreeing with Thomas annoys me I think he's right this time
-
Auto-OC is just a qol thing, getting rid of it wouldn't nerf guncoms much
Frankly auto OC is most useful when paired with snipe mode so you can move forwards while also targeting enemy ACU. Without it you have to stop to shoot OCs
But for defending your commander from T2 spam, manual OC is actually better because it has higher ROF and you can pick better targets
-
why are you guys like 1200 if u can manual oc spam while doing proper base management i cant do that
-
Nerfing gun will relatively buff T2. What do we do to not go back to "T2 always beats gun" days?
-
Since manual OC is already better (CD and targeting) there is no reason to remove auto OC.
Don't make the game more challenging for average players. -
by only having manual OC, you basically have a weapon/unit that only exists at all if you are manually controlling it, which makes no sense, micro should just make it better (manual aim of OC), not be needed for its existence in first place
this is just like groundfiring submarines (battleships' underwater damage being nonexistant unless you are microing them where they suddenly become best counter to them), once again forcing micro to get minimum out of unit when it could do so without it like it currently does, with micro increasing what you get from the unit by making its decision making better with micro instead of turning its weapon on at all with micro
if ACU is op with its potential used to maximum (auto OC), then we shouldn't make its potential more manual labor to use, but balance it at its maximum, or remove OC altogether or make it an upgrade like on SACUs, something that makes sense rather than making it harder to use by the player, because that is like making bombers only drop any individual bomb if you manually tell them to, otherwise not doing anything, or more accurately, bombers dropping stronger (more damage and aoe than normal bomb) if you manually tell them to, otherwise dropping their current weaker one
why are these unit abilities being made available only through micro and otherwise not existing?
-
Because micro means you're paying attention to it and not other things. If game is about automation then game is just decided by spreadsheet monkeys and we might as well as play a grand strategy game instead of an RTS.
ACU is important, but that importance should come at an attention cost that causes the rest of your game to suffer in order to maximize utility. Unless you're a God at splitting attention properly.
These sort of things are fun because it involves both players playing mind games and trying to jebait bad attention investments rather than "oh I hit this button after dragging a line of e storages to make my ACU 3x as strong."
-
Auto OC is some stupid ability FAF added, so it's much easier to argue for it's removal than things in the game from the start. It has horrible anti-synergy with the new variable energy overcharge system (which I still think is the worst thing ever done to the game).
-
well, imo you shouldn't be able to buy a new weapon (OC) with attention, all weapons you have should be usable automatically or shall we start making tanks not shoot unless you micro their guns as well? where is the line between """micro""" and having to do manual labor to use your units to their base effect? micro is about making units "act better", not "act at all" and you can still use OC better manually if you want to spend attention for it like you say, or are you saying auto OC is so good it can replace a human? I for one don't want to have to stare at ACU and click OC every x seconds in a strategy game, grand or not, to have the same unit the other player does
manual OC was an outlier to begin with, in game where every weapon can be and is fired automatically (except once again things like nukes which aren't fired automatically because of obvious reasons), like veterancy, it seemed like some kind of attempt to put rpg/moba elements into the game that was never thought through, if gpg didn't add it from start and decided to do so afterwards you can be sure many players would question it instead of blindly accepting it "because it was there from start"
-
Why do you always take things to an insane slippery slope? The line between the two is what makes a game fun jesus christ
Or is it my turn for the nonresponse and I say "hurr durr since auto-oc exists u might as well as have your engies automatically plan out your optimal reclaim path when you click mexes and units should automatically maintain max distance from anything in their radar range"
-
Is the objective here to make t2 phase last longer or for it to be more impactful while active? The com dampens the impact t2 can have early on, while quickly upgrading to t3 land can usually be more effective than getting the amount of t2 units required.
If you want the t2 phase to be extended, then t3 is the problem here.
if you want t2 to be more effective, overcharging is the problem.
The gun damage does make a difference but only up to a point. Overcharge has more of an impact on later t2 pushes. -
the reason I am using that comparison is because "tanks not shooting unless you tell them to" literally is the same as "ACU not OCing (aka shooting) unless you tell it to", it is not really incomparable slippery slope like you think it is, even if it did appear as one, unit not using weapon unless manually told to is all there is to it
if you want to use "but it uses energy to fire so its not the same as other weapons", static arty uses e to fire as well, and it fires automatically, why should ACU be any different except to give it some arbitrary limitation, when microing it should, like I said, make it use OC better instead of at all, like all other units do (except battleships shooting submarines ofc)
also my predicted outcome for removing auto OC: everyone good at the game (capable of microing acu OC while playing the rest of game) will still stop t2 land with manual OC with change being a minor inconvenience (or fun for some I guess), everyone bad at the game (can't micro acu OC without losing macro) will get overwhelmed by t2 land and lose, or stop it, but lose to enemy macro because they were busy OCing instead of playing the game
-
@thomashiatt said in Smol ACU Adjustment:
Auto OC is some stupid ability FAF added, so it's much easier to argue for it's removal than things in the game from the start. It has horrible anti-synergy with the new variable energy overcharge system (which I still think is the worst thing ever done to the game).
Give me the ability to OC while still following the last move order and I won't complain about removing auto-OC. As is, it is useful for retreats.
IMO frequent lack of T2 usage comes down to dynamics that have very little to do with the T2 units themselves:
- Early game, grabbing mexes and reclaim is a must. Raiding is often also important. Hence T1 cannot be skipped.
- Mid-game, eco is important. T2 pushes take time to build and reach the enemy, time that allows preparation of defence (gun ACU, T2 PD, maybe even T3 land).
T2 land is not useless, but mex upgrades and map size are the real reasons T2 land has little use.
So, nerf mass-storage adjacency bonus for more T2 tanks?
