Smol ACU Adjustment
-
@thomashiatt said in Smol ACU Adjustment:
I hardly see managing some base thing instead of using overcharge as a tradeoff. Overcharge gets you hundreds of mass per second of net gain, double if you get the reclaim. Managing anything else in the game is negligible in comparison. And if your are using your ACU aggressively, but not watching it, you are just going to die.
It is a tradeoff because defense requires constant attention, attack doesn’t. If you sit your ACU around you currently don’t really need any externality costs. You could send a scout at minute 5 just to be sure you aren’t dealing with a guy going pure all in cheese and you then don’t die with your ACU mid. You nerf the protection ability of ACU mid and you make it more relevant to keep more consistent intel + attention on it while you sit it around there.
Keeping OC where it currently is while nerfing “lazy” ACU aspects like the generic gun/auto-OC maintains the benefit of proactive play with it while punishing lazy play that simply uses the ACU as an army substitute for the first 10 minutes of the game.
-
So is the balance team going to say if the idea is even on the table or not? The thread is just 90000 words that nobody can even read at this point.
-
@thomashiatt said in Smol ACU Adjustment:
The thread is just 90000 words that nobody can even read at this point.
The big brain move is to use ChatGPT to summerize this forum post.
-
Ill mention the post in balance team discord.
-
I've read through the meanigful posts and I am considering the idea of nerfing the gun by reducing the extra range it gives.
-
@tagada said in Smol ACU Adjustment:
I've read through the meanigful posts and I am considering the idea of nerfing the gun by reducing the extra range it gives.
Don't you think that will make T2 pd creeping a little too powerful?
-
Awesome, Aeon com really needed that relative buff
-
@ftxcommando said in Smol ACU Adjustment:
Saying a “strategy” is involved presupposes a choice is being made. That choice is between manual and auto-oc. Saying a unit should attack automatically (therefore arguing manual might as well as be removed) actively removes the largest strategic element of OC.
It removes """"strategic"""" element of choosing between "microing ACU to have it act at baseline value" and "playing the rest of the game", thus allowing you to freely play the rest of the game where you can utilize real strategy involving units/buildings/economy/intel instead of looking at 1 unit constantly so it doesn't trip over a rock, because with auto-oc you know your ACU isn't going to "forget it has OC unless you choose to sacrifice playing the rest of the game for manually shooting its oc every second", it may still be better OCing manually (which it already is, that you keep failing to remember with your "may as well remove manual", which I never even hinted) but at least it will still use OC at all, like every other unit uses all its weapons at all.
To ad absurdum your post as well, tanks shooting their guns automatically also actively removes the strategic element of manually telling tanks to shoot every individual shot.
You could say having option to micro something to have far greater effect than on its own in fact removes strategic options from the game because now you have to manually do said micro as enemy, who does, will otherwise have physically better units than your own. Is strategy to you merely "who can micro more units at same time and thus have same units but physically stronger"? I prefer it being about coming up with a better plan than the enemy and then having the units do it as I ordered them to. It's supreme commander, not supreme micromanager.
Also your original post was about making t2 get used more in game, which according to you is due to specifically auto-oc and nothing else, have you still not considered buffing t2 in some other way to make that happen instead of nerfing ACU's "anti-t2 superpowers" so they "only exist if and only if you are manually shooting it"?
Obligatory reminder that this same thing already and still exists with battleships groundfiring submarines, where they also gain a schrodinger weapon, as it only exists while you are looking (manually telling them to groundfire) and never otherwise.
-
Why are you still trying to change FtXCommando's mind on the forum? The balance team already said they are just considering a range nerf. Nobody changes their mind on the internet in 2023.
-
One day mach gonna realize attention is a resource in this game and game design is about spending your attention on the fun parts of the game. If OC isn’t fun for you go play eu4 or sins.
Nerfing gun range is insanely residentsleeper btw, worst change suggested in this thread. I’d rather nothing at all be done.
Like nerf every ACU by 3 range and now percies function as new age sniper bots. That sucks brutally, ACUs don’t need to be nerfed in t3 stage.
-
That sucks brutally, ACUs don’t need to be nerfed in t3 stage.
Right. I wonder about adding a second level range upgrade? But it's still a nerf vs T2 PD.
-
Not trying to change anyone's mind, just state my own take on the topic properly.
I thought game design is about making meaningful decisions and not picking the most optimal use of apm on menial tasks. Still trying to figure out what is "fun" in manual reclaim.
Also on topic but forgot to say, changing the gun range will also effect things like dealing with t1 pd, mobile arty, aurora, experimentals and telesnipes.
-
Back to the OP - I think gun is the more common choice just it feels more 'fun' rather than having a major advantage over T2.
I mean we have another thread running about how good tml is, and if you can use a few pd's to control more mexes they can start paying for themselves, as well as covering reclaims fields, etc. gun still needs e store and more power built to support it.
Recent balance increased t2 land speed and also added hotkeys for splitting units by tiers, so potential to divert your t1 spam vs gun ACU while your t2 units try flanking. Nerfing ACU range would be way too harsh at late game stage.
What would be a meaningful nerf to gun, would be to reduce the reclaim left by overcharging units, say half normal, then it is less punishing to lose your T2 units vs it
-
I'd argue that there are more cases of a unit performing much better when babysat other than the ACU. Tryharding with early raiding tanks and bombers is one. Getting the most out of your first strat is another, and a very impactful one. Hoplites and Mongoose. Beetles, by definition. Corsairs. ASF obviously. All differ from ACU with that you don't press 'O' before you micro. Singling out the ACU which you'll never have more than one of is silly. Nerfing the ACU and moving away from the original balance instead of removing auto OC (which moves us closer to the original) is sillier.
-
Nah, none of those units entirely end 1.5 (up to 2.5 if ur aeon) stages of game interaction in teamgames.
-
About nerfing damage of ACU:
I did some math for current state of game
Used UEF units as example stats. No regen, overkill, range, veterancy and unit loss taken in account.
Assumed 5s OC cooldown, 2 units killed by OC average.Calculated price of ACU in units
-
ACU vs T1:
** No OC, No Gun: ~13
** No OC, Gun: ~18
** OC, No Gun: ~19
** OC, Gun: ~23 -
ACU vs T2:
** No OC, No Gun: ~3,7
** No OC, Gun: ~5,2
** OC, No Gun: ~9
** OC, Gun: ~9,8
So against T1 units Gun upgrade have almost same strength as enabling OC
Nerfing damage will impact T1 vs ACU
But against T2 units Gun upgrade is negligible compared to OC
Nerfing damage will NOT impact T2 vs ACUWhat can be done to nerf ACU against T2 (without removing one kill OC and buffing it against T1):
- Limit OC splash damage to only one shot T1
- increase OC cooldown based on latest OC strength
- Increase ACU damage AND increase OC cooldown
-
-
@black_wriggler Oc mostly already kills reclaim, with its aoe even that of units that were not killed by it, Oc will never leave reclaim from t1 units and usually not from t2 either
-
Why assume 5 second cooldown when that’s only for auto-oc that I want removed?
These stats also don’t really showcase the reality that a gun ACU has continuous free value because the only time your calculation comes into play is if you have so many units that you can swarm ACU+its units. Most of the time, there is a very high margin of error that makes that infeasible and so ACUs get free value shooting at stuff. The point of the gun change is to make the margin of error tighter for keeping your ACU in an aggressive position.
-
@ftxcommando for simplicity. I needed some average value. Properly microed OC will be even stronger against T2 compared to T1
So to buff T2 against ACU we actually should keep auto-OC and remove non-auto-OC instead.
-
I don't try to solve problem of making use of ACU riskier.
I try to solve problem of making T2 stronger against ACU without changing ACU vs T1 balance too much.
Free kills by ACU apply to T1 and T2 equally. OC and base gun have big difference.
