starting eco

just want to say that the main reason why t2 and more advanced stuff is seen in 2v2s and above is because of the starting eco. It's also the main reason why it's not seen often in 1v1s.

Do you even ever use t1 in 2v2 and up? How long if you do?

Well let's say the metal is constant for each test. 50% density.

1v1 means i will likely not build t2 unless the game drags on because it's simply easier to spam t1
2v2 means you will have double starting eco and will likely have double the chance of going 2v2
3v3 means you probably are 3x as likely to go t2 with 3x more starting eco
etc.

3v3, 4v4, and 5v5 t2 is absolutely necassary no matter what, i've found. And it's because of starting eco.

T1 all the way. Until you reach a stalemate. Then t2 and hope you own more of the map. T2 is a bad idea until you can defend your map position.

Just want to point out that we won clan wars without needing T2 most of the time.

i'm sure you needed it for eco

We didn't. The only game we NEEDED it was against VoW, and they turtled on a moon. Every other game was decided in the T1 stage and on a gas giant.

Clan wars was like 5 buildish ago. A lot of stuff has changed since then. I don't agree totally with OP or yourself but you are both a bit right (IMO).

Personally I think T2 is about where it should be. I find myself using it quite often in 1 v 1 and team games, and it's often the deciding factor. I beat Gandalf on the ladder the other day because I got t2 up and he didn't

Increase starting eco, or make t2 cheaper and you'll end up back where we were in early Beta with a 't2 rush or bust' strategy.

Edit: A point I think I should make- I notice many people feel compelled to 'rush' a t2 factory (i.e. plow loads of fabbers + com into it). This is where you hit the trap of stinting your t1 production. What I've taken to doing is putting 1 t1 fabber onto a t2 quite early. Energy is now cheap enough for this to be fairly inconsequential to your eco / expansion efforts, and by around 10 mins you've got your t2 factory without taking the pressure off with t1.

nuke or bust imo

I see what your saying, but if build energy and metal with that fabber instead your economy will be stronger and you can rush out a t2 factory a lot faster, still have it at 10 minutes with a stronger economy to back it up.

It still depends on other conditions. If you have a system with 2 small planets you play your 2v2 more like 2 1v1s. Or with bigger teams, it will be more about surrounding your enemies and getting the advantage and just produce huge T1 blobs that run over their bases. Then you use T2 if they turtle.

On a big system, T2 has a greater impact. If you play against a team and dominate the T1 war but they get away to another planet and build some T2, the tides can turn. For 1v1 you can see T2 on Pacific sometimes because the map feels so big and the impact of the T2 ships is huge.

So I think, maps are a bigger factor for T2 (see also the paragraph below), if you count metal distribution it is obvious. With 30 metal spots on each planet, even a team game will most likely be about T1 and denying expansion. With planets with 80 or 90 metal spots, it will be about expanding and securing the lategame, denying is also important to slow the enemy but it is not the single focus of your game.

@cdrkf
Building the factory is not the problem. It is like orbital (the launcher is relatively cheap): Running the factory (or orbital fabricators) will bring the huge economy drain and the window for the T1 player to attack you. He will just kill your army and you can't rebuild as fast as he does because all your metal goes into these fabbers. I play a lot of team games and at some point if our eco expert isn't in the team or eco will tank because of orbital fabbers or T2 fabbers or both. If you survive this and get some T2 economy up (or proximy bases on other planets for orbital), you are in a good position (you have to trade this position for map control but that shouldn't matter that much because you have T2 eco and can still raid while defending). This is easier on big maps, because defending is easier, killing all your T1 metal takes longer and it is harder to surround the T2 player (you can maybe even sneak some expansion on a bigger planet).

Actually that is one point I forgot to make- I tend to get a fairly quick T2 factory- I don't usually go T2 eco though for a while longer.

The t2 units (especially bots) aren't that expensive. You don't even need the factory on repeat- just a handful of GilE, Bluehawks (esp if orbital is involved) or a few shellers microed well can be devastating.

@clopse, your assuming I *wasn't expanding* with other fabbers My point is a single fabber making T2 slowly is such a minimal impact that I can usually balance it with expansion.

T2 Cheaper and weaker pl0x.

T1 swarm is stronk!

But would love a little more trench in my warfare, machine gun down the ants as they charge.

But I dunno how.

I turned the T1.5 laser into the T2 PD from supcom in my mod, and that guy seems great, but that is with my own unit balance too.



I feel unqualified compared to you gals/guys to discuss this.

I just think t2 should be a little cheaper, that's all!

Afaik T2 bots are the same price as T2 vehicles right?

Only if in return T2 metal extractors would also be tuned down to 7 metal/second as well.

The cost of T2 is partially so high, to counter the avalanche like eco explosion when reaching T2. It's also why you spam T2 just as much as you spammed T1 before, instead of treating T2 as paragon units in an army consisting mostly of T1 meatshields.

Because I mostly play 1v1 games, I have very little knowledge of whether t2 metal extractors are balanced or not. They give like, 21 extra metal/s? I can't remember. A lot though, so yes perhaps they could stand to be nerfed a bit. Maybe their advantage should be higher HP instead of increased output.

That's actually funny, because that's what Statera did, both T1 and T2 extractors extracted 5 metal/s. A nice multiple, why do we use 7 and 21? Harder to follow imo.