Okay, we have threads about cheaper t2 and less income resulting and obviously that would require units be more expensive to reflect their true balance. We have had discussions over "Risk Vs Reward". This discussion is about theoretically what the newest experimental build changes with 2x cost t2 does to gameplay. I am discussing it because the more I think of it, the more alright it seems. T1 lasts longer: what does the current build require to rush t2, about 10 mex and 12 pgens? Doesn't that mean the next build will require 20 mex and pgen? Doesn't that mean t1 fights will last longer? If turret balance is adjusted, this will be when you decide how big you are in t2 and how fast you t2, so t1 will matter. The problem is, t2 boost will be pretty big, it will give you a snowball effect. Really, that means if someone is smaller they could bottle up and t2 early at a risk, and if someone is bigger they can t2 if they feel safer doing so. The problem, is someone bigger usually t2 earlier, and if they t2 they snowball only larger and larger which autowins at that point. T2 is more risky: you ever see a game where someone tries orbital as their first factory? Doesn't work that well, and yes, I did see one. They didn't actually get orbital up until after someone else did, and that other person went factory first. It was because triple the economy built it faster later, than less economy does immediately. The same can be said for t2, it is harder to t2 as second factory, than it is to t2 after you have expanded. By time you t2 off first factory, someone else will have expanded and t2 before you even did. This is including the time it takes to build the first t2 factory, the t2 fabber, and the first t2 eco structures. T1 units are more cost effective: Since t2 units are 8x more expensive, you would build more t1 units because they are more cost effective. You would build 10 of them to 1 t2 unit. You would only use a handful of t2 units ideally, rangers to destroy turrets, vanguard to snipe commanders and soak damage, levelers only to line behind ants so their ranges combine. If anything, you would use t2 eco to produce t1 units, albeit this is worrysome because being able to afford 5x larger t1 armies might get "too macro", excuse my blasphemy. T2 cost/eco is nerfed: technically, the devs suggest they are boosting t2 cost x4, and t2 income by roughly 3.5x. So, technically, the costs are increasing by more than the income. The t2 things are nerfed with extra cost. Nukes for instance, they won't build at their old rate, they will take 25% more time and percent of your economy to build. Hopefully that will be signifiant. Match length: I think if t2 costs more, it takes longer to establish economy for it and thus establish game enders. So, I think the average match will be longer. This is possibly not the case if t2 really gives you so much economy you can overwhelm faster, but actual t2 things increase in cost and most agree those cause endgame more of the time. Overall: I think it at least fixes a handful of problems (why produce t1, t2 rushing in 5 minutes or less, turrets instead of units), and makes a few sort of bad still (getting t2 is practically victory, overabundant resources). Maybe I am just ready for a new build (wont have changes) or this build even, but your thoughts please?
I've shared my thoughts all over the place. I think the increase of the difference in the two tears will do quite a few things. It'll make the tech race all the more important since the exponential growth for Advanced is absolutely insane now. First player to successfully get to T2 will have a huge advantage. It'll be what we have now, but worse. And I hate what we have now. It'll also make recovery nigh impossible. Make one small mistake? Well, you might as well self destruct your Commander. It'll also continue with the current issue of not all units being valid at all stages of the game – which is what I was sold on back during the Kickstarter. We'll see what ends up happening. But I don't like the sound of it. I don't like the entire game hinging on when you step up to T2. That still makes the game a tech race, even if it's a delayed tech race.
Another addition that it'll likely have, if you go Advanced Air/Vehicles/Bots, you can't really do much else for a while. That'll drastically hamper Unit Diversity.
Idk, if a leveler cost 10 ants, and doesn't to 10 ants worth of work, that at least makes the ant useful throughout the game. Not sure about absolutely every single unit period, but a lot of t1 would be game-long units. Unit diversity is a lot more likely, but in one hand you might see more types of t1 factory before a t2 one. T2 factories cost might be manageable after teching eco, but you need 2x the t1 eco just to get up 1 t2 factory so it will be rough getting them. Then again, whichever t2 factory you choose should be your priority of importance, be it air or vehicles or bot.
From watching the steam, here's an unexpectedly unintended consequence: Reclaiming Vanguards is more difficult.
That was in the stream? I agree, with the numbers, cost increase means reclaim decrease. That is unfortunate lol.
I appreciate how the T2 cost increases make T1 combat units more viable, but agree with Brian that with the current T2 econ values, the T2 econ snowball will be ridiculous. The only alternative that might work is rushing orbital (after 1-2 factories), econ-booming on the first planet you reach, then trying to get a T2 econ on that planet before the T2 rusher reaches your planet. Even that strat might not work: with teleporters costing only 400 metal, it will not be hard to invade a planet without total Catapult or mass-Kestrel coverage, and with T2 costing only 50% more, I'm having trouble seeing myself getting established on a planet before a T2 rusher has a vastly superior eco, an orbital fabber en-route, and a bunch of combat units ready to go through the teleporter. With regard to solutions - I'd be interested in whether nerfing the T2 metal to 49 while keeping the 3k cost (and leaving all other costs unchanged) would be enough to keep the snowball under control. EDIT: After someone noted how the T1 Combat Fabber is WAY more potent now, an orbital rush followed by a catchup T2 rush looks a bit more viable. With Air Fabbers claiming mex and combat fabbers helping build power then T2, it might be possible to catch someone who went straight for T2. Still not sure about that though.
Would be neat cheese. Idk, I am fine with all current costs, along with slightly better t1 economy income, t2 economy not being more than 2x t1, and costs staying the same. Honestly, people can ration their metal better, they have too much now, with this patch 7 t2 metal spots keeps you as saturated in metal as a whole planet. If their goal is to make t2 economy be out of control so it ends games, then to make it not snowball as bad leave it's income and increase it's cost even more, like another 50%. Then you have to play t1, if you try to go straight t2 you die, without t1 you don't live till t2. We are talking about 10 minutes of trying to get t2 rushed, surviving an aggressive t1 enemy would be a Hanukkah miracle.
I would imagine the nuke pays for itself much easier if anything in this patch. Say if you just nuke a spot with 6 t2 mex spots, that's all. And say it takes 10 seconds to re queue and 10 seconds to build each t2 mex again. Just going to do the maths in my head. That's like 30k metal lost just rebuilding your mex. And their cost-54k total and -42 metal for rest of the game. I'd nearly be happy with that in itself.
The insane part is the abundance of metal. If you only nuke 6 metal spots, they have 20, they aren't struggling for metal. Even nuking their metal, is probably nuking resources they don't use anyway. Which means nukes are little more than things you need to throw 4 at a time into multiple mexes at once, and hope you actually break enough to put enemy economy negative. If you just throw one, their eco bars don't even feel it.
People will learn how to use this metal. Will probably take a few weeks and crazy apm but possible. Just need to find the balance between how many fabbers on t2 energy to your 1 guy building t2 mex and then spam like a maniac. But you are right, I could never argue with that. Way too much metal from what I saw.
We will need much more factories dedicated to pump fabbers to keep up with the t2 ressource explosion. Once we will get used to it, I bet we will crave for even more metal.
I don't think (and I don't hope) that the actual balance patch will include this insane metal increase. Maybe they will try what we and the players in the stream suggested: Make T2 metal not that much of an increase and give it a long payoff time.
i just hope they dont completely overwrite T1, like with current vehicle land, every T2 vehicle mix very efficiently counters T1, vangaurds soak up damage while levelers and shellers do so much damage that T1 gets obliterated without landing a SINGLE casualty. or Perigrines ABSOLUTELY annihilating HummingBirds. T2 should just support T1, not replace it, but right now, the replacing is so complete that you just simply need to survive first few minutes then pump out T2 then you win game if they dont have T2 This patch i think will help as it allows you to to use T2, but having T2 without T1 backup as a 'meat shield' or else you will loose alot on your investment
