Well I think this is the first question we should ask ourselves before arguing whether dox are nuke or not. Why do I say that? Because we have to know what is the propose to build one unit before discuss about the balance. For example, skitter is for scouting so its job is scouting. Then if they are tanker than inferno, they are overpower. Now is about dox, maybe more general. Let's talk about bot first. My understanding of bot is for support, as we have battle-fabs(I don't know what is it name..sorry). So if they are good at support, they are balanced. If they can be use as main force like tanks, they are not really balance(If you think support should be able do that, I can't say anything). I can't tell what is uber think about bots, but I can guess(I have not been though Alpha, so if I am incorrect, please point out). I think uber initially want tank be the main force which require less micro(one of the goal). And a Rts always have micro to determine win or lose (not absolute, but well take part of it). Let say there are two type of player in PA, one is micro-relied player(more to use their good micro to win)and tactic-relied player(more tactic). And we should balance it for both types to win. So they add bot to favor these "micro relied" player, as bot need more micro than tanks. Then, we can't let the main force to favor the "micro" player, so bots are for support, they are powerful if they are used properly. So it doesn't mean anything if a group of dox are beaten by a group of ants, because dox should not be used that way, they should be for example send to the back of enemy's base to destroy mex, fabs, etc. They can be a good distraction. So I more like the them in the last build(they do under-power somehow as the can't even beat one ant). But now, they can do scouting(so why we build skitter and firefly?), they are super good at doing their own job and they can even ant-air(I don't understand why make it like this instead of adding stinger back). I think a universal unit is not good for the variety of units been used. In conclusion, we really need figure out what dox for in order to arguer about balance, and I personally think the dox now are too strong for the propose of support.
I pretty much agree with you there, i see people doing like 100 dox vs 100 tanks and so on, thinking, why. They are fast and can be buildt fast in nr. Exemple: i was playing a game on multi planets, some was like trying to invade one of my moons with tanks, ofc i had facs building tanks aswell, talking t1, so i super fast thought ,okay need some super fastback up, now on my main planet i was victoryus long ago, it was a slaughter house. But never the less i had like 40 noo, 3000 bot facs makeing dox, i thought okay, need em for support over here ,sent them super fast again, into the teleporter ,they arrive, i spitt em up flanking the army right and left with tanks as front line and it was a beautiful deathball. Game ended with me dildonihilated everyone, its was a glorius death to everyone, besides me. Maynbe not useful posting but atlest on topic
Fast raiders, run around taking down metal extractors, avoiding the opponent's army. That was the idea even before the boost in 70289, and it's certainly something I like. Tanks are kind of slow, so to have a faster option is totally called for. Raiding is always a strong strategy in a game where the economy is so important. With amphibious ability, they can sneak attack (ignoring their ability to shoot from under water). Part of the problem right now is that Dox have a good chance of beating, or at least putting up an equal fight against Rippers (maybe with Infernos). Metal for metal, Dox win hands down, but this question turns out to be more complicated in reality. I don't think anyone would have any problems with Dox losing against tanks in a head-on fight. But this isn't happening right now.
Dox get rekt by rippers. The only thing they do is to make sure there are no rippers to get rekt by. They are used correctly if you destroy mex and block fabber routes. Then there will be very few rippers, and with the high DPS of dox they tear through low amounts of tanks. No other unit is so efficient at taking down metal.
Sure if you avoid them. I was responding to your statement that: Just to be clear. It appears right now as if the dox are using the same self-help ai that the boom bots use. Which means with no micro they will run head long into whatever they see if not given a previous command. Infernos destroy dox at close range. If you micro the dox you can own infernos no problem. Rippers own dox unless you have a lot more dox than there are tanks, or you are able to micro them around the tanks faster than the turret can turn. If there are more dox than rippers and the rippers back pedal while shooting the dox if the dox aren't microed they will continue to chase the rippers and will lose every time. This is because the rippers have a longer firing range than the dox.
well bots(doxes) are not for support, but for raid... they are the same as Strikers in Battletech: http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Striker_(BattleMech_role)
Right, well here's where I'm coming from: I don't know what sorts of numbers you have in mind here. The idea was Dox against tanks of equal metal worth, because that's the typical measurement (not necessarily the best, but it gives a baseline). This was tested in another thread (see quote below), granted with a mix of Rippers and Infernos (which is the more typical tank army). I don't know if using plain Rippers makes a difference – if it does, then I stand corrected, and you can pretend I said Rippers and Infernos. Although based on your description above, it would seem as if this is even more unfavorable for the Dox (the Dox will run into the Infernos and die horribly) – and yet it isn't. If you're going to give one player the advantage of using the units correctly, then you've already tipped the scales and the test is biased. If both use their units correctly, there's no confrontation in the first place, because the Dox are running around taking down the other guy's mexes instead. That's why the tank guy doesn't get to micro for this particular test. If you think there's a flaw in this test, do point it out so it can be tested in a better manner. Maybe area attack favors the Dox somehow. @wondible: Don't mind the quote.
the problem with dox is that they are much faster than t1 tanks now with good scouting and decent range, so can pick and choose the engagements they take on. You can easily outmanoveur the t1 tanks and then smash them in unequal confrontations. It does take a bit of micro but done correctly it is a huge advantage. EDIT: It is possible ramp up your unit production really quickly with dox as the average eco consumption of a bot factory pumping out dox is about 2/3rds of a vehicle factory pumping out units.
BTW: You can beat the **** out of me, but I think I was the one who wanted adding anti-air to DOXes first! And yes, I still think that this is RIGHT! In my opinion the game was lacking an anti-all (well, nearly, Celestrial is missing) unit that is cheap to build but nearly gots no firepower! The problem right now just is that they are too GOOD at anti-air if used in masses/ it´s too easy to produce masses of DOXes!
Here's what I honestly think, bots are supposed to be infantry right? If that's the case, they need more infantry features. infantry in modern combat and rts games are: mobile, able to climb mountains and clear cities and fight in forests (places tanks cant manuever or take advantage of their crazy ranged cannons) are slow, but can be fast if coupled with transports (lets just argue a bot is a combination of both for simplicity sake) are cheap, but get expensive if coupled with transports (again lets just argue a bot is a combination of both for simplicity sake) are used in surprise attacks and can generally win any fight if they are fortified in buildings or forests as they can take advantage of cover to bring to bear their short ranged but very powerful anti vehicle and anti air weapons (I'm talking about rpg's, laws, javelins, and stinger missles) Are, infact, used as raiders and scouts if they can move fast and have the element of surprise (hidden in buildings or forests) Tanks on the other hand Are used as vehicle snipers with long ranges in open areas Deal crazy damage at a slow fire rate can take a beating (mostly to protect from small arms fire) Are useless if caught off guard If we look at this, the answer is simple but very game changing Bots need to be able to hide in forests (invisible to raider and invisible to tanks unless they get too close) they need to be slowed in forests (apc have problems in forests) They're damage should be weak at range but do more at close range (the benefit of surprise and mobility) Need an increased cost
Vehicle factories and bot factories have the same eco consumption when they are building units, however, dox cost much less and there is a time between units when factories don't produce anything. This means you can have more bot factories than vehicle factories running at the same time. Also because you need less eco then you need to have less fabbers so you can get even more factories up so you end up snowballing your opponent.
I thought as much. There's a problem. Yeah, each vehicle factory will produce an army of Rippers and Infernos (5 to 2 ratio) at 11.1 metal/sec on average (if I did my math right ) if you include rolloff time. For a bot factory producing Dox it's 7.5 metal/sec (3 sec production, 3 sec rolloff, that's an easy half of the 15 build power of the factory). Extra metal then, for more bot factories. Sounds easy enough. But that takes time (and metal for the factory itself, which doesn't go into your army). These factories need more energy plants. That takes even more time (and metal, same as before). You can call it an investment, and it is. But all this takes a lot of time. And time is another precious resource in RTS games. It's often forgotten in between number crunching of metal costs and DPS and whatnot. A game of PA is in many ways a race after all. And the surplus metal isn't as easily converted into an army as one might think. (For those of you thinking I'm starting to get naggy about this issue, please forgive me. ) Try it though, see if you can produce the same metal worth of bots as tanks in a certain amount of time (your choice). I admit, it's a loaded suggestion, because I already tried this, but I really want others to see it for themselves. And hopefully share your findings, maybe you'll have different results than me. Or maybe think up a different format for the test.
you can have less expanding fabbers grabbing metal and less building power plants to support the same number of factories so yes the factories take the same time to build but there is also less dead time between factories when you are just building eco to support them. This means you can still get factories up quicker than air/vehicle factories. Now this wouldn't be a problem if dox were weaker in metal cost as it would just be your choice to have lots of cheap units quickly on the field. This turns into a problem when dox get the scouting buff and extra range buff they just received as they couldn't be microd effectively before this change without some supporting scouts. EDIT - you might still get the same average metal cost of units out over a given period of time, i've not done the maths on that. but you can get an early lead which is utterly crucial
Sure, if you're only counting factories. But equal number of factories gives you inferior production power (metal/sec into an army). You'll have less metal worth of army on the field, and what do you have in return for this? Surplus metal? But you just said you're not using that metal, because you have equal number of factories. So you're just wasting time. You need more factories, unless you're doing something entirely different than competing on army strength. There's obviously more going on with Dox than metal by metal comparison. This I'll happily agree to. They're immensely good at raiding, swarming, power in numbers even if they'll be weak when confronted head-on. With them you can be so many more places if you want, than a tank player. Micro intensive, but hey, at least you have the option. And it's a really good option to have, with a lot of potential. But my point is different. Really, just try it out. It's easier that way. Unless you want to read my wall of text on my testing. And with this in mind, do you think you're still getting your money's worth? If so, I'll shut up.
