My crazy idea to bring back T2 - slight wall and defense structure buff?

Discussion in 'Balance Discussions' started by philoscience, November 9, 2014.

?

Do you think a slight buff to defense structures could help balance t1/t2?

  1. Definitely agree

    57.1%
  2. Agree

    28.6%
  3. Neither agree nor disagree

    4.8%
  4. Agree

    4.8%
  5. Strongly Agree

    4.8%
  1. philoscience

    philoscience Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,022
    Likes Received:
    1,048
    Ok, so hear me out before you go "No that is really stupid it would just encourage turtling"! Back in Beta/Gamma we had a period when walls and defenses were absurdly OP and games easily turned into turtle fest. I am not advocating that, but I think that balance has changed enough where a slight buff to walls (decreased build time and cost, increased hp) and turrets (slight hp buff) could actually make t2 much more viable even in 1v1s. Right now T1 balance is actually fairly good, especially compared to gamma/beta. Units mass up nicely and handle both raiding and straight-foward attacks well. Armies start as dox heavy and transition to mixes of tanks and doxs, with doxs flanking around and tanks being mainline offense/defense, and bombers serving surgical strikes. We could still use a little unit variety at t1, maybe even a slight cost reduction to bombers and a buff to grenadiers and infernos particularly if we buff defense.

    But anyway here is the reason I think this could work: right now t1 just completely and utterly decimates defense structures. If it were a little easier to throw up walls and turrets, and more worthwhile, then smallish-to-medium t1 groups would need to flank around to be effective. Early game wouldn't be quite as hectic as you could put up defenses in sensitive areas and focus on flanking and raiding maneuvers. T2 is already buffed in such a way that it overwhelms defenses totally. So early game would be about maneuvering and base building and you would then have to decide: do you continue pumping mass into t1 until you can overwhelm the enemy defense, or do you tech up and strike more surgically?

    TLDR: the best way to bring t2 back and 'nerf' T1 might actually a very slight buff to walls and defenses.
  2. philoscience

    philoscience Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,022
    Likes Received:
    1,048
    Oh god I am not a smart man. Totally messed up my first poll. Treat the bottom options as "disagree" and "strongly disagree" :(
  3. squishypon3

    squishypon3 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,971
    Likes Received:
    4,356
    Haha, I think I can agree. Right now I don't even know the state of defenses, as nobody builds them, which I assume means they're absolutely terrible.

    Defense buff ubr pls. (But make them use energy to fire)
    philoscience likes this.
  4. LmalukoBR

    LmalukoBR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    327
    Likes Received:
    278
    Maybe differentiate the SingleLT by giving it more ROF and the DoubleLT more damage. So the first is more useful against bots and the second against tanks. Buff in HP would be welcome too.
    philoscience likes this.
  5. exterminans

    exterminans Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,881
    Likes Received:
    986
    Better idea: Reintroduce larger planets and improve creation of bottlenecks. Seriously, T2 is still in the game. Just not in your average "gg in 6:59" match.

    Buffing walls? Uhm .... no. At least not decreasing build time, in no way. HP could be boosted a lot, but build time is already way to low, seeing how easy it is to build them right on the battlefield. They don't really change the map, they are just being used to boost turrets HP currently - which is a shame. What they could really use, is a non-linear gain in HP during construction, say let HP only grow to 1/10th while under construction and add the other 9/10th once finished so they are not established while under fire. Personally I would even like to see them with full shield mechanics (you know, 30 second charge sequence after construction, mostly for being impossible to speed that up), with damage still being proportionally reflected to the actual HP.

    T2 just needs more time to fully unfold, both due to resource requirements and the overall increased range and decreased speed - compared to T1. But it's useless unless there are already locations fortified enough to justify the tech up. These locations need time to develop, even more so since micro is overly rewarding so that players usually don't put much thought into playing smart with the map for the first few minutes.
    Last edited: November 10, 2014
    igncom1 likes this.
  6. LmalukoBR

    LmalukoBR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    327
    Likes Received:
    278
    Perhaps combat fabers could build walls too. It seems to fit inside their unit role, as a front line fabber.
    pieman2906 and philoscience like this.
  7. Bgrmystr2

    Bgrmystr2 Active Member

    Messages:
    384
    Likes Received:
    201
    I agree!

    Wait no! I mean I agree!

    No, I uhh.. I... I..... Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh

    Totally agree on defense buff. xD
    philoscience likes this.
  8. cola_colin

    cola_colin Moderator Alumni

    Messages:
    12,074
    Likes Received:
    16,221
    it would certainly help to reach t2 more easily, but it would not fix the core issues I see, which are mostly about energy/metal balance, as I've described so many times ;)
    philoscience likes this.
  9. burntcustard

    burntcustard Post Master General

    Messages:
    699
    Likes Received:
    1,312
    Walls don't need buffing O.O Defensive structures in my opinion do, a tiny bit, or units need to be made worse.
  10. igncom1

    igncom1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,961
    Likes Received:
    3,132
    What numbers would you use for the building then, as I might consider stealing them for my mod.
  11. igncom1

    igncom1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,961
    Likes Received:
    3,132
    Or at least made useful enough that you actually require the siege counter to efficiently beat them.

    But don't tanks now shoot towers behind walls now by aiming for the gun?
  12. exterminans

    exterminans Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,881
    Likes Received:
    986
    Making walls bigger could help a lot. Quadruple the HP, triple the size (slightly increased height and triple the width, but not depth!), quadruple the cost. So you cant just shoot a hole in it that easily.

    Fortifying towers themselves could probably work as well, especially the larger ones. Don't buff the fragile T1 tower, but the T3 tower could use a significant HP buff.
  13. K1S3L

    K1S3L Member

    Messages:
    85
    Likes Received:
    44
    We do not need buff T2, just need use larger radius of planet
  14. Gerfand

    Gerfand Active Member

    Messages:
    575
    Likes Received:
    147
    In Reality Turrets would be OP, if they had more turning Rate!
    igncom1 likes this.
  15. philoscience

    philoscience Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,022
    Likes Received:
    1,048
    I think turrets, particularly t1, need to cost slightly less and be slightly stronger. To go along with this, grenadier and inferno also need slight buffing. This brings us back to a much more dynamic t1 game.
  16. Gerfand

    Gerfand Active Member

    Messages:
    575
    Likes Received:
    147
    well, probably they don't need cost or damage buff... insetad a Turning rate buff, and a range nerf on the Dox and T-1 tanks could be a good idea... but while we have that get a range buff to the grennadiers
  17. klavohunter

    klavohunter Member

    Messages:
    53
    Likes Received:
    21
    Agreed on the turn rate buff: A ridiculously large massed horde of Dox is nigh-impossible to kill due to sheer numbers and the turret becoming confused/unable to retarget quickly enough between shots.
  18. philoscience

    philoscience Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,022
    Likes Received:
    1,048
    Turn rate buff might be interesting but I can't shake the feeling t1 in particular needs to be slight cheaper or tougher. I think i'd prefer cheaper.
  19. mjshorty

    mjshorty Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    871
    Likes Received:
    470
    i remember the days where you could defend your expo mex with some defenses

Share This Page