New balance patch candidate: T1 eco structures, laser accuracy, light unit balancing

[fossil vessel]

Ah, so that must mean in other games it's Cortex instead that is the best, most commonly used Noob 1v1 faction...

[hybrid jasper]

I dont fully get what you are trying to say

sarcastic I guess?

[fossil vessel]

Correct

I am completely genuine when saying that clicking Grunts/Goblins to Fight command instead of just walk command into enemy units is barely any APM toll.

[hybrid jasper]

its still the wrong play vs an attempted tick runby

[fossil vessel]

A nerf. That makes exploiter and llt a more relevant solution than before.

[hybrid jasper]

investing more to defend an expansion than you gain from it will never be a good play

[fossil vessel]

It takes a lot of BP invested into any scout (though less so for a tick) to get a batch out.

[hybrid jasper]

exploiter is still gonna cost more than a few ticks

and will suck after veh come into play

it just means the mex you placed it on is gonna take forever to pay off

also investing bp into a lab is much much less costly than investing bp out on the map

[fossil vessel]

Not false, though exploiter needs very little BP. Cheaper solution is to bring incisors or grunts on Patrol command.

Also your points are very valid for the logic a "different game" follows by having a bit of an indirect nerf to conturrets while also over emphasizing BP costs meaningfulness. Too bad it's off-topic, else I'd elaborate.

[hybrid jasper]

no, we are talking early game where both players are going to dedicate very hard to microing individual units

patrol is gonna suck

patrolling your 2 grunts defending the expansion would be a noob move

[fossil vessel]

Why of course clicking an F command when an enemy has shown itself on radar would be better than ignoring it letting patrol continue

[hybrid jasper]

no f command is also a suboptimal play

it practically guaranees your grunts will not intercept anything

[fossil vessel]

Not in no-run&gun realm

If it's something grunts intercept then the sender wouldn't even push those into the range

[hybrid jasper]

like in starcraft for example? xD

fight move/amove does ineed work very well in tthat game to clear harass

[fossil vessel]

Eh there are explicit units there that can run&gun and not.

[hybrid jasper]

there are 2 units in that game that can run and gun

one is only aa, the other is weird

[fossil vessel]

With local run&gun nerf for low-tech walkers the cooldown-shuffling is only relevant on Arquebus. Others reload very quickly and make no point to hold fire.

[hybrid jasper]

I do feel like discussing starcraft IS off topic tho

[fossil vessel]

To be back on-topic, I'll just repeat that I
disapprove of wind hp buff instead of nerf, and llt buff with no drawbacks, and that Banshee still fires bursts of 5 bullets instead of 6. And don't touch the tidal cost either.
Everything else is likeable but does have alternative solutions.

[radiant sonnet]

even better, minelayer start

saw it in finals of bpl, so it must be good

[scenic breach]

Doesn't exploiter cost more than a mex + dllt? lol

[fossil vessel]

It does, in turn having less BP required to build a combined LLT and normal Mex, with extra large health pool, in the end having huge repairability.

[scenic breach]

In my experience the repairability of exploiter isn't a major factor in real combat situations. Nothing to repair when Janus or Rockos are done with it.

Pretty much the only reason I ever build was is to save myself some apm of setting another turret

Hypothetically you could just make another con, have 2 cons making mex and llts, and still be ahead of the person making exploiters

[hybrid jasper]

Exploiter has more hp than mex+llt so its not that bad especially 1v1

it does alot better vs grunts

but its still inferior to just defending with your own grunts so imo its not super important to balance

[scenic breach]

Yeah it's not super bad, but imo not nerfworthy good

[strong spear]

Build time no
Metal and energy yes

[strong spear]

It forces the player to switch to med tank for raids instead of light tanks and non rocket or plasmabots

[scenic breach]

they kinda nice on frontline because they dont die instantly

[simple island]

The repair speed has been the difference between me losing the exploiter and con or losing neither multiple times.

Doesn't always make a dif but the hp/s you get is nothing to sneeze at during early raids.

[pine mesa]

I dont even think a grunt nerf ould be up for discussion. Every map is just flooded with grunts. Waves and waves and waves and they just wipe out everything. And if its not that its incisors. Maybe its the weapon time. Fast hard hitting short burst lazer. I dont know, but it was reversed and pawns just all swarmed over everything..Well! They'd get nerf in under a week.

[elfin dagger]

This thread is like, waa tick op.... meanwhile grunt with accurate laser sitting quietly in the corner.

[pine mesa]

Still think the twilight should be able to discharge its burst. Leave a wreck and be rezz'd U can rez something so quickly. Destroyed exploiters get rezzed in 2 seconds, I just end up dropping a small fortune in cons and escort units to clean up my wiped ouut mex nodes just to try play on the same playing field only to have to spend even more to rebuild the things.By the time that one con, that managed to not die, spend 3 minutes building a mex. Only to be rammed again
more

[empty lava]

exploiter probably needs a bp increase xD

even if it costs the same as 2 llts, an exploiter shouldn't have such a short window of vunerability while building / rezzing

[simple island]

Yeah the bp is pretty nuts, maybe if that gets nerfed we bring back the slight range advantage they used to have too? (or was it dmg, it's been a while I just remember there was a nerf at one point)

[fossil vessel]

You sure? Does there exist a mode for Balance Changes webpage to sort itself specifically for one unit? The last change appears to be made sooo long ago, and it was a x1.5 dmg buff versus commanders like all llts do.

[simple island]

I'm pretty confident that they had either a range or damage advantage over llt up until ~2 years ago or so (not sure on exact time been playing too long)

I'll do some digging and try to find proof to back up my claim though. Unfortunately I just upgraded my pc so I can't just open an ancient replay to check anymore.

[pine mesa]

Costs like 3 times. The t2 exploiter costs 2400m and 14k energy or something. Same sorta energy as scorpion but 4 times the metal.
✌️ apparently✌️ if you are upgrading the mex to a t2 armoured mex then u only pay the difference. But I dont know how to test this.

[empty lava]

i mean the t1 one

the t2 one is good but there's enough counter play and it costs a lot

[simple island]

Well I dug through the github and I was definitely mistaken. I thought I remembered exploiter getting a 5 range nerf to match llt but it was actually a 5 range buff 4 years ago. Mandela effect hitting hard, but 100% my bad memory.

[true shard]

nerf grunts attack range or add cannons to win turbines

[reef temple]

thats for legion bro

[last osprey]

they nerfed grunt tho

[empty lava]

-3 speed

pawn/grunt both cost nerf too

[elfin dagger]

nerfed and buffed?

[last osprey]

mostly nerf

[scenic heart]

My overall thoughts, although I was only able to play 2 games out of which 1 is relevant so it is more theory than actual feel. I am probably not going to argue about it as I don't have infinite time.

1. The game balance is not only about faction balance but unit and strategy diversity. In 1v1 the unit diversity is low, the game is not well balanced.
2. The game is still in alpha stage so big and frequent changes should not be unexpected. I believe balance team should feel entitled for more experimentation. In SC2 they removed mothership core after many years and millions USDs paid out in tournaments...
3. Economy changes: personally I think more variety is better. I unerstand that this was done for 8v8.
4. Light tank changes: for me only Incisor build time increase makes any sense. Light tanks are one of the most used units and should be nerfed not buffed.
5. Light bots changes: overall a change in the right direction. Especially for grunt, the best unit in 1v1. I would, however, nerf both pawn and grunt more.
6. Tick nerf: an OK change, although I believe accurate lasers can make this an overnerf.
7. Scout vehicle buff is probably just meant to balance accurate lasers so OK.
8. Accurate lasers is a great QoL change but should not affect G2A. Otherwise it is a huge nerf to air. Shuri reload time is definitely not logical, they were not missing and.now ground lasers will not miss them.

[reef temple]

"Economy changes: personally I think more variety is better. I unerstand that this was done for 8v8."
Agree, but rn cortex eco is unplayable. Wind is too op

[tropic gust]

centurions allso got the acurate lasers buff, not just grunts, centurions can completely negate grunts and later you can switch into rocko + centurion

only downside is that you cant protect far away areas if youre playing open 1v1 maps, or you have a much weaker teammate on a lane next to you

[ebon shale]

cortex eco very playable outside supreme tho

rosetta arm eco trolling, koom too

[agile spoke]

Rosetta arm eco is op too

[empty lava]

with the new patch early game arm eco is always better

[agile spoke]

Specially with the power spike on t2 with spiders

[empty lava]

faster solars hue

[scenic heart]

There are very few 1v1 maps where centurions are actually viable. In last BPL it was only Shallow Straights and partially Avalanche. On all other maps you can just run around them.

[minor vale]

Cortex cons got the BP increase so for them, it mostly evens out. While the cortex solar is still cheaper and sturdier

It does get your factory building a tiny bit sooner in the starting build order

[simple island]

Is it fast enough to make up for the cortex exclusive delay before first unit though lol

[empty lava]

not only you can't build is but you lose 250 bp from 2.5 sec delay xD

[pine mesa]

Lol... isnt a cost nerf a buff. XD. Double negative. Like if i nerf the price of that mercedes, it gets cheaper so its a buff isnt it XD. Lol . Gotta love double negatives.

But I dont think buffing and nerfing actually applies to cost. Because inherently a buff or a nerf to a unit stat either makes it more or less valuable. So the buff or nerf is essentially alway directly proportional to the stat thats affected

[astral bobcat]

suggestion: tool tip for balance changes? I think it would encourage more people to try these out

[astral bobcat]

alternate suggestion: automatic welcome message when this option is enabled?

[last osprey]

I agree. No one knows what it is.

they always think it's the extra units pack

[scenic heart]

IMHO just put the changes in the game. The feedback so far has been positive.

[fickle marsh]

Tbh I kinda agree, over all the changes are positively recieved. Add them and fix XD

[quick fulcrum]

Agree as well

[scenic breach]

Plz no nerf grunt microability ;c

[severe wedge]

the bigger problem is this might kill arm in 1v1 for good, people already think this is a one faction game so it's a bad look

[dry solar]

Remove Grunt handling nerf and make the Pawn's weapon range equal. I'm convinced that equal weapon range is a necessary starting point for high level ARM CORE 1v1 balance.
Or crank Tick HP to compensate for the accurate lasers. Buffing Ticks. Crazy, right?

[minor vale]

Did you try the Grunt handling?

[dry solar]

No, I'll be honest, 1v1 high skill I am not, but I get the idea behind it. It's an observation from watching a bunch of games and tourneys. It's too razor's edge to balance Pawn v Grunt on range vs handling, it looks too binary at the high level where kiting is easier. Wasn't a similar balance change attempted like, about a year or a year and a half ago? It didn't work then iirc

I played a lot of MOBAs and other RTS and the principle is the same. Kiting is OP at high level, and if it fails it fails hard. AoE2, cav archers are insane. League, the small range differences in ADC vs ADC matter way more at high level than lower. To have weapon range be a fundamental difference between two units which are supposed to be a mainstay in every bot opener is too hard to balance on.

[lime fern]

Ever since the commander changes infantry bots have been strongly out of meta, its questionable if they're even required to be a mainstay in every bot opener

Grunt certainly, but arm could go pawn or tick

Now they're getting hit with nerfs AGAIN, it feels like grunts and pawns just keep getting shit on together

[empty lava]

i like using infantry as dps behind tanky units

let the stout/welder attract the aggro then pawn/grunt do the dmg

[frigid galleon]

I think nerfing grunt/incisor atm is a mistake, it's the only thing core has going for it

Arm t2 and t3 just infinite better other than shivas

I know it's outside of the scope of this thread but literally they're the only thing making core playable in team games

Arm gets fucking recluse, Razorbacks, titans, thors, sharpshooters, Pulsar, Bulls, Sneaky pete (WHY?), Jaguars, ticks, nuke bombers, emp bombers, Starlight, emp launchers, janus, even cheaper wind

yet somehow forefront of balance changes is the fact that 2 arm t1 units lose to 2 core t1 units in the event they are micro'd properly

[dry solar]

T2-3 imbalance doesn't justify T1 imbalance.

[empty lava]

shouldn't balance faction based on super strong t1 weak t2

[dry solar]

And, since this proposed patch is mostly targeting T1 changes...

[frigid galleon]

I agree just feels weird the plan is to just murder and bury core in the meantime on the off chance t2/3 will ever be addressed by whichever 8v8 playing arm lover balances this game

I don't think the will exists to really fix core in t2/t3 cos it would need some fkn biblical changes

grunt inicsor and shuri have been carrying cortex hard, it's all they have

it's not even that pawns are directly worse than grunts, they just lose the vs grunt matchup, they are stronger in many situations

[dry solar]

I'm no fan of murdering CORE, I just think this one change (equalize Pawn Grunt weapon range) would make balancing 1v1 high level infinitely easier. Blitz v Incisor balance concerns pending. Weapon range mostly affects high level anyways, and like you point out, the matchup.

[frigid galleon]

??? are you high, if range is equal grunts will never be made again in the history of BAR

[dry solar]

That's shortsighted. It doesn't preclude Pawn still being inaccurate, and doesn't preclude other balance changes happening between them.

[frigid galleon]

JAedrik what is your 1v1 os, I am curious

[frigid galleon]

right, I am going to bed

[dry solar]

Tried it in Skirmish, just to be able to say yes LOL. Aggressive Barb, grunt v pawn.

[severe wedge]

core counterparts having a range advantage isn't in itself a bad thing, but the ease with which you can do it is problematic

like back when pawn and grunt were equal speed some people would say "oh but in practice there are situations where the pawn can engage", but as you face better and better players the actual engagements become more grunt-favoured

so the balance of range advantage vs speed advantage currently is a problem, and there isn't even a payoff for getting a perfect engage with blitz vs incisor

[severe wedge]

imo fixing t1 is simply more important, because you have to get through t1 to make t2 units

when players watch a 1v1 tournament and everyone plays core, new players are told not to pick arm in 1v1, etc, and it's been like this for over a year with no plans to address it (and a planned patch to make it worse), it just makes it look like the game has been abandoned from a balance perspective

[frigid galleon]

If you make arm trade equal with core at t1 then grunts should be buffed to not require micro to trade even and make them as strong as pawns for all other purposes, they should also get a tick equiv and a centurion equiv

AND buff like 5 core t2/3 units plus add another core t3 and core t2 unit to each lab to give core equal utility to arm

Then sure agreed

Actually fuck it, buff pawns, and ticks, buff every arm unit, I just became an arm main op, core's many deficiences are NMFP anymore

[fossil vessel]

I protest against touching winds in any way that buffs them.

[scenic heart]

How is this patch murdering arm 1v1? Arm T1 is buffed, core T1 is nerfed....

[ornate crystal]

probably accurate lasers - makes the only 1v1 viable unit arm had so much weaker

[severe wedge]

I don't know for sure it'll be so bad for arm in 1v1, haven't actually played with the latest iteration yet 😆
but yeah tick is somehow holding up the entire faction

[hybrid bluff]

It's really strange, the game is in alpha version but there are no attempts to radically change the balance

that is, what can be said about the faction, it is theoretically better, but in practice the tank factory is not playable at all, and the bot laboratory is playable but requires more multitasking microcontrol, positional play and troop composition

that is, you are not at all tired of watching 1v1 games core vs core

objectively everything says that the core is simply better

this patch tramples into the dirt once again armada

I understand that the balance is designed not only for single discipline but also for team games

but

main questions
why does mace which is worse in hp and repair time take longer to build than its competitor thug

Blitz is the same, it is not capable of anything at all and takes longer to build than light core tanks

for such a price I would like to see more dps and speed

Janus, I don't know how he feels in 4 vs 4 and more games, but in 1 vs 1 games he is a disposable bazooka, and even with micro control there is no way to step back and shoot, he is too clumsy and the slow reload speed gives the effect that in 95% of cases - this exchange turns into a big minus, like blitz, from this I conclude that opening through tanks is simply inappropriate, so at a high level you have to play exclusively through the bot factory

this balance leaves no choice between which opening to choose

I find it funny

what against grant - you have to play with ticks, pawns, centurions, and all in order to contain aggression and not give up control of the map

and the funniest thing is that the armada has much more complex micromanagement, a different troop rotation

Don't think that I'm really that unhappy, I like the idea that the more complex the army and the more diverse it is, the greater the chance of coming out on top in battle

but we are talking about stage T1

it shouldn't look like a late game starcraft 2 zvp where the player is forced to use infestors, vipers queens and hydrolisks to win a fight against carriers

it shouldn't be that hard on t1

I hope you understood what I was talking about and explained the reason why there are no new players for the armada

[empty lava]

i think janus good with support of llts and commander, which in turn are better in slightly less open maps. also being the best com pressuring unit by far makes it good in large teams.

[arctic portal]

Its not just good its op early game

[agile spoke]

Janus not op

Janus is a noob stomper unit

@hybrid bluff imo with 2 changes armada is ok in 1 v 1:

1. blitz -> give same trade potential with incisors , either making them tankier , shoot over each other , increase dps , increase speed , reduce metal cost , etc

2. nerf grunt speed by an extra 3 (if we consider giving it accurate lasers)

[severe wedge]

opening core bots will start feeling like shit if you nerf grunt too much, that thing is your only scout as well as fast fighting unit

[agile spoke]

Which is the most cost efficient trader unit in the game on t1 stage

With Incisor

[severe wedge]

core bot lab should just have a scout unit imo

[agile spoke]

I mean grunt even beat blitzes

Metal for metal and by a lot

[severe wedge]

yeah I still think the range needs to be brought closer

all these other buffs affect the other matchups more than the problematic one

[simple island]

It would be so nice to be able to have greedy con heavy + bot scout open option as core but man would it require alotttt of testing to get the balance right.

[agile spoke]

Make it great again ❤️

[dense elk]

In rocketbot fights grunts r so useless compared to ticks it's almost joke to go cor botlab in some maps

There's literally no vision unit except lashers

Same in t2 there's no gremlin-like for vision

Idk whose brilliant mind decided that the brute force faction should have 0 vision so that they can't see what to brute force into

[scenic breach]

brute force goes where it pleases, doesnt need to see shrug

but yeh lack of vision kinda annoying

gotta micro ilke 1 grunt at frontline, cant select all 'cause they'll just get hit by random rockets ;/

[scenic heart]

I'd much rathwr buff pawn and blitz speed than nerf grunt speed. Make them better at what they're already better even if I don't think light units need a buff.
Most importantly: do some bigger changes, make them more frequently (like.once a month). There is nothing wrong if some of them will be rolled back later. Balance, at least in high level 1v1, is terrible. Below 30 os it's ok but when my opponent controls grunts decently it becomes an almost impossible to win as Armada.
If 8v8 (I don't know as I don't play it) is balanced than probably changing unit speeds will have the least effect on 8v8.

[fringe tulip]

Blitz absolutely need a buff. Their only use is raiding and the lose metal v metal against wind turbines.

[dry solar]

Buffing their speed might have knock on effects that make them too good at raiding.
Making their weapon range equal to their CORE counterparts precisely targets why they get shat on at high level: the binary nature of being kited while unable to do ANY damage in return.

[empty lava]

Since all units can fire while moving kiting is gonna change balance at high skill levels

E.g plat actually good vs spam/fiends since they can kite. Jags die easily but are godly with enough micro

Medium tanks can kite sumos, and welders to an extent.

[frigid galleon]

the problem with Janus is it's really useful in team games, and it's another example of where Core just gets fuckin nothing

like how Arm gets two t3 units around 12k metal class, and Core gets none

or how arm gets ticks, dedicated insane spam and raid unit, and core gets none

[ebon shale]

well how many units in 25k metal class arm gets then?

that one is just a classic cause of tradeoffs

Same as pounder being midly usefull in team games but much stronger in 1v1s

[minor vale]

Bugs like this make it also harder to balance kiting

[severe wedge]

op

[fickle marsh]

Yes cor BP doesnt make any sense, I think changing this would shift the balance more

But also how can it take a grunt 9 shots to kill a scout in some instances

[scenic breach]

Why does Rascal take 20% more time to build than Rover?

[scenic heart]

Exactly, Cortex is better at direct fights, Armada has faster units, better at raiding and deciding when and where the fight takes place. The speed buff does not have to be big at first, let's say +5 for now. This will also help in direct fights a bit.

[scenic heart]

As you're thinking Starcraft is such an example to follow then please tell us how is it possible for Zerg to have a Defiler that has infinite energy and makes Zerg units invincible?
Game balance is not about having equal options but about each faction having a lot of different, strong options.

[frigid galleon]

PunkSkeleton damn i am glad you are here to explain all this to me

I see now I have been a fool

my mistake was to have a differing opinion, please accept my sincere apology

[topaz whale]

l think how responsive the grunt is to strafe or turn is what makes it easy to kit not the speed. how easy it is to do is the problem

[tropic gust]

Ive said it before i say it again: increase pawn and blitz range from 180 to 200, the actual effect of this would mostly be psychological since pawn and blitz are projectile based and very inacurate, but when you see your units start shooting earlier the enemy gets scared more and youre more confident to comit to attacks

It would allso mean that long range grunt micro isnt actually free, you would be more likely to receive small amounts of chip damage to your grunts wich you propably wont repair

[tropic marten]

would rather see shuri get more of a rapid fire laser with lower 'dmg' than it being 1 shot per 2 sec type of unit, its melee after all

shuris should feel microable and quick/agile, if it shoots too seldom it will feel like a bomber

drop the load >> retreat >> drop the load, like so

having rapid fire shuris will make you engage >> unit is increasingly being stunned >> change target with close to no overshooting. It would feel nice to micro, maybe just me

[lost magnet]

I saw this rework once the day it came out then never again
Is there people testing it coz i have never see a lobby use it

[severe wedge]

haven't seen it much, played a couple of games with the latest iteration

[fringe tulip]

Can never get people to enable it because it doesn't say what it does in game.

[dry solar]

https://tenor.com/view/that's-what-i'm-saying-gif-7253831839394134095

Making the weapon range more equal (just equal imo) is the best starting point for balancing grunt v pawn.

[silk sparrow]

No, fixing the bug where grunts shoot backwards is a better start. Don't nudge to sameness, amplify differences

[simple island]

Pawns with equal range would be pretty insane (without other changes), grunts are already slower/less hp/have laser falloff/less dps.

[tropic gust]

Giving pawns 200 range doesnt make them more samey, youre just gonna start noticing that they are projectile based making them bad at range

Pawns are bad at longer ranges even when they are allowed to shoot further

And 200 range pawn vs 230 range grunt is still quite a gap

[topaz whale]

the projectile speed could also be reduced if the 200 range is too good

[topaz whale]

blob v blob they would still hit in this case, but low amount of units the dps would be way lower, so grunts could still kite

[tropic gust]

Pawn could get lower projectile speed and blitz would be unchanged but 200 range

[topaz whale]

l don't think blitz have the exact same issue as pawns to their counterpart, tanks take time to turn, making it way more committal to engage and less time to react to start kitting, unlike bots with the grunt situation

HP and small speed increments might be better to fix the tank issue in blitz vs incisor

[dry solar]

Could see Ubivator (ARM's top guy) said just a bit above. Veh is straight up not a viable opening for ARM

[topaz whale]

l am not disagreeing, just pointing out that the solution might not be the same as bots

[dry solar]

Incisors do kite the f outta blitzes from what I've seen too, which
Yeah you might be right on the solu, but

I'll say more when I'm not supposed to be working (I lied, I'm out of energy to complain about grunt v pawn weapon range imbalance and its outsized impact on higher level play)

[pine mesa]

Yeah im honestly getting a bit dishearted with the state of play regarding arm and core at the moment. I makes me feel hopeless playing arm sometimes. And thats a really bad vibe

, like all the changes to arm units just make them worse. They dont even make core a better faction they just make arm a worse one.

Hounds are not fun at all more. Slow, boring and expensive and like meh. Cancel the hound. Cancel the arm navy, Cancel cancel cancel. I dont understand the vision or at least how the momentum to make core a better faction found its goal, gave core a richer diveristy unit tree , but it never slowed. And arm just feels very underwhelming and well.. it makes me sad. Cos arm is what i play. And id rather stop playing than be force to play a faction because of unconstrained bias balancing. Units should be fun to use. Why remove the fun factor. Like grunts shouldnt be a win condition in t3. I dunno, I dont doubt for a second that your hearts are in the right place but please, listen to the people. Arm needs some attention. Its lost its shine.

[tropic gust]

Arm is the cheese faction right now, centurion rush, ticks, nuke bomber rush, starlight push, gunslinger rush,

Gunship comsnipe

Coretex is more reliable but allso more predictable,

[tropic gust]

You can get away with cheese in 8v8 more easily and it becomes somewhat mandatory

[sour dagger]

the most weird thing for me is armada sea being so bad, and everybody just ignore the situation for ages, nothing has been done after the dolphin only meta nerf
if someone goes armada sea it's automatic be called a troll (and rightly so)

[quick fulcrum]

Uhh... Good sea players like to open Arm tho. Subs are great, skaters are amazing, and destroyer is decent enough. But playing arm requires more experience and more multitasking

So if you new, they will call you troll maybe, but if you experienced, noone will call you troll for playing arm sea

[topaz whale]

any thoughts?

[tropic gust]

armada sea behaves the same way as on land, submarines are basicly your ticks, you make them early and hope the enemy doesnt have destroyers or static torp

a good seaplayer will get their value worth in killing metal extractors over and over again

[dry solar]

I know less about veh but trust Ubivator when he says Blitz+Janus is useless high level 1v1. I've also seen people say that the high speed of raiding units is a dangerous variable to touch when we're trying to buff them to combat their role counterparts from the other faction, because it can turn a raid into to a runaway situation where all your expansions die without any way to catch them.

The solution seems the same to both Grunt v Pawn and Blitz v Instigator to me. They are both undeniably the only units that can fulfill the role necessary in 1v1s: light skirmishing unit to fill out the map. They may double as raiders, but their main role is to fight their counterpart, and that's an unavoidable consequence of their rough stats and cost in relation to the other choices in their respective labs. There aren't any substitutes.

And, since making their speed difference too high is OFTEN seen as edging a potentially runaway situation, making their weapon range difference too high should be seen the same way. It has made combat too binary between the Pawn and the Grunt in the same way that speed difference is feared to potentially make raiding too binary: you either catch them or your expansions are gone. You either catch them or your Pawns are gone. Both speed and weapon range are stats that matter more at higher levels of play, because they have to do with tempo and microing.

180 vs 230 is insane in both cases tbh. Taking absolutely 0 damage while retreating into your territory is winning too hard.

The general idea that ARM has more units than CORE to help make up for the weakness of Pawn/Blitz, and that they should be buffed instead, has too many complications. Nobody wants to buff the Tick, understandably. Nobody wants to buff Janus, because he rules in 8v8.

Ok but I shouldn't complain, then, because the Pawn is buff and Grunt is nerf in the proposed balance patch, yes? But the most important difference at high level that enables the Grunt/Incisor to shit on their counterparts has not been touched. I have little faith in balancing the range difference by touching breakthrough value (hp+speed) instead. It didn't work in the past. It's too volatile of a route to go.

Like, to me, it's verging on a design flaw rather than a balance flaw. This ARM vs CORE design difference for Pawn vs his counterpart must be sacrificed on the altar of competitive design, and a new balance made around it. They must find their diversity somehow else. Having a 50 Elmo weapon range gap is not the way.

On a less pontifical note, I have been playing more of the Proposed Unit Rework. Just vs AI with my friend. Grunt handling changes are unnoticeable to my low OS ass. The metal changes for Grunt Pawn were noticeable though.

[scenic breach]

Meh, blitzes aren't for fighting incisor, they are for making threats to make the incisors chase.

[dry solar]

If so, that is a fundamental design flaw and gap in ARM's veh factory.
If ARM loses any tempo at the opening or light unit stage, Blitz loses that role too. Blitz is a hobo. :(

[scenic heart]

I agree with Jaedrik: the pawn vs grunt and blitz vs incisor balance is a fundamental design flaw. Not only because of high level 1v1 play but mainly because (especially in case of grunt vs pawn) it reduces micro to just reaction time. His solution is viable in my opinion.
I would prefer speed increase because I like the better direct fight vs better raiding kind of balance. This could result in Cortex players having to actually make some static defences.

[severe wedge]

that's a big problem because core players will still attack you with incisor and grunt even if your blitzes suck at fighting them 😔

[pine mesa]

.I only arm, I swear. Like 99.8% arm . And so im quite unique in that regard. It may obviously be bias but I do try to be holistic. And at least u know its genuine

I used to play navy all the time. (arm). Now I dont.

and if i have to its straight into 2 riptides and fk autodestroy that just kinda grows on trees. Sea Trees

So i can use the units. But its like... its a bit much now. This really needs some adjusting. Grunts can kite and run down pawns. thy

Paws have more range...sure as number but the unit suffers. And it does compete realistically ecomincally. So playing core to win becomes the obvious choice.

Id rather have a low OS and kick ass every now and again than rank up spaming grunts.

[hybrid bluff]

In my opinion, at least 1 of the presented options would change the balance,
№ 1 Rework Blitz as stated earlier, add speed and some DPS or make it a cheap raid tank like Legion - light tanks with 60 mass respectively, rebalance HP and DPS and build time, it would be interesting to see them in action (at least a little more differences)
№ 2 Rework Janus, increase speed and turn speed, significantly reduce HP and damage per shot, (so that you can make a profit when micro), but now it is really useless
*And by the way, you will not accumulate a critical mass of Blitz and Januses to see at least some result - this is a note for those who think differently (of course, they can shoot through each other, but Blitz are so fragile and catch up with the army so slowly that you will lose more than half the army before you accept the fight) even consider the ideal option, if the player for the core lets go of his hands and does not move his tanks, for example 12 blitzes attack 9-10 Incisors from the flank, player for the armada lose

№ 3 Bot Lab there are also several options here
*1) As was said, increasing the price of ticks, but decreasing the speed of the core bots,
*2) decreasing the view range of units
If the tick is positioned as a combat scout, give him a view of 540 - 500
Core bots 440, pawns 400 (Why do I say this in ranked games, you are already spamming fast recon units for the first 8 minutes, but what is the advantage of the core bots,
they are faster to build, they are cheaper, simple micro, better trade vs all armada bots , good view - in my opinion, weakening the view of the infantryman would force the player for the core to play a little more carefully, this would give the opportunity to run past the squad unnoticed and would increase the reaction speed to attack, and at the moment this is what we get - that you see a huge area of ​​the map and you have lot of time to make a decision. And at least increased the difference between the review of such units as Rover, tick, Grunt
№4 I would like to see a big difference between the Mace and the Thug, add movement speed and reduce HP (at the moment Mace has 1000 HP and 46 speed, and I would like to see, for example, 650 HP and 64 speed) and in my opinion it would be interesting with this maneuverability The Mace would help at an early stage to break through the encirclement of grants and play against them, catch the army in a disadvantageous position and this change would make a big difference between 2 units Thug and Mace, at least all bots for 3 factions of this type had an obvious difference.

in fact, this is a cool idea in the difference in range, speed and other characteristics, in my opinion, on the contrary, these positions should be strengthened

[dry solar]

D-damn, ARM's top guy disagreed with my solution........ Falls to my knees.

[topaz whale]

l agree that blitz need to be changed stat wise, and when we talk about speed l am 100% sure people want small increments with a hp buff or dps buff. 4-6 + speed with a bit more dps or hp will make them feel like the old flash again.

About janus l really dont know how to change them to fit better in 1v1 s , since they are already good/decent in teams

[severe wedge]

for janus I'd like to see slightly reduced missile damage in exchange for something else, maybe lower cooldown

to reduce overkill on units

[topaz whale]

the vision change idea might be a good way to change the grunt without affecting too much the team vs team balance. currently grunt has 500 tick 600 and pawn 429. since cortex has no counterpart to the tick the vision of it still gotta be higher then the pawn. the minimum l believe might be something close to the attack range of a llt and vision (both sides attack 430 and 435; 494 sight for both ) so the player wont get in range without sight. 460-470 sight might be a good nerf to grunt for early map control

[topaz whale]

now the thug and mace situation l really don't get why mace is just worse in buildtime without compensation in some stat like speed or price to its counterpart, they should be faster for sure, but that fast "64speed" feels like a completely new unit. 49-50 speed with equalized build time would be a start.

[fickle magnet]

It's ok that janny is less useful on open maps. It's kinda nice to have more specialized units

[severe wedge]

hmm, arm t1 vehicle needs something in open maps though, it's way below the bot labs in preference

[fickle magnet]

Well first of all we need a buff for mex and wind hp to make open maps less volatile

Big reason that people dont like small teamgame is that if u have a 20os in the game theres a good chance they lose their base in 2mins and theres nothing you can do about it

[tropic gust]

stouts are better then brutes, if blitzes get a buff of some sort the lab would propably be better in the long run

pounders are kindof a joke outside of 1v1 so janus is still a massive plus

[fickle magnet]

Buff blitz/pawn = buff raiding unit. We already have all games below 50os end in 5mins to raiding

It's not that i dont want arm to be good in 1v1, but u have to recognize the larger scope issues in the game

More arm = more people dying early = less people playing 1v1

Focus on making earlygame less volatile, after that factions will have to be rebalanced anyway

[severe wedge]

I agree about the big picture, too bad there's so much game design inertia in the way of a systematic change like that

[hybrid jasper]

1v1 really would be more fun if some kind of defensive playstyle that relies on defending and building an army of more powerful units was viable

giving both plasma bots more move might be a step in that direction

[fringe tulip]

Bring back the immolator 🤔

[tropic gust]

Plasma bots are one of the biggest noobstompers in the game apart from centurions maybe, just repair them for infinite damage while enemy army gets smaller and smaller

In high os they get a but harder to play and mostly delay unless you get tgat comsnipe

[fickle magnet]

Besides hp change one thing i think would be interesting to experiment on is mex cost. You could word the expansion phase volatileness issue as "t1 mexes are a very efficient investment, so making them early is important". If t1 mex were less efficient (more expensive) we'd probably see a slower expansion phase with more units being built, making it easier to cover all of your expansions

[dry solar]

That's why I'm suggesting we have to let go of a some faction diversity at T1. There is a "light unit phase" in 1v1s, and no meta has found an alternative to it. Like, if Blitz has to give up some of its 'good raiding unit' role to better fill the 'primary light unit skirmisher' role, that just needs to happen, otherwise ARM doesn't have a unit to use at the light unit phase.

Specifically adjusting weapon range and speed to make blitz/pawn more similar to incisor/grunt

[tropic gust]

If arm gete past light unit phase its vehicles are just better tho

[dry solar]

Then the rest of their units need to be adjusted around that new balance. The light unit/T1 phase, being so early and so impactful, just can't be volatile in terms of faction balance/design. One is more important than the other.

Ok but actually reading the above posts, some interesting changes suggested that might reduce the impact/presence of the light unit phase

[hybrid jasper]

my point is that you cant build any of the more efficient units in 1v1 because you just get raided to death

there is a lack of tools to control space

or those tools are too weak

I think sc2 tvt is a good analogy here: one player can pick a marine medivac style for agression, raiding and fast exanding while the other player can make tanks, use them to control space and make more tanks untill you have an "unstoppable" force that enables you to just go kill the marine guy

or in other words you give up economy and map position for a more advanced and stronger army

its just more fun to see dififrent styles clash

[tropic gust]

One way to make blitz more like incisors is to make it more of a burstfire unit, it allready shoots in bursts but so quickly that it looks like full auto

[hybrid jasper]

If you look at blitz vs incisor problem in isolation the cor player can spend his metal faster on incisors so he has more and they are better in a direct fight

so even if blitzes could trade more evenly they would be playing from behind

[fickle magnet]

Agree

Idk what youd add for area control tho

[tropic gust]

the extra units pack has a t1 armada EMP vehicle, i actually think thats a pretty cool idea because unlike shuriken you can actually fight them

in theory a EMP vehicle can be faster then most other units without being broken since it would be allmost entirely defensive

[hybrid jasper]

llt range buff might be something to consider

not really sure how that would impact the game tho

[tropic gust]

rocketbots would get outranged propably

[hybrid jasper]

yeah

[tropic gust]

the twin guard only has a bit more range and outranges them

[hybrid jasper]

majority of llts ever built die before shooting once

its not like they deal serious dmg at max range

[tropic gust]

rocket bots allready arent really anti static units because most static defense outranges them

people just use rocket bots for fighting mostly

[hybrid jasper]

they murder static easily and you mostly dont lose any if you com repair

they would still murder llts

[tropic gust]

plasma bots might be better if youre allready repairing your units

[hybrid jasper]

only on hills

but kinnda besides the point

[tropic gust]

if LLts outrange rocketbots commanders could probably just stand infront of them and threaten to d gun

[hybrid jasper]

it could happen if you increase the range by alot I guess but there is only 1 commander and many llts normally, also noobs would not get instarolled by rockets and janus as fast 🤣

[topaz whale]

all this rocket bots talk is mostly a team game issue to be fair

[topaz whale]

literally build time change

[dry solar]

"Incisor buildtime +25%", it's true.

[fossil vessel]

...buildtime change so that it's bigger than that of Blitz instead of smaller, to narrow down the reasoning.

[topaz whale]

l think this is enough

in terms of build time

[scenic heart]

I am like 30 os and my games usually last way longer. The problem is that my defensive playstyle is not very effective against high os players as those will just outexpand me.
I think decreasing cost and mainly build-time of T1 static defenses is needed. They're just ridiculosly overpriced and take forever to build. I would also buff/rework all artillery but I guess it's quite useful in 8v8.
Increasing mex and wind hp is a great idea. Now raiding is just binary: you either get through and do terrible damage or donate metal.
I also think the whole reclaim/ressurect mechanic is broken. Reducing overkill damage so leaa metal and wrecks are created might be the solution.

[tropic gust]

Shellshockers should be quite usable in 1v1 since they are a lot cheaper then wolverines, making 1 and just sending it to an llt, exploiter or HLT is definetly worth it

In 8v8 wolverine is very good cause it can actually kill units if the enemy doesnt micro enough

[fickle magnet]

Yeah im exaggerating a bit of course. If you play unreasonably passive and outskill opponent then games will of course last longer.

I dont think that t1 defenses need a buff they are already plenty strong and if ur building them you are falling behind in expansion anyways (which will kill you too, just slower). There should be a choice involved in making t1 defenses instead of it being default part of your expansion

And yeah reclaim/rez needs nerfs

[tropic gust]

Maybe t1 rezbots shouldnt be stealthy, there could be a t2 rezbot

[dense elk]

idk analyzing the pubs for 1v1 is sus since theres at max 1 lobby for it at any given time

tourney better area

[fickle magnet]

Here's other ideas:

• nerf scout damage
• increase radar radius

[tropic gust]

Scouts? You mean ticks and rovers?

[dense elk]

you could buff llt by reducing its buildcost

or buff constructors

[fickle magnet]

Dumb take im sorry. It doesn't matter what the highest level looks like if nobody plays 1v1 because they feel like it's just t1 tank spam (which is what i constantly hear from 8v8 gamers)

[tropic gust]

Ticks are only strong cause they shoot over each other

[dense elk]

ticks are strong bcz constructors have too low bp and mexes have too low hp

[fickle magnet]

Oh yeah imo constructor buildrange should be increased and reclaim dmg should be buffed

[dense elk]

ye most of the games ive played is grunt incisor shuriken brute pounder tiger

its isnnaely boring

[fickle magnet]

I get that reclaim dmg is so low because u build 100 nanos in this game, but maybe you could nerf nano reclaim dmg then specifically (inelegant i know)

[dense elk]

theres no actual thing like reclaim dmg

its same thing as buildpower

[tropic gust]

You reclaim as quickly as you build stuff

[dense elk]

a t2 bomber with very high bp might take longer time to reclaim than a mammoth which costs more and has more hp

[void cove]

RepairSpeed, ReclaimSpeed, ResurrectSpeed, Capturespeed & ultimately BuildSpeed(WorkerTime) can all be defined separately on a unit with buildpower

[dense elk]

reclaim speed is just buildcost/buildpower

[void cove]

Its a function of workertime/buildtimecost. but workertime is only used if reclaimSpeed is not defined on the unit

So you can change the reclaim power of a rezbot, seperate to its repair power or its rezpower

as can be seen in the history for rezbots, where they have been fiddled with a lot: #1336330924576477184 message

[fickle magnet]

Ah the issue is that reclaim speed of wrecks and the damage that reclaim deals are tied together?

[void cove]

kind of, need to do some testing 😄

[fickle magnet]

Engi improvements:

• increase buildrange
• (maybe increase hp)
• drastically speed up startup animations especially for veh con
• increase dmg dealt by reclaim
• keep speed of reclaim of wrecks the same

[void cove]

Tzar wreck:
4500hp
990metal

Mammoth wreck
8400hp
1320metal

Both get reclaimed at 57.5metal/s by a rezbot which has 200 workertime

and both get metal put back in by a rezbot at around 33m/s

All unit metal features seem to reclaim at the same 57.5m/s with 200bp - so the "time it takes" for a wreck is metal of wreck / 57.5 * number of rezbots (at 200bp) = time in seconds

Found the formula eventually - not straight forward, but c'est la vie

Rezsubs for example, have 150workerTime, and only 100reclaimSpeed

and this is all only relevant to features (trees, rocks, wrecks, debris etc), reclaiming alive things is buildtimecost / workertime = time taken in seconds (assuming full hp)

[severe wedge]

imo reclaiming living enemy units should be decoupled from buildtime, ie it should be proportional to hp instead

[void cove]

It is... reclaiming alive things removes hp

[severe wedge]

the time it takes is proportional to buildtime though I think

[void cove]

Yes but if you change that then you don't get a hp/s repair bonus for unit experience

[severe wedge]

who cares

[void cove]

Probably quite a lot of people, since that's a huge part of micro and value in keeping your units alive

[severe wedge]

I'm just saying the hp on a unit should be the resource the enemy has to overcome

[void cove]

Reclaiming an alive unit removes hp over time, once it reaches 0 it is reclaimed, if you damage a unit, then reclaim it, it will take less time to reclaim overall

[severe wedge]

ie reclaiming enemy should deal damage proportional to buildpower, this is cleaner as a weapon

[severe wedge]

I feel like you're not understanding what I've proposed? should I rephrase it some more?

like, I know how reclaiming enemy units works

[void cove]

yeah i'm clearly not following, sorry 🙂

[severe wedge]

I'm saying if two units have the same buildtime they take the same time to reclaim, right? even if one had double the hp
but if the time were proportional to hp this would not be the case

this is something really minor, I didn't expect to dedicate this many words on it 😑

[void cove]

Gotcha, I understand now, i don't have any issues with current way it works tho tbf

[severe wedge]

I just don't like seeing my units getting eat up faster by the enemy just because they're more buildtime efficient basically

but I can see why this would be preferably for symmetry

[fickle magnet]

I just want my engis to be able to fight scouts by reclaiming them

Also the targeting has to be improved somehow since scouts are like impossible to click

[severe wedge]

I'm thinking attack circle command should issue a reclaim on weaponless units

[void cove]

Enabling area reclaim to target enemy units would solve that? or units with workertime on "fight" auto-targeting enemy units for reclaim if in range - i think they might already do this latter one

[fickle magnet]

I think area reclaim yeah and make it prioritize enemy units if they are on range

[severe wedge]

you want reclaim enemy unit on lowest priority sometimes though

[fickle magnet]

This is better actually

Maybe both even

[severe wedge]

eg I don't want my bots running into enemy units to reclaim them when I want to eat wrecks and repair my own units

[hybrid jasper]

yeah there should be a better way to reclaim all enemy ticks in range, holding a mouse on one and dragging a circle from it is mlg360noscope level aiming

[void cove]

Nano turrets will reclaim enemy units only if idle or specifically told to do so
Rezbots & Constructors do not reclaim enemy units on fight (sadly)

[hybrid jasper]

does fightmoving your conturrets do anything in this example?

[void cove]

stops them doing what you want 😄

[hybrid jasper]

k 🤣

[void cove]

In priority order conturrets will:
1: Assist building stuff
2: Repair allied units
3: Reclaim enemy units

each time their current task iys complete, they will check for things in range to do, starting from the top of that list

[fickle magnet]

Can u guys promote me to balance dictator

Emergency powers like caesar after roman civil war :-)

[severe wedge]

the blodir balance putsch

[steep stag]

i wish con turrets could interrupt every like 2-5 second and reevaluate this priority, currently, its very common for con turrets to get stuck repairing something, like slightly damaged afus. They take forever to repair stuff and you need to manually micro them if there is anything damaged nearby

[void cove]

I'd check widgets, and if nothing there do a request or sugguestion, i also get annoyed by this

[hybrid jasper]

that would be very cool, I would also love if con turret switched from boosting a unit out of a lab to helping con build wind if I run out of e

currently its just gonna be stuck on the lab estalling u

could be too unskilled for some I guess

[fickle magnet]

also i wish con turrets would ignore orders that are outside their range

rezbots also get stuck sometimes but i have no idea why that happens

[hybrid jasper]

rezbots definetly get stuck if they encounter a wreck on top of a rock or something other they cant acsess

but there are probably other reasons too

[wary blaze]

Uhhhh you know how that story ends for Caesar... Right?

[fickle magnet]

i'll be a martyr to improve bar 👼

[lost magnet]

there is a widget for that, maybe it will be merged one day

https://discord.com/channels/549281623154229250/1283987575652220978

[rose hound]

I think it's broken though, it does some weird stuff and overrides your commands iirc

[scenic heart]

Lower skill will almost always play "unreasonably passove" by your standard. It's true for any RTS game.
As for static defense I think it should be super cost effective against light units, good va medium+ units and hard countered by artillery. Now they're only ok against light units terrible against medium+ units and artillery doesn't properly counter them because:
a) it doesn't prioritize static defenses over units so just units on patrol make it miss
b) its damage against turrets is too low, it takes too long to kill turrets
c) the range is too small, it's not very easy to put it behond other units
d) there are pop-up t1 turrets which IMO should be just removed from the game.
The idea behind buffing static defenses is that it should be somewhat viable to guard your cons with heavier units amd mexes with static def in early game so you can make.more cons than the guys being aggresive with light units

Anyway there are many good ideas in this thread. I'd be delighted to see some of them implemented.

[topaz whale]

is there a date to when this future patch might happen? The changes already on the tread message.

[minor vale]

No set date

New version of the modoption coming soon, with slightly reduced Grunt/Incisor range (230 -> 225).

I'm also looking to some potential hitbox changes, should Incisors (and other direct-fire tanks like missile trucks) be able to fire over each other's hulls.

[dry solar]

YYYYYEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEES

[scenic heart]

Can we play FightNight apprentice league with the changes? So you can see how it affects general population? Because right now there is ome patch a year that is discussed more than the latest śc2 balance patch (and sc2 has been played competitively for like 15 years).
I would suggest the following pipeline for releasing balance changes:

1. 1 week like currently (mainly theorycrafting).
2. FN apprentice.
3. All other FNs.
4. Main game.
   Of course after every step the changes may be refined and the process restarted.

[severe wedge]

huh, I had the impression that the hitboxes were settled wrt balance

[ebon shale]

restricting missle trucks firing angle would kill them in 8v8 once again thought

and as currently stands lasher/whistler spam is one of few counters to rocketbots that can actually beat em in t1 phase during an 8v8

[rose hound]

BAR isn't in the same place sc2 is and doesn't have dedicated people for testing patches. Balance in bar is much more compicated with the diverity and number of units, diversity of competitive modes, diversity of maps and diversity in the amount of resources you can get per map. All of which are simplified in sc2.

[scenic heart]

I think you're overestimating the state of SC2. Currently there's like 1 person implementing the changes, the rest is done by players. And they had big problems too, one of the recent World Championships was dominated by Swarm Host + Nydus meta in the same way grunts dominated last BPL. The real balance testing is usually done at HomeStory Cups which has like 20k USD prize pool.
But you're surely right about 1 thing: SC2 is in a different place. BAR is a great game. It has the best interface I've ever seen. It has the best macro I've ever seen. It is the most tactical due to the moving shot. SC2 doesn't stand a chance in that respect. But the balance is terrible and the work on improvements is as slow as for a game that is considered well balanced.
Anyway the only thing I'm asking is to be bold and do some bigger changes and do them more often than once a year. Failure is not a problem, it's a part of the journey.
At least do small changes frequently.

[quick fulcrum]

I agree about bold changes, when possible considering dev time. Its early enough. But i think game is pretty well balanced, except a couple of voiced issues

[steep stag]

sc2 is a dead game for all intent and purposes, they even axed all remaining tournaments for this year
i doubt there is even a single person working on it anymore, they do like 2 patches a year that change barely nothing
BAR probably has more manpower than sc2 has nowadays

[topaz whale]

still, the grunt issue has existed for years by now. something needs to be done. Take me for example, l tested this game like 2 years ago stopped playing and grunt is still a massive issue for 1v1 balance, l get that the dev team works on this like a side project, but this time frame l would believe it would be fixed by now.

[wary blaze]

Massive issue
If you think Grunt mirrors suck to play in 1v1 more than Tick mirrors, then we've been playing very different games.

[dry solar]

Tick mirrors also suck, but nowhere in his post is that denied.

[scenic heart]

Ticks are way easier to counter with defensive approach as they can't fight pawns/grunts cost to cost. So the counter is deadly.

[hybrid jasper]

brother chasing ticks around is one of the more infuriating things in the game

[severe wedge]

a unit that fast should not have the combat power it does, mega annoying

the entire reason anyone would ever propose accurate lasers

[simple island]

Ticks are also one of the primary reasons I despise maps with bad radar coverage spots from typical spawns.

It's one thing to intercept/clean up ticks when you can spot them on radar but not much else is as tilting as when someone is individually microing 10 ticks and you think you killed them all so you finally push out with your grunts only to find that 3 were left hiding behind that small rock in a radar dead zone and they once again suck up your apm.

It's just simply annoying af lol

[dry solar]

It's me, the APM sucker. I've come for your APM.

[minor vale]

Possibly they are, but personally I'd rather improve them, the current ones cause a lot of trouble with unintuitiveness and friendly fire

[severe wedge]

i think incisor feels about right now since the bugfix

not sure about the whistler/lasher turret piece though, and the unit got changed and nerfed as well

[tropic gust]

you know what would be funny? If tick damage was EMP

but rovers even more broken tbh

[strong spear]

The turret hitbox peice isn’t being used in game play
And only was in for two weeks until the new ground attack was added

[severe wedge]

that explains why I couldn't make it out in debug view

[topaz whale]

l noticed that the ingame current pawn hp is 335 instead of 340, just a reminder

so what do you guys think about the recent incisor + grunt range nerf? l made quick tests on it combined with the lower turnrate and acceleration.
-grunts vs pawns are less reaction based to instant kite them. Combined with the hp buff for pawn they seem more equal at first glance.

• hp, build time and range nerf will make blitz trade better.
  -The cortex eco buff to wind and coms BP are noticeable
  Still, has anyone tested this in a decent OS range for 1v1 or teams yet?

seem promising

[minor vale]

We had a talk with the balance team and they looked through the current patch changelog, they didn't like higher metalcost for pawn/grunt as it might make them less spammable. So Grunts will receive a bigger range nerf instead, but keep a lower m cost

This patch is as of now outdated, as we decided on a list of changes that will go into the game without further testing

Coming soon

[severe wedge]

damn, there's a game running with the outdated patch right now

[dry solar]

I'm genuinely excited.

[lost magnet]

I guess range nerf should be fair if grunt get accurate lasers with it

[scenic breach]

Please at least don't nerf grunt maneuverability. :,c

[ornate crystal]

remove grunts alltogether

[tropic gust]

if grunt Gets nerfed cortex botlab might be in serious need of a 5th and maybe a 6th Unit

grunt is botlabs antispam, i would like to see a centurion counterpart

[minor vale]

https://github.com/beyond-all-reason/Beyond-All-Reason/pull/4450

There's the planned changes in code for those interested

[quick fulcrum]

ty!

oh well, i thought it could read it but nope

too smoothbrain for this

[timid vector]

quickstart to skim the changes:

1. go to the 'files changed' tab from the pull request link
2. ignore the .bos/.cob files (balance as discussed in this thread is primarily in the other files)
3. match the filenames of the '.lua' files to their commonly-known BAR unit names via this: https://github.com/beyond-all-reason/Beyond-All-Reason/blob/master/language/en/units.json
4. red highlighted lines are removed lines, green highlighted lines are added lines; red lines and green lines next to each other may be interpreted as text replacement

the rest of the changes should be at worst annoying-to-read rather than blocked by anti-smoothbrain barriers

[minor vale]

Written changelog is in the PR description now

[little lodge]

I just wrote one up right as you commented lol

The changes look amazing how can I host a lobby to play these proposed changes

[minor vale]

Youll have to wait for now

[fringe tulip]

Poison Arrow
Energycost 29000 -> 21000
Buildtime 22200 -> 19000
Sightdistance 385 -> 500
😍 Best unit in the game is viable again!

You guys watch out. It got the impulse buff last time, now watch it stunlock bulls and tigers who can't shoot over each other. Poison Arrow is the best tank I'm putting my money on it.

[hybrid jasper]

Cor bros...we so back

[dry solar]

Spybots emp nerf good imo
(my tzar got killed by one recently)

[hybrid jasper]

there is some really cool stuff in there

like sneaky pete cloak removal

my only concern are the heavy grunt nerfs

anyone know what kinnda weapons the 1hp change on the tick could affect?

[fringe tulip]

Grunts getting a huge buff with accurate lasers.

[dry solar]

Grunt range nerfs, my beloved. I will watch the coming 1v1 tournaments with great interest.

[topaz whale]

it feels like grunt gonna be better in the anti spam role but worse at everything else. How much the accurate lasers affect them for hitting gunships and air drones?

[severe wedge]

it only matters vs shuriken, everything else outranges by too much

and flies too high

actually shuriken range is 220 so this might cut grunt dps vs shuriken by a lot

[dry solar]

In the above changelist the Grunt+Pawn I see metal cost still going up. Is intended?

[timid vector]

just need to call it "pete" now. Just "pete".

[severe wedge]

they were at 50 and 56 or something in the test patch

[dry solar]

Ohhhhhh

[topaz whale]

l hope they find a good sweet spot for it to remain good

[quick fulcrum]

Regarding spybot emp nerf, is it still viable to emp the antinuke? 8s is not much since nuke needs around 10s to fire missile. How does emp strength affect when units get EMPd?

[ornate crystal]

I'm thinking it won't even start the emp timer with how weak it is

[hybrid jasper]

is emp dmg directly proportional to unit hp?

[void cove]

Test it?

[hybrid jasper]

if so new ghost can 1hit stun an an but cant 1hit a tzar

also cloaking cost got significantly reduced so ghost play can probably happen a bit earlyer in the game

[ornate crystal]

not with the huge energy cost to build it and the BP required

[hybrid jasper]

you can in theory bank wind energy and build it fast

[fringe tulip]

The unit is stunned when empdamage>effective HP (I.e Max HP)

The stun duration goes up to 20sec when emp damage = 2x(effective HP)

And is capped at min(weapon paralyze time, 20s for mobile units, 35s for buildings)

[hybrid jasper]

Paralyzetime 35/20 -> 8s

this implies there is only 1 timer now than?

flat 8sec

[fringe tulip]

Well because 8 is less than both 20 and 35, that cap will always be hit first.

But the 20s is still relevant as a global setting, to work out how much damage you need for the full 8s. The spy needs to do 1.4x the unit HP to stun for the full 8s

[hybrid jasper]

I feel like this pushes ghost much more into the recon role

[fringe tulip]

So with 4500 damage (ignoring edge effect aoe) you will full stun things with 3200hp or less. 3200hp to 4500hp will be stunned but not for 8s. Over 4500 will accrue emp damage but not be stunned.

[quick fulcrum]

impossible until late evening, its a full house here xD

so the AN has 1500 HP

[hybrid jasper]

the modoptions didnt get updated anyway

[quick fulcrum]

meaning it should stun it reliably

[hybrid jasper]

not sure how we could test it

[fringe tulip]

You could tweakdefs it.

[quick fulcrum]

but text says it stuns for 8s. is this like.. the hard limit now?

[ornate crystal]

it still requires a crazy amount of BP compared to, say, sheldons

[hybrid jasper]

well that also means it stresses ur energy per second spending less making u less likely to estall, its not an argument against producing them early

[quick fulcrum]

man Poison arrow isn't a meme tank at all with these changes

[fringe tulip]

Yeah, the emp gadget checks the paralyze time parameter, and then discards all excess damage to prevent longer stuns.

But the number here are different so 🤷

[quick fulcrum]

yeah, this certainly needs to be tested

wondering if spybot nuke play is still viable, and how skybot performs vs razor or titan

[fringe tulip]

So redo my above comment but with 2650hp-3700hp breakpoints

[hybrid jasper]

clearly it will preform badly vs t3 now

getting multiple ghost hits on a single unit is asking too much and too expensive

[quick fulcrum]

i dont trust numbers too much in this game, have to see it in practice xD

[hybrid jasper]

u need 2 ghosts to stun a tzar and it will get stunned for far less time

[fringe tulip]

I have multiple Excel spreadsheets for emp damage

[hybrid jasper]

its clearly a significant nerf

[fringe tulip]

But hornet didn't like my elegant solution

[quick fulcrum]

which was?

[fringe tulip]

#1337407508293095544 message

[quick fulcrum]

2 spybot per tzar is pretty big. not sure i love it, getting spybot out means you need same tier of lab as tzar and you need 2 which BOTH have a chance to fail. and after that you need to also kill the tzar

[fringe tulip]

Off topic for here.

[idle topaz]

Summary of upcoming changes:

T1 economy

We are bringing the factions closer to each other when it comes to wind and solar. This is so that choosing one faction over the other doesn't feel mandatory on maps with particularly high or low wind.

• Arm solar
  • 2800 -> 2600 buildtime
• Arm wind
  • 37 -> 40 metalcost
• Cortex wind
  • 45 -> 43 metalcost
  • 199 -> 220 hp
• Arm tidal
  • 250 -> 200 energycost
• Arm advanced solar
  • 370 -> 350 metalcost
• Cortex constructors
  • +5 % buildpower (because they cost more than Armada constructors)

T1 military

For more consistent and predictable early game interactions every laser weapon in the game has been given 100 % accuracy. This aims to give the player more feeling of control in early fights. T2 units already had it, so this just affects T1 units that have a laser weapon firing at fast moving small targets. Many of the other T1 military changes aim to balance the game around these accurate lasers, especially when it comes to 1v1 faction balance.

T1 land military

• Exploiter
  • +7 % buildtime
• Blitz
  • 690 -> 725 hp
  • 300 -> 350 sightdistance
  • New hitbox to reduce friendlyfire
• Incisor
  • +25% buildtime
  • 273 -> 330 sightdistance
• Grunt
  • 36 -> 43 metalcost
  • 230 -> 210 range
  • Slightly lower turnrate and acceleration
• Pawn
  • 48 -> 52 metalcost
  • 960 -> 870 energycost
  • 340 -> 370 hp
• Tick
  • 17 -> 21 metalcost
  • 340 -> 300 energycost
  • 600 -> 550 sightdistance
• Rover
  • 89 -> 103 hp
• Rascal
  • 75 -> 87 hp

T1 air military

• Stormbringer
  • Drops bombs 17 % closer together
• Banshee
  • 485 -> 560 hp
  • New weapon with higher rate of fire but similar dps
• Shuriken
  • 1.2 -> 1.3 seconds reloadtime

Invisible threats

We feel that certain one-shot mechanics from completely invisible units (that have both cloak and stealth) have not been fun for gameplay. Therefore we are nerfing them.

• Sneaky Pete
  • Loses cloak ability
• Spybot
  • EMP damage massively lowered from 56000 to 4500.
    • The balance goal is for spybot to be effective against light T2 units such as Sheldons and Mausers (fully stunning them), but ineffective against heavier T2 units such as Bull or Mammoth.
  • Maximum emp stun duration lowered from 20 seconds to 8 seconds.
  • Can now use manual attack command to instantly self-destruct on a targeted enemy or location.
  • 50/100 energy per second -> 15/40 energy per second cloak cost (stationary/moving).

Cortex T2 vehicles

Cortex T2 vehicles have been consistently less popular than Armada. Thus we are giving them some buffs.

• Banisher
  • Can now fire in all directions
  • 550 -> 650 sightdistance
  • 23000 -> 17000 energycost
• Tremor
  • Attack a bit more spread
  • 200 -> 210 AoE
  • 150 -> 200 damage per shot
• Poison Arrow
  • 29000 -> 21000 energycost
  • 22000 -> 19000 buildtime
  • 385 -> 500 sightdistance

Amphibious vehicles

Amphibious tanks haven't been very popular. We are giving them all except salamander 500 sight distance so that they are easier to use for raiding.

The dog and the spider

We are cleaning up the user interface, removing less common toggles to simplify it for the upcoming UI rework. This affects the Hound. Furthermore Recluse has lately been taking role as "better than hound in every way" unit, so we are nerfing it slightly to promote more unit variety.

• Hound
  • Loses the secondary gauss weapon.
  • 300 -> 285 metalcost.
• Recluse
  • 600 -> 575 range
  • 52 -> 47 movement speed

Other

• T2 radar building
  • 560 -> 400 metalcost
  • 19000 -> 14000 energycost
  • 11800 -> 8000 buildtime
• Jammer ship (both factions)
  • Higher cost to be more in line with other jammers

[quick fulcrum]

Cant wait to try banishers and banshees more

Banisher 360 attack sounds very nice, qol for micro

[fringe tulip]

Also helps differentiate/balance with legion. Medusa was but a better banisher, now banisher can be the hit and run specialist. Legion amphib tank had 500 sight already. Now PA and trut not just completely power crept.

[void cove]

Can all units be in either percentage change, or absolutes? (ideally both, but i appreciate time exists)

[idle topaz]

Yeah I should tidy it up for release 😄

[fringe tulip]

Also double check the spy damage number

[worn hill]

imo this will make banishers too powerful

they were already pretty good

they destroy other skirmishy t2 units

[fringe tulip]

If they get their smarter targeting buff too... 😏😋

[hidden niche]

good changes, now go ship it

[fringe tulip]

Don't forget that's in the works somewhere

[quartz laurel]

looks good overall but wasnt the idea behind grunt / pawn price change so were not forced into cortex bot on wind map?

grunt had 25e to 1m ratio vs pawn at 20e to 1m ratio (25% ratio diff)
now grunt is 20.4e to 1m vs 16.7e to 1m for pawn (22% ratio diff), aka basically the same.

in fact the whole go grunt on high wind and go incisor on low wind is also gone, just go incisor everytime now or am I missing something

[lost magnet]

any ideas how the game gonna play if you remove all the counters to certain plays?

surely that's balancing

[void cove]

Is this a specific play, or more a general query?

[severe wedge]

20:1 vs 9:1 is still significant probably but i wouldn't start grunt with these changes... incisor having range advantage could be very powerful

it's like one free shot for incisor in the best cases for grunt... worst case is grunts getting wiped out before they even get to fire once you hit critical mass

[quartz laurel]

seems like its just tick naked expand or incisor meta no inbetween

[lost magnet]

idk, seem like if you make a change to remove something that people think is very op
then you need to adjust the other things, otherwise you just deleted something without knowing the consequences

There is many plays that emp and commander dgun were the only reliable counter

but i guess that's how the game is moving along now : if you don't know how to balance or rework something, just delete it from the game

[fringe tulip]

I had a fix to let spybots stun T1 and T2 sensibly, without kneecapping T3. Rejected instantly as not 'wysiwyg' despite it looking to players as identical to the current system in every way. 🤷

[void cove]

Has anyone confirmed/checked Anti & Spybot breakpoint for nuking?

[fringe tulip]

The damage numbers in the notes and code don't line up.

But Anti has 3650hp. If spy does 3700 it will stun for (3700-3650)/3650*20 seconds = 0.3 seconds.

If spy does 4500 then about 4.5s

2 bots will get the full 8s either way.

Yeah that's why I say your timing would have to be on point 😅

[void cove]

I think if you delay a launch by 4.5s you might juuuust squeeze it through with a very accurately timed shot, but in reality - not gonna happen i think

[fringe tulip]

Will a 250ms animation inturrupt be enough? Probs not

[idle topaz]

I tested spybot vs anti and it got 8 seconds stun with latest numbers. Though you still probably want 2 of them to stun it again.

[fringe tulip]

New plan: How long does it take a spy to reclaim an antinuke?

[void cove]

lol, too long, 50bp?

[fringe tulip]

Hmm, so it must be (damage-HP) /hp*35s for buildings. Makes sense I think...

[quaint island]

Ngl at least Pawns can more effectively deal with Grunts

In small numbers

But by the point masses come to play, Cuentrion and LLT’s do the job

[quick fulcrum]

Thx this is big info

[quartz laurel]

do they though?

nearly same ratio difference of e to m as before, but now cortex has less of a windmill gap

[fringe tulip]

And accurate lasers

[elfin dagger]

Good stuff excited to try it

[quaint island]

It made Grunts less micro able

But in large scale it still favors grunts

At least we have ceuntrions

[fringe tulip]

The tick+pawn swams won't work as well with the laser buff.

[quaint island]

Yeah

Has to either go into Vehicle transition or Mass Defense

[fringe tulip]

I saw that a lot before centurion were feasible. A few ticks to distract while pawns close distance. Now ticks will evaporate

But the distance will close much quicker.

[quaint island]

And I definitely won’t start Armada with vehicles, Incisors going to be true Tanks now

Definitely going to need Thugs and LLTs everywhere

The fact that Hounds lose Gauss cannon pisses me off though, they were good at shooting up

Recluse will just barley be affected though, they still do some heavy ass damage

[upper elk]

op

[wheat kayak]

You might want to rename arm jammer description, currently still Cloakable Jammer Tower.
Maybe "Formerly Cloakable Jammer Tower" would work?

[quick fulcrum]

Rename to Clumsy Pete

[wheat kayak]

attack mode on spybots is a bit flawed

if you send two of them in to zap tzar, one will detonate a bit sooner and stun the second spybot

so manual destruct is still preferable

wait no, even if you self-d, one will get stunned

thats horribly flawed

[wheat kayak]

Nerodni Jožek 😛

For those intested, two spybots will stun tzar for up to 4 seconds. Depends on how close you can get them. If you place them badly they barely stun for a second.

And they have to be far enough from each other to avoid zapping each other.

[ornate crystal]

4 seconds for two spybots selfding by a tzar...

that's just so horribly wrong

[wheat kayak]

Max 4 seconds, has to be optimal positioning.

Average case id expect 1 to 2 seconds.

Also, cant nuke with just one spybot to stun AN

Has to be at least 2

[ornate crystal]

another thing I was afraid of coming true

not to mention nuke can't land in the what, 8 seconds, so you need to stun twice, which means 3 spybots at least

[wheat kayak]

two is enough

but requires very precise timing

had to test 10x to pull it off 🙂

[elfin dagger]

Ya sounds like spybot changes Will shake up balance a good bit. Interested to see how it works out

[severe wedge]

vehicle meta incoming

[ornate crystal]

yeah

[void cove]

Spybots were always the last bastion of a hold; without them being as effective we'll see more snowballs and less comebacks imo

[elfin dagger]

Yep agreed, my gut feel is they're probably just useful for vision now, and if the desire is to have them as CC they're probably too expensive now

[wheat kayak]

Maybe if they were imune to stealth detector (or their ground signature would be displaced similar to radar without pinpointers making them harder to find) they could be more useful than just pure recon but would be the ultimate recon instead. But it does seem they will be just mobile spycams with the patch.

[indigo patio]

spybot for sure needed some adjustment, but this is absurdly big nerf

maybe if emp had the slow attached like with old emp rework it would be fine

[severe wedge]

kinda feels like the bot labs (especially core) are missing a tool without op spybot

but maybe it's the skuttle's time to shine

[wheat kayak]

Buff arm rolling bomb with stealth/cloak? :p

[outer fulcrum]

Honestly hound losing it's guass cannon feels like a death blow to it for me personally. With the guass cannon it could moderately deal with spam but now it can't. Even with the recluse nerf, id say it's now vastly superior to hounds metal for metal

[wheat kayak]

return the toggle

[void cove]

Yeah i think i'd prefer the gauss over plasma if i hd to choose but i presume re: hope it'll get balanced to something good after the toggle removal

[wheat kayak]

Why was the toggle removed? It was effectively gauss-less if you didnt toggle it on before.

[void cove]

Lots of players don't notice it exists

and a game design goal is to remove toggles afaik

[wheat kayak]

Honestly prefered the toggle

[outer fulcrum]

I already hate the removal of toggles, I had a arty fire at every other unit it could before arcing up and fire at the one I wanted

[wheat kayak]

Hate it when t1 arty goes into high-shooting mode when a unit walks infront of it

Should be an ingame option that allows you to restore toggles, otherwise no toggle button as default and have them on autopilot like it is now.

Keeps it newbie friendly and allows for higher skill ceiling for those that prefer the toggle.

[lost magnet]

emp rework was terrible but this change is even worse for the spybots

[indigo patio]

personally i prefer the slow, i find the stuns to be very obnoxious. but i do agree that the spybot has been effectively removed as a tool

[wary blaze]

Sir this is a Wendy's.

[naive viper]

whoa what channel am i in my bad

[timid vector]

for folks who want to try the github PR changes up to T1 (since they're not in-game via the experimental options yet), here's a tweakunits b64encode (split into two parts because discord is idiosyncratic):

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

in the lobby, go to adv options -> cheats -> tweak units and paste the code in there

It should be most if not all of the T1 changes (notably excluding blitz hitboxes because I got sick of seeing the game crash; someone else can do that <_< )

[flat minnow]

I have some doubts about the adjustment of Grunt. Under the metal energy consumption adjustment of Pawn, there is an attribute improvement, but Grunt actually reduces its rate and range under the metal energy consumption adjustment. Will this make Grunt more difficult to fight against Pawn, but more difficult to fight against Centurion?
It is known that in cort1botlab, two units are missing compared to armt1botlab, which are tick and centurion.

In terms of functionality, armt1botlab is higher than cort1botlab. Therefore, I believe that cort1botlab should be better than armt1botlab in terms of attribute cost-effectiveness, with the most obvious being grunt. Of course, in the original version, grunt was too strong, and I have also experienced it when playing arm. But has this adjustment weakened the attribute advantage of cort1botlab? I think weakening the Grunt is a bit too harsh, because increasing the cost of metals has not resulted in any increase in hp.

This is my question. I don't have strong technical skills, so please forgive me.I used translation software and apologize for any grammar errors. Thank you

[tropic gust]

If you go grunts and enemy gets centution in a choke its basicly gg for taking that choke, should have rushed thugs or rocketbots

youre allready behind at that point

[flat minnow]

In 1v1 narrow terrain, it is generally not advisable to use grunt to attack narrow terrain, so when using grunt, it must be done in open areas.Even the grunt before weakening cannot compete with the centurion in a narrow area, so this situation will not be discussed here

Previously, it was quite difficult to attack LLT with Grunt. After this update, grunt attacks on LLT will become more difficult. Because the increase in metal prices will result in a smaller quantity than before.The same goes for Pawn.The metal price difference between Pawn and Grunt has decreased in this update, so there will be more quantity advantages when facing Grunt than before the update

And centurion，if Cort1bot needs to use Thugs and Rocketbot to deal with Centurion, I don't think it's a great adjustment.I think at the very least, we should leave room for fault tolerance in special circumstances, so that grunt won't have a very ugly battle loss ratio when attacking the centurion.

Why do i compare like this? Because cort1botlab lacks units with the same positioning. I support weakening grunt, but I think this update is a bit unreasonable

[tropic gust]

yes cortex t1 bot needs another unit

its the same issue as salamander nerf, the unit was OP but without it the lab is missing a viable land raider and anti spam unit

you cant Allways go tigers instantly, and armada gets jaguars wich are broken

[topaz whale]

l had a similar assumption to this,but not related to the cost, reasoning being that now pawns engaging more in their effective range with more hp makes so grunt take way more damage even when microing properly. So the question becomes how good they trade into straight pawns? Because they are gonna lose harder when fighting llt creep ,centurion and other anti swarm stuff. Also in a real game it is gonna take more attention to kite multiple grunt groups vs pawn pushs due to needing to react sooner, specially in 1v1, not so much in bigger teams like 8v8, even then still noticeable. Remember the main issue with that interaction was engaging with similar cost and much lower damage received in grunt vs pawn kite so they won hard when payed attention.

Adding to this core/cortex doesn't have a counterpart to centurion or tick, so you expect grunts to win or trade well against straight pawns due to arm/armada having more options/specialized units, the problem was how hard they were doing it before.

With much lower range (210 now proposed) + turnrate nerf they are gonna engage more in pawn effective range and centurion+llt is gonna outrange them more. Maybe a small increase to their HP seems reasonable. pawn would get +35hp in this patch compared to live, maybe +10 to compensate for grunt.

somewhat related the cost increase for tick, grunt and pawn would make hard spamming then in open maps more costly, in result maybe encouraging more unit variety.

Still, l believe people should test this in a real game with good players in 1v1 and 8v8 due to the indirect effects of the eco changes for both factions in t1 and the vehicle vs bots concern.

A new patch is exciting even if some changes are not perfect,
iterating it for improvement is expected.

[severe wedge]

Yeah, it's true that grunt performs a lot of functions... it's your only fast unit out of the lab and has to perform most of your defense, raiding, scouting, etc duties. So big nerfs to grunts have a disproportionate impact on the lab as a whole and have to be tuned very precisely

from a few games... 210 doesn't feel completely unplayable I don't think

[lost magnet]

accurate lasers will make grunt great

[severe wedge]

it'll make tick bad

[lost magnet]

nevermind i see it

[severe wedge]

we tested -10 range on grunt without accurate laser once and it felt mega bad

[lost magnet]

yea idk why they turned range down so much

[tropic gust]

yeah the 230 vs 180 range matchup might actually be as good as it gets, i tried increasing pawn range to 200 and it turns out that pawns overshoot their own range a lot making them shoot as far as grunts when you dip into their range ones

i allways assumed pawns are too clunky to hit anything beyond their own range because i remember them missing while chasing leaks a lot

[lost magnet]

has the new range been tested in 1v1?
it would be a shame if grunts are useless until a new hotfix

[tropic marten]

Hey! Can we please have an 'updated' 'top view'? So whenever you click 'top view' its accurate?

Jump to top i mean

its confusing when ppl talk about changes and the top view isnt actually whats new

[topaz whale]

At first glance l can see the 210 range working if they are slightly cheaper or have a bit more hp, the extra hp might be the way due to encouraging more unit variety due to the cost changes. that is if it isnt already enough without any more changes then current patch proposal.

[dry solar]

The range nerf is an absolute necessity to balance high level 1v1 imo. Kiting was simply far too binary, and touching Pawn speed is too volatile imo.

Alternative means must be found to buff the grunt, or nerf the Centurion, if that presents a problem. I'd lean towards Grunt HP buff first

[topaz whale]

that is why l believe a small test with some matches with good players in 1v1 and 8v8 would be good to get an idea how it would play out. reasoning being lots of changes at once.
or
Be ready to do a small hotfix if needed

[lost magnet]

surely this has been done already right?

1v1 to test new grunts would take 20 mins

[dry solar]

Well, Modulo says he tested and it's not unplayable they don't think

[topaz whale]

The gihub has some values different to RebelNode post last time l saw.

[hybrid jasper]

the latest changes never became a modoption

[dry solar]

Nonsemantic did offer the tweakdefs.

[severe wedge]

maybe it is unplayable lol

[dry solar]

Uh oh!

[severe wedge]

feels very uphill for core

[lost magnet]

that's weird to not allow small group of players to test it

[dry solar]

Ehm. Small indie developers in alpha, I wouldn't criticize it too much. On the other hand we have people saying they should be more drastic and frequent with the changes, which I also lean towards, but

[severe wedge]

yeah we're trying to do it ourselves

[lost magnet]

not sharing the changes for testing and having people to have to duplicate with own tweaks for testing doesn't look like healthy way to develop a video game

[hybrid jasper]

there is probably some reason behind that since we got to test the previous changes

I mean its not horrible now at least we can test them for real

not like it cant be changed anymore

[ornate crystal]

I think rebel said that the current tweak contains stuff that cannot be used through modoptions

[topaz whale]

ok

[lost magnet]

[idle topaz]

Hound and spybot can't be done easily with modoptions. Though it's mostly just the grunt/pawn/incisor/blitz meta that is interesting from testing perspective. Pretty sure the rest of the changes aren't going to break the game.

[mighty nova]

Spybot nerf seems like it will make holding when you are behind so much harder (or impossble), probably will lead to players getting steamrolled much faster, especially by tzar rush etc

[ornate crystal]

1v1 maybe, but other modes the spybot/hound nerf is much more impactful

like, it completely removed spybot AN emp plays

[hybrid jasper]

who even liked those xD

[idle topaz]

Spybot antinuke play is kinda cool, but it happens in like 0,1 % of matches so overall it's not meaningful. I believe you can still do it though, just need 2 spybots instead of 1 now.

[void cove]

Spybot antinuke interaction is a thing we should strive to maintain imo

[idle topaz]

As long is enemy doesn't spot you and kill your second still cloaked spy almost immediately, you get the other spybot to emp it further to 16 seconds, which is almost same as old 20 secs.

[dry solar]

I do have personal beef (not with the anti-nuke one). Feels bad when my Tzar push as front gets no-sold by 1 emp bot and 30-50 feral Hounds

[minor vale]

Definitely it's a buff to attacking, when you don't have to be as afraid of the invisible

[tropic gust]

sneaky pete still the same or nerfed too?

Thats the real bane of attacking not spybots

[lost magnet]

ticks/spam already were good counter to spy bots, players just needed a way to have mobile detection to be able to push on those long maps without getting spybotted on repeat just like they need anti nuke to not get nuked to death when they push

very sad to remove gameplay from the game

[void cove]

I suspect this overall might nerf defence and recovery options too much and we'll see a much larger amount of games decided by an earlier snowball or raid

[tropic gust]

definetly buffs marauders

[lost magnet]

with the sneaky pete removed too, it just allow 1 click enjoyers that can't do army composition to be able to make balls of units and send them brute for without any tactics

[tropic gust]

I just think sneaky pete is too good compred to cortex, with core its like why even bother making t1 jammer

[lost magnet]

yea everyone agrees sneaky pete is too good but removing it isn't balance

[naive hawk]

do t2 radars die to juno shot

[void cove]

or at the very least, removing the one thing which makes it uniquely interesting from a strategic and tactical pov - make its jamming range smaller, increase its costs, or cloak cost etc

[fickle marsh]

accurate lasers makes the combat with lasers feel really good 👍 ]

[tropic gust]

just should have flipped arm and cores jammingAOE ranges

[naive hawk]

t2 radar shouldnt die to juno IMO

[fickle marsh]

In addition to the sound design their lasers feel "sticky" if that makes sense

[fickle marsh]

Would give a reason to make them

[ornate crystal]

Didn't someone test that you need 2 spybots to stun a single AN? That would mean you need 3 to stun for 16 seconds which is just stupidly hard to have

[lost magnet]

pretty sure they did that to make place for the juno rework, since they have no idea how to deal with sneaky pete they just made it un sneaky
that way their juno rework can maybe work

[tropic gust]

i think juno should disrupt radar and jammer not kill it

[void cove]

Kill scouts, kill t1 radars and jammers, duration stun t2 radars and jammers, maybe remove cloak for units in the field?

[severe wedge]

a weapon that only blows up scouts feels insanely "gamey" to me

[idle topaz]

Johannes increased the damage a little bit since it didn't matter much against units. So now it's 1 spybot to stun for 8 secs.

[severe wedge]

like the game should just have units that can kill scouts effectively

if anti-scout is needed so much

[tropic gust]

eh i mean i kindof agree that juno vs tick is weird

[severe wedge]

but the t2 units all have shitty fire rates so they don't really chew through scouts

[naive hawk]

I've speculated that gunslingers are actually good vs scout/ tick spam

[void cove]

Most labs have an anti-spam unit its just people tend to not focus on army composition and supporting units to their main unit. e.g. AA and Anti-spam

[tropic gust]

One way to nerf ticks particulary is to make them chainreact if like 2 or 3 of the die next to each other while balled up

[void cove]

I'd rather give more weapons slightly more aoe so Ticks balls are just generally easier to kill, if you give Ticks explosion dmg they will just cause more dmg to units they engulf?

[tropic gust]

Nah deathexplosion is short radius and ticks have little HP

[severe wedge]

they feel a bit compromised in a way... like what do you make from cor t2 vehicle lab?

[void cove]

Salamander, which was specifically designed to be anti-spam?

[severe wedge]

that thing shoots way too slow for dedicated anti-spam imo

[tropic gust]

its not anti spam when youre paying amphib tax tho

[void cove]

Yes, you can't just have free-anti Tick stream, you'll need to spend some ratio of metal your fighting, but Salamanders handle Tick streams very well at ratio

[tropic gust]

jaguars are so much better anti spam

[void cove]

My point is, all labs DO have anti-spam, people just don't use unit compositions and prefer mono-balls where possible, should we not be encouraging thoughtful unit composition?

[tropic gust]

i have to test this but im pretty sure ticks can overwhelm salamanders

[void cove]

Yes, of course, but at what metal ratio of a stream?

and whats that ratio compared to jags

[tropic gust]

you kindof need to fix all anti spam OR you add the chainreaction to ticks when they ball up

[severe wedge]

i suppose it's a matter of preference as to how effective anti-spam should be in its role

[simple island]

A big issue with Salas imo is they can't shoot over wrecks, once there's an actual fight with wrecks they blocks the Salas shots from even hitting the spam as much as you'd want imo.

[severe wedge]

but compared to how hard flak trucks shut down air...

or even to beamer cost-effectiveness vs spam

[void cove]

3 ticklabs with 8 nanos is defeated by 2 sala's and 2 jags apiece

[severe wedge]

op

[void cove]

that's roughly 30~35m/s of tick production handled by 2 units, which don't even need repairing if they aren't pushing fwd

So yeah... if people refuse to actually use the units available; they will have problems, we should discourage mono-balls and reward thoughtfull and strategic unit composition

[minor vale]

Try how many ticks it'd take to actually kill those salas

[void cove]

ii'm slowly scaling tick stream up

[minor vale]

Not as a stream but as a group coming in to surround

[severe wedge]

and to move the goalposts a little bit... by the time they're that close the spam has done its job in a sense

by drawing out shots from other units and giving vision

[lost magnet]

that's not real gameplay to thave those ticks being afk

[hybrid jasper]

yeah llt can do the same even better

[void cove]

Yeah that's why i'd like the slightly larger weapon aoe, that can encompass more ticks, but not any other grouped units

[void cove]

I know, but its illustrative of my point

But you jags/sala's wouldn't be idle and would have other supporting units behind them

[lost magnet]

jags are already very very good against ticks

[void cove]

holy shit, sala's wreck tickballs due to the beam duration

[void cove]

50 ticks aren't enough to relaibly kill 2 jags or 2 salas, but the sala's generaly come out with more hp

so thats 850metal of ticks vs ~700metal of jags/salas

etc

[void cove]

I'd say Salamanders are roughly equivilent vs Ticks to Jags tbqh, and I think that's what their intended balance position was in the first place

[ornate crystal]

What if you split up the tick balls a bit?

like, not move them in a single massed group like that but more in a spread line and then converge on the units once you get some ticks behind them

[void cove]

I was doing "some micro" on both tickballs to try and keep surround and focus targeting 1 jag/sala at a time not letting them split fire

and leaving the jags/sala's to just do whatever they do

[wheat kayak]

One stuns for 8s, need the second one to reset to 8s once it's around 1s left. But on big maps nukes takes around 18s to land, so you have to be very careful with timing both the nuke launch and both spy bot detonations

Very heavy on precise timing and your attention if you go in with just two.

Three spybots is the same as before imo

[elfin dagger]

ngl sounds more like you'd need 3, unless you're perfect

[wheat kayak]

It doable with two, but requires super tight timing

[elfin dagger]

not to mention they'll try to kill the second one in those few seconds

[wheat kayak]

You need to open the nuke silo door in advance before you do first stun

So that nuke launch is instant once you do attack command with nuke silo. Then you need to baby sit the second spybot to re-zap the AN.

IMHO it makes nuking almost impossible once An is up

[elfin dagger]

hmm ya spybots have been big part of the strength of the botlab and they're omega nerfed. I would have expected a cost reduction given it's <1/2 as good as it used to be and is an extremely strong part of the lab w/ no other buff anywhere else

[hybrid jasper]

its not completely joever, they can still stun groups of smaller units

including t2 ones

[elfin dagger]

for 8s tho right?

[wheat kayak]

some t2 ones

[hybrid jasper]

with huge aoe

[wheat kayak]

Up to 8s, depends on unit HP.

[elfin dagger]

wait so it has more aoe?

[wheat kayak]

Same aoe

[hybrid jasper]

well no its just staying huge like it was

[wheat kayak]

The unit is effectively removed as far as im concerned 😛

[elfin dagger]

ya..... today it's used to stun important units, as it is extremely expensive today, now it's terrible w/ the nerfs....

spybots have enormous BP/energy cost

[wheat kayak]

Only makes sense against shelldon balls, but they are only stunned for 8s, you need to close the distance FAST>

[elfin dagger]

curious to see how it works out tbh, but seems sus

[indigo patio]

its still useful for giving vision

but the nerf to the emp effectively removes it as a useful tool

[elfin dagger]

sure, for vision, im more, saying that given the current price it is not that useful(but we'll see)

[wheat kayak]

Cheaper + more LoS (has 10 less than spycam) would be nice buffs to have to make it useful since its delegated to more of a scout unit with some stun capability.

[tropic gust]

dont send them 1 by 1

ok didnt read all messages nvm

[smoky pulsar]

I really really dislike removing spy antinuke interactions, to an extent that is not describable with mild terms like "really really"
Can we increase damage and/or stun time to antinukes? iirc spies already had a special stun time for buildings compared to units before

Game is good because there are so many unique and possible interactions between every unit. Removing interactions for simplicity is just reduces tactical depth. strategies lose character

I also really dislike removing second hound weapon for this reason. Was it a really necessary part of hound's power budget? No, but having tools for every situation and knowing when and where to use them is good for skill expression and depth

[ornate crystal]

couldn't agree more

[topaz whale]

l am also not a fan of removing the spy anti nuke interaction, maybe to go within the idea of a infiltration unit make it so they have 2,5 stun time and emp damage to structures only (8 to 20 sec in this case for antinuke so 1 spy still works), and also reduce their BP/energy cost accordingly

[topaz whale]

The hound gauss case l get that is something which feels hidden to newplayers, at least if they gonna remove it compensate with more projectile speed to get a merged gun between plasma and gauss

[severe wedge]

yeah and I don't think it's huge skill expression to toggle between gun for fast units and gun for slow units

a unit having just one weapon is better for unit "identity" imo

but the slow weapon is also more boring

[elfin dagger]

i dont care a ton about the hound thing, as long as it has a place in any meta, where today it has none(other than being a good boy)

[smoky pulsar]

There were many reasons to use either weapon, beyond fast vs slow targets.

Everything is hidden until people find about about it.
IDK, maybe it's just me, but the reason I got into bar and put so much time into it is exactly because it's complicated and hard, and not in a contrived way. Decisions are meaningful and have payoffs and reward game and situational knowledge. It feels like the goal is to remove a lot of that

[severe wedge]

that's also a source of bias, ie you spent so much time learning all these quirks that you become invested in their existence regardless of how good they are for gameplay

[smoky pulsar]

Are they quirks or applications of an extraordinarily flexible engine? How simple do people want the game to be?

[idle topaz]

The spybot antinuke interaction will still work with new patch. Just need 2 spybot instead of 1, which is fine imho. If someone figures out how to make spybot do 20 secs vs antinuke but 8 secs vs other things I wouldn't mind such pull request.

[smoky pulsar]

2 spybots instead of 1 is huge.

[idle topaz]

Well it's 150 metal more to your 9000 metal nuking plan.

[smoky pulsar]

The metal is not the problem

[topaz whale]

l agree with module, because a weapon switch mechanic feels like a soft spell caster stuff from other rts with way more focus in micro, it can be done in bar and other TA style games for sure, but its just weird and quirk for the style of game

[severe wedge]

the game generally stays away from special damages like that though

[smoky pulsar]

It is exponentially harder to sneak increasing numbers of spybots past a frontline and moving units and reinforcements

[topaz whale]

takes way longer to build 2 spies and those two need to get to antinuke without bumping to anything to not die, then you gotta detonate the first time timing nuke to shoot it to detonate second while trying to not get detected when its about to go off ... its way harder to execute

[idle topaz]

Yea we generally avoid special damage. In this case I wouldn't mind it too much since it's a specific interaction you have to just know anyway. Like nobody is doing spybot antinuke strategy without knowing how many spybots they need in advance.

[smoky pulsar]

iirc spybots had a special stun time modifier for buildings before, can that not be leveraged for antis specifically?

[idle topaz]

Special damage is easy, idk how to do special stun time. But someone more knowledgeable might know.

[smoky pulsar]

#⭐｜main message it has been known for a long time that buildings are stunned for longer than units. I am not familiar enough with BAR code to be able to find it myself at this point. Itanthias says it's something in the gadget. i have now caught up on the past discussions and context more

[ornate crystal]

|| ```
if (building === "an") {
empMultiplier = 2.5;
};

Jokes aside, if something like this was possible it would be great. Sneaking in two spybots is so much harder than sneaking in just one

[upper elk]

i used to sneak in 3 and spread them out before building 2 nukes

its doable

I do agree tho it would be better if only 1 was needed per AN

[smoky pulsar]

Certainly it's doable. But it makes stunning 2 antinuke for example, practically impossible then. I would not call requiring sneaking in 2 spybots, consistent enough to bet on in a nuking strategy. And if it's not consistent enough to bet on, then it won't be done

Tbh I am greatly disappointed in the fact that this is not considered to be a big deal by the teams in charge

[elfin dagger]

spybotting anti is basically a party trick even w/ current balance, and while somewhat interesting, im much more concerned that the botlab will be significantly weaker given there is no other buff for normal engagements

[topaz whale]

l agree that the spybot nerf feels too harsh with the changes they show. not sure if just a cost reduction to BP and energy are enough

[topaz whale]

Like this dany example he tested, this should be more then just 4 sec if we need two spies and good positioning+timing considering cost time to make then

[topaz whale]

l saw this in the code, isn't this splash fall-off for the emp damage? if so practically none now for the radius at least. Don't know why no mention for the changes to it

[orchid acorn]

Problem 1, how many spybots does it take to actually shut down the anti nuke?
2, you can't stack the spy bots, they'll emp each other(even if you select both and self d command), extra cost in micro/space it out.
3, it lasts 8 seconds. So we need additional bots until the nuke is close enough.

[orchid acorn]

I really don't like spy bots EMP other spy bots when they're triggered at the same time.

[topaz whale]

Going back to the pawn vs grunt changes, after watching some games and tests on it l feel like they are fine/more fair.
-Already retreating grunts hard win vs pawns.
-pawns advancing when grunts are about to get in range to shot and turn win over grunts
-pawns advancing and grunts react a bit sooner then their range to move lose to grunts
this is due to the range nerf+ turnrate change making it harder to abuse the extra range (210) accurate lasers are nice.

feels like footsies from fighting games: back and forth to who approaches baiting to come in or not. Arm player can bait grunts to chase to them engage while the cortex player can react to disengage sooner. This is considering both players are paying attention and microing.

What seems a bit stronger is the incisor with accurate lasers. Oh and ticks get wrecked against accurate lasers from anything that has it.

[fringe tulip]

Yes, it should already be 35 seconds for 'isbuilding' units and mobile antinuke, 20s for everything else. According to https://github.com/beyond-all-reason/Beyond-All-Reason/blob/master/luarules/gadgets/unit_paralyze_damage_limit.lua

But I guess we'd have to check the engine limit too somewhere else.

Like an: if unitdefnames armsilo then
Max this time = 25s
Or maxtime = weaponparalyzetime*3

[lost magnet]

unless its identity is to have 2 weapon types xD

[severe wedge]

xD

[quick fulcrum]

This really needs to change, even of the logic stays the same (spybots only vs medium light units)

[chrome cloud]

Do you see the difference though? The ticks get much closer to the Salamanders. Aside from paying the amphib tax and not having AA like the Jaguars, a frequent problem Cortex players have is that the units behind/beside the Salamander, which the Salamander is allegedly guarding/supporting, will friendly fire the Salamanders to death. There is no friendly fire check on AOE damage and the way units are designed, this tends to be a big reason ticks are so effective against Cortex, is that they can get close enough to cause friendly fire issues. Whether that be a cannon, Tzar, Banisher, Pounder, Negotiator, or whatever. It's not just a matter of killing the Ticks, but killing them before they get close enough to cause friendly fire. That's why Mammoth is so much more effective than Sumo at dealing with spam, because it can kill them further away.

[chrome cloud]

By the way, for the antinuke/emp spybot stuff, when you order a nuke to fire it takes 8 seconds to actually launch and antinukes don't start shooting until the nuke starts shooting, and fires an antinuke every 2 seconds, which generally gives it enough time to stop 4-5 nukes (8-10 seconds). To maximize your odds of success, you'd want to order the launch of the nuke and then stun the antinuke 6-7 seconds later if timed right. When it stunned for 20+ seconds, this was easy as you had seconds to spare after emp'ing to then order the nuke sent, so you could verify you stunned it before giving the order. So with a single 8 second stun, you'd need perfect timing (maybe still not quite possible) or a second nuke, as there would be just enough time to stop one nuke if timed very well. Or a second bot would give you much more room to breathe. The trick is just to know that you can give the nuke order before you need to stun the antinuke. As someone said above, the time to nuke is ~18 seconds, but that's from the order given, broken down, it's 8 seconds to launch and then generally 8-10 seconds before it can't be stopped by antinuke and will hit.

So if you guys adjust the stun timer on antinukes, you'll want to consider how tight you want to make it, and whether you want to require the player to order the nuke before the stun or not.
Also, many people build counterintrusion, which identifies the issue, but doesn't actually stop it, which is a constant drain on eco too. Cheaper solution over time is just to surround the facility with grunts/pawns/ticks, and then the bot can't even get to it and if it tries it will bump into them and die. Basically pre-emptively building the units to kill the spy instead of after the detection in response.

[flat minnow]

Before, grunt can't be approached to defeat pawn, so more micro is needed to ensure grunt is at a safe distance to attack pawn. Then the range of grunt is reduced to 210 after the update, so should more attention and micro be allocated than before? If you have to invest more micro and attention than pawn, then I don't think it makes sense

Let's not talk about Grunt's attack on LLT and Centerion for now.

In the past, to defeat Pawn, Grunt needed to invest attention and micro to ensure that Grunt was at a safe distance from attacking Pawn without being attacked.

After the update, Grunt will definitely invest more attention and micro than before, as mistakes will result in high battle damage from Pawn, as it used to be. In the past, Grunt was stronger than Pawn because of its range advantage, which led to significant suppression of Pawn. However, Grunt was unable to defeat Pawn when he was close to Pawn

If Grunt needs to invest more attention and micro in order to be at odds with Pawn, then I think it's an unequal trade-off between effort and reward

Not to mention attacking LLT and Centerion.

Of course, if many people think it's okay, then I won't say anything more. Let's see if it's balanced based on the updated actual combat results

[flat minnow]

And about spybot, I think we should make it emp that the time of architecture and soldiers is inconsistent? For example 18s/10s? Because in many cases, it is necessary to use spybot's emp enemy defense buildings and units push？

[mighty nova]

I really think that spy bots need a coat reduction of they are this heavily nerfed or they will become a unit like the commando that is almost never used except for cheese or unusual plays.

[flat minnow]

Alternatively, if you are really concerned that Spybot has been too dominant in the past, you can add a feature to Spybot: it can be destroyed by Juno to increase its ability to resist Spybot

[ornate crystal]

I would rather it loses cloak ability in the juno

[quick fulcrum]

Ive observed a couple of balance tweaks in BAR now and somehow they always unload like 3 nerfs on a unit at once. I guess its better to do one and see how it plays?

[topaz whale]

That is why my initial idea/suggestion for the spy bot emp was to increase against structures in general (which would also affect the antinuke), because what the dev team wants to change is emp against big t2 and t3 units.

[topaz whale]

Things to add about, metal ratio makes so the larger the quantity of grunts vs pawns there will be more grunts then pawns in the field.

who has the range advantage still has more control of the engagement, so grunts are still grunts but its easier to mess up.

To make pawns win in similar amount also requires attention since you gotta react to push at a certain distance when grunts are advancing to pawns (punish the turnrate nerf) otherwise grunt will win if they start kitting sooner and get chased.

The thing that made straight pawn to grunt bad before was the fact you could walk to outrange them to poke and even if they instantly made pawns move forward they would lose, which is not the case anymore. (this is what l refer to abuse the range) So pawns also require some attention to win.

Pawns are slightly better at raiding due to more health

accurate lasers are very good, l cant see tick baiting for centurion or pawn be as good as before

LLT and centurion slightly better against it but no horrible or mega game changing.

Incisor is what might be stronger and l would be more worried, no wonder blitz hp stat was increased to 750hp in the github changes

[flat minnow]

Perhaps you are right, but I still need to experience in actual combat whether it is really as you said. The only thing that can be confirmed is that armt1botlab has indeed surpassed cort1botlab in terms of adaptability and functionality. However, this is also normal because it was the initial troop ratio of TA😩

[orchid acorn]

Could someone pin the actual change list?

[solemn tendon]

Changelist:

General
Laser weapons no longer randomly miss vs moving targets

Economy
Arm solar 2800 -> 2600 buildtime
Arm wind 37 -> 40m
Cortex wind 45 -> 43m, 199 -> 220hp
Arm tidal 250 -> 200e
Arm asolar 370 -> 350m
Cortex cons +5% bp, since they cost more
Exploiter buildtime +7%

T2 radars
Metalcost 560 -> 400
Energycost 19000 -> 14000
Buildtime 11800 -> 8000

Sneaky Pete
Cloaking removed

Jammer ships
Costs +130%
Health +130%
Speed 61 -> 40

Spybots
Cloaking cost 100/50 -> 40/15
EMP immunity removed
Attack command for self-destruct added
Damage 56000 -> 4500
Paralyzetime 35/20 -> 8s

Banisher
Can now fire in all directions
Sightdistance 550 -> 650
Energycost 23000 -> 17000
Improved aim/tracking

Tremor
Damage 150 -> 200
AoE 200 -> 210
Weapon hits a wider area

Poison Arrow
Energycost 29000 -> 21000
Buildtime 22200 -> 19000
Sightdistance 385 -> 500

Turtle
Sightdistance 372 -> 500

Garpike, Pincer
Sightdistance 305 -> 500
Faster turning turrets

Hound
Lost gauss weapon
Metalcost 300 -> 285

Recluse
Range 600 -> 575
Speed 52 -> 47

Grunt
Metalcost 36 --> 43
Energycost 880 -> 840
Range 230 -> 210
Turnrate 1391 -> 1200

Pawn
Metalcost 48 -> 52
Energycost 960 -> 870
Health 335 -> 370

Tick
Metalcost 17 -> 21
Energycost 340 -> 300
Health 61 -> 60

Scout cars
Health +20%

Blitz
Health 690 -> 750
Cost rounded: 109m, 911e -> 110m, 900e
Ellipsoid hitbox
Sightrange 299 -> 350

Incisor
Cost rounded: 118m, 1042e -> 120m, 1040e
Buildtime 1761 -> 2200
Sightrange 273 -> 330

Shuriken
Reloadtime 1.2s -> 1.3s

Stormbringer
Drops bombs 17% closer together

Banshee
Health 485 -> 560
Altered weapon, plasma bullets with similar stats
Turnrate increased

[void cove]

If we are removing sneaky pete cloak, it should at least have a cost change that is ratio'ed on the cost/range of sneaky pete scaled up to the arm t1 jammers range.

[solemn tendon]

Why are we not just normalizing the T1 Jamming towers? If pete is loosing its stealth, 160 Jammer range for an entire con turrets worth of energy is a big mismatch whether you want the range or not. If the plan is to make T2 radar/jammer more buildable, can we just normalize the T1 jammers to be more or less the Core jammer at T1. Then allow T2 to have its place

[void cove]

i'd like to have some difference in the jammers, e.g. arm more expensive larger area, core cheaper and smaller area seems reasonable as a step change to see how it feels

#1347596266124742788 message for further discussion 🙂

[orchid acorn]

Figured we'd get more traction on that piece by focusing on each individual change. Stuff just gets buried here due to the amount of things done at once.

[solemn tendon]

Well I know most people are going to be focus on the Grunt change, but the pete needs a bit more of a tap to seemingly acomplish the goal.

[severe wedge]

a slightly unexpected interaction is pawns can outrange chasing grunts sometimes with this range gap

[tropic gust]

i fear what poison arrow rush will do now

but banisher buff seems reasonable

dont get me wrong poison arrow isnt very good but you can make it in amphib lab

[severe wedge]

pawn weapon speed = 500, range = 180, a grunt travels 29 units in the time it takes for a bullet to reach the edge of range

which is nearly the entire new range difference

[topaz whale]

It feels like unintended behavior. Not sure if changing projectile lifetime or speed would be good to compensate for this, since it could cause more unexpected stuff.

[severe wedge]

I don't know how true this is in practice... it doesn't feel like pawn vs pawn gets the full "range bonus"

but I saw a pawn shoot and a grunt not shoot

[void cove]

While retreating you have to include the travel time of the projectile for the pawn and the distance the grunt will move in that time, which allows it to shoot while retreating. This crops up quite a lot in very close inspection of unit interactions

[severe wedge]

I'm doubting myself because it doesn't quite look like a pawn gains ~30 units of range vs grunts and pawns

but then again you never kited except in pawn vs pawn

[fickle marsh]

Ive been playing a lot with the changes. They feel pretty good to me. Even though grunts got a nerf they still feel a lot better to play with, accurate lasers really does make laser units feel more responsive

[flat minnow]

The laser changes are only about sount units

There is no significant impact when attacking other units (1v1game)

[fickle marsh]

Im not sure what you mean. Accurate lasers effects any t1 unit with lasers. T2 units already had it

Ohh did you mean scout units?

This still isnt true because accurate lasers effects the pawn/grunt matchup as well. Lasers miss pawns some times

[severe wedge]

i almost never see it missing 🤔

[quick fulcrum]

Sneaky pete range is unchanged, meaning its bigger than core jammer. More cost for bigger range

[orchid acorn]

But does the extra range justify the cost?

That's why I made #1347596266124742788 to discuss.

[quick fulcrum]

cool i'll join the debate

[flat minnow]

Really? I haven't seen Grunt laser miss Pawn in previous battles

Well, in small-scale team battles, there may be very few occurrences, but the impact should not be too significant

[fickle marsh]

Yeah its small but still does happen some times :p

Its mostly just for scouts tho

[tropic marten]

The spybot change is a bit baffling, a single spybot wont even be able to stun a bull?

Yet alone not a Tiger. And if you use 2 you will accidentally stun your own 2nd spybot

The 8s stun im fine with, could even be 10. But the dmg has to be 20k. Spybot is single use only and its been nerfed like its a bomber

Make it cost more metal also. Like 300

Hot tip: round all costs. I know its balanced around formula but plz round it for user saneness. Noone likes seeing 119 as cost on build menu button, difficult to remember. Same goes for E/BT.

[hoary zinc]

even if the spybot didn't have any stun, it would still be really useful

[minor vale]

Arguably gremlin becomes the better unit if you remove spybot emp totally

Though it can't reclaim or climb hills

[pine mesa]

Good ideas

[pine mesa]

This is why I suggested at some point that their self destruct defense mechanism should be the same as twilights. 5 Seconds is a joke. If a behemoths attack was a headbutt even the behemoth would close the distance with time to spare.

[plain niche]

Any way to nerf shurikens a little bit harder? My golly pawns used to have somewhat of a chance shooting them down even though a pawn here and there got emp’d, but now they have no chance. Really is lame to raid and see one shuriken and just know that all your units are dead and will get no value whatsoever. Pre-patch I would still try to raid and target the shuriken when it was in range (already hard given how fast and small it is), but now it seems impossible to do.

[hybrid jasper]

I agree it would be nice to be able to click on the shuris with set target somehow

but its like an impossible mlg420 spinshot kinnda click

on the other hand shuri seems completely fine in 1v1 because the raiding groups get so large so fast its like impossible to stun everything

[agile spoke]

Shurikens are buffed this patch

Not nerfed , just remember

Accurate lasers means shurikens will never miss a fast moving target ever

[lost magnet]

it's okay they increase reload time by 0.1 sec when shuriken would often miss target 3 times in a row
the classico

[minor vale]

ground lasers also dont miss when firing at the shuris

so vs small fast units (w lasers) its a mixed bag, vs bigger guys they didnt miss previously either

[agile spoke]

You Can permanent move a jeffy and it won’t be stunned

Same for ticks

[lost magnet]

shuriken always missed pawns/grunts

it was funny to see shuriken fail miserably at hitting pawns

not sure how you would think 0.1 sec would change anything when the change is 100-200% on average probably

little ball of pawns could counter very well shuris, now it's probably never going to be able to with that change

[scenic breach]

Banishers are gonna be hella strong

[scenic breach]

Keep Pete sneaky, bump it to t2, and make t1 jammers about the same for both factions?

[little lodge]

when patch

[timid vector]

**Is it the dev team's view that "ticks are scouts" and that there is no commitment to maintaining their current viability as combat units? ** e.g. that the intention is for early 1v1 Arm bots v Cor bots to be balanced around monocompositions of pawns vs grunts, whilst compositions including tick-balls vs grunts are a non-consideration or to be ensured suboptimal?

(as a counterexample I'm imagining the grunt keeping most/all of its range but ticks get a health buff keeping the mid/late-game OHKO breakpoints the same, or whatever else to keep the current 1v1 interactions and have a later more nuanced arm-bot-vs-cor-bot fix than, "make pawns and grunts more the same")

Separately:
The GitHub discussion seems to be about matters of process rather than indicating any further discussions about balance. Does further discussion in this thread have any impact on the proposed changes?

[idle topaz]

Buffs to ticks would be problematic for non-1v1 reasons. Also armada being so much more difficult to play than cortex in 1v1 is something we don't want and I think most players don't either. So maintaining that is perhaps not worthwhile.

All balance discussion is welcome, but there is a lot of it, so forgive us if all ideas can't be put into the game.

I do hope early armada bots will have both ticks and pawns. Even if ticks can't fight grunts very well anymore they are still a good unit for raiding.

[pine mesa]

Shurikens should cost more to off set the overwhelming value they can exploit from the other team, whilst at the same time preventing shurikens from projecting power ubiquitously everywhere over the map early game. A higher cost would also create actual risk for the core air player in order to actualise getting value. Instead of just it being an cheap highspeed flying army destroyer.

[hybrid bluff]

everything is fine, but some units emphasize the peculiarity of the faction and give it exclusivity, in general I understand that balance at this stage is probably one of the last things worth spending time on, the game is still in alpha version and is far from release, but I would really like to believe that it will not be like in faf supremecommander, where the difference between units is only in name and appearance.

you can't please everyone, we need to test these changes, at least this balance patch gives the possibility of reaching the T2 stage for the armada

and changes a number of combinations of units in the bot laboratory t2

the only thing I really don't understand in terms of balance is the cheapness of t1 radars or the viewing radius that they cover, the difference is absurd and I, as a player, will never build a t2 radar because it would be better for me to build 7-8 t1 radars for this mass, the totality of which will cover much more territory.

[idle topaz]

Cheapness of t1 radars is a consequence of units in BAR having less sight distance than weapon distance. And also buildings in BAR being so squishy that you have to rebuild your radar quite often.

Personally I wanted to reduce t2 radar cost more but as a compromise I got it down a little bit at least 🙂

[pine mesa]

I cant remember the last time i built a t2 radar or jammer either. lol

[hybrid bluff]

what I wanted to say is it reasonable to make it more expensive or reduce the viewing radius of the T1 radar by 300 units? if you take the same Isidis Crack map, one T1 radar is enough to cover an area of 1/4 of the map and not worry about anything and pay ~65 mass for that

[severe wedge]

~300 wouldn't be too bad

it depends on the map, the strength of radar feels fair when there's enough terrain to obstruct it

actually

I prefer strong radar, the game becomes too volatile if you can't defend

[hidden niche]

hard pass, radar is already too small on most maps. whats the point of a radar, when units appear on it and you still gonna lose all expand due to too long reinforcement time compared to enemy attack timing

[hybrid bluff]

take the same map of the Canis rivers, there the radar works and shows an impending threat where in principle it should not work and I am talking specifically about the large plateau and the territories adjacent to it, and such places are on other maps, and the point is not even that this mechanics has small errors, but that the cheapness of the radar negates various types of reconnaissance, this is my opinion and complaint

[hidden niche]

u should show a picture of unbalanced radar

[hybrid bluff]

Okay, as soon as I have the opportunity I will definitely do it

[fickle magnet]

nerfing t1 radar would only make 1v1 games even more volatile than they already are

already feels very coinflippy

[idle topaz]

There's an idea to remove pinpointers and instead make T2 radars always have the more accurate radar signatures, which would make them more distinct. But there's a bunch of technical hurdles to solve for that first.

[quick fulcrum]

T2 radar with localized pinpointer, juicy. Really good way to incentivize t2 radars

[ornate crystal]

actually a really good idea for a change

[strong spear]

Would it be worth combining t2 radar and pinpointers into the same building?

[quick fulcrum]

I think so yes, because you will hardly see much more than 3 t2 radars. Maybe more in teams

Would make it a lucrative building but not op IMO

[ornate crystal]

if it could be done, how about not making t2 radar wobble zero, but if you have 2 or more t2 radars from different angles they can kinda work like triangulation (yes i know you need 3 from different angles, just the general idea) or something like that

[pine mesa]

Also an even higher value strategic target

[quick fulcrum]

No need this complex imo :))) not all maps are 4 lane 8 players to triangulate the whole front ez 😅

[outer fulcrum]

Just make em crappy pinpointers

[dense elk]

Pls add t2 trans speed nerf to the patch

[ornate crystal]

i mean obviously you wouldn't need actual triangulation from all sides, but it could be interesting imo if the wobble reduction stacked based on radar range. And lore-wise it could be explained something like triangulation (more like the broad concept of it ^^)

[gilded grotto]

As requested.
https://imgur.com/a/xnsD6tj

First time contributing. Hopefully this is done properly:
https://github.com/beyond-all-reason/Beyond-All-Reason/pull/4485

[idle topaz]

Thanks! Didn't expect someone to actually do it. We will have to get this voted by others too though before we can merge. I'll get back to you in the PR.

[quick fulcrum]

Very cool work @gilded grotto

[plain niche]

Absolutely they are buffed by the laser accuracy. The small nerf to weapon speed isn’t enough to compensate. They need to get nerfed harder in another respect to make up for it. Personally, I think I’d like to see it take two shots instead of one to emp something like a pawn.

[agile spoke]

I’ve seen a shuriken miss 3 out of 7 shots to a tiger yesterday , imagine the buff

[lost magnet]

i bet they don't have the %miss rate by size

that 0.1 sec increase look like a juke

[timid vector]

https://github.com/beyond-all-reason/Beyond-All-Reason/pull/4450#event-16749276123
the patch is now a 'scheduled balance release'

[dry solar]

GOOD.

[fossil trench]

Hecc yes

Here's one thing I think should be considered.

Make tigers and bulls not get stuck on their own wrecks... It's crippling for a tank ball

[gilded grotto]

I hope they'll consider the spybot exception for anti-nuke along with it. It'll be weird if that comes later.

[fringe tulip]

Somone did already make a PR with that, to keep it 20s on antinuke

[fossil trench]

Would be great if a com over 75 % HP didn't die to another com's explosion too...

[gilded grotto]

Yeah, that was me. It isn't approved yet though. That's why I was saying that I hope it gets approved to go along with this balance patch instead of potentially later.

[chrome cloud]

Did you see the 40k Discord event games on that tiny Hook map? Commanders were chain popping all over the place. Was pretty funny as the main strategy was to sacrifice a commander into the enemy to chain pop a whole group of them.

[fringe tulip]

What happened to that hovercraft mode, to stop that?

[frigid galleon]

20 range nerf to grunt feels like too much with the manouverability change also

[quick fulcrum]

In 1v1 ticks die insta to accurate lasers, grunts might be too strong without nerf

[hoary zinc]

grunts missing ticks was really frustrating though

[quick fulcrum]

I bet it was but the playstyle of pawn with tick surround kinda dead im afraid

Which i loved, zerg style

[dry solar]

Ling Roach, I think someone in this thread said.

[quick fulcrum]

Its gigafun playstyle

[dry solar]

Personally I'm ok with it going for now 'cause it's probably gonna be impossible to sell a tick (HP) buff, and we all hate RNG hit rates right? Haha

Theoretically I think all it takes to make the surround style viable again is Tick HP buff if needed.

I'm a bit clung to the idea that Pawn and Grunt ought to be fighting on even footing to role match for the giga important 1v1 light unit phase, even if I'm a little sad to see the 'combined arms' go down.

[hybrid jasper]

i'm honestly scared of new pawns vs new grunts xD

they already do kinnda well if they get the jump

[dry solar]

Ideally both could be equally viable.

[lost magnet]

made a hover scout yesterday, that thing missed a tick 5 times and lost the 1v1

[dry solar]

Looked at the GitHub most recent commits before approval and it seems like the Banshee buffs are being rescinded, and spybot emp is upped to 5000 from 4500, and changes to the Blitz that I do not understand besides the hitbox changes

[solemn tendon]

Random handouts to what is largely considered one of the worst units in the game.

Im holding out some minor hope the vision buff amounts to something but seeing as they are buffing incisor vision as well its probably only going to come into play vs lone rocket bots

[fossil trench]

Yeah I just feel that players are not being rewarded for playing well with the Commander trades at all. If you commander is at 75% HP and theirs is basically dead and you die just by being in range of their explosion they are getting rewarded for being lower HP, while you are being punished for almost killing them.

That's a bad precedent to set.

The player who has the other one low should be rewarded but instead because the one choosing to walk forward has control of the situation they can plan to move their things out of the way and capture the double reclaim after.

**My suggestion would be that Commanders with 75% HP have a "shield" or increased armor value (with some kind of visual indicator) that reduces damage from other commander explosions. **

So when will the new patch drop?

[tropic gust]

no, its good this way, otherwise loosing a com would instantly snowball into a loss, if You yave a few units in range then use those to finnish the com while you move your own away

its complicated to explain why but encouraging commander fights will have terrible results in practice

Combombing to kill enemy commander is allso the only real counter to cockroach playstyles where you rush into a chokepoint with centurion constructor and commander to then make HLT popup and gauntlet, if combomb would not kill the commander standing inside the porc then that move would be unpunishable for someone who didnt make early commander hunting units

commander hunting units being centurions of your own or janus, thugs take to long to get in numbers so core has nothing since the centurion counters grunts, so all that is left to do is combomb the commander who is boosting the constructor

[timid vector]

Thing is, ya don't need to sell a tick HP buff; you could sell that grunts get their sportscar-handling back (or a bit of range or whatever buff), but do slightly reduced damage to ticks (or scouts in general) enough to breakpoint 1 more hit on average to KO per engagement with a tick ball of equal resource value or something like that.

But for whatever reason I keep seeing folks pushing back on units doing different damage to different units even though it's ubiquitous in the game (LLTs vs coms, land vs VTOL, everyone vs sub, EMP resist, juno, nano explosion damage...).

[timid vector]

Thugs counter centurions and at-range out-dps centurions buildtime-to-buildtime and cost-to-cost. The scenario outlined just makes it sound like the centurion player has more resources already.

[tropic gust]

no you cant go thugs instantly unless you want to loose to ticks pawns or grunts, going centurion means you wont get swarmed wich means it can be your first unit

so theres a very early phase where the centurion player has an advantage until you scout the centurion

in this phase hes gonna build an HLT

wich will then counter rocket bots

[timid vector]

Centurions have a move speed of <50; where is this problematic HLT getting built...?

[tropic gust]

in the middle of isthmus by the suicide player

again currently its easy to counter just combomb him and swarm with units after

mostly counters noobs

i still dont think that its good to encourage commander fights on normal maps, killing a com with your own com and then immediatly eating it snowballs so quickly, right now you have to be afraid of being too close when a com blows wich gives the other team a chance to intervene

[dry solar]

Playing with patch. Eno murdered me with Tick only as I Grunt only on Isidis Crack. It's because I'm bad. The next guy fared much better but still lost. Man has micro. What this limited testing says is that Ticks aren't completely entirely unviable, because of how microable they are, to raid/outmanouvre role.
Eno says it's harder to go in for straight fights with Ticks against Grunts than before though. edit: clarified last sentence

[rose hound]

yeah it's better since the grunt range decreased

part of me wonders if it's overtuned

[quick fulcrum]

Was also specing games on patch tweak. Grunts kill ticks faster but surrounds still kill grunts in reasonable numbers. I saw some ticks escape grunts because of lower range so thats a thing

Gonna be hard to chase and defend if you arent on point

[outer fulcrum]

I'm wondering that too

[frigid galleon]

-20 range on grunt very heavy handed honestly in combination with the cost AND the manoeuvrability nerf

personally just makes me want to extend my 1v1 hiatus to forever

but w/e it's just the opinion of 1 shitter

[timid vector]

Eh, I understand an argument about the combination of maneuverability and range, but costwise ticks received a slightly harder nerf than grunts metal-for-metal (and a slightly better buff energy-for-energy; point being costwise it seems like a wash or moot).

[timid vector]

I ran some cursory skirmish tests (slowed speed + pausing, microing both sides); seems like you need about 15-20% more ticks than 'before' to make the surrounds (i.e. 'straight fights', as opposed to raiding) cost-effective if you don't micro individual damaged ticks back (... multiple times a second...). I can't argue whether this is desirable or not; maybe it is, maybe it isn't.

[timid vector]

points at earlier suggestion where grunts could get their range or maneuverability or something back and instead do slightly less damage to scout units as the trade for their accurate lasers rather than... the current future (basically making the indirect buff to individual-tick-raiding-against-grunts and direct nerf to tick-swarm-fighting-against-grunts of the current future instead be a slight-nerf to individual-tick-raiding-against-grunts and a maintenance of tick-swarm-fighting-against-grunts respectively)

(emphasis on 'something'; I realize the desirability of pawn monocomps working complicates this)

[dry solar]

Bringing Pawn Grunt weapon range closer (50 elmo diff was insane bro) is the most important change for the sake of high level 1v1 bot opener balance imho. If Ticks do turn out too good at raiding v Grunt, a different variable should be touched.

[frigid galleon]

grunt has to be everything for Core you can't just keep nerfing it, it's the scout, the brawler, the antispam

[timid vector]

Accurate lasers is a huge buff in the antispam department. Would an accurate interpretation of your sentiment be that the grunt should not be skewed harshly towards any of the 'scout', 'brawler', or 'antispam' roles?

[strange edge]

Is there any plan to reduce the scope of this change? There seem to be so many highly impactful yet wholly unrelated content in this patch that it seems impossible for anyone on the team proposing or monitoring this change to accurately assess impact.

There’s the wind change
Laser change
Air changes
Emp changes

Each could be rolled out separately with proper focused testing and feedback

Response to this patch seems mixed at best and attention is split between these changes

[dry solar]

There is strong sentiment that, being in alpha, changes/frequency of balance or design adjustments are too slow, like once every half year or something. This is fine imo.