Rovers/Rascals need a nerf

[elder falcon]

Currently it's too easy to leak with rovers, they are soo fast (36+speed on a tick) , and since they have longer range than a tick, once they leak, its impossible to chase them. They need to be brought more in line with ticks.

Rovers should have different use cases and weaknesses than ticks. Currently their poor turning circle and weapon rotation are their drawbacks. This should allow ticks to out micro rovers, but that currently isnt the case, as rovers are faster and have longer range. A sizeable speed nerf (10-20) is required, at least, maybe a nerf range.

If you want to keep the speed of rovers, than you need to nerf their dmg and range. so that ticks are able to cut off the rovers with better mico, and not instantly die as soon as they enter their range.

Thoughts?

[lapis crow]

Core doesn't even have tics.... there are also considerable cost differences and entirely different movement abilities. While I share the frustration of running down rovers with tics, they are paying a bit more per unit and mass tics are far far superior to mass rovers due to thier movement alone. I think i would need more reasons, as to why they would be balanced directly against tics as only 1 faction even hass access to them, but all factions have a rover.

[elder falcon]

you dont need to balance them against ticks, but we do need a counter, which currently there isnt

ticks are the only thing that come close that early in the game, and if ticks cant stop rover leaks with superiors micro, then nothing can

currently a rover can leak with minimal micro, and no matter how much micro you have with other units you cant stop them, due to their speed. you should be rewarded for microing well, and a unit that stat checks their only counterplay, as well as requiring much less micro is unbalanced and requires balance changes

[tight silo]

now imagine being cor bots

[visual plover]

Aren't all veh faster (but harder to maneuver) then their bot equivalent? What's the difference in this case compared to "pawns can't chase blitzes" that suggest they need a speed nerf?

[visual plover]

As soon as rovers need to turn, ticks can catch up. Also, rovers cannos are slower to turn. I would say good micro is rewarded in this matchup.
But yeah, 1:1 ticks lose hard, as in most bot vs veh matchup

[warm scarab]

Sound like what you need is better plan to deal with rover/rascal than chasing them. Try parking defensive grunt/tick next to allied mexe, instead of chasing them in circle.

Worst case scenario, the rover/rascal stay alive, but as least they didnt kill anything of yours

[lapis crow]

I think you may find yourself kind of alone in this opinion.... maybe not, but I certainly don't feel like I can not defend against rovers and I don't really ever come across people complaining about not being able to defend them.

[warm scarab]

Generally, the strategy to catch a fast moving enemy is not to chase behind them, but to intercept their destination.

[elder falcon]

Blitz are much more expensive than a rover so can’t be made as early. As such units are in place to stop them. Rovers can be the first units out of the lab.

[elder falcon]

Currently the speed difference is soo big, the rovers can stop next to a mex, wait a second while it cannon turns, kill the mex, and then go again before the tick catches up.

Also since the rover has longer range, even if the rover turns, the ticks die when they enter rover range. The only way to prevent the leak is to be there first. If you don’t want to stop rovers stat checking, then increase their cost to slow the time they come out.

[visual plover]

Idk that seems a bit of an exaggeration to me. Maybe if the way between the mexes is verly long and you can move always on a straight line?
Tbh I haven't seen any rover domination so far. But I wouldn't know much about 1v1 -- if that's where it happens

[elder falcon]

I wanted to keep this discussion relevant to all maps, but I am isthmus only so I’ll give an example from my experience. As front it’s your job to stop leaks. I can have multiple ticks/pawns across the front line. If I’m suicide and my 2nd front is sleeping, their suicide goes to put units down 1 side, I need to cover. That single move to the side is enough for rovers to get down the other side, due to their speed.

Good micro is not rewarded here

[warm scarab]

Nah. Rover aint that big of a deal, just watch any high level 1v1.

[warm scarab]

In that scenario, you ping and tell geo to wake up and make pawn/tick. Or air to wake up and make one shuriken.

[elder falcon]

I do not play 1v1. This is purely the perspective of an 8v8 isthmus player.

Currently, players with poor micro are leaking with rovers ~50% of matches.

[elder falcon]

But that’s not something I can deal with other than tell those positions. If geo makes pawns, they don’t stop the rover. If geo makes 5 ticks the moment the rovers leak, they still probably don’t stop them

[warm scarab]

Sound like a skill issue, not an unit issue, idk how to tell ya

[visual plover]

Idk, I frequently play geo armada and always open bots. Rovers are more annoying when going to the sea player, but you should have time to make some ticks out and catch them.

Ofc you can't run after, you have to anticipate where they are going. It also feels that they die fairly easy after hitting one mex cause it takes them some time to resume moving, especially when they need to rotate.

[elder falcon]

I am very competent front player, that is not the issue. A unit that can come out as fast as the only thing that’s remotely close to it, requires less micro, and requires my teammates to deal with it because I don’t have the units to match it, is broken by definition

[lone plover]

I don't play team games but isn't exactly one LLT is what's needed to stop any rover/rascal? I mean, between the isthmus hill and sea

[visual plover]

I think you are stretiching a bit the problem here. The speed difference isn't that huge, and rovers actually slow down significantly when they stop or turn too sharply.
You are describing a specific scenario on a specific map as an example, but it doesn't feel like suicide player on Isthmus should cover for those leaks, it's mostly to the geo player at that point (who can responde with ticks metal-on-metal). Or the air player if it goes even further

[elder falcon]

Making 1 llt as suicide is the difference of securing 200 metal from mid or not.
Becides, it’s mostly leaking past 2nd front, not suicide, who would never have an llt there in time to stop it. The only way they would is if they did a 4 mex walk, which is considered grief due to the slow time to get units out. They sacrifice too much mid metal

[elder falcon]

Negative, if we can recognise that suicide can’t prevent that then that’s good. However I disagree that it is geos job to stop. It is fronts job to stop leaks. And if front isn’t able to do that because of 1 unit, that unit needs changing. Also the speed difference is 36, it is significant. Pair that with longer range and the tick can’t compete.

[visual plover]

Well yeah, I would say suicide cannot easily prevent that. But geo can still catch those rovers, even with ticks.
Overall, ofc it's front's job to stop them! In your scenario, the safe-front was sleeping; otherwise, they should catch it on time!

My 2 cents: it doesn't feel like the meta is dominated by early rovers opening, nor that a unit should be balanced around a specific case on a specific map. If you pick ATG, bigger rovers vs ticks fights happen more frequently early game, and metal-on-metal they seem reasonably balanced.
I'm curious to hear more voices tho

[elder falcon]

You’re not wrong, I am coming from a very specific viewpoint and as such am bias.

[tight silo]

this rover leak strategy u describe already got nerfed quite a bit by mex hp buff

[lone plover]

Yeah, it's barely possible to get any value with them now https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7AOC2RgwJA xD

[urban radish]

is the counter not

'literally anything that fights back'

?

I'm amazed an isthmus player is complaining about them and not flats and forests or something, I'm pretty sure rascals are actually straight dogshit

[urban radish]

is this vid supposed to make people think rascals are good?

because imo looking at that they probalby need a buff xd

[lone plover]

Well, with barely any economy and with only a few rascals he essentially won the game (obviously not alone and not in isolation).

But no, this doesn't show how good or bad the rascals are. If it shows anything is that the pure greed meta builds are too risky, nothing more.

I'm pretty sure it shows a situation where the rascals can seem more effective than they really are which is what most of this thread is about.

He probably could have achieved the same result with ticks, or with grunts; and honestly, if you want to achieve the same result the best possible option is probably the goons which might seem stupid but that's the best scout tier unit and it can avoid the spot where usually players build LLTs.

[urban radish]

ah ok lol. was gonna say the front literally alt-f4'd when his comm died, had no static d, and the 12 os' base he ran into didn't react at all
..and his rascals still almost died to 2 con turrets

more on topic specifically, OP complaining he can't chase them down, which is their only saving grace. they lose to legit everything in an actual fight

I also disagree that they need some fundamentally different role than ticks. they're both in the scout/chaff slot on their respective buildings.

[lone plover]

Yes I agree with you. There are many units where one faction has a faster option so not being able to chase 'them' down is not a unique problem to rascals. I mean, grunts can't chase down pawns either and that's a slightly more significant matchup than ticks vs rascals.
Against fast units radar and defences are the answer. The problem is not rascals, it's that players feel they have to squeeze out every last second to reach a greedy eco target so they think they can't invest in a radar at least. One radar can turn an uncertain chase into an easy interception whatever the unit matchup is.

[elder falcon]

Negative, due to their cheap cost they can be made early, before ‘literally anything else’ can be in position to stop them

Both of you are missing the point of the post. Go back and read from the start.

[lapis crow]

There is an entire map to cross.... if you find yourself typically playing against people who all in on early scouts then you need to adjust. A rascal is not reaching my base before Ive had an opportunity to make something more significant myself due to travel time alone. It kinda feels like your argument is "they can be made first therefore they have no counter" and when taken into context with map size that is never true. If I am teching on ATG or something and I see LARGE packs of tics/rascals... I think hey, maybe a slower T2 timing and keeping my commander alive longer might be wise this game, not omg how did these guys make 12 rascals already they are so OP. Another I wonder is WHY are you limiting your ideas to simply "chasing" the rascals. With the knowledge in hand that you are slower, you should be looking at other ways to mitigate the damage of a leak.

[elder falcon]

reread the thread from here #1407840561523855543 message****

[lapis crow]

I have read this thread thanks, and with the last few responses from you being a general "you don't get it" perhaps you sohuld consider re-explaining whats being missed?

[elder falcon]

Rovers can be made at the same time from suicide/2nd front as ticks can. pawns/grunts will be slightly later due to their e cost. ticks cant enter the range of rovers withouht dying. Pawns/grunts are too slow to be in the correct positoon to stop the rover leaking, due to the rovers speed. The rover takes low apm to leak, and the rover player hs to mess up their micro, for a well microed pawn/grunt to stop it. The unit is stat checking with less micro required. that is the definition of broken

[lapis crow]

See... it's not that we don't understand. It's that we DISAGREE. I have no issues combating rovers with tics directly, while they may get "some" first shits my tics can circles them faster then they can turn and rotate thier wepaons leaving totaly vulnerable with thier ONLY option being speed.

PAwns grunts being slower is "ok" due to the time it takes for a rover to travel, in your particular istuation ISthmus front, there is no reason a grunt is not in position to deal with some incoming rovers. WHile 1 grunt vs 5 rovers could certinaly still leak, you're kill more than 50% of them on the way by and even still.... you should have at least 2-3 grunts on suicde before 5 or 6 rascals arrive even with a boost

[elder falcon]

no... you are clearly not familiar with this situation
"there is no reason a grunt is not in position to deal with some incoming rovers" is completely wrong, and 1 of the main points ive made in this thread

[lapis crow]

It is, but its also been consistently contested as an objective truth....

[elder falcon]

As someone who has done 2 mex on 2nd front, which is not the meta, its 3 mex, and 1 wind and solar, into a lab, into a pawn, and had 3 rovers leka past bc the pawn was too slow, i can tell you you are wrong. And it wasnt even close the pawn was a few seconds out of the lab, while the rovers went down the side of the map.

[lapis crow]

OK so then at least we have a clear test case. Can pond + front jam rovers past enemy pond + front before they can defend agasint it with an infantry bot.

[elder falcon]

pond is irrelevant to this conversation, the rovers are coming from suicide. and yes they can, i have seen it many times. which is why i started this thread

[lapis crow]

Pond is going to be boosting to increase the speed or is the claim that you can just solo push enough Rascals from suicide to leak?

[elder falcon]

no, pond boosts on both teams, there will a little variance in the boost enough for it to matter to this conversation, so pond can be ignored

[lapis crow]

Pond is not irrelevant unfortunately. They are providing a large portion of the economy to allow the increased rate of unit production, and while I would indeed use tidal to limit testing variance, its still going to be a required part of it.

[lusty compass]

i feel like the whole point of rascal/rover is that its hard for ticks to catch up to them so that is why they are way more expensive especially rovers
though it is pretty annoying they have more range than ticks

[harsh sentinel]

Do you have a replay? What I'm hearing is that rascals/rovers are overpowered because they come out before anything else and can do a lot of damage. This is happening in a Supreme Isthmus game.

My understanding of the Isthmus meta is that it is typical for pond to boost front with a few tidal generators to help them get units early. If one side is doing this and the other is not than they will get their units out earlier and can do massive damage with a raid. Otherwise if both sides are getting similarly boosted and neither side has an inherit economic advantage than I believe it should be possible to zone out the rovers with pawns.

[arctic moat]

Even if rovers can reliably get past the frontline in the earlygame ... is that really undesirable gameplay? God forbid someone in the backline has to make a unit or look at the map.
I am pretty sure if rover openings became very popular our very capable backline players could figure something out.

[harsh sentinel]

Seems to me having an air player respond with shuris is standard operating procedure?

[urban radish]

rovers can be made and cross the map faster than an LLT can be made? also comm like 2 shots them?

I've read the thread I think you're conflating people completely pigging out on isthmus with optimal gameplay

..and wanting the game balanced around that

[tight silo]

tidal boosted grunt cant for sure intercept tidal boosted rovers I see no reason why that would be impossible

even with short rush distance on supreme botlab buildtime is a little shorter

[normal trout]

rover pretty op in tourney early game, and very good in 1v1. At least it's limited to that phase of the game and not an all-stages unit like the tick.

[normal trout]

people don't use gunship they use transport to pick up nano and cons, because the time to kill is less, and transports are faster and cheaper than gunships

[lapis crow]

But do you think they are nerf worthy?

[normal trout]

eh i dunno. you'd tone down the speed

[lapis crow]

hm..

They already loose en mass to ticks, Core has no bot scout, make much slower and they are useless and increasing the costs seems kinda meh as they are already pretty expensive to spam. It kinda feels like speed or nothing, build time i guess....might be something as well?

[visual wren]

Dude… if they can have rover in your base…. You can also have units at that time….. lmao

[lone plover]

Please @elder falcon correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure Raven's problem is not with the unit in isolation, but more like with the interaction with specific meta plays on one specific map.
For example, on Isthmus, there are players who are expected to give wind turbines / tidal for the frontline players while the frontline player is expected to rush to the isthmus with rez bots and grunts.
So it's not that these players can't make units to counter the rovers, but that they won't have the time IF they do the expected meta play.

[visual wren]

Yeah the expected meta play is irrelevant. If you’re dying to rover maybe your meta is shit

You should absolutely not balance a unit because it’s killing isthmus meta lol. That doesn’t mean rover isn’t too good but that’s definitely not the way to assess it.

[lone plover]

Obviously, but we can still understand op's point without agreeing with it.
A relative newbie who just joins an Isthmus game might not be aware of the risks of the rover rush and might just follow the meta based on spectating other games and such.

I mean, let's face it, that Isthmus meta is extremely weird. Essentially no player is equipped to deal with a rover leak if the frontline players can't stop them. The pond is a battery, the geo is rushing for geo, the sea is probably walking to the shore, the air player can't even scout the rover rush because they need to gift tranports, etc.
So if they're lucky then one of them may be able to make some ticks at least and OP is correct in that those just won't cut it.

[visual wren]

It makes no sense. Of course pond should be weak to units. He gave all his money to other players. Is there supposed to be no downside to that?

The isthmus meta is irrelevant because it’s purely socially enforced. No balance decisions should be made based on it because it does not develop naturally.

[lone plover]

Of course pond should be weak to units. Of course a rover rush should work if the players don't do anything to try to stop it. Obviously the rovers don't need any nerf...

All I'm saying is that be a bit more understandable. If Raven is new and they pick the pond spot and their team is essentially forcing them to give away all their resources and pray to not die to a rover rush, then they might be a bit frustrated if they do die to it.
Again, I'm not saying OP is right, just that some empathy can be helpful.

[visual wren]

Maybe that’s a weakness of making 0 units. You will have to rely on teammate to support you. Lol

“I want to only make e production and no units but units killed me - pls nerf “

Just proves my point - someone actually adapt to isthmus meta with rover attack and they immediately ask for nerf because it changes the meta lmao

Just set no rush timer xd

[jolly bobcat]

do you know what u can build to counter roers? llts

[visual wren]

No we supposed to be able to make tidal for free

[jolly bobcat]

hmm perhaps an ew meta would be different positions get different perks? pond would have a unattackable (bubble) for first 10 minutes? front spots would have +10% dmg given, +10% dmg taken?

[elder falcon]

I dont understand how soo many people can comment on this withouht reading the thread. Yes I am aware llts can stop rovers. no 2nd front on isthmus cannot make an llt in time to stop the rovers leak.

[visual wren]

I’m literally replying to baldric

Realistically if u started with units 1 rover wouldn’t be an issue

[normal trout]

Nothing about rascal should be map specific.

Commie just needs to give units to the battery to deal with leak. Dealing with rover/tick with grunts is pretty brutal but oh well

[lusty compass]

i dont think nerfing rover should be because its annoying to deal with on 1 map with a specific meta

[visual wren]

It could be rover / gator too fast or range too long but isthmus rush distance and pond meta not relevant to discussion

If u die to a scout unit after giving all your gaming money away don’t cry about it 🙂

[lusty compass]

like if they start with 3 rovers at start on map with a small rush distance
obviously if you are in equal fight and u leak its urfault for not making ticks to defend or 1 grunt

[lone plover]

It's not that we didn't read the thread, it's that we disagree with your point. It's very obvious that an LLT can be made before the rovers arrive, or your own rovers, or radar and grunts, etc.
The only reason you might not have the time to build that LLT is that you're doing something else.

[lusty compass]

just cause its easy to leak early because people greed/get more tidals/winds than other person because of how a meta works on 1 map doesnt mean auto nerf imo

[elder falcon]

no...an llt cannot be made on 2nd front to stop the rover leak, not even close, the com hasnt even started walking

[lone plover]

It should be very easy to prove us wrong. Share a replay, replicate it in a skirmish game, etc.

[normal trout]

The game isn't all straights, geo needs to clean it up with 3-4 tickz

[elder falcon]

that is such an outragous point to be trying to push that anyone with experience knows it isnt the case

[lusty compass]

yea also like if u cant deal with 3 rover and u have a lab

[visual wren]

Then u just suck :/

[normal trout]

Rovers are really strong in tournament play with flat map but we'd have to see much more staleness before nerfing

[lusty compass]

i mean obviously they are meant to leak they are fast thats their whole purpose
if your geo player cant make 3 ticks to stop it thats just stupid
plus as i said earlier why nerf rover just because its annoying to stop on 1 map

[normal trout]

If shuriken didn't exist would rover be op af at high skill?

[visual wren]

They’re not even better than tick lol the only advantage I think is they can go over water. Yes I am aware of the range and speed etc. Tick should beat them

[normal trout]

Na at high skill rover beats tick generally. More range and speed. Rovers don't scale up like ticks do because they don't fire over each other but early game they are best unit in the game

[visual wren]

No you can beat them with ticks

[elder falcon]

only with surround which requires bad micro from the rover player since they are faster with longer range

[lusty compass]

nah they are reall yannoying to deal with cause the range + speed but if u get jump on them with tick they get cooked

[elder falcon]

perfect, if you get the jump, so requiring bad micro from the rovers. thats not how units should be balanced

[visual wren]

The turret can’t track a tick

[normal trout]

It can track if you don't let the tick circle you
If the tick circles you, kite it or circle in the same direction

[elder falcon]

again bad micro from the rover player

[lusty compass]

yea but i think the range advantage is quite minimal plus the slow turnrate and acceleration of rover makes it easier to get jump on them
i guess if you have infinite apm they are OP but ehhh feels like you can box them out with ticks

my apm is quite shit though so i do hate chasing down rovers sometimes XD

[normal trout]

The are op scouting and map control... faster units means faster scout and threat while being able to greed / respond
Their speed is extremely powerful over grunts in tourney as an opening lab

[visual wren]

Supreme is basically the last map it’s op on ironically lol

[elder falcon]

which is exactly my point. if they are op on isthmus imagine bigger maps

[lusty compass]

i dont really watch tournement much was this the tm one?

[normal trout]

Nation wars

[lusty compass]

yea fair enough. I do think rovers are better early game than ticks cause metal cost doesnt matter as much but i feel like ticks are way better as a spam unit caus ehtey are cheaper
i dont think ticks/rover has to be perfectly balanced in early game to be unbalanced cause rover becomes poop after first few mins usually

[normal trout]

I think there's room for a speed nerf because the speed does so much for the unit but it's not a major issue atm because rover doesn't do everything like the tick used to

And it's only even an issue for like 50 os + / tourney where you can have dedicated microers which makes it kinda op

[elder falcon]

they only way as a frontliner you can stop the rovers is having ticks in position already. Doing this causes you to be behind on e, since youve skipped a rezzer, and if the rovers dont come youre very behind for no reason

[lusty compass]

well thats a situation on isthmus plus as i said i dont see a huge problem with rovers being slightly better than ticks in early game

[normal trout]

Don't worry rez bot even more op

[elder falcon]

even fi they come and you stop them, youre still behind. my point is, i should be able to stop them as front, currently you cant withouht majorly disadvantaging yourself. bc rovers stat check, thats a broken unit

[elder falcon]

i have no problem with them being better than ticks, my problem is there is no counterplay

[lusty compass]

yea but this is on 1 map where poeple in back can make some ticks too or air can make 1 shuriken
maybe a slight build time nerf so they feel significantly more exepnsive than ticks early but i feel like they are alright

[elder falcon]

thats a different point, if the argument is that someone else in the team can deal with them so its not an issue, i dont agree, but ill accept it and tell my team to deal with it from now on, and if they compalin ill send them here.

[lone plover]

I haven't played on Isthmus since like 2024, but I'm fairly sure that one radar and 2 grunts is pretty much what's needed to stop any amount of rovers/rascals as front. I'm also sure that these can be made as front with the current meta before rovers arrive. Am I wrong?

[lusty compass]

fair enough but i dont see how someone is behind if they make ticks to stop it?
you can make 1 tick as first unit of lab or something
if you overspend on ticks and they dont leak well thats yourfault for overspending on ticks without scouting

[elder falcon]

yes... if you havnt played since 2024 then why are you commenting on a balance change discussion. By the time suicide can make 3 rovers and ahe them going past 2nd fronts base, 2nd front could myabe have a pwn leaving their lab, if they do a 2 mex opening, and skip a rez bot, which are 2 things putting thm already significantly behind, and they still dont stop the rovers

[visual wren]

Bro if you give all your money to other people and make no units …. How do u expect to defend ?

[elder falcon]

not once did i mention giving resources to teammates, or not making units?

[visual wren]

You’re playing pond am I nuts

Literally if u have a lab rascal is not a problem on supreme specifically

[elder falcon]

cant scout what opening suicide is doing before the rovers are there, only way to scout that early is to make a tick and walk it at them, by the time you see the rovers they will be approaching the m at the middle and its too late

[elder falcon]

... this thread is purely talking about how im expected to stop rover leaks from frontline. It's easy as fuck to stop rovers, as geo or air, that isnt a discussion

[visual wren]

Use units lol

[lone plover]

I don't like how people are often rude, but that's irrelevant.
What I don't understand is why are you allergic to actual data? Tell us when a rover can reach and where. It should take like 2 minutes to start a skirmish game to show us in what circumstances can rovers arrive too soon, when, and where.

[elder falcon]

#1407840561523855543 message

[lone plover]

I suspect you can't do that because it requires a co-op start or something like that and then it becomes obvious that the unit itself is not the problem.

[visual wren]

Everything has trade off. If they have rover in your base before you have a single unit they’re lacking something you have lol

[elder falcon]

because its incredibly hard to simulate the pond boost. if i knew how i would do it for you right now. I dont know if just making an extra 4 winds before the lab will correctly simulate it or not

[lone plover]

Omg okay. So the problem is just co-op. Thread is over I think

[visual wren]

It’s not hard to simulate pond boost. Just give yourself tidal with cheats

[elder falcon]

Suicide has an earlier wind boost then 2nd front, they have e faster. the pond players boosts e to the frontliner who needs it. If a front is doing a vih start, they will not be making rezzers for 2 units out of the lkab, which is currently required for e. the vih player is boosted more e to make up for not having rezzers

[tight silo]

so I think im getting the problem now and its due to commie-pond boosts suicide first and enemy suicide than leaks rovers past the 2nd (not yet boosted) front?

[visual wren]

Sounds like u guys may need to adapt your strategy then dawg 🤦‍♂️

[tight silo]

only reasonable response is for the boosted front to cover that than

[elder falcon]

i can only reply every 1 minute lads can you all not make stupid comments at the same time

[visual wren]

You’re not required to do shit. It’s all part of a strategy btw. The meta is fake.

[elder falcon]

Idk how to use cheats. tell me how to spawn in tidals/winds and ill do it.

[lone plover]

/cheat, /give 3 armtide

[visual wren]

/cheat to enable cheat
/give number unitname 0

[tight silo]

well there is a 2nd possible response: boosted front does its own rover leak and tries to deal more dmg 🤣 enjoy your new cursed commie meta

[visual wren]

Raven your issue is u think the meta / strategy can’t be changed. What you’re seeing is someone attacking your strategy lol …. Learn to adapt

[tight silo]

both sides do uncounterable rover leak and side that does more dmg is ahead

[elder falcon]

negative, it would be easy as fuck to stop if i did 0 mex ticks. but then i have 0 mex. It's not an issue of adaption build, its an issue of what ive have to give up to stop it, without even knowing its coming

[visual wren]

The problem is your team has to adapt because you’re basically fighting a 2v1 when they do boosted t1 attack this early

[tight silo]

this is making me feel less bad about the glitter fatboys and tzars

[elder falcon]

i dont know how im meant to calculate pond manually boosting e, or the difference in tidals vs winds in this discussion

[tight silo]

just use cheats to give yourself 2 commanders and increased banks

[visual wren]

Well it’s time to actually play the game and figure out strategies and how the game works

[tight silo]

I almost guarantee that the only counter is for the boosted front to intercept the rovers

[visual wren]

To simulate boosting two players you can make extra tidal and then self d them btw

[elder falcon]

this thread is infurating, lads im one of the better players in this game, i am very competent at front and got to 40os on it. I am not commenting as a noob, i am very well aware of how to sacrifice my build to stop this. Thats not the issue

im trying cheats now

[normal trout]

you can just set wind to constant and record the time, travel time of rover, etc.

[visual wren]

Oh sorry you sounded like a noob based on your msgs

Also baldric specifically said u noob and I didn’t know

[elder falcon]

yes im sure the level of detail i gave of the specific situation came across as noob material

[visual wren]

Your issue is u think the supreme meta is like constant and can’t be changed. What you’re missing is you need 2 player coordination to fight 2 player rush attack. Has nothing to do with gator unit

[lone plover]

I think the main point is, that rover/rascal is irrelevant now to this discussion because the problem is the boost. Most unit boosted can cause a very similar problem. If they make a centurion instead of a rover then you will still have about the same problem except maybe you won't identify it as easily.
But of course we might all be wrong, maybe you can show us the skirmish results and that will make the problem clearer.

[elder falcon]

I said pond is irrelevant to this conversation bc both sides are getting boosted. THe only difference is variation, is if pond manutally feeds e to one front or the other, or if tidals or winds

[visual wren]

Literally no difference making tidal for another player and sending e manually it’s the same thing

[normal trout]

it might be up to the suicide player to punish the enemy suicide from making 2 rovers first. and they are giving up doing 4 mex walk

[elder falcon]

chrono is this the shit you have to deal with in the coop thread? this is infuriating

[visual wren]

Explain the difference slinging resources and sending tidal

[normal trout]

na it's a different breed of people there

[tight silo]

i think this is a good example of coop being a problem xD

[elder falcon]

you are focused on the wrong thing. Some players jsut give winds. some players jsut give tidals. some players give winds and send e. some players se4nd tidals and send e. some players plan for winds, and do 1-3 solars if wind is bad. thats not the focsu of this discussion.

[visual wren]

If they boost the wrong way then your team just did the worse strategy and they should lose

[normal trout]

if neither side had boost wouldn't the relative timings almost be the same?
although suicide can get funnelled energy harder earlier

[visual wren]

I mean idk but you could definitely just go Straight lab with boost and it’ll be way faster timing. Very cancer

If it’s not boosted you’re supposed to have units and be able to defend it

[elder falcon]

yup, which is why its not reelvant to the conversation

ok, i couldnt figure out how to do wind so i did 2 solar, i have rovers making it past 2nd front at 1.30

[visual wren]

Wind is just /give 2 armwin 0 or whatever

The code names are on the website urls

[elder falcon]

solar is more consistant anyway

[visual wren]

Isn’t tidal just the best on isthmus if you want to rush someone

[tight silo]

spawn in water and do 0 mex tidals

[lone plover]

Yeah but interestingly, I think this is a great example where the co-op isn't the advantage. I mean, the problem is not that the other team does co-op, but that one specific coop strategy beats the other coop strategy. If the pond player wouldn't act as a battery, then they could easily stop the co-oped rover rush.
edit: proof below that this comment was correct...

[elder falcon]

i have math on 0 mex tidals, 1 mex tidals, and standard 4 wind boost already. but again, its not reelvant

[visual wren]

What about the e cost though does that make solar better for early only attack?

[tight silo]

rovers leak on the geo tech side and likely leak into them

[visual wren]

Realistically if you’re against tidal or solar boost and your team goes wind and Mex you’re just fucked

[normal trout]

the exact math of solar/wind vs tidal doesn't matter here. it's just getting into the weeds
use /atm

[elder falcon]

can i give myself a full e bar somehow?

[tight silo]

if you get e insta you can just cut all e and go like mex>lab>boost rover

[normal trout]

boost kinda ruins balance and balance discussions because you can just make anything more powerful by being more and more a battery

[elder falcon]

tyty

[normal trout]

"but you can just give all your e in additional to the 6 tidals" = just batterying more

[visual wren]

Yeah imagine if me and chrono spawn pond and “eco” and just make solars and tidal for front. Won’t be very fun will it ?

[lone plover]

unbossted, normal pond player with 3 mex start...
but wtf do I know, it's easier to mark my apparently correct comment with a stupid "no"
edit: sorry, cut off the time, it's 1:32

[elder falcon]

ok so i needed about 1.5ke~2k to not stall, with 2 rezzers into 6 ticks, and the ticks are too slow to stop the rovers. You can see where they are at the same time as the rovers
and thats making 6 ticks first units, which tbh is greif as fuck, as im giving up control of the m in the middle, in the hope of catching the rover,s that might not even come.

[visual wren]

Frankly we could spawn 2 people in the pond 🤔

[elder falcon]

and i got the 2nd solar faster in the tick run. by about 5s i think so another 100e. I did make a radar after the 2 rezzers, so i can stop the rovers

[elder falcon]

ok and you have lost the game, bc their front has 8 winds and yours has 0. i dont understand your point.

im doing 2nd front with an unoptimal opening, to show you that as well dont worry.

[visual wren]

I don’t think u get just give yourself e but you can give yourself both e and metal /atm and number

[elder falcon]

type /atm. and it fills both up fully i did that twice in the bot opening to stop myself stalling

[lone plover]

Yeah, it's hard to follow a thread like this.

I replied to voncomet that: "Yeah but interestingly, I think this is a great example where the co-op isn't the advantage. I mean, the problem is not that the other team does co-op, but that one specific coop strategy beats the other coop strategy. If the pond player wouldn't act as a battery, then they could easily stop the co-oped rover rush."

OnlyThus marked that with a NO.

So I replied with the proof that yes, if there is no coop at that pond, than the other team's co-op rover rush is worthless.

[elder falcon]

ok, so you have stopped a rover leak that might not come, but your front has both had to make 4 winds each, wasting 20s of their time. and now your team has lost 1.25mk from the middle and the middle mex'.

[visual wren]

It’s not a disadvantage because you just boost other people and they defend u

[lone plover]

To be clear. I don't say that is the best strategy. I'm saying that the co-op rover rush works because the other team is doing something coop too which works less well

[elder falcon]

i had to refll e once for this run. and the ticks are still barely in place to sstop the rover leak, requiring no e. so even with better boosting, the ticks arnt stopping the rovers. so cop is not the problem. also, i need to make pawns for mid, 1-2 more rezzers, and a minimum of 2 con bots before my commander can leave the lab, walk all the way over to the side of the map to llt. Do you see why i said this was wrong?

[visual wren]

Perhaps you should lab faster if you can’t defend in time

There’s no rule you have to 3 Mex

[lone plover]

I'm sorry. So this build is doing nothing but trying to stop a leak?

So if I do the same exact thing with 3 mex and I do it in a time where I could stop the rovers, would that prove something? Let's say I skip the rez bot. Would that work?

[visual wren]

Oh right she literally want to give units away xd

[elder falcon]

Correct, I could do 2 mex and stop this. However then I need earlier boosting and more E from pond, and I’m also behind on their 2nd front, since the current meta is 3 mex, and the rovers might not even come. I should not have to put myself a mex behind, and require more E boostto cover a unit that might not come. The unit is broken

[visual wren]

Metas develop because of stuff like this. You figure out how to beat their strategy by making changes to builds. In team game with shared economy that will require coordination as well and test coop build in single player

Frankly my idea is have eco player spawn in the pond and tidal boost 2nd front until he is out of metal. I think that will help a lot

[lone plover]

Essentially, the problem with your build is the rez bots. Rez bot is shit for energy generation if your aim is an early advantage. Don't make them instantly and you can easily stop any coop early rush

[visual wren]

That’s not true. They’re busted for e on isthmus especially for rushes. The issue is she can’t make them and defend in time I think given current build

[lone plover]

I said "if your aim is an early advantage"

[visual wren]

They’re literally all about early advantage. It’s the fastest way to get e on the map far as I can tell

[elder falcon]

? i have no interest in giving units away and have not mentioned that once, stop saying that

[lone plover]

so you can have an earlier advantage by getting grunts before the time seen in that screenshot if you use rez bots? NO

[elder falcon]

ok so the rovers go past you here because you made grunts which arnt even nearly as fast as rovers. You have no e because you didnt make rez bots, and the rovers leak anyway. now what?

[visual wren]

Your build is trolling. Front should NEVER make own energy this early

Should be 2 Mex lab probably or even 0 Mex if you want to make a Rez bot

[elder falcon]

#1407840561523855543 message

[visual wren]

Frankly you should be spawning next to the trees otherwise it’s very troll imo. Metal is not the constraint early it’s energy

[elder falcon]

@lapis crow maybe worth revising this thread

[lone plover]

are you saying ~4 grunts couldn't stop some rovers? because they are slower? Even if they don't leave space for any scout units to pass through? And you're saying that I don't have E and somehow that is relevant?
I'm sorry, I'm out of this discussion

[elder falcon]

the rovers see your grunts cos they have longer los. and they go above your top right mex, below the mountain in the middle of the 2 fronts. and your grunts are too slow to stop them bc you covered the side of the map,. you dont have e for 4 grunts bc you skipped rezzers. plus it looks like you did 2 mex solar mex solar which puts you behind anyway and is objectively bad

[elder falcon]

if you mean a 1 mex from suicide, 1 mex is pretty trash, its very reliant on you getting value with leaking ticks, which could just get shut down by shuris, on your 3nd front not sleeping and making units fast (if they start vih youre screwed), and if their fronts both decide to spam 10 pawns each you lose all the middle reclaim, and your 2 mex down. overall very bad at the moment

[visual wren]

this just reveals your lack of knowledge really. being to front with units is worth more than the mex

[elder falcon]

... are you for real? ok then, why are you making units?

[visual wren]

there's >1k reclaim in the center and the 4.3 mexes are middle so it's very important who gets an early advantage front - your starting mexes are irrelevant because teammates can send you their money from the back

it's just much more important for people close to front to make labs/units instead of energy/mexes

[elder falcon]

the reason is to secure the middle reclaim, or to leak and kill infasetructure. If you are pushed off the middle reclaim, bc of their fronts opening, even if you made 10 pawns, their suicide did too, and their 2nd front has 5, yours has none/. youve lost the middle reclaim, and 2 mex worth of metal. youre fucked

this is.. a tiring conversation

[safe lynx]

u can give 1 pawn to backliners to run after the leaked tick its that simple

[elder falcon]

1 pawn wont even get near to a rover.

[visual wren]

that's not right. you don't chase rovers or ticks with pawns lmao. ticky boi ok

[safe lynx]

if u leak a rover as front its def ur build problem not a rascal nerf.

Ok so when u are core bots u do nothing but pray for some1 respond? lol

[elder falcon]

id go back and read the thread before commenting. nothing youve said has anything remotely to add to the conversation

[safe lynx]

not worth the anyones time tbh i made my point

[elder falcon]

no the only thing you did is show you have no idea what we are talking about, noone is talking about leaking pawns, nice change now tho

but thank you for adding to my point, yes cor bots has no chance of stopping the rover leaks

[safe lynx]

i cant make a typo lol

[elder falcon]

if youd read the thread,. youll see the timings the rover can leak, and the current builds done and how they cant stop them. to stop them, youd have to skip mex, which puts you behind your opposition, and they might not even be doing rovers. if a unit is requiring you to put yourself behind, for any chance of stopping it, the unit is stat checking and needs reworking

[lone plover]

1. I don't even need to step once with the commander to kill any rover trying to get through above that mex.
2. I don't have to send all my grunts to the shore, I'm making the grunts continously, some will be there to stop the rovers.
3. I did 2 mex solar mex because that's objectively just good depending on what your aim is. But it's irrelevant because I can make grunts with 3 mex start too which is an objectively a worse build btw. The screenshot below is with a 3 mex start.
4. You're correct, I didn't have the E for 4 grunts, only 3.8 grunts. That's still more than enough to counter 3 rovers you were able to make with coop.
5. Rezzers worth shit in the short term. Just because players are doing that doesn't mean it is good. I mean you don't have to be a math nerd to see how 30-40 E/s won't mean much in the short term if they cost 1400 E. They are great, after you have the grunts to counter the rovers (and after one con).

But if you want, there's another approach. Just do a 4 mex build but build an LLT near the shore. So commander protects the hill part of that area, the LLT the shore. You're not behind on anything, you're even ahead in metal produced

[elder falcon]

your first point is wrong, you 100% can leak past that commander with 3 rovers.

negative, you can do 3 mex solar without stalling e, why would you ever do 2 mex solar when you have the e for 3 mex. doing 2 mex solar mex puts you 140e ahead, and loses you 23 m, not worth.

youve way overbuilt solars and wasted your time. you have no rezzers so now even tho you have pawns out, your lab will stall on making more panws, rez bots, con bots, antyhnig that isnt ticks. so youve fucked yourself, to maybe stop a leak that might not come

4 mex llt walk is troll, as it gets units to the front very late. also, your lab is in range of the sea and can die easily if tour beach is losing.

[lone plover]

You're correct with the first point but only if I place the solars there. Now that I know that can cause problem, I can just not do that. Then the com can kill the rovers, maybe not all, but I have grunts as well and I can even move with the com.

Because 2 mex solar produces a bit more E than 3 mex solar. It's not very relevant in this specific case, but because that small amount of E means you can have units a bit earlier, that can eventually pay back the lost metal.

Wtf do you mean that i've overbuilt solars? So you're saying that because I have no rezzers and too many solars, somehow I will stall on making pawns (those are grunts)?
I find it a bit weird how people are so confident on their builds without even considering other options. I have to say, I'm fairly confident in my understanding of the game. I'm not saying you are wrong. What I can easily say that everything depends on your goal, and for example if you want units very quickly, or you want more units early, or you want an early con, etc... then my build is pretty good. (also, wind was 19, I could have built wind turbines to achieve an even better result, I just don't like wind in skirmish experiments).
I find it pointless to discuss this though, because I don't see how it is relevant to this discussion. You claimed that we can't do anything to stop cooped rovers, and pretty much the build I would do anyway just simply stops it.

Yes maybe 4 mex walk is bad, I don't know and don't care. Again, how is that relevant? Do you think the other team that coops rovers hence having essentially one fewer players don't face any disadvantage? The 4 mex walk is perfectly capable to stop a rover rush, and your claim was simply that there is no way to stop the rover rush.

also, maybe 5 mex start? You end up at the geo with the lab, I think that can be pretty good and you also stop any rover rush.

[warm scarab]

Bro. Just have 2nd front start by building llt on spawn instead of 3 mexe open. If that means being behind on mexe then so be it. It is a tradeoff

How about you try that opening yourself and see how effective it is?

Hopefully that make the stupid Supreme meta change a tiny bit

And you are making a big deal about an units that can easily be stopped if geo/tech make 2 pawn/grunt each and park them next to sea player mexe

(And rover/rascal need a good whole second to kill 1 mexe with the new hp buff)

[lapis crow]

I think it might. I stopped playing high tier Straights in v1.5 and with issues that tend to only exist for the top 1% it probably needs a replay and explanation. I don't have enough personal experience with the issue to try to identify solutions in this case.

[jolly bobcat]

How about just build rovers

[jolly bobcat]

Y u laff @tight silo

[tight silo]

the whole discussion is funny to me

and what u suggest is true and fair but its likely gonna piss raven off even more xD

[rapid spire]

Rascals+Rovers are clunkier to manouver as they are vehicles. Ticks have hitscan and are bots so move smoothly. It's a lot harder to catch ticks, nerf all 3 of them I say

[jolly bobcat]

Discussion is kinda goofy to me too however I think if raven try to make units or if no unit challenge. Maybe walls or llts? If purely pacifist challenge i think walls are best bet here

[lost galleon]

0 mex wall-off will be the new meta

[tight silo]

I used to dream about op mex walks with perfectly placed llts to defend everything than autopilot completely ruined everything by just diving the mexes with ticks and avoiding llt

if you op pre turn llt to face the right way u might have a chance but I doubt its enough

[night trench]

Me after getting leaked by rovers:

[livid crescent]

i realy want tick / rover / rascal to have either no dps or a realy realy low dps
they are scout unit why are they able to kill eco structure?

i'm gonna use supcom as example but there is a scout unit
they are fast but no dps
so why not here?

[lone plover]

I think vehicles couldn't punish greed then, especially bot greed.
Also that would nerf Modulo far too much

[livid crescent]

i mean if the scout were faster with mor vision you could make a early incisor / blitz raid with 1 scout in front

[lone plover]

Maybe on some maps, probably not on others. If the only unit vehicle players could use to punish greed is an incisor, then the bot player could easily get 3 or even 4 cons out before 1-2 incisors could arrive. And because incisors, vehicle lab, vehicle con, etc. are all pretty expensive, the vehicle player probably couldn't match that expansion/greed.
Also incisors would need to match grunts in number in defense at least while they need to punish the con greed at the same time.

It's hard to imagine it though so I could be wrong. It would be nice to have dedicated scouts, but I'm pretty sure we would just need another cheap unit to do damage instead for that to be viable.

[jolly bobcat]

Just make an llt

[safe lynx]

Buff llt to counter rascal 😄

[jolly bobcat]

i actually would like llts to have legs like sunken colonies. like call the press. i wanna be able to upgrade all my porc by paying 50% mineral/vespene cost to give them legs like sunken colony form sc2

[harsh sentinel]

you could just build a heavy trans

[warm scarab]

No. I want all building to have the capability to grow thruster and fly slowly everywhere like a Terran

[jolly bobcat]

Either of these pls. Legs or thrusters 🦵

[safe lynx]

Ye, llt kill 1 tick and grows legs and chases the other ticks, a way to use XP

[warm scarab]

I changed my mind. Rover/Rascak need a nerf.

I got bored of scout veh fights after tournaments

[normal trout]

they are dominant in the early game at high level
speed does more than make them very hard to catch, it lets you scout and attack/defend with less travel time. Making the unit inherently more effecient

[lapis wyvern]

https://youtube.com/watch?v=1IV4VNHxN4s

Apart from the scouts attributes being a literal balance joke...this is just beyond tilting. And what is worse is that this is widely known and that no one is bothered about fixing it for the longest time.

13 - 13:45
1630 - 16:40
20:25 - 20:50
Basically the veh scout stays there underwater invulnerable to damage for 10+ minutes. Xfactor eventually makes two lasers to cover that section and moves the troops away.

I can actually see on the minimap both llts firing continuously to the underwater scout costing 50E/s each to fire.

Everytime a veh scout hides underwater God kills a kitten. Please help save the kittens.

[lapis wyvern]

@latent veldt @grizzled ridge @shrewd roost @hybrid pasture @thorny hazel
Hi folks, sorry to ping you here.
I have been fed your names in the hopes that any of you could help solving this ridiculous and really long standing ingame issue. I did attemp to fix it myself but couldn't find an appropriate movetype that solved the issue and don't know any other means.

Please see the post above for details and evidence.
I do not know how the balance team hasnt pushed for this to be sorted ages ago...bad boys...

[thorny hazel]

Submerged units already take damage, which is very, very moderately easy to extend to Rovers.

We have dynamic collision volumes, also, and (although it's kind of a stupid hack) they could be raised for units when in water without any performance issues.

imo a newer contributor could handle both^ solutions I just mentioned since they are relatively easy and pack massive returns for competitive play.

[normal trout]

prevent rover from going into that deep water, or make them hittable (as expected) when in water. Either seems good and doesn't seem to have any negative costs in the future. I'm in favour of the collision box expansion over drowning dmg, because it might be frustrating if a player accidently drowns their rovers by pathing them through water

[lapis wyvern]

Collision is the solution please

[thorny hazel]

I wouldn't want to stretch the hitbox too much, though, so it should be capped at a small shift. However, Rovers can submerge fully while remaining "mobile" according to their movedef, and drowning damage requires that the unit is stranded. Again though, easy fix, all you'd need to do to remove that requirement is add a new flag/customparam. nbd. I can ask if someone would be interested in doing this, but BAR contributors are basically cats.

[lapis wyvern]

Would you reckon this can get done in a day's work?

I have a laser pointer and I know how to use it.

[normal trout]

c3b0 holding a gun to the rover "It's you or me, buddy"

[lapis wyvern]

Yes please, this is a major balance issue unresolved for as long as I have been playing (2 years).

I think it is about time it gets sorted by the balance team.

[latent veldt]

I think the most straightforward fix is "if a laser unit is trying to shoot the scout in water, the scout should be taking damage"

So, a hitbox change so that the box extends above the water would be the easiest change

Otherwise, you have to adjust the water depths the scouts are allowed to traverse, which may affect balance on various shallow river maps

Oh, wait, that's real bad, not sure a hitbox change would work

...Technically, a dynamic hitbox, that changes when a unit enters water (or is in deep enough water), might work?

[thorny hazel]

I think it is fine to jump the queue with this issue with an internal balance post. There are potential solutions that might waste someone's time and effort if the BLT later determines that one or another method is better to do. @clear shore, how's a bóbr to know

[clear shore]

Yeah, I programmed that water damage. It applies damage if they are underwater and they are stuck.

These rovers aren't stuck therefore they don't take damage

[lapis wyvern]

Yeah, I tried and didnt change anything by removing maxwater depth or =0.

[thorny hazel]

Right, I mentioned adding a customparam to skip the mobility/stranding check. But collisions are the major issue, not drowning.

[clear shore]

I was unable to do the method you're thinking of. Calculating and matching the slope of a beach incline was impossible and I tried for a good long while.

Besides, why would you want a place that a unit can normally move into to cause it to take damage?

[hybrid pasture]

the really simple solution of just extending the hitbox, is unfortunately so high its goofy in other circumstances.

whoever has a good idea (that's either reasonably simple to do, or they can implement it), for how to get this fixed by some other method, I'll do whatever I can to get it into the game

[lapis wyvern]

Yeah, 🤚 I dont know why scouts can go in the water at all.
Last time I checked they are not amphi to be submerged.
Would creating a new veh movetype work?

[hybrid pasture]

limiting the scout car passability in water is not good either, since maps are not made with that in mind (though tick already has lower water depth they can go to... so it IS an option but not one I like)

[clear shore]

Probably because for intuitive reasons you want rovers to be able to go where other vehicles can go

[thorny hazel]

This is generally what I mean by the multiple solutions -- only BLT can tell us if the answer is to restrict the movedefs, and only BLT can judge whether the new hitboxes are good or actually unintuitive or stupid in some way. I'd like to pop this over to them, at least for a temperature check.

[latent veldt]

Blame Riverrun and maps like it

[woven bloom]

personally I don't mind if the hitbox goes out a bit far since nobody is actually scrutinising it usually

whereas laserproof units just below the water surface is immersion-breaking

[clear shore]

Well. Drivver would.

[lapis wyvern]

Honestly if the slightly comical hitbox solves the issue, you can use it on the interim.
I can tell you no one will complain and many will thank you.

Cause it would be a cosmetic issue rather than a serious balance issue.

[clear shore]

Well. I thought of one solution.
Had some kind of "in water" variable that moves the model up or something... Like the rover floats a bit or something.

[latent veldt]

-- cormlv armmflash corgator legmrv leghades leghelops armfav corfav armconsul armlatnk cortorch legmrrv
All share a movedef right now

[sick hornet]

"TakeRep" command returned an error: strconv.ParseInt: parsing "cormlv": invalid syntax

[woven bloom]

if there's a special rule for small unit hitboxes in shallow water then maybe ticks could be allowed to cross certain maps at last

[clear shore]

https://tenor.com/view/wheelie-rollin-they-see-me-rollin-jeep-kid-gif-5436852

Lmao what if they could do a wheelie in the water. To put their hitbox higher

[lapis wyvern]

Thats not the point. We dont want any more invulnerable units under water. We want 0

[latent veldt]

maxwaterdepth = 22, for armfav
And next lowest maxwaterdepth is maxwaterdepth = 5, for armflea only

[woven bloom]

I'm saying the opposite: if ticks don't have to be invulnerable you could have them cross

[lapis wyvern]

I did maxwater depth 0 and the movement type still lets it get in the water submerged.

[clear shore]

@silver pond what's your take on invulnerable underwater rascals?

[clear shore]

Like, is something like this possible even

[thorny hazel]

https://tenor.com/view/what-the-car-car-what-the-fun-gif-9888607012051155155

[woven bloom]

just add small aoe to every laser

[lapis wyvern]

Lol, cortex user detected

[clear shore]

You mean like with a wide area of effect large enough to reach a little bit underwater ticks/rovers? But super low edge effectiveness?

[thorny hazel]

I can, genuinely, add hit detection from lasers vs submerged targets. It will be dumb but it's all, kind of, a little dumb.

[woven bloom]

or super high edge but minimum radius necessary (the idea is that it would never factor into normal shooting above water)

[clear shore]

Detecting submurged is cursed sir

[lapis wyvern]

Dont touch the weapons, that is not a solution.

[clear shore]

So being underwater protects you some but not all. I like it. It's interesting.

[thorny hazel]

This guy doesn't even PSTATE_BIT_UNDERWATER

[clear shore]

Wot

[woven bloom]

though this only works if the gap between hitbox and surface is sufficiently small I guess

[hybrid pasture]

Raising the laser turret to be taller, so that there is always a part of the unit also visually above surface, would be one way. But needs modeling

[clear shore]

Could look bad

[woven bloom]

the rascal gun isn't in a turret above the chassis either currently iirc

[hybrid pasture]

itd also work as a snorkel, explaining their ability to traverse that water

[thorny hazel]

Deploying tactical snorkel

[lapis wyvern]

I mean, gonna end up circling back to veh scours taking reasonably fast water damage as rust

[latent veldt]

https://github.com/beyond-all-reason/RecoilEngine/blob/317735e1573779615c26a26a38d5bcd96f18c54e/rts/Sim/Weapons/Weapon.cpp#L1429
aimPos.y = std::max(aimPos.y, aimPos.y * weaponDef->waterweapon);
Semi-relevant engine code. This is setting the "aim position" of laser weapons targeting the underwater unit to the water surface.

[thorny hazel]

I'm angling more toward this'n

[latent veldt]

https://github.com/beyond-all-reason/Beyond-All-Reason/blob/0e6fc5c046bf3183a6b0483da05b296de9195a1c/luarules/gadgets/unit_dynamic_collision_volume.lua#L293

This is where the relevant code would go.
Instead of pairs(popupUnits), you would have a pairs(inWaterFlatUnits), that changes the hitbox of the offending units

[thorny hazel]

Right, we don't need to raise the aimpos ourselves, since the weapon code will do that for us (so that part is nice). But we need the collision from above the unit, at water level, to be viable.

[lapis wyvern]

Dont go about it fixing weapons. Because you are gonna have to fix all the weapons in the whole game.

It needs to be hitbox or waterdamage. Cause I only play armada if I can help it and I dont have lasers either.

And then you are gonna run into the same problem with alk legion weapons, railguns, drones, napalm, electric, fire...

[latent veldt]

More posting that line as a reference.
Knowing that all we have to do is raise the hitbox vertically, and the engine is already handing the aiming above the water part for us.

[clear shore]

This might make them easier to hit, and this have fewer effective hp

[clear shore]

This i mean

[thorny hazel]

They gotta be easier to hit

[silver pond]

Are you asking me if I think rascals being invulnerable under water is a good thing? Or are invulnerable rascal-level scouts on the water a good thing?

[clear shore]

Possible solutions. Because if we simply make them unable to go in shallow water like other vehicles, it's likely there will be maps where they can't traverse areas most other units can.

[clear shore]

This is... Promising?

[silver pond]

Okay I see the issue now

Yes, spam units becoming invulnerable to lasers underwater should be something we definitely think about fixing.

Seems that the general consensus is to address the hitbox and allow it to be a bit higher than would otherwise be normal compared to its max water depth it can traverse

[thorny hazel]

How hard is the suspension animation thing

[silver pond]

Shouldn't be too bad depending on how the model hierarchy is setup. I can give it a look

However it does mean that the hitbox needs to be applied to the chassis in the unit, rather than applied to the unit wholesale such that it raises up appropriately. Thankfully I have done this before, but currently I'm trying to finish the T2 naval turrets so this issue I may have to address a little later in the week

[thorny hazel]

It only needs to be near-term possible imo since it will be waiting on the rest of what's talked about in here to happen. If it's approaching remodel-level work, then we'd wait on doing it even if the hitbox fix is chosen.

[silver pond]

No I don't think it'll need a remodel. I may need to "splice" what's already there into multiple parts is all

[lapis wyvern]

This involves the veh scouts of all 3 factions too (just to clarify)

[silver pond]

-remindme 48h Pimp My Ride: Tri-Faction Vehicle Scout Edition, the Air Suspension Episode

[sick hornet]

Set a reminder in 2 days from now (<t:1761179355:f>)
View reminders with the reminders command

[latent veldt]

Proof of concept here

[lapis wyvern]

That is really reasonable, can you try tossing an enemy unit nearby?

Not sure if the water on that map is a bit shallower than the others? (It probably is the same on other maps with shores but give it a try on Aurelia/highnoon/or hellas)

[thorny hazel]

basically perfect

I do think we get less stretch just from changing from box->sphere but that's a refinement/detail

And anyway past a certain depth it basically can't be anything but rectangular or cylindrical (wait, I'm seeing a scale value, stretched sphere collider?)

[thorny hazel]

Yep. Nice.

I think the only absurd case might be a hover sitting on top of a Rover, and the Rover takes a laser shot. That's about it.

Well that's not quite all. They will also get bumped around weirdly by ships. We can detect unit-unit collisions and use it to shrink the Rover collider, maybe. Hmm. Anything to keep from creating a new scout-tugboat system.

[lapis wyvern]

I keep looking at the video and that may not be the best body of water to be testing this cause it is peeking over the water at points.
Could you move the same testing to the same area on Highnoon map?

#1407840561523855543 message

[grizzled ridge]

I think if you start looking into it too much, you'll end up seeing how land units in shallow waters vs ships is weird.
In this case its a coasr so most ships will be pushed away. And on a shallow water map this woukd be an alt where subs, roys cant go. Only lighter ships.

[thorny hazel]

Seems like it would be mostly okay?

[latent veldt]

Bleh, no easy way to know a unit's collision volume height.
Might just be easier to set a custom param thisUnitIsAFlatFrick

[grizzled ridge]

Yeah i think this would mostly be ok-ish.
Not gonna rewrite / edit the whole maxwaterdepth entries just to avoid ships land units collisions.
This might look weird on the scout but basically is prolly happening on the blitz, pawn and other units just the same.
And for that matter, almost the same happens to subs surfacing on shallow waters, showing without recquirement for sonar coverage, but where the subs armortype would still happen and prevent from damaging.

[latent veldt]

Posting the code I have.
Not 100% sure when I'll get around to making it better

[grizzled ridge]

Besides making sure max/min water depths and unit radius/colvols/heights fit (or waterline), there isn't much to do i believe.

[thorny hazel]

Oh wow. They're flat.

I think the collider should be scaled vertically rather than offset. And there is a unitDef.collisionVolume and unitDef.moveDef for determining which units can traverse deeper than their collider.

Yeah you've got it. There are just a lot of cases to cover.

[latent veldt]

Ya, that's the annoying part. I don't want to deal with all the edge cases of colvol types, and do the accounting for the mulit-hitbox units, to determine if they are taller than their movedef water depth.
Plus, for like armstump, there is no guarantee the above-water aimpos will actually be in the smaller turret hitbox.

[Other major part my code does not do, is properly raise multi-part hitboxes]

[latent veldt]

I'm not sure unitDef.collisionVolume respects SetPieceCollisionData
[Which is done at unit creation, basically a frame after it is created]

[thorny hazel]

It super does not

When I was estimating unit volumes earlier, I went with this, which is, transparently, not correct but should give an idea of how to get to good-enough:

local function getUnitVolume(unitDef)
    local mo = unitDef.model
    local dx = mo.maxx - mo.minx
    local dy = mo.maxy - mo.miny
    local dz = mo.maxz - mo.minz
    local volume = dx * dy * dz

    local cv = unitDef.collisionVolume

    if cv.type == "sphere" or cv.type == "ellipsoid" then
        -- (4/3)πr => (1/6)πABC
        return volume * math.pi / 6
    elseif cv.type == "cylinder" then
        -- πr²h => (1/4)πABc
        return volume * math.pi / 4
    else
        return volume
    end
end

[latent veldt]

The full solution is basically for every if statement here, do some accounting magic after each Set operation to keep track of max colvol height.
[With maybe some magic fudge factors if the tallest part of a unit is not directly above its aimpos]
https://github.com/beyond-all-reason/Beyond-All-Reason/blob/master/luarules/gadgets/unit_dynamic_collision_volume.lua#L161

[...Would be nice if the game could tell the engine to run arbitrary raytraces. Would be real easy to figure out each unit's height]

[...actually, I have a dumb idea for later. A dumb, dumb, script that can shoot a laser from +1000 above unit aimpos to its aimpos, and print the coordinates where it intersects]

[thorny hazel]

You* can**

* I do mean you
** technically can

There's also a lua raytrace PR that would extend ray tracing to be way more convenient to use

[latent veldt]

[So, you run it periodically, when deving, and just have a .txt table of true unit heights from aimpos]

[rapid spire]

All T1 spam should get speed cuts imo

[silver pond]

Need a refresher, @thorny hazel @latent veldt @grizzled ridge do we still need the model update to push the chassis up with the suspension animation?

[latent veldt]

I don't think so. This is technically a more systematic problem with all units with colvols shorter than 22 units tall

[thorny hazel]

Nice-to-have and something to think about for future stuff. We (BLT*) would probably would accept a mediocre fix until a fix she tells you not to worry about comes along.

[silver pond]

Superb stuff, less work for me too, splendid yes

[lapis wyvern]

Is it likely to get fixed by the weekend?
Dont fancy abusing it or getting abused by it during this week's BPL games 😂
https://www.beyondallreason.info/replays?gameId=7cdcf76852d17a4444199ae7a97a1045

[thorny hazel]

Not unless some hero pushes it through

This kind of change really should go through a test round, though. Personally, I wouldn't want to release it right before a tourney, if I'd made it.

[lapis wyvern]

Fair enough.
Can I help with the testing?

[sick hornet]

Reminder for @silver pond

Reminder from YAGPDB

Pimp My Ride: Tri-Faction Vehicle Scout Edition, the Air Suspension Episode

[normal trout]

forgot they were buffed March 2025. tick is 60 hp

[thorny hazel]

This approach got a positive review internally, so now it needs someone willing to do battle with the code until it's done.

Simple colliders are a good enough start and Itanthias got you [99.9% of the way there](#1407840561523855543 message). Per-piece colliders are next, so a new implementer would need to figure those out, too.

This is an open recruitment call, hear ye hear ye, open call to implement dynamic collision volumes to resolve peekaboo hitboxes in water.

[tame crane]

are we talking about 1v1 or 8v8 with this
in 8v8 specifically its pretty much impossible to do any damage with leaks unless your doing 0 mex strategy, rovers being faster has the massive trade off of being way worse in mass then ticks

[elder falcon]

Rovers are impossible to deal with with ticks. There’s no counter play as the frontline player, but as you can see from the reactions the community disagrees

[tame crane]

theres no way to catch them (other then to outpath them) but the counter play is to defend important expansions
8v8 typically has air player and if it doesnt its a lane map and u shouldn't be really be leaking too much

[warm scarab]

My context? Coop 4v4 and 5v5 in tournament play.

Watch the Omega Serie games

When masses, even shuriken does not enough to them. They do not even need to kill anything to get extreme amount of value, just wasting enemy attention and time chasing them around

[normal trout]

they are really strong at high lv. not high level not a problem. I wouldn't be surprised if they got nerf but also would be fine if they stay since it takes considerable amount of skill to use them well

in team games it's more like them leaking into ally base who only have bots. If you are playing team game either shuriken or have to give your ally rovers to clean it up faster

[quaint dagger]

Some players may like this actually, not gonna name names. One (strong) user said it was kinda skill expressive in da BPL chat
Not to delay any fixes. Ultimately glad it's gonna be fixed 👍

[normal trout]

Imo, it's unnecessary advantage for an already strong unit. It can let a rover hide underwater to get around an llt

[lofty thunder]

without any performance issues.
there are perf costs

[thorny hazel]

I didn't think they were high? Was this tested?

[lofty thunder]

well unfortunately the admins decided to remove me from the dev team
and they did so at a very interesting time, if they want to reverse that then ill have a pr resolve the matter

there is a far simpler answer that people have not thought of tbh

wether people like the solution or not is a different story however
its much less involved

[thorny hazel]

It is hard to believe that the # submerged Rascals would be high enough to matter in an ordinary game, even if it was doing quite a lot of work. Looking at the InitShape code, it has some subfunctions, but they're all cheap.

[lofty thunder]

if you want dynamically changing hitboxes they are expensive when a hit occurs

also there are other units that have this same exact issue as the rovers

[thorny hazel]

Sure, Blitz, etc.

I am poking around the collision logic. I don't see how the hit becomes expensive, except that the bounding sphere increases, so more collisions are tested against in the first place.

[lofty thunder]

hit detection is expensive not the changing of shapes

and you cannot have either the collisionvolumede/usepeicecollision= true and unitdef hitbox switching
you have to pick one or ther other
why is it that ticks dont have the use peice collision tag despite the fact the jumping animation goes outside of the hitbox

Ask the hitbox isn’t a good solution and returns back other problems I had to undo in 2023

[thorny hazel]

Right. I don't see the point, so far. I think the magical surfing hitboxes are going to be a unit collision issue, but I'm fine with trying to make it work.

[lofty thunder]

The better solution is to just stop units pathing below the water line the problem with arcane hitboxes is that they do block far more than intended and are completely invisible

[thorny hazel]

Yeah, no disagreements there. Just literally no possibility of reworking everything downstream of that while doing the release roadmap. Zero doubt that is the eventual solution.

Well, some doubt, because the surfbox™️ can be made adaptive to go underneath boats/hovers that pass above. But that's a marginal doubt.

[lofty thunder]

Your working too hard

[thorny hazel]

There's even an event raised on unit collision we can use to reset the box to its original size. idk. Not even that marginal.

[lapis wyvern]

How is it going, getting some really obnoxious games with veh units going underwater and travelling full safe. (not just limited to scouts)

[thorny hazel]

I probably have to do this one, don't I

[thorny hazel]

There are some tradeoffs and optimizations but as long as I extend the shape up out of the water, encapsulate the midpoint/aimpoint, and fit the new collision volume to the "real" one with as little delta as possible, then it should be basically invisible to the players.

Remains to be seen what funky unit shapes my super-simple heuristic fails with, and it's not /luarules reload safe yet, but like, that's the tweet, honey.

[thorny hazel]

I did code the unit collisions/volume ducking but I didn't test: the code

[hybrid pasture]

So what happens when you do /luarules reload?

It stops working, and in multiplayer desyncs the game? Or smth stranger than that

[thorny hazel]

It forgets what units have entered the water, already, which is used to add them to a watch list.

Perfectly possible to fix, I just did not do it yet. And no crashes.

[thorny hazel]

This was basically impossible to see on mobile, so here's zoomed in snips from the recording.

The box-shaped hitbox is replaced by a rounded one that approximates it closely, and that grows and "floats" in the water, slightly.

[lapis wyvern]

This hitbox extends to light tanks too, right?

[thorny hazel]

Yeah. It's actually way too generic rn, I need to reel it in.

[hybrid pasture]

Should probably just specify it to affect only the scout cars now.

Add a customparam that tells to use it?

[thorny hazel]

K, you got it. Then the other rule that I put on it, that's too permissive, will be like a fallback check to make sure.

[thorny hazel]

There are still cases where the unit isn't visible that are messing w/ my tests (like here)

added cylinder:ellipsoid transform, and am making the others, and then pieces (ugh) can be supported

[quaint dagger]

[BONELESS] really said fine I'll do it myself. What a lad.

[thorny hazel]

And some misses at low angles like this. I don't really wanna make these volumes bigger but idk, this also has to be, basically, impossible.

So I guess I have to lift some tiny amount more and can leave them at this size.

[thorny hazel]

That's time, see everyone tomorrow, for more hot action

[thorny hazel]

K have consulted the docs & will rewrite. So it goes.

[lofty thunder]

what would be best here is to remove impact only from weapon tags in general
and give them an aoe of 4/8 (unitdef number only)

[thorny hazel]

Yeah that would cut out all the fine-tuning/math at the end here

but afaik isn't possible specifically for lasers (no aoe)

[lofty thunder]

fleas and critters are on the same movedef
its safe to minimize the pathing of the flea movedef
also you could of added an additional movedef for the vehicles with the issues of going underwater
fleas have that restriction to begin with so i would recomend just upping the fleas restrictions and adding vehicles to their combined movedef

thats how i would of actually fixed the problem btw
adding movedefs is something i never wanted to due because of the terrain recalcs being very expensive to do
however its worth noting that bar is running on fewer movedefs than it used to use so its safe to readd one or two when its shown to be needed and could easily be combined with a number of units
60 then vs 42 now and i think i had a means of reducing to 39

it might not actually be a movedef things but a "waterdef" tag in the unitdef

[thorny hazel]

I just needed a little guy with a cylinder volume. Ticks can't submerge, but we could allow them to with this change, potentially. I don't think that's coveted design space, but still.

Noted, yeah idk but I would guess we are more burdened by collision detection than movedefs atm.

[lofty thunder]

its the other way around right now for the cost increase in performance
and these very cheap units need to be very performant
i was told (and ignored afterwards) to not add blitzs to pr1935
anything cheaper than blitz i would not bother adding the collision changing logic to because that is perf cost waiting to really add up

btw fleas are intentionally designed to path as they are
thats been a feature of fleas for decade or so

[thorny hazel]

I don't think a BAR dev would touch the idea, at least not by itself. Johannes asked for a customparam, though, so modders could make the change at the unit level.

Still something I meant to fix earlier after reading through recoil docs and idr and I definitely, definitely didn't change it in the code. That's when I know it'll come up again like two days into testing.

[lofty thunder]

they already have access to changing fleapathing with the movementclass being in the unitdef
also the maxwaterdef tag is also present if it still works

there are actually a number of projectile collisions to consider when making any changes to the volumes btw
i was trying to get the gdt to make a number of decisions that would lead to a more cohesive system (that we currently have but dont really make cohesive)
but it involves breaking balance at times
and i was very tired of having to prove every broken collisionvolume i was aware of

btw midpoints should not need to change on these afaik
the target border tag already handles that aspect of targeting to begin with

[thorny hazel]

The midpoint is used for a lot of things. I'll probably have to catalogue every possible effect this code has -- it's unfriendly to review as-is.

[lofty thunder]

there is another nasty type of solution to this problem but that is reseverd to dms only as i know very well how broken it makes other aspects of the game
its one of the hack prevention gadgets (not sure if its game or engine)

I know what midpoints are used for
I had a doc about them but i am not going to waste my google drive space for an org that decided to remove me

[thorny hazel]

Sorry man. I did start on writing code to detect disjoint/broken colvols at one point, but it felt like the attitude was for unit designers to be responsible for it and to change them one at a time.

[lofty thunder]

the big part of the problem i did resolve
which was that when new models for arm and core were made
they only changed the models of the units and not the colvols
and the colvols in BA are generally very very bad
the wrecks have remained a complete mess though unless i went out of my way to fix them

the big issue with colvols is that they should never exceeed more than half a footprint away from the movedef itself
thats when unit interactions start breaking(and its a big reason why i was very particular about the sizing of colvols to the model)
most of the cases should not be present anymore unless legion has a few i never caught
and legion did have a lot of units that were not properly sized to the movedef

[lofty thunder]

they are not respsonsible directly
the issue is tollerances which people loved to ignore and didnt realise how tight they are

the model is a guideline to what the shape should look like but not much past that point

[thorny hazel]

We have code sprinkled around that mostly-correctly assumes a relationships between footprint and unit radius too. I tinkered with a couple of the high-error cases in the buggeroff gadget this week. So like, to me, if I want to enforce a constraint, I need some code that follows it, at least. Everything else is eternal quality assurance. Code can clamp down and get more accurate over time, but every new unit is a new colvol.

[lapis wyvern]

I should have made it more clear. I found blitzs also travelling safe in some maps, didnt check incisors but neithet should travel safe

[woven bloom]

i say we just remake every map with fords and change minimum depths 🙂

[thorny hazel]

I know, test code will be for scouts for now but blitz/incisor/even minelayers all show the same bugged behavior.

[thorny hazel]

I have an hour or so today to produce this test, which I'm pretty sure I can do, and then am doing Legion things (and then having a real life, in that order,) but I'm mostly positive on fixing the missed collision. It's caused by the new closest point on the collider moving closer to the weapon, so the weapon's aim drifts without me adjusting the math for the collider (which will shift the aim again, etc). But I have a trick.

[hybrid pasture]

would any maps be meaningfully affected if the basic maxdepth that land units have, was changed from 22 to 20?

[thorny hazel]

I don't think anyone but the mappers would know

[hybrid pasture]

mappers dont know tbh.

but if somebody has a specific map / place in mind where the water is really deep but still makes for a passable ford, they can check that and report back

[thorny hazel]

I tested three maps yday and will find out their depths today, then

[thorny hazel]

neat

[hybrid pasture]

with the hitbox moving so far up, do they still get hit by torps and such properly?

[thorny hazel]

It's been my theory that torpedoes definitely work but you're right I should verify that. I'll be back around tonight and can do so.

[lofty thunder]

Uw targeting goes to the aimposition unless the aimposition is above water.

[hybrid pasture]

the hitbox is the potential issue, not the aimposition

[lofty thunder]

if the aimposition being above water was a problem
ships would have a lot of issues right now

[hybrid pasture]

its not a problem. if anything is an issue, its the hitbox

[thorny hazel]

Torpedoes are working currently vs the surfbox but I should add some unit tests to verify that for the long future

Every time you reload, critter hitboxes grow. Soon it will all be seagull.

[thorny hazel]

K next: unit collisions have a billion rules for performance reasons so my "ducking" solution to prevent scouts from pushing boats is either (1) completely unneeded or (2) has to be shaped like the perfect key to fit that byzantine lock. Fingers crossed for #1.

It is door number 1

[thorny hazel]

I'm accepting the hopes, wishes, and dreams of the public for another 24 hours and then putting this into a modoption (with a less stupid name than "surfboxes", since they don't surf anymore)

[lofty thunder]

Radious is the only check for pathing
Tbh this is a case of adding a movedef over changing collision

[thorny hazel]

I thought we'd have the provisional modoption approved by now, but since we're still here, I will add extra-dynamic colvols per piece today. Pray for me, frankly. Not every unit has a true "main" piece to convert to its floater colvol.

[hybrid pasture]

where are we at right now? whats keeping it from being approved

[thorny hazel]

Probably just lack of review. I was not at the previous review sessions.

Well, lmk. I made a version that is good enough for yay/nay approvals and nothing more than that. Adding per-piece colvols and supporting unit on-off states and open-closed states is going to triple the work.

[hybrid pasture]

ok seems like just lack of communication, I hadnt seen the PR

[lapis wyvern]

I dont think you need to go over the top. Just for the unit to not be invulnerable underwater on surface level water.
As long as that condition is met I wont bother you anymore.

[thorny hazel]

Agree but Incisors (and others) have multi-part colliders so this* development path is fixed to the remaining work.

I wrote some very-yucky regularization with some math earlier and that's probably enough for now. I'm continuing my holiday tomorrow, though, so if I'm not done in an hour or so then I wouldn't expect me to finish soon.

[thorny hazel]

Glorious. But this code is hyper-garbage so I'll share when I'm back in a week or so.

[clear shore]

Sounds as easy as giving them a unit rules param or GG table for swimmers

[thorny hazel]

Already fixed this, it doesn't need a rules param, and the GG table will be lost in a reload no?

[clear shore]

...
Now that you mention it, reloading all gadgets would hypothetically reload that table right?

I don't know. Good point

But if it's already fixed, good enough good work good job

[thorny hazel]

Quick check-in. I wrote a lot of code for processing colvols of all shapes, kinds, and origins. It's a moderately large change that will be a hassle to review and merge.

But, with that handled, per-piece colvols can "float" in the same way as the others, so I can support more basic cases like Incisor, which has a two-piece collision volume (and indeed all cases across all units, even pop-ups).

I hope we never do this ever again tbh. But, if we do, then we will want the overkill of my approach.

[clear shore]

This Thread is downvoted to Oblivion and appears to now be more about the technical development of its collision volumes.
I want to close it up. Any objections?

[thorny hazel]

Nope. There's also a vehicle scout nerf in the next patch.

[clear shore]

All right let's lock it up