Forged Alliance Forever

Re: ACU TML

2014-04-30T01:29:24+02:00

sasin wrote:
Blodir's point is also pretty interesting, but I'm already at TLDR status.

No such thing bruh. It's always more interesting to get the nuance in people's ideas/opinions, so thanks for that.

It seems like one solution would be to alter the behavior of the ACU TML so that it flies more similarly to the standard TML.

Statistics: Posted by Mycen — 30 Apr 2014, 01:29

Re: ACU TML

2014-04-29T23:27:26+02:00

Mycen wrote:
I don't know what all the fuss is about. I am a mid-level player, and even when I'm only playing against other mid-level players the ACU TML can be relatively difficult to use, let alone dominating. I mean, really, do people wait to build TMD until they spot a TML somewhere? That seems ridiculous. Shields will stop it too, and although I hear all of this about how it's "super-mobile" I don't understand how you're achieving that mobility without transports - which is a huge risk for your Commander.

sasin wrote:3.) It's really not noob friendly, because new players don't know how much tmd exactly to build, nor what's going on. There's no explanation as to how much you have to build either. It's basically a random advantage for experienced players over new players. Experience should help with a game because you get better at operating the game, not because of some random knowledge.

This game has something like seven, eight hundred units, many (most?) of which are just subtly different enough that they impact the game in dramatically different ways often despite filling the same role. Once you get into their synergies with each other and usefulness versus other factions...

Knowledge of the various details of the game is what makes one player more experienced than another. What do you think "better at operating the game" means? It's not just about how often you can click, it's about knowing what where and when to click. If a new player gets hammered by ACU TML you can bet when he goes back and watches the replay he'll try and figure out a way to avoid it. So his ability to counter it is hardly "random" - it's based on whether he puts in the minimum amount of effort to get better.

sasin wrote:
4.) It doesn't seem very skill based... it's pretty much the classic definition of cheese, right? You don't rely much on your own skill, more on your opponents lack of knowledge or inability to to build tmd...

I think it's just as skill based as anything else. You have to make sure you're scouting where their TMD are so that you aren't wasting tacs shooting over TMD. You have to make sure you're protecting your forward deployed ACU from snipes by air or from being surrounded by enemy forces. You have to make sure you're protecting your own economy so that an enemy raid doesn't shut down the tactic you've poured your resources into.

BRNKoINSANITY wrote:
Most of the time when I see complaints like this it is from people who either #1 aren't scouting or #2 totally panic when they see it happening and don't do anything about it. If a player drops his com in the middle of the ocean or somewhere near you at a certain point in the game, it is EXTREMELY obvious what his intent is.

^^ This.

It's a fairly subtle point, but better at operating the game means, to me, better at making decisions/taking actions in the game, not having a better knowledge of the rules. If I beat you in chess because I can play with strategies that you have never seen before, you can appreciate my skill at the game. If, on the other hand, you were outplaying me throughout the game but lost because you didn't understand that knights could jump over pieces, that'd be me not being better at operating the game, but rather having a better knowledge of the rules. To me it seems like games are generally better when the operating the game part, playing within the rules, is really deep and fun. Having more complicated rules and increasing the level of memorization one has to do to compete in the game is only good if it's adding to that depth.

Obviously, the amount of units is a bit overwhelming for new players. But the interaction between those units, which does make it hard, is the interesting, core part of the game! That's what makes it fun. Thinking of army compositions and movements and anticipating what you're opponent will do. That's the whole art of the game.

Furthermore, information about the different units, range, dps, health, etc. is readily available to players. Along the same lines, if a player is getting beat by a group of percivals, it is easy to see that during the game.

In addition, a player not knowing the difference between a mongoose and a rocket bot won't suddenly and thoroughly knock him out of a game. Not understanding the difference between ACU tml and ordinary TML can.

So, what makes this situation different from the others is that the knowledge isn't provided by the game, it is crippling if you don't understand what's going on, and it's not in the same art of the rest of the game. I see what you're saying about the circumstances in which it can have strategic depth, but I've been in games on dragon's beach, 4v4 wonder, and other 10x10 4v4 maps where it's much harder to detect/low risk. It seems to me a way to change the game from how well can I play the game to how well do you know the game. On many maps, if you know how tml and tmd work, then you can just build tmd to protect against it. If you don't, you lose. I don't see what that adds. On others, as blodir said, it is automatically cost effective (t2+tml and/or ACU TML, not distinguishing here) because the enemy is forced to build tmd at so many mexes that you have paid for it even if you don't kill a mex. And, if the enemy doesn't understand just how many tmds they need they lose.

Honestly, I really don't feel that strongly about this. It isn't the biggest annoyance to me especially because I just overbuild TMD the second I see a missle and I wouldn't care enough to create the thread myself. But, I still believe the TML isn't adding anything to the game, that's why I weighed in.

Blodir's point is also pretty interesting, but I'm already at TLDR status.

Statistics: Posted by sasin — 29 Apr 2014, 23:27

Re: ACU TML

2014-04-29T23:01:12+02:00

Aulex wrote:
sasin wrote:3.) It's really not noob friendly, because new players don't know how much tmd exactly to build, nor what's going on. There's no explanation as to how much you have to build either. It's basically a random advantage for experienced players over new players. Experience should help with a game because you get better at operating the game, not because of some random knowledge.

Just want to say this game in general isn't very noob friendly so I wouldn't really consider that a point

In general the game isn't noob friendly but that doesn't mean it isn't better, all else equal, to have a game be more friendly to new players. I think as a general principle most people can agree that games are generally better when they are simple to learn, hard to master... to the extent that we make a game harder to learn it should be to make a game more strategically deep etc. Sup com is already very hard for new players, but a lot of the complexity (variety of units etc.) adds to the rich depth of the game.

This strategy though, doesn't add to that depth very much as far as I see and is very noob unfriendly. I've played 700 games or so and I still don't really know exactly how much TMD is required, nor how well TMD will shoot down missles that fly over them but aren't landing near them. I've had a TMD blown up by one TML and then the next tml blow up the mex. To be safe when I see someone doing the strategy I just overbuild TMD because I'm not sure what the right level is. I've played with other players who have their base blown up and don't really understand why, especially when they've built a TMD right there. If I explain, "Well, there's this other type of TML that you can build as an ACU upgrade that can bypass 1 tmd sometimes" that's not very satisfying to them. It's much different than when say you get beaten by a superior player who is kiting you with his auroras and you have no answer, or a gun upgrade.

Statistics: Posted by sasin — 29 Apr 2014, 23:01

Re: ACU TML

2014-04-29T00:12:54+02:00

The UEF tmd was fixed in the last patch.

Statistics: Posted by BRNKoINSANITY — 29 Apr 2014, 00:12

Re: ACU TML

2014-04-28T16:02:07+02:00

buletproof_bob wrote:
UEF TMD can be bypassed too? I havent seen that.

In some cases it either flies too high or UEF TMD only has one shot against it.

Statistics: Posted by Aurion — 28 Apr 2014, 16:02

Re: ACU TML

2014-04-28T12:43:41+02:00

UEF TMD can be bypassed too? I havent seen that.

Statistics: Posted by buletproof_bob — 28 Apr 2014, 12:43

Re: ACU TML

2014-04-28T10:29:03+02:00

IMO perfect change would be more range for TMD and higher price at the same time, mb increase fire rate too. That way it could be defended cost efficiently, but TML would still be an option if the TMD gets killed. What totally sucks ATM is that certain TMD's (Aeon, UEF) can simply be bypassed by ACU TML, that needs to be fixed.

Statistics: Posted by SC-Account — 28 Apr 2014, 10:29

Re: ACU TML

2014-04-26T07:46:42+02:00

E8400-CV wrote:
SAKO_X wrote:[...]

the reason its "op" is because countering it brings you an advantage anyway, and not wasted resources.

[...]

Same thing can be said for nukes. Build an early launcher = 16K +40/s for next 5 minutes = 28K
Either all four enemies build SMD and load it (=40K) or you get to kill a base

This is correct, but there's a couple of things you need to consider
1. Building a nuke is a bigger risk because it has a much higher payoff time.
2. Nuke is a smaller problem since much fewer games reach the nuke stage and lategame balance is much less fragile anyway
3. All nuke defenses are equal
5. Building 1 nuke defense is enough, nuke doesn't force your opponent to rush tmd in front of all mexes seperately which can be a huge pain to a slow player

There's more, but you get the point.

Statistics: Posted by Blodir — 26 Apr 2014, 07:46

Re: ACU TML

2014-04-26T02:10:18+02:00

SAKO_X wrote:
[...]

the reason its "op" is because countering it brings you an advantage anyway, and not wasted resources.

[...]

Same thing can be said for nukes. Build an early launcher = 16K +40/s for next 5 minutes = 28K
Either all four enemies build SMD and load it (=40K) or you get to kill a base

Statistics: Posted by E8400-CV — 26 Apr 2014, 02:10

Re: ACU TML

2014-04-26T02:05:55+02:00

Mercies really are a pain aren't they? No air, they dominate at sniping.

One T2 flak -pointless.

:/

T2 com > gun com
Just look at the costs, t2 costs more (cause it's better) for a bad explanation. For a decent one, T2 PD and extra health > double damage + range?

T2 > T1 spam
Depends on a bit with fractions, by all of them have a spam counter at the T2 level.
Cybran: Hoplites (splash), Renegade (even more splash), T2 tanks in general (Cybran's high RoF/low damage let's them counter spam passively)
UEF: Mongoose, Riptides are good too
Sera: Ilshavoh, Ilshavoh, Ilshavoh, Ilshavoh, Ilshavoh
Aeon: Asylum (with Auroras), Blazes are an option as well...

You need insane spam to beat T2 cause T2 gives a lot of tools to counter spam. At best, low-tier spam stalls the other guy -allowing you to tech up proper.

Oh then T2 PD generally shuts down all spam as well... (mix in some T1 if the spam is really heavy and use the T2 to pick of arty manually).

Statistics: Posted by errorblankfield — 26 Apr 2014, 02:05

Re: ACU TML

2014-04-26T00:25:50+02:00

Lame wrote:
oh so mercy is OP now aswell?

t2 com gets countered by guncom
t2 landrush gets countered by t1 spam

if you dont know these basics its pointless to discuss with you

I assure you that guncom does not counter t2 com (assuming there is some distance between coms when the upgrades finish, which is a fair assumption to make). There's some serious irony in your post... Not to even mention "t1 spam counters t2 rush"... I'll give you that OC does that well enough though

Oh and mercies? They are nothing short of gamebreaking by design. If you want to discuss this I suggest you think about the unit from this perspective first: is a unit that's sole purpose is to limit strategic options by gamble very healthy for the game?

Statistics: Posted by Blodir — 26 Apr 2014, 00:25

Re: ACU TML

2014-04-25T23:10:53+02:00

oh so mercy is OP now aswell?

t2 com gets countered by guncom
t2 landrush gets countered by t1 spam

if you dont know these basics its pointless to discuss with you

Statistics: Posted by Lame — 25 Apr 2014, 23:10

Re: ACU TML

2014-04-25T22:56:30+02:00

Best counter to static TML is definitely not pushing... You'll only get mercied like sackooor said (extremely badly designed unit right here! game would be much better without them for several reasons, but that's a topic for another thread). The TML player will be able to defend himself and his teammates with his t2 upgraded commander (or t2 factory that works too). It is actually extremely common to counter push with t2 com so this strategy actually directly counters what you are suggesting could be a good strategy against it xD

Statistics: Posted by Blodir — 25 Apr 2014, 22:56

Re: ACU TML

2014-04-25T21:07:13+02:00

yes, seems good on paper, however, the guy can fend of a significant number of tanks with his acu
if you bring your own acu on a countryside stroll you run into a small problem:

having said that, if the guy manages to tml you anyway due to your spam (and therfore no tmd) you will still be at an eco disadvantage
his job is now to simply fend you off, if he succeds you are at a disadvantage already, and can be tmled for extra annoyance : P

also remember that if you are a bit late he will have t2 and tml, if you go as fast as you can, im not sure you will have enough tanks to crush him before he gets t2(pd) up, but at least air payer wont have mercies so early : D

i think spam is the best counter to tml rush, but i think its not impossible to stop while he is tml rushing

Statistics: Posted by Exotic_Retard — 25 Apr 2014, 21:07

Re: ACU TML

2014-04-25T20:51:43+02:00

Blodir wrote:
Plasma_Wolf wrote:I've watched the replays you put in an earlier post and for as far as I've seen, the power of TML strikes is very dependent on the element of surprise. In the earliest replays, the effect is pretty definitive but it isn't game changing in the later games (even hurts more than it helps, especially when your team is already outnumbered in terms of land units). Even then you managed to get a lot of mexes down, but your opponents managed to win regardless.

Them winning was completely irrelevant to the TML play. My teammates just did stupid shit and they lost game for it. TML isn't absolutely gamebreaking strategy, it's simply very very strong and on several map gives you the advantage nearly always.

its not irrelevant

of course YOU are hard to push - you have 2 guys next to you that can help you out rather easy

but to counter the tml rush the middle player should simply roll over one of the sides with his t1 spam
and in a similar manner if you would get tanks instead of tml you could fix side imbalances faster than with your play against their eco

TML is strong because of the way most teamgames are played - with zero team strategy because if you go t1 landspam and crush your guy he can get help from middle - as a result the most used tactic is to simply eco because getting help for defense seems to be a shitload easier compared to getting offensive help
tml is the counter to this mentality but it doesnt make it op
a rather trivial counter on wonder would be for example sharing mexes all over the place and only teching the back mexes and then later the core mexes

Statistics: Posted by Lame — 25 Apr 2014, 20:51