2 points I'd like to see explored in the next balance mod

[Wakke]

1) Small accuracy penalty for firing on the move for land and naval units. Maybe exclude some units from this penalty (for example, ACU,...)

2) Reduce mass cost for repairing to 50% of build mass cost (instead of the current 100%)

Both these point should place more focus on troop placement and tactical maneuvers/retreats. Lots of experimenting required ofcourse.

Feedback?
Cheers

[Astrofoo]

I like the repair idea. Would love to see people actually bring an expensive unit back to base and repair then send it back out. As it stands now people will just ctrl k it, reclaim it, and build another. Not so sure about the accuracy penalty. I'd say if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Units shouldn't be penalized just for moving. This isn't Starcraft 2.

[BRNKoINSANITY]

I also agree on the repairing, but maybe not to such a degree.... reclaim is 81% I believe? Maybe make repair cost 70% or something like that.

As to the firing randomness, it is already built into the sniper bots as a balance to the fact that they can now fire on the move. As to any other unit, there is already a penalty for moving as it screws with the aiming mechanism. If your turret rotation speed is less than your unit turn speed and you continually turn away from your target as you are microing then shots will be few and far between.

In both of these cases, best hang on to the idea. The next balance patch is quite a ways away!

[Wakke]

Regarding point 1), I just dream about actual fronts forming in a battle (by using attack move, for example), instead of armies just endlessly walking into/through each other as they do now

[ToejamS]

The idea of making unit repair more viable has been talked about for years. This will start turning the game into a too heavy micro game IMO. At the moment the game is not very apm dependant, that would change it radically.

[RoLa]

The idea of making unit repair more viable has been talked about for years. This will start turning the game into a too heavy micro game IMO. At the moment the game is not very apm dependant, that would change it radically.

Perhaps reducing repair cost to reclaim level of 81% is the way to go. Why do you need micro to repair units? just set some engies on patrol in a safe area behind your lines. there you can retreat single damaged units and bring them later back to the frontline. From there you can also send some engies after the fights to reclaim wrecks.

Or put some engies among your fighting units in your land factory queues. So you can reclaim and repair directly on the battlefield.

[Hawkei]

The idea of making unit repair more viable has been talked about for years. This will start turning the game into a too heavy micro game IMO. At the moment the game is not very apm dependant, that would change it radically.

No I disagree. We are not talking about making repairing more viable. We are talking about making repairing viable. Period. With the current siduation, players are actually punished for repairing units.

I also disagree that it would be micro intensive. Because, it could easily be achieved by building forward engineering stations, or setting forward engineers/Mantis/Harbringers to assist ground. That way, the army could park at the designated spot and recieve repairs. Or engineering stations could be integrated into a firebase build. No micro required.

It is not the mechanic itself. But, rather the magnitiude of the benefit which could be game breaking and that is something which is entierly open to negotiation. I would consider anything between 60% and 80% to be an acceptable figure. 80% cost would make it neutral with reclaim. While < 80% would make repair the slightly better option.

Consider you have a T3 artillery structure which is on death's door. With say 1 HP left. You could:
1) Repair it... Which means you pay 100% of the cost in mass and energy;
2) Reclaim it and build another... Which means you reclaim 81% of the mass, and spend 19% of mass cost and 100% energy cost
3) Destroy it get the rebuild bonus... Which means you recover 50% of the mass, 50% of the energy and gain 50% of the completion time.

As you can easily see. Repairing is a vastly inferiour option. The mechanics should be changed to at least make it neutral.

[Wakke]

Firewall, I agree with your post, but as you have shown yourself, the below is not correct:

80% cost would make it neutral with reclaim. While < 80% would make repair the slightly better option.

Repair should cost 19% to be on par with reclaim, not 81%. But I don't think it's necessary to go that far in repair cost reduction...

[CopyyyCattt]

The idea of making unit repair more viable has been talked about for years. This will start turning the game into a too heavy micro game IMO. At the moment the game is not very apm dependant, that would change it radically.

Plz stop propagating this myth.
FA has as much micro as any other rts.
The question is where do you focus it so its most beneficial.
Since a human's attention and clicking and thinking speeds are limited, one must choose how to spend it during a game.
Good players spend their attention and focus on the most important thing every game second, bad players spend their attention on less beneficial things during a game.
Adding repair will turn the focus towards that kind of micromanagement as oppose to micromanaging your engineers or base layout.
It will simply shift a bit of the attention towards repairing units or turrets under attack.
If we are to decide if this is a worthy thing to have in a game we should probably think what we find to be more fun.
Is it micromanaging engineers and construction projects around the map? or is it micromanaging our fighting forces.
There is no real micro ceiling in FA because of the nature of the simulation so the notion that you can leisurely play and still be as good as some high apm player should be saved for turn based strategy games.