T2 shield disruptors for Cybran, UEF and Seraphim.

[moses_the_red]

I kind of want to just throw this out there and see what people think.

I think the shield disruptor mechanic is a great mechanic that just isn't used often enough. I like the idea of highly specialized units that can be produced for the sole purpose of dealing with fire-bases.

I also think that its a bit too easy to turtle, and a slight nerf to turtling would make sense.

So how about a fast, fairly expensive T2 tank - something like a wagner - that does high damage to shields but must be in close range of the shield to fire.

This would function as a buff to T3 artillery, which seems to be used rarely, and as a nerf to firebases.

It also preserves Aeon's special firebase-killer status, as these things can't attack a firebase from a range of 85. The Disruptor would still be the king of shield disruption. This just gives other races the ability to do it as well when necessary.

I'm trying to think of unintended consequences, and I came up with a few possible unintended scenarios:

- Might be a nerf to the fatboy, as its shield is its primary means of protection (how do UEF players deal with disruptor fire now, is it a concern?) At the very least it would make dropping on the fatboy worthwhile if it means you can break its shield quickly.

- Slight nerf to T3 shield SCUs (don't they kind of need it anyway?)

- Slight Nerf to all T2 and T3 shield units (this seems bad as I feel like they're used less nowadays than they used to be, but i could be wrong)

- Might be slightly OP for Cybran to have them, as shields are cybran's mortal enemy. Perhaps Cybran gets a gimped one?

- Slight nerf to all ACU shield upgrades, and indirectly a buff to repair upgrades.

I know that its super unlikely for new units to ever be added, and this would perhaps not be a super simple thing that doesn't cause unintended consequences, but I think the idea is interesting enough that it deserves discussion. Does anyone else think more dedicated shield killers in the game would be gameplay enhancing?

[moonbearonmeth]

This just gives other races the ability to do it as well when necessary.

You ever seen what a Spearhead can do to a shield?
It's quite a sight.

[Evan_]

yeah spearheads are pretty fun.

maybe some ballpark figures for this unit, like how much damage, range, cost, hp, ect?

[moses_the_red]

yeah spearheads are pretty fun.

maybe some ballpark figures for this unit, like how much damage, range, cost, hp, ect?

Ballpark?

Same cost speed, health and range as a wagner, but does 5 damage unless its shooting a shield.

I think a 4x damage boost would probably make sense, but this is just a ballpark figure, say between 2.5-5.

So 2.5-5x a wagner's DPS which is about 100 so 250-500 DPS against a shield with 400 DPS being a current best guess.

With a firing cycle of 3 seconds you'd need 3 and 3 volleys to break a UEF T2 shield in around 6 seconds. That sounds really fast, but like the Aeon Disruptor this thing is completely useless for anything other than shield breaking so I don't think its crazy to have it be that strong. It also lacks the range of the Aeon variant and isn't that much cheaper either. You're likely to lose these every time you use them.

[ZeRen]

jesus another pointless and endless thread

much better would be increase range of T3 mobile arty, UEF got new meta - go in mid of map, build shields and T2 static arty, and before you have T3 land and lot of arty to break it, your opponent has multiple shield and T2 arties, it is really pain to break it with T3 arty, you need a lot of them and those T2 arties can fire at you before you get into range

also range diference between T3 m arty and Ravager is not that big

this would be better change then some new unit

[ThomasHiatt]

I do think it would make sense for cybran to have a shield disruptor rather than aeon.

[zeroAPM]

UEF got new meta - go in mid of map, build shields and T2 static arty

OP's suggestion might be bad, but yours is frankly low effort trolling

[ZeRen]

UEF got new meta - go in mid of map, build shields and T2 static arty

OP's suggestion might be bad, but yours is frankly low effort trolling

not trolling, this is how it is, for T2 arty with massive range you need only T2 ACU

[moses_the_red]

UEF got new meta - go in mid of map, build shields and T2 static arty

OP's suggestion might be bad, but yours is frankly low effort trolling

not trolling, this is how it is, for T2 arty with massive range you need only T2 ACU

So, you're proposing that T3 mobile arty outranges T2 arty?

I mean, if you just increase the range a little, like say by 10, that doesn't do much. They can still get T2 engineering upgrade, shield and start building T2 arty.

And you'd still have your T3 mobile arty under fire when you try to use it to attack the firebase.

And you'd still need a LOT of T3 mobile arty to break through, as T3 mobile arty does really low DPS to a single target.

With a T2 shield disruptor tank, you could put your T3 arty attacking the firebase, and then "pop" it using T2 shield disruptors. Once popped just a few T3 mobile arty would take down the shield, and the rest of the firebase would fall soon after.

I don't think its possible or makes sense to change the range of T3 mobile arty so much that it can outrange T2 static artillery. I think if you want to nerf firebases its much more sensible to provide units that can pierce the shield cheaply.

I think that at least that part of my suggestion makes a lot of sense. I think it would be a useful, although niche tool for dealing with enemy firebases.

The part of this suggestion that I think might not make sense, the part I'm not super confident about are the unintended consequences of introducing more shield killers. What happens to fatboys? What happens to Harbingers and Obsidians? Would such units significantly affect balance outside of the firebase mechanic they're intended for? If people start producing comps of 3 rhinos 1 T2 shield disruptor against Obsidians then the unit is interfering with fights that are already well balanced. That's where the risk in this approach lies. That said I do like the idea of giving more incentive for micro, either for Aeon targetting the shield disruptors or for shield disruptors targeting obsidians.

The advantage to new units for this purpose is that this suggestion doesn't have a lot of risk of unbalancing other things. Increasing the range of T3 mobile arty would definitely cause balance issues. Trebuchets are already very strong, they already counter T1/T2 very effectively, and are amazing against even massed T3. Do they need another 10-20 range? I don't think so.

EDIT: In writing this post, I'm kind of realizing that this might be a Cybran-only issue. Other factions have decent shield popping units, Aeon gets the disruptor AND a sniper bot, UEF gets the T3 MML and Sera gets sniper bots. Sniper bots with shield support should be highly effective and economical at popping firebase shields to let arty fire through, and people have already mentioned that Spearheads do the same thing.

Maybe what I'm really proposing is a cybran shield disruptor or sniper bot for the purpose of firebase breaking. Currently I use bricks, although perhaps vipers would work better. I don't know. All I know is that generally I either need a lot of trebuchets or I need to sacrifice some fairly expensive units to get that shield down. Perhaps its fine as is, but I think its still something worth discussing.

[moses_the_red]

I do think it would make sense for cybran to have a shield disruptor rather than aeon.

Upon thinking more about this issue I've come to agree with you. Aeon already has sniper bots, which should be effective shield breakers. Cybran really doesn't have anything for this.