Why the Aeon Sacrifice feature does not work for ACU

[Chosen]

Why the Aeon sacrifice feature does not work for Acu ?

[keyser]

because acu is worth 2k mass, don't think people would like to suicide to get 2k more mass into an exp.

[LabPunk]

lolwut?

[Chosen]

because acu is worth 2k mass, don't think people would like to suicide to get 2k more mass into an exp.

I mean ACU doesn't get any health if you sacrifice units to acu.

[keyser]

because acu is worth 2k mass, don't think people would like to suicide to get 2k more mass into an exp.

I mean ACU doesn't get any health if you sacrifice units to acu.

ah i thought you wanted to sacrifice the ACU.
So you want to sacrifice units into the ACU/sACU to make them get upgrade faster ? Never thought of that.

[Chosen]

because acu is worth 2k mass, don't think people would like to suicide to get 2k more mass into an exp.

I mean ACU doesn't get any health if you sacrifice units to acu.

ah i thought you wanted to sacrifice the ACU.
So you want to sacrifice units into the ACU/sACU to make them get upgrade faster ? Never thought of that.

YES upgrading or getting the health boost

[ThomasHiatt]

Sacrifice doesn't really do anything useful at all ever. My proposal for making it somewhat useful would be to change it from being a mass/energy based system to more fair system that takes energy, mass, and buildtime into account. After checking the numbers on a few different solution the most fair way to value engies seems to be calculate how many engies it would take to account for the buildtime cost, mass cost, and energy cost of the destination structure and take the average of that number as the number of engy sacrifices required to complete it. Here is a spreadsheet showing how this would play out for some common and interesting units. This would make it so sacrifice allowed you to trade your engineers for a fair market value and get something else for them, which would make aeon much more interesting to play and allow sacrifice to actually be a fun and interesting mechanic.
https://imgur.com/QETGKHF

[keyser]

what's the formula your are using ? i think you should add some weight to the mass; having 3k mass for an asf is fucked (even if you save tons of energy). Maybe you should show the mass/energy saved in term of % of the original unit price. And then you take that percentage into account in some way, to add more weight to the mass (so you save more mass than energy, or at least for the units that have big differential in term of their mass/e cost)


Also i think you can make it so you aren't losing any mass/e at all when doing it, maybe even saving 10% or so. So theoretically you could build only engie and suicide them constantly and saving mass/e. But i don't think it can be abused.

[ThomasHiatt]

The formula is [(Mass Cost / Engy Mass Cost) + (Energy Cost / Engy Energy Cost) + (Buildtime / Engy Buildtime)] / 3. I wasn't really thinking it would be a thing anyone ever used for ASF anyway. It would be most useful for getting ACU or factory upgrades or trading engies for lower tech units I think. I was thinking that you wouldn't want to encourage building only engies and sacrificing them so it should be a little less efficient, but idk. You could weigh them differently somehow or make it more efficient but this formula gets fairly close to reasonable efficiency for most things so that it might actually be used.

[Plasma_Wolf]

What is the current formula anyway? I thought it was purely mass-related, based on the sacrifices of RAS SCUs I did into land and air experimentals, but when I moved on to the game enders that idea went out the window. The GC needs 5 SCUs, the Ythota just over 4, but the Paragon needs 71, while it's only 9.1 times the cost of a GC.

Also, if Thomas's formula would be implemented, you can get a GC with 3.15 RAS SCUs.