Not fixed in Equilibrium? Complain about it here!

[Exotic_Retard]

no its not integrated.

i know the reply isnt immediate but it took a bit of time to work out how much effort putting this in would be.
putting it in wouldnt be so hard, just need the authors permission, but fixing + making it work the way we want it would.

the answer is a maybe, but its a pretty controversial thing to put in and it would need to have extremely huge benefits to go in (yes it already has some but those arent enough)

anyway some questions for you this time
1. if you dont play eq why are you requesting features like this in it xD
2. what will happen if i put it in

[AdmiralZeech]

1. I don't play SupCom much these days, but I am still interested. EQ is very interesting to me, due to emphasis on nice features (like splitting carrier-style units into an attached factory.)

2. If it was integrated, it would be one more nice feature. Although the haters would be less likely to play EQ, I guess.

[Evildrew]

Hi,

Factory on Atlantis will make planes that launch from under the sea surface level when it is full. This needs fixing

Would you mind explain how it works?

I was thinking if you made the factory auto select when you click on the unit (so you select 2 in 1 click) and the unit had 0 BP and still able to build units, you wouldnt need to switch between the 2 as much.
Then you could also maybe make the factory icon 1 pixel and at the same time put it where it doesnt display (kind of hide it)

The only problem with the dual select is that stop will cancel units being produce but maybe that can be circumvented somehow and the unit would look very complete

[Exotic_Retard]

Ok so, me and evi talked in pm about this a while back.

the atlantis building planes while full and deploying them while submerged is a bug from faf, not eq, but while its silly its actually a little less annoying this way. its possible to fix. we may look into it in the future, but for now its enough that its not a regression )

the next point doesnt really bear semblance to how you would code something like that, while it would technically be possible to do autoselection it wouldnt make sense, since you would need to either relay orders or use the second unit either way. this isnt quite relevant.

and its much easier to totally hide the factory instead of just its strategic icon so making it 1 pixel doesnt make any sense.

[Exotic_Retard]

so, we have just had an eq tourney which is great because it was full of people who complained about things so we have lots of data to work on.
lets just look at a couple of the complaints: acu being too fragile early game and t1 spam being too strong
we take complaints like this fairly seriously, while it may not look like it all the time.

the simpler one is the acu being too weak in eq:

Spoiler: show

so we can approach this from a few different directions, and then compare the results. since i do prefer a scientific method to finding things out and not just opinion stacking.

1. replay evidence
we can use replays in the tourney, since the complaints stemmed from replays in the tourney that makes them the most relevant.
so ive watched all the replays in the tourney multiple times by now.
out of 18 games, a bunch of which were on navy maps where there wasnt the best chance of getting a lot of acu action in, half of them featured an acu with 50 kills or more, 2 games had all 4 acus get that, and 2 more where 3/4 acus had 50 kills or more

based on that alone its safe to say that acus have a significant impact on the game in terms of power. In a lot of cases a bunch of kills were gotten before any acu upgrades, then you would retreat, get something then go into it again

2. analysis of changes in eq
while we think this isnt as valuable as actualy replay evidence, it certainly does help if changes point in one direction we will need more replay evidence to show that the changes arent working as intended.

so lets look at the acu changes
- t1 land in eq has been redone a little, but the same number of tanks is required to kill an acu without oc, this has been tested a lot of times and shown to be the case
- the acu no longer gets instant heal on vet - this means when it gets a vet it essentially has less hp
- the acu now gets 5 regen every vet, up from 3, and it also gets +15% max hp up from 10%. this is a buff, and it does take a little more time to pay off but its stronger in the long run
- while not entirely relevant, the acu gets vet at the same speed vs t1 spam, but vs anything else it actually vets up faster due to the way the mass based vet system works.
- the acu has overcharge from the very beginning of the game and due to its variable nature that oc is 2.5x as cheap. it means that if you have 400e/s (compared to 800/es) you can oc all the time. of course you rarely have that much income early, but it still can be used twice as often as before.
- the acu main gun (not oc) target priorities are now t1 land so its a little more efficient when an enemy acu is nearby.
- the acu has 1 (one!) more range on its gun and oc
- the acus turret turn rate is now slightly higher, this is important because it means you can make tight turns and continue shooting more reliably now

overall, these mean the acus strength in the very early game is the same, since it needs the same number of tanks to be killed with. when it gets its first vet its weaker than faf balance, but by then the cheaper oc would have enough of an impact to start evening things out. later the strength of the acu increases due to the cheaper oc and better regen + max hp on the acu, and acu upgrades are also stronger since they tend to add regen and that has a higher hp pool to fill up.

so this analysis agrees with the replay evidence.

3. prior experience
so we can also look at how eq has performed in the past with these changes. eq is an old mod by this point, its had significantly more work put into it than anything else balance related on this time scale, and that certainly does include the efforts of the balance team, indeed it outperforms those by several times at the time of writing this.
we can look at things like complaints about eq in the past about these same changes. in this case the acu was complained to be op a few times in the past, a contradicting view to this.

having spent 2+ years on this which is actually more than anyone else working on balance atm, ive seen quite some shit in my time. while i do value feedback it makes sense to assign an actual value to it. lets say that the complainers opinion is the same value as mine. this would mean that they would need to process the same amount of evidence as me to have a stronger case. so far ive watched quite some games, played quite some games, sandboxed and changed the balance to make this work. so a similar amount of effort would be needed.

but lets say the complainers opinion (to to their extreme skill in the game and excellent perception of balance) is worth more, that means they require to process less evidence to have an equally strong case.

in this case, this opinion was formulated based on the games played, and in this case its a grand total of 3 played games in the tourney, and for the sake of argument 7 replays watched, although i think its an overestimation. so 10 games of evidence.

so ive watched, 18 replays in the tourney, did over 100 hours of development time on the acus, played over 100 1v1 games where this issue was relevant, and i guess i wont count the teamgames since it is a different situation, but it doest really matter at this point.

normally i assign someone elses opinion to be of higher value than mine, about 2-4x as valuable. however since the person complaining rarely if ever bothers to do some research and is just giving their views on things, it ends up that my experience far outweighs theirs. in this case the complainers opinion would need to be worth 20-30 times as much as mine to make a strong case.

conclusion:
i think we can put this argument to rest really, with all due respect, theres practically nothing to back it up, and that includes the games in the tourney, all but 3 had the acu not die to t1 spam and those 3 where it did happen it died to a lot more than it would have handled in any game, usually in a 1v2 scenario

the next one is the jucier complaint, its the one about t1 land being op in eq:

Spoiler: show

so again, we will be looking at a few different things here to work out whats going on and make some conclusions from there.

now someone complained to me that i just ignore their feedback since it doesnt agree with eq being amazing, but i hope you understand that just me taking the time to write this shows that it was taken very seriously, even though you may not have gotten the response you wanted. Im not going to throw away 100s of games of evidence because of what happened in 10-12 replays. that just doesnt make any sense, from anyone really.

1. replay evidence
so again, the most relevant replays are the ones from the tourney. i made a post in the tourney thread after watching all the replays a couple of times with what i saw in them. 10 games out of 18 were decided by t1 spam. for the sake of argument and since i do tend to be biassed towards eq we will increase than number to 12 out of 18, exactly 2/3rds of games.

the first very interesting thing i noticed is that while indeed there was a lot of t1 spam these games, it was very difficult to say if it was just the spam being op or not. this is because there wasnt much practising for the tourney, if anything. people, even top players, wont adapt to all the nuances of the balance in 3-5 games. thats just not sensible to expect. this alone is what makes it very hard to conclude that the spam games were there because of the balance, and not because of habits.

to further explain this, to show that t2 is useless, it first needed to be built, and then the team that built it needed to lose vs t1 spam. loya rush was always very strong, but wasnt used because people didnt know it was a thing. in the tourney, the situation described happened twice, one of those replays featured a teamnate dieing in a 1v2, he needed quite alot more to survive against that, not going t2 would not have helped there at all. in the other game the winning team also got a t2 upgrade on their factory and won because of more reclaim and map control.

the rest of the 10 replays featured games where either some external factors helped out like t1 subs, torpedo bombers, gunships, or where no team attempted to go t2.
the replays with no attempt to go t2 are the most interesting potentially, since they were the cause of the complaints, but didnt really feature anything being to weak since there was only spam to compare to.

now i cant read minds so its hard to say what was going on there. lets assume the intuition of the players was perfect and they immediately sensed that going t2 would have killed them, before trying it.

at this point it makes sense to test this assumption, so from watching the replays yet another time we find that in some cases this indeed appeared to be true - the games were extremely close indeed and going t2 would have been a bad idea. however, in a couple of replays it was also important to note the choice to upgrade gun as opposed to t2. in eq t2 on acu is 100m cheaper than in standard balance, and i checked the mass bars of the players getting the upgrades, in a lot of cases they had enough to spend on some pds.

what i saw was a conscious choice to focus on t1 spam, starting from the very first games in the tourney, where both players on a team in question upgraded early gun and decided to go full spam before any pressure even started. if people want to do that, then it was their decision. granted, this was not in all games, but it certainly did happen

something else i saw was that the winning team often got a t2 factory upgrade but won the game before that happened, this is evidence of t2 being affordable enough not to cost you the game

however, none of these actually excuse the 12 games which featured t1 spam a lot, perhaps this isnt a real problem but it certainly did happen. really a significant issue is that the sample size is just too small. both in terms of player and map variety.
what i did next was compare replays of normal balance to see the situation there.

i found replays of games on those same maps featuring official balance, and at least one 1600+ player (1800+ was bscly non existent in 2v2)
here:

Code: Select all

6364805 --yeah this one isnt exactly high quality but high rated games are rare
6341850 --an actual high ranked game, t1 spam then a guy dies to t2 pd
6210392 -- t1 spam on one side then it ends with some sort of snipe, what interesting is im 99% sure the guy who went t2 could have been killed by the t1 spam guy if he went for it
6289709 --its crimson feud what did you expect :D
6253868 -- another crimson feud, its likely not fair to put any more of these in. funnily enough the guy who went t2 here died.
6356544 --a high ranked diversity. had some t2, and then t3. kinda interesting to watch? nah xD
6224326 -- dry canyon :D you have 3 guesses. well really there was a beetle snipe attempt but teamnate died too fast
6120457 --yeah you know when ui mods break the game when watching replays cos some guy wanted to update them for fun? xD yeah thanks bruh. i still watched it on +0 though which was a pain - this one was strange since there was a t2 hq but no units coming out of it for aaaages, ended up being 100% spam game tbh
6372008 --isis with spam in it, here we see a t2 acu get overrun by t1, shouldnt have build a t2 pgen in the frontlines tbh
6371952 --this one was horribly stacked but even so the lower rated team got a draw of 2 acus with their spam, and then the other guy was just rekt already from bombers and stuff
6370453 --third spamsis, i didnt look at any more it was fairly clear how these go. featured mighty yudi going into t2 pd and beating everything with gun acu + tanks
--apparently no ones mad enough to play open palms 2v2 :/
-- i watched some 1v1 games but its not really relevant. but yeah spam galore, its not exactly closed palms is it
6358016 --adrastea - this one had different starting spots, and hat t2, snipes and all that. i reckon the finals should have been with spots like these, or at least to have that snipe fail in there so we could see a second game perhaps xD
--the only 2v2 wonder replay i found stopped at 2:40 : (
-- skipped forest planet since the replay vault broke at that point, and same applies to all the other maps in the tourney : (

what was a reoccurring thought was that the sample size was just too small. in the tourney we played maps at most two times, nowhere near close enough to determine if its an issue with balance, player habits, or just the map was like that. however, out of the maps compared we do see that in normal balance its a similar situation, twin rivers and diversity having spam in the eq tourney but judging for 3 replays is a bit far imo. crimson feud and dry canyon were quite spam maps as it turns out, and so is isis it appears.

in conclusion, its inconclusive to say that there is more spam in eq based on replays of similar maps. based on replays outside of the eq tourney, there will have to be significantly more replays to show a correlation. since im biassed towards eq, im inclined to believe that this was primarily based on the map selection and player habits, especially considering that the winning team usually had a t2 hq, but won without that paying off, only being a drain on resources.

2. analysis of changes in eq
so this is like before pretty much changelog reading.
-1. above we arrive at the conclusion the acu isnt weaker in eq
-2. t1 spam is indeed buffed in eq. it has 60-100 more hp depending on faction, but the most common unit in the tourney was the mantis so lets look at that:
the mantis has:
--60 more hp (20-25% more)
--3.333 less dps (yes that exact number) (12% less)
--2 less mass cost (4% less)
--builds in 3 less seconds (30% less)

so its fairly buffed, but as before its important to note (again) that its not really stronger vs the acu than before

-3. factory upgrades in eq are cheaper, 270 mass cheaper to be exact, thats 5-6 t1 tanks more
-4. t2 units are not weaker in eq vs t1, since it got some small buffs to increase its ease of use, and also build faster
-5. t2 mexes are 100m cheaper in eq so its easier to opt to eco
-6. t2 acu upgrade is 100m cheaper, costs 7k less e in eq, and builds faster too.

while the t1 spam is better, its also both easier and cheaper to get t2. overall i would say t2 is better in eq, but for the sake of argument we can say its the same. after all i am likely to be biassed towards eq.

3. prior experience
this isnt actually the first time ive heard this complaint, i have had it once before, quite a while ago now. the person in question lost to a gun push when he sent his t1/2 units away to help a teamnate. interestingly it was also a 2v2 in twin rivers. i looked at the replay and determined since he just lost a game he had increased saltiness and the cause of death was units being out of position rather than anything else.

eq games very often get past the t1 spam stage. this tourney does not appear to show the overall trend. its however hard to compare since the games ive been monitoring werent 2v2s

conclusion:
eq doesnt appear to have any conclusive evidence showing that t1 spam is than faf in it. the sample size is far too small for it. also given that people who complained are known to be biassed against the mod, it needs to be taken with a grain of salt anyway, especially when they didnt really process much evidence for it. the bottom line is that this needs a lot more games to really work out whats going on, and specifically 2v2s and such, since in teamgames this is a non-issue.

its tempting to attribute this to just having players pick spam strategies.

but actually its not infinitely important how it compares to faf. fafis different to eq. what we saw is a high proportion of t1 spam games, and while it also appears to be that high in faf, that doesnt matter, since it just appears to be high regardless. there will need to be some more looking into this, playing specifically 2v2s and whatnot to work out if changes are needed.


even if you dont agree with the conclusion, i would prefer it if people didnt think that complaints about eq are just ignored.

i spent too much time writing this out xD
normally a similar amount of effort goes into other changes of eq, but no one bothers to write things down.

i am happy to discuss any comments on this or about the tourney in general in PM, as always if you have any complaints/suggests/whatever please do let us know. they are always appreciated.

[keyser]

Spoiler: show

so again, we will be looking at a few different things here to work out whats going on and make some conclusions from there.

now someone complained to me that i just ignore their feedback since it doesnt agree with eq being amazing, but i hope you understand that just me taking the time to write this shows that it was taken very seriously, even though you may not have gotten the response you wanted. Im not going to throw away 100s of games of evidence because of what happened in 10-12 replays. that just doesnt make any sense, from anyone really.

1. replay evidence
so again, the most relevant replays are the ones from the tourney. i made a post in the tourney thread after watching all the replays a couple of times with what i saw in them. 10 games out of 18 were decided by t1 spam. for the sake of argument and since i do tend to be biassed towards eq we will increase than number to 12 out of 18, exactly 2/3rds of games.

you should maybe remove the water map from this, since we aren't going to see T1 land anyway. So to be precise it should be 10/14 (or 12/14)

the first very interesting thing i noticed is that while indeed there was a lot of t1 spam these games, it was very difficult to say if it was just the spam being op or not. this is because there wasnt much practising for the tourney, if anything. people, even top players, wont adapt to all the nuances of the balance in 3-5 games. thats just not sensible to expect. this alone is what makes it very hard to conclude that the spam games were there because of the balance, and not because of habits.

if it was out of habit we would have seen even number of game decided by T1 than in normal faf, that was not my feeling, neither what i heard from other people in chat or in twitch chat. (yes that's not very scientific, but i guess feeling here has some value since we are used to the game, and are able to detect when something change and does really impact the game)

to further explain this, to show that t2 is useless, it first needed to be built, and then the team that built it needed to lose vs t1 spam. loya rush was always very strong, but wasnt used because people didnt know it was a thing. in the tourney, the situation described happened twice, one of those replays featured a teamnate dieing in a 1v2, he needed quite alot more to survive against that, not going t2 would not have helped there at all. in the other game the winning team also got a t2 upgrade on their factory and won because of more reclaim and map control.

the rest of the 10 replays featured games where either some external factors helped out like t1 subs, torpedo bombers, gunships, or where no team attempted to go t2.
the replays with no attempt to go t2 are the most interesting potentially, since they were the cause of the complaints, but didnt really feature anything being to weak since there was only spam to compare to.

now i cant read minds so its hard to say what was going on there. lets assume the intuition of the players was perfect and they immediately sensed that going t2 would have killed them, before trying it.

at this point it makes sense to test this assumption, so from watching the replays yet another time we find that in some cases this indeed appeared to be true - the games were extremely close indeed and going t2 would have been a bad idea. however, in a couple of replays it was also important to note the choice to upgrade gun as opposed to t2. in eq t2 on acu is 100m cheaper than in standard balance, and i checked the mass bars of the players getting the upgrades, in a lot of cases they had enough to spend on some pds.

what i saw was a conscious choice to focus on t1 spam, starting from the very first games in the tourney, where both players on a team in question upgraded early gun and decided to go full spam before any pressure even started. if people want to do that, then it was their decision. granted, this was not in all games, but it certainly did happen

something else i saw was that the winning team often got a t2 factory upgrade but won the game before that happened, this is evidence of t2 being affordable enough not to cost you the game
if you have already won the game (have enough map control, and secured reclaim for example, you can really afford that)
however, none of these actually excuse the 12 games which featured t1 spam a lot, perhaps this isnt a real problem but it certainly did happen. really a significant issue is that the sample size is just too small. both in terms of player and map variety.
what i did next was compare replays of normal balance to see the situation there.

i found replays of games on those same maps featuring official balance, and at least one 1600+ player (1800+ was bscly non existent in 2v2)
here:

Code: Select all
6364805 --yeah this one isnt exactly high quality but high rated games are rare
6341850 --an actual high ranked game, t1 spam then a guy dies to t2 pd
6210392 -- t1 spam on one side then it ends with some sort of snipe, what interesting is im 99% sure the guy who went t2 could have been killed by the t1 spam guy if he went for it
6289709 --its crimson feud what did you expect
6253868 -- another crimson feud, its likely not fair to put any more of these in. funnily enough the guy who went t2 here died.
6356544 --a high ranked diversity. had some t2, and then t3. kinda interesting to watch? nah xD
6224326 -- dry canyon you have 3 guesses. well really there was a beetle snipe attempt but teamnate died too fast
6120457 --yeah you know when ui mods break the game when watching replays cos some guy wanted to update them for fun? xD yeah thanks bruh. i still watched it on +0 though which was a pain - this one was strange since there was a t2 hq but no units coming out of it for aaaages, ended up being 100% spam game tbh
6372008 --isis with spam in it, here we see a t2 acu get overrun by t1, shouldnt have build a t2 pgen in the frontlines tbh
6371952 --this one was horribly stacked but even so the lower rated team got a draw of 2 acus with their spam, and then the other guy was just rekt already from bombers and stuff
6370453 --third spamsis, i didnt look at any more it was fairly clear how these go. featured mighty yudi going into t2 pd and beating everything with gun acu + tanks
--apparently no ones mad enough to play open palms 2v2 :/
-- i watched some 1v1 games but its not really relevant. but yeah spam galore, its not exactly closed palms is it
6358016 --adrastea - this one had different starting spots, and hat t2, snipes and all that. i reckon the finals should have been with spots like these, or at least to have that snipe fail in there so we could see a second game perhaps xD
--the only 2v2 wonder replay i found stopped at 2:40 : (
-- skipped forest planet since the replay vault broke at that point, and same applies to all the other maps in the tourney : (



what was a reoccurring thought was that the sample size was just too small. in the tourney we played maps at most two times, nowhere near close enough to determine if its an issue with balance, player habits, or just the map was like that. however, out of the maps compared we do see that in normal balance its a similar situation, twin rivers and diversity having spam in the eq tourney but judging for 3 replays is a bit far imo. crimson feud and dry canyon were quite spam maps as it turns out, and so is isis it appears.

in conclusion, its inconclusive to say that there is more spam in eq based on replays of similar maps. based on replays outside of the eq tourney, there will have to be significantly more replays to show a correlation. since im biassed towards eq, im inclined to believe that this was primarily based on the map selection and player habits, especially considering that the winning team usually had a t2 hq, but won without that paying off, only being a drain on resources.

2. analysis of changes in eq
so this is like before pretty much changelog reading.
-1. above we arrive at the conclusion the acu isnt weaker in eq
-2. t1 spam is indeed buffed in eq. it has 60-100 more hp depending on faction, but the most common unit in the tourney was the mantis so lets look at that:
the mantis has:
--60 more hp (20-25% more)
--3.333 less dps (yes that exact number) (12% less)
--2 less mass cost (4% less)
--builds in 3 less seconds (30% less)

so its fairly buffed, but as before its important to note (again) that its not really stronger vs the acu than before

-3. factory upgrades in eq are cheaper, 270 mass cheaper to be exact, thats 5-6 t1 tanks more
-4. t2 units are not weaker in eq vs t1, since it got some small buffs to increase its ease of use, and also build faster
-5. t2 mexes are 100m cheaper in eq so its easier to opt to eco
-6. t2 acu upgrade is 100m cheaper, costs 7k less e in eq, and builds faster too.

while the t1 spam is better, its also both easier and cheaper to get t2. overall i would say t2 is better in eq, but for the sake of argument we can say its the same. after all i am likely to be biassed towards eq.

3. prior experience
this isnt actually the first time ive heard this complaint, i have had it once before, quite a while ago now. the person in question lost to a gun push when he sent his t1/2 units away to help a teamnate. interestingly it was also a 2v2 in twin rivers. i looked at the replay and determined since he just lost a game he had increased saltiness and the cause of death was units being out of position rather than anything else.

eq games very often get past the t1 spam stage. this tourney does not appear to show the overall trend. its however hard to compare since the games ive been monitoring werent 2v2s

conclusion:
eq doesnt appear to have any conclusive evidence showing that t1 spam is than faf in it. the sample size is far too small for it. also given that people who complained are known to be biassed against the mod, it needs to be taken with a grain of salt anyway, especially when they didnt really process much evidence for it. the bottom line is that this needs a lot more games to really work out whats going on, and specifically 2v2s and such, since in teamgames this is a non-issue.
Yes i'm not a fan or EQ, but i don't mind playing it from time to time, like i didn't mind playing the tourney. Not being a fan, doesn't mean that i will do shit feed-back just for the sake of shitting on EQ.
its tempting to attribute this to just having players pick spam strategies.

but actually its not infinitely important how it compares to faf. fafis different to eq. what we saw is a high proportion of t1 spam games, and while it also appears to be that high in faf, that doesnt matter, since it just appears to be high regardless. there will need to be some more looking into this, playing specifically 2v2s and whatnot to work out if changes are needed.


even if you dont agree with the conclusion, i would prefer it if people didnt think that complaints about eq are just ignored.



As for the first part, i don't get why you overall nerf com : nerf instant health and 1 more shot to kill T1 tank, even if buff regen and max health and +1 range. (and nerf the gun upgrade, that is THE offensive upgrade) But buff the OC. So that now the effectiveness of the commander depend on how much e you get and how much "luck" you get from killing several T1 tank in 1 shot (of course this is normal behaviour of OC, but it impact much more the game since the OC is now super affordable.)

also just tested sera com vs 18 sera tank without kiting, no OC (i know the +1 range here would impact a bit); acu die, and 3 tanks "survive" in normal faf; acu die, and 9 tanks "survive" in EQ

and btw, i felt the aurora being super weak, that range drop made me feel they were useless, and 200 hp make them 2 still shootable from ACU

[Exotic_Retard]

well i did ask for discussion in PM but whatever i guess

Spoiler: show

1. the water maps were included because one of them i counted as having being won by land spam, there were land battles happening on the flooded shloob so yeah.
2. you feelings certainly do have value. in the why acu isnt that weak in eq i explained that i assign a value to peoples opinions, usually 2x as high as mine. however that means you would need to have at least 50% of the evidence for it as against to show an equally strong argument. currently that's a little behind.
3. yes indeed but the turning battle came in at least 3 replays at the same time the hq was complete - the t2 was a waste of mass there but it didn't prevent them winning, this happened more than getting a t2 factory and losing because of it. but again there's just way too few replays for it to work out if its a trend or not.
4.actually i didnt imply that you would give shit feedback on purpose. however i have seen way too many times when people just assume that something is a problem, based on what they saw. for example t1 bombers in eq were first op then too weak, and the balance didnt change in that regard between the two complaints. its just the result of a couple of games happening and people assuming that its eqs fault. in fact you yourself are a great example xD in the tourney you start building t2 air and your eco is balanced.then your air production becomes idle and you start overflowing since you have 50 idle engies. you then say eco balance is super weird in eq. its on your stream, forest planet 26:45, on the recording time
immediately after you say that flak shooting down scouts is so stupid, which is an interesting comment since uef mobile flak in normal balance is also capable of this, just not quite as reliably. also despite that you still get intel over the enemies base, and later you do indeed get a scout past t2 flak when it was flying by the edge of its range, when you scout the ML. also its interesting why you would think thats stupid since t1 aa manages it just as well in any balance. i dont want this to sound like something personal, but theres a lot more that you could be flagged up on)

really i can provide countless other examples of this on practically every change in eq by now, from just getting stats completely wrong to assuming sth is buffed when its nerfed, and so on. there were examples of people complaining about eq balance while playing without it, too xD

you certainly don't do this on purpose, but its important to realize that it does happen. this is why i don't trust people just on what they say, they might mean well but its easy to make mistakes. too easy.
5. so about the com - the replays from the tourney dont support your claim. as mentioned there, 50 kills on an acu was very common indeed. and oc or not, there was quite some use there either way. and about gun upgrades nerfed, that is also not supported in there since in a lot of games we saw players opt for gun and use it very successfully indeed. its nerfed yes, but it works well as shown in the replays also the luck behaviour of oc is a bit strange of an argument imo since it quickly evens out over the course of the game just because you oc so much. if you want, you can oc manually so that you hit the best targets all the time.

the regen is also not to be underestimated as is the larger max hp on vet. infact ive got complaints about acus being op/unkillable. its interesting you are complaining about a weak acu when you had the most kills on it that tourney - 115

and yeah on paper the acu is weaker, indeed that makes perfect sense since t1 land is buffed. in practise however, you would need to provide quite some evidence of it happening in real games before asking questions like that )

6.about the aurora - well tbh i cant really say much since whenever i play aeon i get an irrational hate for them xD i hate aurora no matter what!
in eq its certainly significantly stronger vs t1 armies in close combat. but yes its harder to use them more efficiently. its an increase in the skill cap here. vs the acu its no longer possible to outrange it which i think is a good thing tbh. that shit was just a noob trap xD


oh and lastly since you didnt address a large part of the explanation/response im assuming you agree with it, or have nothing to say against

but seriously, would be nice to take this into pm <3

[Exotic_Retard]

ah yes, another EQ tourney and another set of complaints. sadly there was no massive issue last eq tourney so we cant keep up the tradition oh well.

so the most obvious thing is probably going to be the lab stun, best show in blackhearts expert commentary on his stream. truly a thrilling experience. do check it out.

Spoiler: show

so, specifically, the complaint is that stun on the labs is too strong. seems reasonable. So lets have a look at the game where BH abused this mechanic to get a brutal domination, despite not playing seriously at all.

sadly he plays only one game with lab spam so thats all we have from him on this topic but lets take a look at that one at least.

so watching the replay at minute 7, BHs base looks like this:

meanwhile this is moraxes.

i admit that im not an expert at playing the game, but i think that if one side has 11 factories for spam and the other has 4 (1 for each team is making engies)
then one player will have more spam. I will need to ask a few 2k players to check but thats just my humble opinion for now.

Next, we take a look at what the whole map looks like:

appears to me that morax has a bit fewer land units there. Blackheart has 80 labs at this moment (2400 mass) while Morax has 16 tanks, 4 arty, and 5 scouts. (2000 mass worth of everything, of which 1200 is his land units)

Again, not an expert here but if you have 80vs20, that means its on average 4 labs vs 1 tank, and i think they might just be able to handle one.
for context, congreve and the mighty highlander have 32 and 39 land units, respectively. so you could say that the mighty highlander is trying hard to outspam congreve here; indeed, he is ahead on mass income, with 29 vs congreves 23. very formidable.

now, lets fast forward just 50 seconds in this action packed game to the following situation:

here we see BH and highlander expertly outmaneuvering moraxes upgrading acu, defended by all of 10 tanks, and flanking the right flanking labs with 6 more.
while blackheart has 52 in the immediate vicinity, and exactly 50 more stuck behind his acu. presumably hes microing them to bump it towards morax faster. simply astounding gameplay.

of course lets not forget highlander whos moving in with 24 strikers of his own, in a perfect example of high level teamplay.

Now, lets just pause for a moment and consider the unthinkable - what if BHs 52 labs were tanks?
Of course he was clearly building them for the extreme speed and micro benefits, but if he spent that mass on tanks he would have 28 of them. Now again, not an expert here but i do believe that 28 + 25 tanks are able to kill an acu. I'll confirm this with the top winter duel players as soon as possible.

but of course building anything but labs here would have been a mistake, and BH always plays super seriously and never makes those. so the labs were clearly used to stun the enemy army (of 10 tanks) before it ever had a chance to respond!

now, just 25 seat shaking seconds later, at 8:15 in the replay, the results of this epic battle (still in progress!) are as follows:
Morax has taken heavy damage, having lost 8 tanks, but he has gained 18 kills in those short seconds, possibly due to the part where labs have 100 hp. cant confirm, will need to sandbox. Morax has also lost around 2000hp on his acu, leaving 8000 left
Blackheart has lost 40 of his 50 labs that were there at the time! How could this happen? well 18 were ravenously downed by morax himself, 20 were killed by his valiant land army, and the rest were utterly destroyed by moraxes hidden bombers, sharing 12 kills between them!

Note that Highlanders tanks are still alive and well, but congreve is moving in as well! how exciting!
shortly afterwards, the epic battle concludes, but BH DID manage to stun a couple of t1 tanks. No really, i checked! they were indeed stunned!

fast forwarding a little more, we come to this epic engagement, with morax still on 8k hp, this time with 62 kills and blackheart himself moving in bravely with some labs in tow! lets not forget the overall situation, both players have added 2 factories each to their land spamming, morax on now on 6, and BH on 13 (again not including the engy facs) also highlander expertly snipes moraxes bomber squad. important detail here.

by just before 10 minutes the epic finale is starting to brew, with both morax and BH on 6.5k hp and BH bringing in 34 more labs, having kept them safely stuck in his base for later.

so to sum up the situation, morax has 8 tanks nearby, congreve helping out with 1 more and TWO arty, and BH has 35 labs, with highlander bringing in TWO tanks and THREE arty! Very intense! Both morax and congreve have a bomber each, and morax is bringing in a second. here, morax is deciding to run for the safety of his 4 mexes instead of trying to get to the beach.

mere moments later, we discover that morax is all alone, and facing BH + 17 labs, so while morax is shooting the labs, and gets his second vet, all of the mighty dps of BHs acu is crashing onto morax, his mexes seemingly reluctant to help! Likewise his bombers are focusing on the labs, and BHs acu is hardly recieving any damage!

and it continues! morax and the bombers are focusing on the labs, while they and BHs acu are bringing down his hp!

and thats when morax hatches a genius plan and DISTRACTS BH with a PD! BH stops shooting at morax with 700 hp and focuses on the pd instead! the pd is finished and BHs labs have sadly been out of range most of the time, not to mention that the stuns dont work on the acu! must have been a misreading of the eq changelog, surely if BH had known this he would have attacked the acu earlier instead of the pd!


At this point the game is in a solid draw territory, even now, both morax and BH choose to not attack the acus instead focusing on more labs, and the pd respectively.
congreve goes on to beat highlander against all odds. what a game, showcasing exactly how strong cybran lab stun is, were it not for that, things would have turned out entirely differently!

[edmundopt]

I only have a question, because you sure know the "subject"
Why did you even bother ??
zero constructive feedback was given, so zero effort should be put by you
sometimes being nice is not very good man

[Blackheart]

Now imagine that i wouldnt have fed 80 kills to morax acu by idling my acu in base on purpose or make 2 t1 maa or dont place my facs in the path of the labs streaming out.

But hey, me pumping a 100 hp unit into an acu that does 100 damage per shot with no chance of killing it for 10 mins straight, then sending acu in for suicide and suddenly easily drawing (with a bit better micro even killing, but i was too surprised about the ridiculous fact that LABS are crushing once acu shoots acu) is certainly a good proof of labs not being sickening.

Forgot that the professional mass based analysis of EQ creator (who skipped his own tourney) proving the quality of his balance (especially 1500e landfacs and 3500e airfacs) will crush.