Repair speed increase for damaged units

[stimpack88]

Right now the repair speed of damaged units in the game is too slow to be meaningful should be sped up a bit (probably start with 2x what it is now).

[FunkOff]

Right now the repair speed of damaged units in the game is too slow to be meaningful should be sped up a bit (probably start with 2x what it is now).

Repair speed depends on build time of the repairee and build rate of the builder.

[stimpack88]

Ahh so they are linked, you change the time it effects both since the build is used globally for repair as well.

[uberge3k]

Why would you want to repair a unit?

It's always cheaper to make a new unit and put that buildpower towards reclaiming or assisting factories. If it's an exp, it's a *far* better deal to simply kill it and reclaim it to build a fresh one rather than try to repair it.

[thygrrr]

Why would you want to repair a unit?

It's always cheaper to make a new unit and put that buildpower towards reclaiming or assisting factories. If it's an exp, it's a *far* better deal to simply kill it and reclaim it to build a fresh one rather than try to repair it.

And you don't think this means Repairing is broken/misdesigned? I think the game would profit from sensible repair costs (both time and speeds).

Repair should always be cheaper and more effective than a rebuild.

[uberge3k]

I disagree. I think that building a new unit in favor of repairing an old one is a fundamental concept to FA. Sure, the option to repair is there, but it's never efficient as FA focuses on the overall strategy of massive quantities of units, not micromanaging a few units.

Unless repair is made cheaper than building a new unit (which should NEVER be allowed IMO), it will always necessary be less efficient as you are taking build power away from reclaiming / making more stuff instead of simply making a new unit and using the old one as cannon fodder.

[AdmiralZeech]

It used to be that I felt that repair needed to be better than building a new unit, because I felt there was a need to reward other forms of tactical micro.

But now I'm coming around to the view that it would just be an annoying task you would be forced to perform, like clicking reclaim targets individually (which is a retarded bug of the UI / unit behaviour, imo.)

Then again, if I think about it some more, imagine if repair was really good. So much so that keeping some engineers with your army provides a huge amount of additional strength.

Not only does this mean that people who remember to keep engineers with their army can defeat larger, engineerless armies, but it also means that sniping the enemy's engineers can have a powerful effect on the outcome of a battle. And hiding/protecting/microing your engineers as well.

It may or may not be appropriate for SCFA, but I think the concept itself is an interesting and good one.

[stimpack88]

It used to be that I felt that repair needed to be better than building a new unit, because I felt there was a need to reward other forms of tactical micro.

Repair should work in the game but it was not implemented correctly, there are plenty of uses for repair for those capable of managing their units effectively. Not to mention delaying the destruction of structures early in the game.

[thygrrr]

Repairing an Experimental: Reward-Low Micro=Substantial Reward -> Do it!
Repairing a Mantis Swarm: Reward-High Micro=No Reward or Negative Reward -> You can do it, but it's stupid.
Repairing your T2 Factory that just got damaged by a TML: Survival-Medium Micro=Survival -> You should do it

So repairing masses of units is offset by the micro cost, which should exceed the repair reward for T1, and maybe Breakeven for T2 Structures and Ships, and start being profitable for T3 Mobile.

The whole concept of Veterancy is there because key units that have seen combat action are supposed to gain value, meaning repairing them should pay off. It doesn't mean you have to repair every single LAB (except in really rare early game situations where a far out engineer could repair its guarding platoon)

[Kryo]

Repairing an Experimental: Reward-Low Micro=Substantial Reward -> Do it!
Repairing a Mantis Swarm: Reward-High Micro=No Reward or Negative Reward -> You can do it, but it's stupid.
Repairing your T2 Factory that just got damaged by a TML: Survival-Medium Micro=Survival -> You should do it

So repairing masses of units is offset by the micro cost, which should exceed the repair reward for T1, and maybe Breakeven for T2 Structures and Ships, and start being profitable for T3 Mobile.

The whole concept of Veterancy is there because key units that have seen combat action are supposed to gain value, meaning repairing them should pay off. It doesn't mean you have to repair every single LAB (except in really rare early game situations where a far out engineer could repair its guarding platoon)

repairing buildings loses a lot of importance, if you count in that rebuilding bonus of wreckages is quite high:

repairing a t2 pgen for example that has only 10% will cost you 90% of building a new one, is that right?
destroying it and rebuilding it, will cost less than that?

even if its not that way, if you repair you have costs, that you might now have, if you just wait until the pgen is regenerated by itself. Maybe this pgen never again in the match will be shot at, so it can even survive with 1 hitpoint without costing you a single mass or energy point.