SACUs and mass wrecks

[---]

Hi,

I was wondering why SACUs don't give any mass when being killed. Not starting a fight here, I just don't understand it. I know there is a mini ACU-nuke-Explosion and this probably is the reason for the mass "gone" in the end.
Sometimes it seem SACUs are a bit, dare I say it... OP (not looking for a fight though). They can build (facs, shields, SAMs, torps, t4, you name it), be put on a trans or tele (extremely mobile), dodge pd/arty fire, dodge/render t4 ineffective with micro (Mega, GC), suck mass (!), assist shields, and dish out tons of damage (rambo version).
As with any t4, SACUs are a huge investment and losing them hurts. However, losing a t4 not only hurts due to loss of the investment but also due to donation of mass to the other team (unless mass is destroyed ofc). With SACUs such a "reward" for defending against an attack is not given since there never is a mass wreck of SACUs. Hence, it seems (rambo) SACUs are less risky to use than t4. Killing them won't give the other team the mass they need to recover and thereby "punish" the attackers for their (unsuccessful) move.

I wonder what would happen if SACUs left mass wrecks behind. Would no one build them anymore due to the increased risk of losing them and donating mass? Would they be used less aggressively and thereby maybe impact the game in an undesired way? Or would it make the game more dynamic? I don't know. What do you think about it?

[Aulex]

I think they should be able to be balanced properly without the wrecks, but that is 1 possible way to balance it.

[-_V_-]

Aren't SACU only 2k mass ? (not too sure, I don't build them as they are quite OP atm)

If so, at the point of the game where they come in play, it's not a SIGNIFICANT amount of mass to reclaim.


And if you put wreck for SACU why not for ACU ?

[Apofenas]

Prehaps upgrades' costs wouldn't count into wreck, like in aeon SCU sacrificial system. So probably getting wrecks to "survive" SCU mini nuke explosion would give only 2k mass... out of 10k seraphim SCU for example. I dislike this idea. Do we have textures for SCUs with all setups of upgrades? And that may need time investments for somebody to code. And since i don't see issue with balance or unit design, i would be against this idea.

[E8400-CV]

I definitely like the idea of not giving mass and even blowing up some wrecks at the place it dies.

But considering upgrades don't count into wrecks... it's a marginal role.

[tatsu]

i can agree that SACUS are pretty strong but I'd rather we leave the wreaks out of the story just because if they did leave a wreak it would make the explosion completely underwhelming (I say this from experience : PA)

[Col_Walter_Kurtz]

Yeah, don't introduce wrecks for SACU or ACU. It's one of the things that add to the variety between T4 and SACU. If some people would have their way this game would be full of exactly equal units and effects, something like PA.

[-_V_-]

If some people would have their way this game would be full of exactly equal units and effects, something like PA.

That's hardly new. And a quick read of the "balance" topics reveals that. sadly.

[Neutrino]

I think I've read all the current balance topics and I don't see anyone suggesting that all units should be made the same. Quite the opposite in fact, it seems to me that the one thing people are agreed on is that they like the unit diversity SupCom offers.

[-_V_-]

Read better ? Lol