SACU/ACU nano-repair system

[Ithilis_Quo]

Hi guys, im not sure if suggestion or general discussion, maybe more suggestion.

Aeon sacu had shield and nano repair on same slot, so then can be build only shield or nano repair, not both.
nano cost a little bit more like shield. And i dont see any situation when is better to build nano repair like build shield. So then is this upgrade useless. Dont it will be better move nano repair to slot with rapid fabricator + sacri system, to be possible build both shield and nano?

Or in with situation is better build nano repair instead of shield ?

other option, will not be better on nano-repair upgrade give some HP bonus for some less regen? For a reason why build nano instead of shield?

________
Same with UEF ACU, he has nano regen who is nearly useless with comparing with T2, T2 cost half, give third regen but give 3000HP and T2 and 32build rate. I dont see any reason why build nano repair on UEF instead of T2. Dont bring different option when nano will give some HP and lower regen like its now? for example +2000/3000hp +45/50regen (instad of +60)

thx for answer

[Plasma_Wolf]

I just checked the unitDB and the shield and nano system are not on the same slot. On the left slot, you have the nano system and the rapid fabricator. On the back, it's shield, sensor and TML.

As for the UEF, that's true, the T2 and nano system are on the same slot, but I think that some changes have been made some time ago, that makes the nano system far better (and also a bit more expensive), so that the choice can be taken either way. I'm not entirely sure though, and I'd personally choose the T2 system all the time, so someone else has to comment on the UEF thing.

Does this help?

[Ithilis_Quo]

http://faforever.com/faf/unitsDB/unit.php?bp=UAL0301

Yeah on UEF its different slot but the first topic was about aeon sacu
It will be nearly waste on Aeon sacu make shield and regen togehter, but styll better like never build regen

UEF nano was make a cheaper and lowest regen, previous time it give +100regen per sec, but was incredible costly, so it was going down with regen and price, but styll is better make T2 like regen becase everything.

[Plasma_Wolf]

http://faforever.com/faf/unitsDB/unit.php?bp=UAL0301

Yeah on UEF its different slot but the first topic was about aeon sacu

The nano system does give an incredibly high regen. With the ability of the SCU to build static shields, it might give something useful, but other than that, I don't know. I also haven't seriously tested it...

[Iszh]

For the UEF acu i can tell that the nano has no use at all. I thought about it in different situations but the advantage for cost is ridiculous.

Engi upgrade 760 mass --> 20 hp/s and 3k life and t2 buildings
Nano upgrade 1200 mass --> 65 hp/s
Shield on back --> 1500 mass --> 24.000 hp and 35hp/s

The Engi uprade is times better for suviving and provides huge advantage with t2 buildings compared to nano and costs less and additional provides more life which nano does not. Shield costs more energy but the mass costs comparing is a joke if you compare nano to shield. If you really need life get a shield and nano is useless.

Possible Options:
1. Alternative to Engi upgrade
-Improve nano with additional HP like 3000 so you have 15k life and 65hp/s without increasing cost. It would be at least the same useful then t2 engi upgrade.
2. Improving the Engi/Gun acu upgrade with lower engery cost
-Move nano to back slot to have a triple upgrade with low energy use thats the best solution i think. The shield would be for eco maps late game and the nano much cheaper for 1v1 and rushing for rambo upgrades.

The problem i see is that the engi upgrade is to important compared to the nano. To move nano like it is to back slot would be a fantastic thing.

p.s. to improve it with additional HP and move it to back slot would be definately OP

[pip]

When I tried to replace UEF ACU nano in 3629 with something different to avoid redundancy, a small AOE effect, several players jumped at my throat, even though they never have and never will use nano upgrade. Yes, it's currently redundant with engy suit, which is a far better deal, even if you also add 3000 HP to the nano repair, because of the ability to build, and to upgrade it further to t3 suit.

Moving nano to back does make it a bit more interesting, but there are 3 problems :
- the visible part appears on the arm, not on the back
- the shield will still be a better option, because the price is roughly the same, HP boost much higher, and there is a second upgrade to the shield.
- third problem : it leaves no choice for the arm, only engy suit (though everyone already only uses it). It's not elegant to cram the back spot and offer no choice on the arm.

As for Aeon SCU nano, yes, it's not currently a good upgrade, shield is better.

[Sheeo]

When I tried to replace UEF ACU nano in 3629 with something different to avoid redundancy, a small AOE effect, several players jumped at my throat, even though they never have and never will use nano upgrade. Yes, it's currently redundant with engy suit, which is a far better deal, even if you also add 3000 HP to the nano repair, because of the ability to build, and to upgrade it further to t3 suit.

Moving nano to back does make it a bit more interesting, but there are 3 problems :
- the visible part appears on the arm, not on the back
- the shield will still be a better option, because the price is roughly the same, HP boost much higher, and there is a second upgrade to the shield.
- third problem : it leaves no choice for the arm, only engy suit (though everyone already only uses it). It's not elegant to cram the back spot and offer no choice on the arm.

As for Aeon SCU nano, yes, it's not currently a good upgrade, shield is better.

I vote for giving the Aeon SCU's chrono dampeners, perhaps in a nerfed variant.

It seems like the Cybran SCUs have the regen + stun, Sera ones the OC, and UEF ones the shield + dmg, whereas the Aeon ones are lacking.

[Iszh]

UEF ACU -- You re right pip it is useless to move it to back since shield is better. It is simply a bit unlucky upgrade which is useless. The problem is that all the other upgrades are simply better now matter how you see it. If you have to leave it in the arm the shield will always be the better option.

-> Means it can be only a cheaper rush upgrade compared to shield
But on the other hand the engi upgrade is cheap and excellent for a rush so it must be cheaper and worth it compared to engi upgrade.

-> Cheaper means since the engi upgrade is already fast that it should be significantly cheaper because it will be completely useless in late game anyways
So if you design now something like regen field from sera, an acu upgrade which costs less then engi suit for rush it can be easily OP and should be handled with great care.

-> I would offer now after thinking again to make 360 mass 6k energy (low energy cost) and +15 (or +20) hp/s rush upgrade. But this MUST be tested carefully since it can lead on small maps in ranking to a balance desaster. The original regen rate is 10 hp/s and would be increased very cheap to 30 hp/s. On 1v1 Maps it would be possible to use it.

This can be only done in a balance period.
(And for balance period i would add the wish to decrease mass cost for engi drones to the cost of a t1 engi since it is the same. Energy cost prevent rushing those drones, but they are shot after min 2 much more easy then normal engis with interceptors. Thats why they should not cost double then a normal engi.)

p.s. AEON SACU NANO: the sacu nano of aeon is better for under water usage. On seton you can see often sacus used for reclaiming hills of battlehips after huge seabattles and building sams or t2 torpdo launchers/exp units. sacus with a shield under water would lose permament health to torpedo bombers. But with Nano they might be nearly undefeatable under water since it is not so easy to bring enough of damage under water. Torpede weapons have low damage and 300 hp/s is insane you can remove an atlantis from the game just standing arround an sacu with regen

[Hawkei]

Granted Aeon have the weakest raw combat SCU. But overall their kit is more versatile for most of the support functions an SCU is likely to encounter. In direct answer to the question: I would equip heavy combat SCU's with the shield upgrade and forward engineering SCU's with the nano repair.

The main advantages of nano repair being:
- It requires no energy upkeep
- It will provide more capability to absorb DPS over time than a shield.

Therefore, the situations when I use it are for units which are subject to constant damage. Such as SCU's which are building and repairing a base under artillery fire. I would generally equip these units with Nano + RAS + Rapid Fabricator. The nano upgrade makes them far more resilient... As opposed to the double shield - which is better for direct fire combat against Heavy T3 and T4.

As for UEF ACU nano repair, I agree that it is rather useless. But I have made the rare use of it in the early game in 1v1 ladder or taking mid on Setons. It's ability to absorb DPS is incredible. It works precisely because opponents expect that upgrade to be an engineering suite. They usually throw everything at the ACU when I present it. Often, half of their army will be destroyed before they realise the mistake. But this is a rare thing.

[Apofenas]

I would suggest to make UEF nano upgrade being the stage of shield upgrades. If you don't like T2 to be only upgrade at the arm, drones can be moved there.

Also i would switch Aeon SCU nano upgrade with sacrificial system. Nobody uses it because it's a totaly useless thing.