Uncontroversial changes

[Zock]

This thread is to discuss everything regarding a bunch of small changes. Please make sure to read the overview and rules first: viewtopic.php?f=58&t=5681

In specific, but not exclusive:

SCU Presets
SCU Vet and small adjustments
T4 air vet
Cybran missile split
Sniperbots
nuke subs
tempest
sera adv. resto field

[Mycen]

for the nuke-subs
since it takes many nukes in lategame to wipe out an entire fleet, maybe make the sub-nuke have different damage values vs buildings so its not overused against bases, lower the range so its much less a strategic weapon more a tactical, and make it build nukes much faster but lower damage and maybe lower AoE
you get the idea?

This is similar to an idea that I've long thought would be a better change to missile subs - Have them fire tactical nukes in the same manner as the UEF billy. Have the sub be able to store a larger number of them (maybe ten?) and fire them off as quickly as it can now. Obviously the costs, buildrates, etc. would have to be worked out.

I think this would complete the shift that we have been working on so far, moving missile subs from a strategic weapon to a tactical weapon. After all, remember when subs used to essentially be mobile nuke silos? With the latest range reductions, by this point they're really not strategic weapons at all anyway, (less range than a T3 arty? What a joke) so it would make more sense to have them work as I described above. Tactical nukes rather than strategic ones.

Hardly an "uncontroversial" minor change though. But something to think about.

[Patton]

for the nuke-subs
since it takes many nukes in lategame to wipe out an entire fleet, maybe make the sub-nuke have different damage values vs buildings so its not overused against bases, lower the range so its much less a strategic weapon more a tactical, and make it build nukes much faster but lower damage and maybe lower AoE
you get the idea?

This is similar to an idea that I've long thought would be a better change to missile subs - Have them fire tactical nukes in the same manner as the UEF billy. Have the sub be able to store a larger number of them (maybe ten?) and fire them off as quickly as it can now. Obviously the costs, buildrates, etc. would have to be worked out.

I think this would complete the shift that we have been working on so far, moving missile subs from a strategic weapon to a tactical weapon. After all, remember when subs used to essentially be mobile nuke silos? With the latest range reductions, by this point they're really not strategic weapons at all anyway, (less range than a T3 arty? What a joke) so it would make more sense to have them work as I described above. Tactical nukes rather than strategic ones.

Hardly an "uncontroversial" minor change though. But something to think about.

NOPE NOPE NOPE! Strat subs fill an important role, stealth. sure only the cybran sub has true stealth, but it is much easier to miss a submarine with a nuke than it is to miss a missile silo. Don't take away my favorite nuking tool. UEF has the tac nuke and I believe it should stay that way, perhaps buff the damn thing so its worth building over normal TML or shield.

[Mycen]

NOPE NOPE NOPE! Strat subs fill an important role, stealth. sure only the cybran sub has true stealth, but it is much easier to miss a submarine with a nuke than it is to miss a missile silo. Don't take away my favorite nuking tool.

This was easily the case two balance patches ago and back. Submarines could lurk about and launch missiles just as you describe.

But lately the stealth aspect is much more understated. They can't even shoot across a 20x20, so any time you wish to nuke an enemy base when you don't have naval superiority you pretty much have to win a naval engagement in order to get your subs in range. A smart opponent will be able to spot your subs by then. (My favorite nuking tool was, essentially, taken away in the last patch. ) If you're playing on a 40x40 or an 81x81 they really do not function in a stealthy role at all - it is far too easy to notice those sonar blips while the subs are still far out of range, intercept, and destroy them. Also, who gets surprised by sub nukes? Do people actually wait to build SMD until they spot a silo? That's stupid.

I do like that the UEF tactical nuke is totally unique, but with the way people have been changing missile subs, it just makes little sense at this point to have a strategic weapon alert for something with a shorter range and less power than many conventional weapons. The current sideshow over making missile sub tactical missiles more important (why do we care so much about this secondary weapon, again?) also is indicative that the desire seems to be to shift missile subs into a more tactical role. Removing the strategic feature of their nukes and allowing them to saturate an area with missile fire in a tactical timeframe would be the natural culmination of these changes. It would also prevent them from dominating a naval engagement, because, while they would have the firepower to clear out an entire navy single-handedly, the TMD inherent to any proper naval formation would prevent them from doing immense damage without proper support.



But your response alone is enough of a reason not to implement this change right now. Obviously it is controversial.

[Zock]

It doesn't has to be uncontroversial, i just put it here because i thought it is. If there are good ideas for the sub, and enough people support it, i don't see why it shouldn't be done.

[pip]

@♣Mycen : Strat subs can move. Silos cannot move. It's not necessary to give the same long range to a unit that can move compared to a unit that cannot, especially when the moving unit cost 5000 mass less. You want to nuke at long range? use a nuke silo. You want to use sneaky strat sub and make a surprise attack? Play Cybran, their strat sub is designed for that.
And even not playing Cybran : don't tell me it's hard to hide a strat sub on the 40x40 and 81x81 maps you seem to play on. You can send t1 subs on all sides to make "sonar blips", it will impossible to check if these cheap subs are nuke subs or just regular subs. Once your missile is ready to launch and you bring your t3 sub in range, cover it with your ASF, or make a diversion with them. It's really not that complicated to use / hide them.

You seem to forget that nuke costs for strat subs were considerably reduced compared to before, and are now the same as the static launchers, and yet strat subs are considerably cheaper (10000 mass compared to 15000 mass : do you realize the difference?).

The new strat subs are designed for:
- sneaky nuke attacks from an unexpected direction (no protection).
- they can be used as a cheaper secondary launcher to back up your nuke launcher to overrun SMD with multiple nukes.
- but essentially : to kill / damage naval forces, because they can shoot close to the enemy fleet and will be much harder to dodge. They are more fleet killers than base killer now. That's intended.

If you just prefer to use strat subs like they are static nukes not requiring to be moved : build static nukes instead and protect them with shields.

[Mycen]

@♣Mycen : Strat subs can move. Silos cannot move. It's not necessary to give the same long range to a unit that can move compared to a unit that cannot, especially when the moving unit cost 5000 mass less. You want to nuke at long range? use a nuke silo. You want to use sneaky strat sub and make a surprise attack? Play Cybran, their strat sub is designed for that.

Yes, nuke subs can move, and silos cannot. But that is why silos have unlimited range while subs do not and never have. But the range they have now is just too short to make them effective strategic weapons.

And even not playing Cybran : don't tell me it's hard to hide a strat sub on the 40x40 and 81x81 maps you seem to play on. You can send t1 subs on all sides to make "sonar blips", it will impossible to check if these cheap subs are nuke subs or just regular subs. Once your missile is ready to launch and you bring your t3 sub in range, cover it with your ASF, or make a diversion with them. It's really not that complicated to use / hide them.

Not only is it not impossible to check all these blips, it's not even that difficult. Just queue up a flight of torpedo bombers to hit each blip. The one that your opponent moves to protect is the one to look out for.

Yes, you can move the sub into range once its missile is ready, but you said it yourself - you have to manage them and protect them, because it is relatively easy for a defender to neutralize them before they get into range. And it only gets easier to defend against sub launched nukes as map size increases.

In the past you could hide the subs and use them at the same time, because their range was great enough to shoot over an enemy navy and into the enemy base. Now you have to fight your way through the defending navy to hit land. Silos and subs were both long-range strategic weapons, but the silos were protected by shields and base defesnes, while the subs were protected by mobility and submersiblity. My issue is not that it is complicated or difficult to use them, it is that they are hardly strategic weapons at this point.

You seem to forget that nuke costs for strat subs were considerably reduced compared to before, and are now the same as the static launchers, and yet strat subs are considerably cheaper (10000 mass compared to 15000 mass : do you realize the difference?).

You seem to forget that missile subs require a T3 naval factory, while silos do not. Do you realize that silos can take advantage of adjacency while subs cannot? The differences in cost are appropriate for reasons aside from their different roles on the battlefield.

The new strat subs are designed for:
- sneaky nuke attacks from an unexpected direction (no protection).
- they can be used as a cheaper secondary launcher to back up your nuke launcher to overrun SMD with multiple nukes.
- but essentially : to kill / damage naval forces, because they can shoot close to the enemy fleet and will be much harder to dodge. They are more fleet killers than base killer now. That's intended.

This is exactly my point. You have transformed strategic missile subs into primarily tactical weapons. This transition should be completed, it is done halfway right now, with ugly, counterintuitive results.

[pip]

In the current mod, their tactical role is increased by a range buff to their tactical missile to be the same as a tactical missile launcher : 256. So we do intend to improve their tactical effectiveness, just with a more conventional approach that is less likely to be rejected.

But let's examine your desire to turn the sub nukes into Billies. It's not a bad idea, but there are too many problems. The Billy is a tactical nuke counterable by TMD which means it doesn't work well against normal bases, but well against land armies which don't have tmd.

T2 and t3 fleet have a lot of units equipped with TMD, so they will counter tac nukes super easily, unless you give lot of hp to these nukes, or extreme cheap price (very hard to balance by the way).
Aeon fleet would be immune to t3 subs because they would deflect the tac nuke with a single Aeon TMD on a cruiser, or battleship. They would also make it impossible for other fleet to counter their tac nuke if it's supported by just one or 2 Torrent ship with flights of 10 or 20 missiles with 2 hp each to cover the tac nuke itself. That introduces a huge imbalance, and as you stated it, it's far from uncontroversial.

Whereas now, all navies are equal in regard to strat sub nukes: there are no naval nuke defense, which precisely make strat subs excellent support units in a long t3 naval fight.

[FunkOff]

Whereas now, all navies are equal in regard to strat sub nukes: there are no naval nuke defense, which precisely make strat subs excellent support units in a long t3 naval fight.

You're right that bill nukes on SMS subs are bad, but for the wrong reasons: UEF would reign supreme because their shield boats, and billy is useless against bases for much the same reason. (aeon ship TMD isn't that good and it's easy to overload them with TMLs from subs)

That said, the nuke characteristics should be adjusted so that it's more tactically relevant.... maybe cheaper and less time in the air.

[Master_Vallex]

@pip
guess you didnt read my post in the beginning ^^
my idea was to still have it be a nuke (maybe have smds not shoot them to keep from cheap overwhelm, idk) but like acu death nuke have it make very little damage to bases, but much and often to fleets in lategame.
i can imagine some fun turn-arounds to this