Page 10 of 12


PostPosted: 17 Jun 2018, 12:19
by Turinturambar
not to mention you can easily drop t3 engies anywhere


PostPosted: 22 Jun 2018, 02:42
by 5cript
Turinturambar wrote:not to mention you can easily drop t3 engies anywhere

Ofc, true.
But you need dozens of t3 engineers for an exp now. its tedious and annoying. Especially if the problem is the terrain. Having to ferry off the shit-terrain, from within your base which is maybe filled with t1 engies for air, is simply annoying or aggrevating. And then transports can f*** up the pickup point, having to wait for t3 engineers to walk to them, because of bad terrain.

This all sounds so hypothetical, but Its commonplace. Especially with air experimentals.

Or you want to build something secretly someplace else, less scouted or within a stealth field. ferry over 30 t3 engineers is not great.
I also will now add BP Upgrade to my RAS ACUs where possible, and I will build SACUs with bp upgrade much sooner, because spamming t3 engineers to get experimentals is annoying as f***.

This all might be less relevant to 1v1 gameplay, but gap and setons are a thing. look at open games and tell me its not 80% of open maps or more.

Also tell me to get RAS SACUS to build stuff, and I will start calculating the cost of the RAS SACUs.
Spending 2 GCs worth of mass to build a gc is not the way to go.

I also dont understand, why the argument "to make t1 engineers and t2 engineers and RAS ACUS more viable" is a thing. Why should they be the better pick at experimental spamfest stage?


PostPosted: 22 Jun 2018, 02:53
by Farmsletje
The whole point of the nerf was to make t4's build slower and now the complaints are that... they build slower?


PostPosted: 22 Jun 2018, 02:58
by FtXCommando
I don't really see the confusion with RAS ACUs becoming more viable. They are ridiculously inefficient for increasing your eco. T4 buildpower increase gives an additional consideration when factoring whether mass fab/SACUs are the better path to go for your late game eco.

Also you can consider it tedious and boring, but you aren't providing any actual solutions here. T4s required changes because keeping their original buildtime would mean they would crush attempts at building up a T3 push because they outclass T3 far more than they did before. I mean you could play games in old balance where you scout, then your mirror starts a T4, and when your next scout is over their base 40 seconds later the T4 is 60% done. That's always been way more tedious and annoying than having to make an additional 9-12 t3 engies in my eyes.

Also just because gap and sentons are "80% of open games" doesn't mean the game is balanced around them.


PostPosted: 22 Jun 2018, 03:09
by 5cript
What I am saying is: I can live with lower build speeds, sufficient amounts of other people have decided its better and complaining now is a little late.

The thing is, that T3 engineers have always pissed me off and I only ever got a few for t3 mex (replacement), SAMS, T3 Power, or to get a Quantum Gateway, or to build an experimental with help of what other engineers are close, including ACU.

But in the case that I decide to build an experimental, I need buildpower and lots. And that has to get places. Safe places, terrain friendly places, .... I repeat myself.
This is where I want to use more t3 engineers, but they take forever to get there without an army of air shipping.
The game has horrible pathfinding and horribly slow t3 buildpower, except for the ACU and SACUs. The latter of which are expensive and not as efficient as t3 engineers and take forever to get. This is time I probably dont want to invest on several maps.
Cybran and UEF Players wont notice a thing, since they have drones.

(Its especially bad with the CZAR, the Tempest, Megaliths on coast and naval sites, Ahwassa)
Game Enders weren't nerfed, but they honestly wouldn't have been affected much, because this is where SACUs are common anyway.


PostPosted: 22 Jun 2018, 03:17
by FtXCommando
Then you need to work on your ability to plan out what exactly you expect to need during the game. Obviously you are going to feel punished if you only have 5 t3 engies and realize that you need a T4 NOW. You need to look for the signs that you need to make a transition to T4 build capacity before it's too late now.


PostPosted: 22 Jun 2018, 03:27
by 5cript
I still dont understand why it is necessary, that SACUs (fastest) traverse 10km in 3:35 and t3 engineers in ~6min.
Whats the balancing aspect?

(The original T3 Engineer, Steam balance takes around 4:30 to make the 10km(, but has less BP if I remember right.))

EDIT: And to your advice: I am adjusting... with t3 engineers....... which suck
Even the Scathis is faster.

Mass invested in engineers / buildpower is the same for alle engineers, but we get more health and have to pay for that health with mobility. But its to drastic IMHO. 1.4 movement speed is a snail.

I dont want to invest 2.7 times the mass in SACUs (BP Upgraded, which is worth it ofc, otherwise its 3.5 the investment and 11.5 times for stock RAS ACUs. Who builds RAS ACUs for buildpower???) for buildpower to build experimentals, because t3 engineers take their sweet ass time. t1 engineers clutter like hell.

Raidability and "running away" arguments are also nonsense, because you get t3 engineers when... t3 units are on the field, and except for slippers all of the factions have fast as hell raiding units.
And you "cannot" run away from air.

I'd even take the 560HP (Aeon) for 1.7 movement speed (21% more speed for 21% health exchanged). It would be worth it.
It cannot just be a small minority that thinks T3 engineers are slow AF...


PostPosted: 22 Jun 2018, 05:40
by TheKoopa
You are literally the only one


PostPosted: 22 Jun 2018, 07:20
by 5cript
Which is already false if you read the chat.
Dont assume your view is the penultimate to absolute truth.

Also why is it that nobody builds larger quantities of t3 engies?

I wonder what the Equilibrium values for t3 engineers are (move speed), prolly even slower.


PostPosted: 22 Jun 2018, 08:49
by PsychoBoB
TheKoopa wrote:You are literally the only one

Nope, i am the other one! He's right! Engies at higher tech levels should be more viable and not only because of more HP and BP.

The Engimod, which is a real improvement for the game, adresses buildpower problems for building units all around the map and to bring higher tech units faster to places where they are needed.
But there is no improvement of BP for in general. Engies of higher tech levels should be a bit faster and have a bit more buildrange to fill this gap. (see

@Balanceteam & Pros: Please give me good reasons not to test it or what the resulting problems are.

@Equilibriumteam: Any comments? ;)