30 replies to this topic

[BlackAbsence]

In my mind, a units statistics should be proportionate to its value, its production cost.

So, simply because of the cost, if conscripts are $50 and G.I.s are $100, it's safe to say that G.I.s should be twice as powerful than conscripts, right?

My idea, about the G.I., is all about a cost to power ratio.

 

G.I. changes:

- When un-deployed, he would have the power of a unit with a cost of $75, even though he costs $100. This makes him 25% less efficient, in comparison to other standard infantry, in this state.

- When deployed, he would have the power of a unit with a cost of $150, even though he costs $100. This makes him 50% more efficient, in comparison to other standard infantry, in this state.

- When deploying/un-deploying, 4 seconds 2 seconds of time is required. Within this time period, the G.I. is defenceless.

- The speed of the G.I. is slightly decreased by 1 speed point (or whatever).

 

With these changes, the G.I. becomes the best defending t1 infantry in the game, yet the worst t1 attacking infantry in the game, because you can always intercept them when they're deploying/un-deploying in Mexican-stand-off situations.

 

What do you think?

Edited by BlackAbsence, 24 May 2018 - 01:02 PM.

[DrMaggot]

4 seconds deployment would be waaayyyyy too long.

[BlackAbsence]

4 seconds deployment would be waaayyyyy too long.

They really need to be punished for having such an efficiency advantage. +50% amounts to a lot, in large numbers.

Maybe 3 or 3.5 seconds.

[Handepsilon]

You had me until that deploying part. Not even boidmachine take that much time, or any deployables. Did you know that static defenses are not that much useful in PvP? Mobility is a big factor in defense, and removing that is how you get a terrible unit to defend your base. That deploy time will automatically classify GI as an overall worst infantry ever existed in MO.

Edited by Handepsilon, 23 May 2018 - 05:18 PM.

[BlackAbsence]

You had me until that deploying part. Not even boidmachine take that much time, or any deployables. Did you know that static defenses are not that much useful in PvP? Mobility is a big factor in defense, and removing that is how you get a terrible unit to defend your base. That deploy time will automatically classify GI as an overall worst infantry ever existed in MO.

 

The worst, you say?

 

Let's say two teams are limited to $7.5k in an early infantry-only mode. One is Allied, the other Epsilon.

The Allied player can make $7.5k/$100=75 G.I.s whereas the Epsilon player can make $7.5k/$150=50 Initiates.

75 G.I.s have a net-power of (75)$150=$11250 (when deployed) whereas the initiates have a net-power of (50)$150=$7500.

The power difference is a staggering $11250-$7500=+$3750 in favor for the G.I.s.

Now just imagine that with $15k. That would be a +$7500 difference in power, for exactly the same price.

 

And they're not "static defences"; they're mobile defences.

 

The only downside for the G.I.s is that they need to be placed in advance and prepared.

Otherwise the un-deployed G.I.s will have a net-power of (75)$75=$5625 which is awful.

 

Edit: G.I.s are also built quicker than initiates, right? (I'm not too sure)

Edited by BlackAbsence, 23 May 2018 - 06:18 PM.

[Handepsilon]

A mobile defense that can't shoot properly without spending 3-4 seconds of being defenseless and immobile in order to get the guaranteed firepower is just as good as dead. And what good would they be if they get outrunned by infantries trying to maneuver around them? You did say their speed will be slower, no?

And you clearly underestimate Initiates. They're by far the only T1 Anti Personnel that can actually go against Knightframes with good winning odds. Atm, they can pretty much wipe out GIs quickly. If we go with your deploy speed, they can exploit that immobility by pinching them out one by one before all of them can reposition themselves into places where they can all shoot at once. I'd say even mass Conscripts would win if that was the case.

[FELITH]

Knightframes are outranging them. so speed nerf, 4 sec deployment make this even worse.

GI should be the one who outranges Knightframe.
I think GI range is already fine if compared to Conscripts, Initiates. you know what I'm gonna say 

Edited by FELITH, 23 May 2018 - 11:38 PM.

[BlackAbsence]

A mobile defense that can't shoot properly without spending 3-4 seconds of being defenseless and immobile in order to get the guaranteed firepower is just as good as dead.

Unless it's deployed and getting 50% more bang-for-its-buck while also being at a good location where they never really have to move, like at some cliff entrance or something, but yeah I know that's not always the case. I gave it a bit more thought and do realise that mobility is good, but these G.I.s can't have it all due to their efficiency advantage but I can at least lessen their restrictions.

 

Knightframes are outranging them. so speed nerf, 4 sec deployment make this even worse.
GI should be the one who outranges Knightframe.

I had no idea. That is a problem...

 

Problems:

1 - Other infantry can "get around" G.I.s, on open maps.

2 - Knight frames can out grange G.I.s.

 

Probable solutions:

1 - Make their deploy maybe 2 seconds.

2 - Maybe make their range match when they're deployed?

 

Here's a TIMER to give you guys an accurate perspective of the deploy duration.

Edited by BlackAbsence, 24 May 2018 - 12:59 AM.

[StolenTech]

Here's a TIMER to give you guys an accurate perspective of the deploy duration.

5 minutes ? o.O

[GuardianGI]

Making GIs spend 4 seconds to deploy/undeploy? Did you even account for the possibilities of stuff like siege infantries turning them into practice targets instead?

[CLAlstar]

- When deploying/un-deploying, 4 seconds of time is required. Within this time period, the G.I. is defenceless.

 

 

- The speed of the G.I. is slightly decreased by 1 speed point (or whatever).

 

 

>making calculations that do not help your case at all because 4 sec delpoy on GI's make them die to enemy infantry/units/anything while they are undeployed/undeploying

And here i thought that Kivz's ideas were the peak of intelligence. Sadly, you managed to beat him.

Your logic of "costs more = more damage" makes no sense aswell. Might aswell just make Charon Tank costs 20k credits, if some people know what i mean.


Back to point. Every infantry will lose to Kekframes if you decide to just amove your stuff into them or just wait and hope that your problems will solve themselves. You can perfectly fend off kekframes even with conscripts in early stages of game if you split them to minimalize the splash damage. Even WITH price calculus.

[mevitar]

Infantry deploy time is something that is tied to the infantry gfx, and it cannot be changed. Even if changing it was an option, 4 seconds (at what game speed? 6? 4?) is far too long anyway.

[BlackAbsence]

5 minutes ? o.O

No, click on the timer then type 2.

 

1 - Your logic of "costs more = more damage" makes no sense aswell.

2 - 4 sec delpoy on GI's make them die to enemy infantry/units/anything while they are undeployed/undeploying

1 -You really think that's wrong logic? Well let's just make megalodons $100 then *sarcasm*

And I never said that specifically. I stated that a units statistics should be proportionate to its value, its production cost.

A statistic could be a variety of things other than damage too.

2 - If you're stupid and use them incorrectly much like any other unit, yeah.

 

 

So if 4 seconds is so abysmal, how about 2?

Edited by BlackAbsence, 24 May 2018 - 01:26 PM.

[BlackAbsence]

Making GIs spend 4 seconds to deploy/undeploy? Did you even account for the possibilities of stuff like siege infantries turning them into practice targets instead?

That's the Pyros, Seals, and Dune Riders thing. They're suppose to be anti infantry. Why should G.I.s be able to kill them? they shouldn't.

If you want to counter those guys, use anti-inf vehicles. 

Edited by BlackAbsence, 24 May 2018 - 01:28 PM.

[Endless]

[NorthFireZ]

So what you’re saying is you want to make G.Is into somewhat like the RA2 counterpart with the slow movement speed and cost efficiency but just completely counteract it out with a god awful deploy time making it no better than let’s say a dig in riflemen in Kane’s wrath. Sounds like a unessary change.

[GuardianGI]

Lemme double check something... I said siege infantries, and you dragged Seals into it?
Are you sure you even get what I'm saying entirely?

[BlackAbsence]

Seals are anti-structure/infantry, dude. Oh, I'm sorry, were you talking about prism troops which do nothing to infantry then? Wow, how could I have missed that?

 

Oh, I'm sorry, you want a better deploy time? Yeah, let's just make them just as versatile and 50% better than everyone else. That sounds fair.

How about you use your brain and set them up beforehand instead of wanting to push with them. I'm done repeating myself.

[Damfoos]

I do think T1 infantry should be more effective as anti-infantry, to not become completely unappealing once T2 anti-infantry and then T3 stuff steps in. While KFs are always relevant, conscripts can be used as cheap fodder (yet I don't see people bothering with them in late game, it's easier to get something more useful), Initiates are powerful on their own and hit instantly unlike Duneriders, GI's heavy MG doesn't seem that useful once you get SEALs (which also do more damage to tanks with their SMG than GI's HMG lol), especially considering how bad it is vs plate armor. I'd like to see RedRes GIs and Conscripts in MO, those are actually worth using outside garrisons unless some serious anti-infantry weapons appear. But I think changing them like this, with a 4 seconds deploy time, is overkill, because while it turns them into movable defences, it also makes them very vulnerable to everything that is not infantry. So you won't quickly relocate them to escape from, say, gatling tanks, without losing a few, and from what I see in people's games, standoffs where infantry blobs dance around each trying to not let the other blob pass happen quite often. This change will make them very vulnerable to harassment, and even a 150% firepower increase will not be enough to compensate. I'd rather not experiment like that on a T1 basic infantry, something that can cost you your early game.

Edited by Damfoos, 24 May 2018 - 03:03 PM.

[Handepsilon]

Oh, I'm sorry, were you talking about prism troops which do nothing to infantry then?

 

That's exactly his point. With your changes, these 'prism troops which do nothing to infantry' will be able to kill GIs with little hassle. See where I'm getting at? Basically you're turning GI into an infantry that can't even do his job right and gets countered by something that's he's supposed to be countering.

 

Leave GI alone. It's good enough already. Why not tackle something more problematic like... I dunno... Godsbane for example?