There is like 70m cost difference between static shield and mobile shield. Last thing i heard is that static def has a cost efficiency of 1.5? That means static shield is a bit underpowered i guess.
+0 / -0
|
The main difference is that mobile shield costs 33% more energy to charge. This isn't that much of a difference so yea something else could be done.
+0 / -0
|
I still don't like the accessability of shields. Remove static shield from build menus and make it deploy-only from mobile shield. Effectively requiring users to have a shieldbot lab to get shields.
+0 / -0
|
I'd rather have a larger, more expensive static shield, and have the mobile shield be factory exclusive. You can still use the big one to stop concerted artillery, but need the shield factory if you want to make a shield ball.
+0 / -0
|
Ya if you do something remove shield morp and cloaker morp.
+0 / -0
|
+1 for Jasper Eraser has a too small radius for it's cost+energyConsumtion. But Aspis is fine - walking shields need more micro and dies easier to bombs/snipers just because they move with your army to undiscovered area.
+0 / -0
|
+1 Jasper. Most people, when wanting a mobile shield, just build a static one and then spend half a minute morphing it. Would be more interesting if shieldbot fac was actually required for this.
+0 / -0
|
Aw. I do that ALL the time. Light veh. wolverines/slashers work magnificently when they have a mobile shield with them. Ticks and roaches are devastating with a mobile cloaker. Definitely worth the e cost.
+0 / -0
|
I like common use of utility things such as shields and cloakers. If the units were restricted to a factory or larger and more expensive they would see less use. Eraser is that expensive because mobile cloaking is really really powerful.
+0 / -0
|
I like common use of utility things, I don't like easy accessability to both shields and cloakers at the same time, anywhere on the map you have cons. I feel like it cheapens their coolness, and strategic value of getting mobile versions in their respective labs.
+0 / -0
|
^I don't ever build the mobile versions in the lab. Even when I have a cloaky bot plant and want to get cloaky ticks, I plonk down a cloak tower and morph it, rather than take up build time in the lab. Cloak towers and shields are support/utility units. They're not as important as those few glaives you need *now*.
+0 / -0
|
What about giving Eraser a 20 energy requirement bigger radius and removing morp.
+0 / -0
|
Radius is already big enough.
+0 / -0
|
Someone added mobile shield and cloaker to their factories for completeness. I don't know any other purpose for their presence there because I rarely produce them from the factory. Energy drain is more powerful than equivalent extra metal cost for a few reasons.
-
If you build energy to support a shield only the cost of the unit is in danger.
-
If you lose the unit you don't have to rebuild the energy to support it (like *craft supply).
-
If the unit's ability is disabled you can use the energy elsewhere, maybe for overdrive.
-
Energy drain tends to make units particularly expensive early game but the energy drain can almost be ignored late game. Energy drain is mainly to prevent rushes.
The radius is not increasing because this version was nerfed to balance cloaked armies, particularly explosive ones. Low radius puts Eraser in danger so it is possible to find and kill.
+0 / -0
|
And before that someone merged the two different factions so you weren't limited to either shield or cloak depending on the faction you chose. (Ignoring for the moment that you could steal or borrow technology; it didn't really happen that often anyway) And before that someone gave intermorphing between static and mobile versions, so it became silly easy to get a mobile version without the required factory. >> I don't know any other purpose for their presence there because I rarely produce them from the factory. If shields and cloakers were only accessible from their factories, then people would build them from the factories. It's not like they would suddenly become useless. They would just be a little harder to get. Right now its just much easier to plop one on the front like and then morph. That is silly. And a cloakybot or shieldbot factory would be more interesting because their tech would suddenly be more exclusive.
+0 / -0
|
|
|
Bottom line pretty much being, a mobile cloaker is better made by dropping a static and morphing, than made from the cloaky bot factory. This we can all seem to agree on. And imho, this is counterintuitive and silly.
+0 / -0
|
I would like to have a direct weapons factory and an indirect weapons factory instead. Felon is to much a direct fire unit, and the shield factory is not the only indirect bot factory ( Puppy, Firewalker, Jump, .., ) - it need more units.
+0 / -0
|
I think shields and cloaks being available to any builder makes them much better support units, just like striders being buildable anywhere would. That should stay. Mobile versions should be removed from factories for less unit clutter. The more units in a factory, the more confusing for newbies. Static vs mobile balances seem fine, imo.
+0 / -0
|
I don't really think factory clutter (<=12 units each) would be more confusing than static clutter (~60?). And being available to every builder doesn't make them better, it makes the more accessable. Which, IMHO, takes away from the strategy a bit. It's too easy to say "hey, cloaker would be nice right now", and almost instantly have one. In starcraft you can never have things so easy, you need to plan your way to get them. You don't do so well with simply impulsive play. I would settle for removing mobile <-> static morph. So you can get a static anytime, but you need the factory for the mobile version.
+0 / -0
|
