| 1 |
[b]Summary (TLDR)[/b]
|
1 |
[b]Summary (TLDR)[/b]
|
| 2 |
Hacksaw has a health/cost ratio on par with chainsaw, but has significantly lower health/cost than the similarly priced razor.
|
2 |
Hacksaw has a health/cost ratio on par with chainsaw, but has significantly lower health/cost than the similarly priced razor.
|
| 3 |
\n
|
3 |
\n
|
| 4 |
Hacksaw has dps/cost ratio that slightly outperforms chainsaw, but is only about 60% of the dps/cost of the razor.
|
4 |
Hacksaw has dps/cost ratio that slightly outperforms chainsaw, but is only about 60% of the dps/cost of the razor.
|
| 5 |
\n
|
5 |
\n
|
| 6 |
Hacksaw
MASSIVELY
under-performs
both
the
razor
and
chainsaw
in
area
coverage/cost,
which
I
consider
to
be
one
of
the
most
critical
aspects
of
static
AA
performance.
|
6 |
Hacksaw
MASSIVELY
under-performs
both
the
razor
and
chainsaw
in
area
coverage/cost,
which
is
one
of
the
most
critical
aspects
of
static
AA
performance.
|
| 7 |
\n
|
7 |
\n
|
| 8 |
\n
|
8 |
\n
|
| 9 |
\n
|
9 |
\n
|
| 10 |
[b]Introduction[/b]
|
10 |
[b]Introduction[/b]
|
| 11 |
I suggest giving the hacksaw a buff or rework.
|
11 |
I suggest giving the hacksaw a buff or rework.
|
| 12 |
\n
|
12 |
\n
|
| 13 |
Generally, static defenses are designed to be highly cost effective against mobile units, as they cannot move themselves. Further, dedicated AA units (both mobile and static) are designed to be highly cost effective against air targets, as they sacrifice the ability to target ground. As a result, one would expect static AA to be one of the most cost effective units against suitable air targets.
|
13 |
Generally, static defenses are designed to be highly cost effective against mobile units, as they cannot move themselves. Further, dedicated AA units (both mobile and static) are designed to be highly cost effective against air targets, as they sacrifice the ability to target ground. As a result, one would expect static AA to be one of the most cost effective units against suitable air targets.
|
| 14 |
\n
|
14 |
\n
|
| 15 |
Hacksaw is tagged as an anti-bomber static AA, however when bombers are an issue, they are rarely used.
|
15 |
Hacksaw is tagged as an anti-bomber static AA, however when bombers are an issue, they are rarely used.
|
| 16 |
\n
|
16 |
\n
|
| 17 |
They can kill a phoenix or raven in a single two-shot burst or two of them can take down a thunderbird or licho.
|
17 |
They can kill a phoenix or raven in a single two-shot burst or two of them can take down a thunderbird or licho.
|
| 18 |
\n
|
18 |
\n
|
| 19 |
In the case of countering ravens, the enemy will typically send many at a single time, so to effectively counter the entire bombing run, a 1:1 ratio of hacksaw:raven will be needed. In this case, the defender is spending 220m to counter a 300m unit.
|
19 |
In the case of countering ravens, the enemy will typically send many at a single time, so to effectively counter the entire bombing run, a 1:1 ratio of hacksaw:raven will be needed. In this case, the defender is spending 220m to counter a 300m unit.
|
| 20 |
\n
|
20 |
\n
|
| 21 |
I'll be comparing the hacksaw to the razor and chainsaw across three categories, all with respect to building cost.
|
21 |
I'll be comparing the hacksaw to the razor and chainsaw across three categories, all with respect to building cost.
|
| 22 |
\n
|
22 |
\n
|
| 23 |
\n
|
23 |
\n
|
| 24 |
\n
|
24 |
\n
|
| 25 |
[b]1) Range: [/b]
|
25 |
[b]1) Range: [/b]
|
| 26 |
Because most static AA is so cost effective, typically air players will avoid it, so that most AA serves more as an area denial measure rather than in direct combat. As a result, range is critically important, as it determines the coverage area. The hacksaw struggles due to it's terrible range. See the stats below, with area coverage/cost being the most important:
|
26 |
Because most static AA is so cost effective, typically air players will avoid it, so that most AA serves more as an area denial measure rather than in direct combat. As a result, range is critically important, as it determines the coverage area. The hacksaw struggles due to it's terrible range. See the stats below, with area coverage/cost being the most important:
|
| 27 |
\n
|
27 |
\n
|
| 28 |
Hacksaw
|
28 |
Hacksaw
|
| 29 |
Cost = 220m
|
29 |
Cost = 220m
|
| 30 |
Range = 490 elmo
|
30 |
Range = 490 elmo
|
| 31 |
Area coverage = 750k elmo^2
|
31 |
Area coverage = 750k elmo^2
|
| 32 |
Area coverage/cost ratio = 3400 elmo^2/metal
|
32 |
Area coverage/cost ratio = 3400 elmo^2/metal
|
| 33 |
\n
|
33 |
\n
|
| 34 |
Razor
|
34 |
Razor
|
| 35 |
Cost = 280m
|
35 |
Cost = 280m
|
| 36 |
Range = 1040 elmo
|
36 |
Range = 1040 elmo
|
| 37 |
Area coverage = 3.4M elmo^2
|
37 |
Area coverage = 3.4M elmo^2
|
| 38 |
Area coverage/cost ratio = 12100 elmo^2/metal
|
38 |
Area coverage/cost ratio = 12100 elmo^2/metal
|
| 39 |
\n
|
39 |
\n
|
| 40 |
Chainsaw
|
40 |
Chainsaw
|
| 41 |
Cost = 900m
|
41 |
Cost = 900m
|
| 42 |
Range = 1800 elmo
|
42 |
Range = 1800 elmo
|
| 43 |
Area coverage = 10.1M elmo^2
|
43 |
Area coverage = 10.1M elmo^2
|
| 44 |
Area coverage/cost ratio = 11300 elmo^2/metal
|
44 |
Area coverage/cost ratio = 11300 elmo^2/metal
|
| 45 |
\n
|
45 |
\n
|
| 46 |
\n
|
46 |
\n
|
| 47 |
\n
|
47 |
\n
|
| 48 |
[b]2) Health: [/b]
|
48 |
[b]2) Health: [/b]
|
| 49 |
When comparing health, razor and chainsaw have two different methods for staying alive. Razor have high health and armor, allowing them to safely be placed in front lines, whereas chainsaws are more fragile, but use superior range to stay alive. Hacksaw has neither range nor health to stay alive. See calculations below:
|
49 |
When comparing health, razor and chainsaw have two different methods for staying alive. Razor have high health and armor, allowing them to safely be placed in front lines, whereas chainsaws are more fragile, but use superior range to stay alive. Hacksaw has neither range nor health to stay alive. See calculations below:
|
| 50 |
\n
|
50 |
\n
|
| 51 |
Hacksaw
|
51 |
Hacksaw
|
| 52 |
Cost = 220m
|
52 |
Cost = 220m
|
| 53 |
Health = 580
|
53 |
Health = 580
|
| 54 |
Health/Cost = 2.64 health/metal
|
54 |
Health/Cost = 2.64 health/metal
|
| 55 |
\n
|
55 |
\n
|
| 56 |
Razor
|
56 |
Razor
|
| 57 |
Cost = 280m
|
57 |
Cost = 280m
|
| 58 |
Health = 3000 (12000 closed)
|
58 |
Health = 3000 (12000 closed)
|
| 59 |
Health/Cost = 10.7 (42.8 closed)health/metal
|
59 |
Health/Cost = 10.7 (42.8 closed)health/metal
|
| 60 |
\n
|
60 |
\n
|
| 61 |
Chainsaw
|
61 |
Chainsaw
|
| 62 |
Cost = 900m
|
62 |
Cost = 900m
|
| 63 |
Health = 2500
|
63 |
Health = 2500
|
| 64 |
Health/Cost = 2.77 health/metal
|
64 |
Health/Cost = 2.77 health/metal
|
| 65 |
\n
|
65 |
\n
|
| 66 |
\n
|
66 |
\n
|
| 67 |
\n
|
67 |
\n
|
| 68 |
[b]3) DPS: [/b]
|
68 |
[b]3) DPS: [/b]
|
| 69 |
The major counterargument to looking at DPS here is that hacksaw have incredibly high burst damage, however, as mentioned in the intro, to stop a raven attack, a 1:1 ratio of hacksaw to raven is needed, which is typically not practical. Additionally, as bombing attacks become larger in size, or more spread out over time, high DPS AA defences will outperform high alpha/low dps ones. See dps comparisons below, again accounting for cost ratio:
|
69 |
The major counterargument to looking at DPS here is that hacksaw have incredibly high burst damage, however, as mentioned in the intro, to stop a raven attack, a 1:1 ratio of hacksaw to raven is needed, which is typically not practical. Additionally, as bombing attacks become larger in size, or more spread out over time, high DPS AA defences will outperform high alpha/low dps ones. See dps comparisons below, again accounting for cost ratio:
|
| 70 |
\n
|
70 |
\n
|
| 71 |
\n
|
71 |
\n
|
| 72 |
Hacksaw
|
72 |
Hacksaw
|
| 73 |
Cost = 220m
|
73 |
Cost = 220m
|
| 74 |
DPS = 66
|
74 |
DPS = 66
|
| 75 |
DPS/Cost = 0.3 dps/cost
|
75 |
DPS/Cost = 0.3 dps/cost
|
| 76 |
\n
|
76 |
\n
|
| 77 |
Razor
|
77 |
Razor
|
| 78 |
Cost = 280m
|
78 |
Cost = 280m
|
| 79 |
DPS = 149
|
79 |
DPS = 149
|
| 80 |
DPS/Cost = 0.53 dps/cost
|
80 |
DPS/Cost = 0.53 dps/cost
|
| 81 |
\n
|
81 |
\n
|
| 82 |
Chainsaw
|
82 |
Chainsaw
|
| 83 |
Cost = 900m
|
83 |
Cost = 900m
|
| 84 |
DPS = 225
|
84 |
DPS = 225
|
| 85 |
DPS/Cost = 0.25 dps/cost
|
85 |
DPS/Cost = 0.25 dps/cost
|
| 86 |
\n
|
86 |
\n
|
| 87 |
\n
|
87 |
\n
|
| 88 |
\n
|
88 |
\n
|
| 89 |
[b]Possible Solutions[/b]
|
89 |
[b]Possible Solutions[/b]
|
| 90 |
Option 1:
|
90 |
Option 1:
|
| 91 |
This is a more conservative option. Buff health to give a bit more front-line toughness and allow for tanking of a single raven bomb. Give a slight range buff to improve area coverage.
|
91 |
This is a more conservative option. Buff health to give a bit more front-line toughness and allow for tanking of a single raven bomb. Give a slight range buff to improve area coverage.
|
| 92 |
\n
|
92 |
\n
|
| 93 |
health 580 ---> 850
|
93 |
health 580 ---> 850
|
| 94 |
range 490 elmo ---> 600 elmo
|
94 |
range 490 elmo ---> 600 elmo
|
| 95 |
\n
|
95 |
\n
|
| 96 |
Option 2:
|
96 |
Option 2:
|
| 97 |
Really focus on the hacksaw's strength: burst damage. Buff damage to allow for a single one to kill a licho, without affecting DPS. This will make hacksaw a dedicated anti-heavybomber. This can be easily countered with use of lighter craft, but still gives hacksaw a niche use.
|
97 |
Really focus on the hacksaw's strength: burst damage. Buff damage to allow for a single one to kill a licho, without affecting DPS. This will make hacksaw a dedicated anti-heavybomber. This can be easily countered with use of lighter craft, but still gives hacksaw a niche use.
|
| 98 |
damage 500x2 ---> 1000x2
|
98 |
damage 500x2 ---> 1000x2
|
| 99 |
reload 15s ---> 30s
|
99 |
reload 15s ---> 30s
|
| 100 |
\n
|
100 |
\n
|
| 101 |
Option 3:
|
101 |
Option 3:
|
| 102 |
Remove hacksaw. It currently underperforms other AA by so much, it has no use in it's current state.
|
102 |
Remove hacksaw. It currently underperforms other AA by so much, it has no use in it's current state.
|
| 103 |
\n
|
103 |
\n
|
| 104 |
\n
|
104 |
\n
|
| 105 |
Thank you for reading! Let me know what you think!
|
105 |
Thank you for reading! Let me know what you think!
|
Hacksaw Discussion