Tech protection for all mk 3 tech

Cadillac · Post by **Cadillac** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 4:59 am

Make it unstealable for the team by all means but if I shoot someone in the back (where else do you shoot people??) long enough to get mini 3 to drop after I pod their ass then I deserve to be able to mount that bad boy and go to town on some mo' suckras.

Mastametz · Post by **Mastametz** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 5:02 am

Cookie Monster wrote:QUOTE (Cookie Monster @ Mar 25 2012, 09:59 PM) Make it unstealable for the team by all means but if I shoot someone in the back (where else do you shoot people??) long enough to get mini 3 to drop after I pod their ass then I deserve to be able to mount that bad boy and go to town on some mo' suckras.

I think we are all in agreement on that point.

Cadillac · Post by **Cadillac** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 5:13 am

Yeah I know, I just wanted to say "go to town on some mo' suckras".

Also continue the pretence that I can't read so I can continue to use it as an excuse for my failures

DasSmiter · Post by **DasSmiter** » Mon Mar 26, 2012 6:05 pm

I think my biggest issue with making Mk3 tech unstealable (besides the things brought up by MW) is the hvy int

Going from enh to adv only Exp receives an increase in firepower JUST through researching the Adv level version of their fighter. A mini2 int versus a mini 2 hvy int is a tough battle for most, add mini 3 to both sides and it becomes something of a knife fight (only the hvy int is wearing leather cuffs I guess?). A mini 2 int versus a mini 3 hvy int though...

Sup receives this boost at the Enh level (which is part of the reason ints start to slip in dogfight supremacy if the enh phase drags on too long and the Sup team can get tech) while Tac never gets anything of the sort. I think at this point we're safe ignoring our red headed step child of a tech path. SF already pop so quickly versus Hunter 2 and Sniper 1 that the only real benefit to the SF small craft comes from increased cloak efficiency and efficacy.

Just considering the mirror games where both teams go the same tech path we can see that protecting Mk3 tech provides a massive domination for the first team to go Adv Exp, but less of an advantage for whichever team decides to go for Adv Sup or Adv Tac quickly. With mirrored Sup there is a lag time while they purchase all the tech and GA needed to establish a complete domination (time that the opposing team can use to mine for Adv tech and then bam they can steal all the stuff again), while with mirror Tac there's not going to be any miners left anyways. Also consider the Econ GA in Adv Exp and it becomes an incredible steamroll for the first team to get heavies up.

Overall I think I'm against it, but since the forum poll here shows that most people seem to enjoy the idea I'll do a full ASGS poll. If there's not an incredibly negative response it'll probably go through in CC16.

Malicious Wraith · Post by **Malicious Wraith** » Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:10 pm

The tyranny of the masses.

NightRychune · Post by **NightRychune** » Tue Mar 27, 2012 6:11 pm

fed didn't build a home tp as ic on nova

his opinion is invalid

Adept · Post by **Adept** » Tue Mar 27, 2012 9:35 pm

NightRychune wrote:QUOTE (NightRychune @ Mar 27 2012, 09:11 PM) fed didn't build a home tp as ic on nova

his opinion is invalid

And so our past mistakes haunt us. A lesson for us all.

Spunkmeyer · Post by **Spunkmeyer** » Tue Mar 27, 2012 10:22 pm

NightRychune wrote:QUOTE (NightRychune @ Mar 25 2012, 11:30 PM) if your team has no money compared to the other team, you lose. if your team can't execute, you lose. if your team has money and they can execute, you win! that's how allegiance works!

Yeah but you would be making it more towards "if your team has no money and and the other team can't execute you are still gonna lose because of the huge difference in tech power".

It's basically violating the principle of giving the loser a chance to come back. The game will be even more of a case of teching up first, and we'll see more resigns. Also consider how long it takes to get a game going in the first place. And then someone falls behind, resigns, another 10 minutes of dead time. Rinse, lather, repeat. That's the scenario this change is going to make more common.

Adept · Post by **Adept** » Tue Mar 27, 2012 10:56 pm

I'd hope it means more decisive gameplay, and less mk1 tech fights when both sides went for the same path.

Spunkmeyer · Post by **Spunkmeyer** » Tue Mar 27, 2012 11:06 pm

Adept wrote:QUOTE (Adept @ Mar 27 2012, 05:56 PM) I'd hope it means more decisive gameplay, and less mk1 tech fights when both sides went for the same path.

If they are closely matched, and get there about the same time, yes... and that's why most people are voting for it I suspect. Thing is, it doesn't really matter in that situation. If you get there at the same time, then you are both at advanced level so the situation doesn't apply.

If someone gains an early economic advantage however (like, oh I don't know, a few miners dying in quick succession - ever seen one of those?) then it'll be very tempting to resign once people figure out it means mg3 heavies vs mg2 regulars for a while.