REPLAY - TEC Rebels VS TEC Loyalists and balancing discussion

Honestly, while the TEC loyalists do certainly need some love, I don't think it's a reasonable expectation to really go "all in" on defense at the expense of your economy and do well.

Frankly even the TEC loyalists should be stingy and put down the absolute minimum amount of defenses necessary to hold a planet(just like everyone else)- their defensive perks should just makes them able to hold points more reliable with said minimum defenses.

Honestly the TEC loyal Eco is only really worse then the rebels in games of pure eco where TAR is an option, so I don't think that is so much the main issue.

The real problems for the TEC loyals are IMO the following:

1). Weak titan.    The Ankylon is quite underwhelming, and honestly is the main reason their offense is so pathetic- offensive techs aren't really key- having all the essential ship types reasonably adept at offense however is.  

2).  Lack of reliable gamechangers.  Starbases are too prohibitively expensive to reliably get much play out of twin fortresses without setting your fleet or econ behind- and like every other race, building too many starbases is a great way to lose the game by means of said setbacks.  Novalith Deregulation is close to the mark, but still takes too long to really break the enemy's economy to make up for the TEC loyal's lack of offense.

3).  The tech loyalist research tree is rather top heavy- almsot all of their decent techs require 5 or more labs.  often the most key points to defend are in the early game- and at that stage they don't really have anything over the tec rebels going for them.  Some of their techs don't anywhere near warrant their tier- a good example being hardened defenses:  + hull and armor for tactical structures only at T6?  The Advent can add shields to all of their structures at T3; the Vasari rebels get a tech giving a only slightly lower hull/armor boost to EVERYTHING at T8.  All that said though, #1 & #2 are the primary issues.

TEC Loyalists (my favorite faction) need to be the masters of the art of the bounce.  Sucker your opponent into an attack or attacks that they can't get away from without a loss ratio in your favor, and then hit them on the rebound. 

In the meantime you need to maintain a skirmishing game so that your economically inferior opponent can't build up significant resource reserves, all the while accumulating some yourself, so that when you make your offensive move you can replace first-stage losses quickly while he rebuilds more slowly.

Some of these tactics do take more than 4 hours to develop, however, so YMMV (your mileage may vary).

Generally speaking you are right. The problem is that the only superiority TEC Loyalists have over TEC Rebels is a somewhat superior defense. On all other fronts TEC Loyalists are equal or even inferior. Early Novaliths are not compensating for that enough as fielding them until late game is usually inadvisable anyway.

If you dont intend to dig in... there is no reason to choose TEC Loyalists. Any offensive strategy is far better suited for the TEC Rebels.

As mentioned above the faction needs to be played rather defensivly, otherwise you have to choose TEC Rebels because they are superior in anything but defense. Playing more defensivly means fewer planets... period. If those fewer planets cannot offer a similar income then their economy will fall behind. I suggested in the past that TEC Loyalists get an additional level of Development Mandate.

Yes, the Anklyon is the weakest Titan in the game right now. It is the only Titan that even on high levels is stopped cold by a slightly supported starbase. Against an enemy Titan even a few levels below.... it just fails miserably.

Very few skilled players will directly attack an fully upgraded starbase, let alone two. The problem is that 

- Starbases can by avoided

- Bomber spam counters starbases hard.... and the bomber spam that counters one starbase counters two exactly as hard.

- So in many situations Twin Fortresses is more or less worthless..... ist awesome to watch the fireworks if the AI sacrifices its fleet on them, but against a human enemy, they arent doing much.

- A single TEC Loyalist starbase is not particularly more dangerous as a TEC Rebel starbase.... yes it has more armor and more firepower, but it is not like the TEC Rebel one doesnt gets the job done... assuming somebody is so stupid to move into range.

Imho TEC Loyalist starbases should have a considerable range increase and more important strong anti bomber weapons....

- when your enemy no longer can instasnipe your starbases from afar that alone would make TEC Loyalists much more powerful because you now actually have to deal with their bases instead of just flying by and waiting for the bombers to do their job.

Novaliths are more or less annoying to the enemy, nothing more. The main problemsi are:

• They remain a very expensive choice. So expensive that in the medium game where you can "rush" them with TEC Loyalists you have to make the choice between:
  - building a at least remotly competive fleet
  OR
  - building Novaliths
  OR
  - building defensives that can hold off the enemy so your Novaliths are not massacred by the incoming assault fleet. 
• If you built fleet, no Novaliths for you.... if you build defenses, no Novaliths for you.... but if you just build Novaliths there is nothing to hold off the imminent enemy attack that will not only cost you your expensive Novaliths but several planets in the process, possible loosing you the game.
• So you can only reasonably build them after you have defenses or a descent fleet up... but this means the end of the medium game.... so when they finally open fire there is very little economic damage done because other players can easily afford the starbases by then. Not to mention TEC has the planetary shield generator that holds of Novaliths shoots for very cheap. If your enemy doesnt have current vision on the planet, he will never now that it is just a planet shield (that could be overwhelmed) instead of Auxilary Goverment. So he wont fire on it again unless by random target choice .... which is mitigated by the planetary shield.

Tech tree is not the right word, TEC Loyalists have very few things that are worth something.

• Milita armor and weapons --> only really descent tech.... but comes very late - doesnt help anything with expanding and wont make a world of difference in the later stages of the game. I suggested a Tier movedown and more levels on it. Its current form could be moved down to Tech 2..... and a more powerful version could remain at Tier 5.
• Twin Fortresses - awesome but impractical
• Hmmm... what else.... well maybe Battlefield promotions, but thats just a 20 % increase in XP gain..... no offense but a Ragnarov is still a lot easier and faster to level because it
  a) doesnt need to be on the defensive
  b) kills a lot of things, like enemy ships on retreat, a job the Ankylon is terrible at. 

Yes, TEC Rebels dont have that many useful techs, either, but I would rather have a permanent 10 % damage increase than a 30 % damage increase that can be countered hard by bombing the planet into oblivion or moving into a not owned gravity well.

There is also the issue that TEC in general are a faction of early and medium game.... so late game techs are not fitting in well.

Those techs should be moved down considerable.... I knew nobody who researches hardened defenses for anything but access to Twin Fortresses.

I am sorry, but things dont work that way.BTW, that game lasted for over 4 hours.

Watch the replay.... I had wonderful defenses to crush anything but large scale bomber spam... a halfway smart enemy will never attack that. Now, the developers were actually quite good with the initial planning of the faction.

The best defense of the world will do you no good if your enemy is not attacking it.

So you have to have something that forces your enemy to attack you on your terms. Novaliths were meant to be that force.

Since they dont do that much..... you cannot force your enemy to attack you. And with that he can dig in nearly as well. making any offensive even more impossible.

Not to mention that because of weak Titan TEC Loyalist offensive is nothing to worry about.

I really think the TEC Loyalists need some nasty buffs to their Novaliths.

Current implementation:

Sir, the enemy has build several Novalith cannons that are making a slight dent into our economy. Shall we attack the TEC Loyalist system? No.... we will further build up our fleet and ignore that minor annoyance until we have enough fleet to crush them once and for all.

Implementation as it should be:

Sir, the enemy has build several Novalith cannons that are doing severe damage to our economy and ravage entire planets. If we dont destroy them within the next hour, our empire will be in ruins! Damm.... prepare the fleet for immediatly departure... we have to fight our way past their defences with the forces we have now.... there is no other option.

How about making Novaliths/Auxilliary Government work the same as Nuke/Anti-Nuke missiles in Supreme Commander?

I mean the Auxilliary Government would become multi-level upgrade, which would get "used up" on the Novalith hitting the planet, so you would have to "rebuild" it on SB again...and if you dont, and another Novalith hits the planet again, you lose the planet. Pretty much as when you have less anti-nukes than your enemy nukes... tough shit. This would make Novaliths bit more useful.

How exactly? As far as I'm concerned most of the TEC Rebels techs are mediocre to bad except for Truce Amongst Rogues. But if you aren't going to be exploiting that and do a typical rush, I don't see why the TEC Rebels are any better until they get their titan. I fail to see how the Loyalists are at any offensive disadvantage until titans get deployed. The only thing you could argue is that they don't have any advantages either, compared to the non-TEC factions.

And that is exactly the problem at hand! They are not better than TEC Rebels at any stage of the game!

In early game.... they are equal......

in medium game..... they are equal.... if TAR is not an option for the Rebels.

in medium game with Titans deployed.... TEC Loyalists are inferior

In late game.... TEC Loyalists are inferior (Ankylon vs Ragnarov... no comparsion.... Novalith are not compensating enough)

So that make the following final tally:

Early game:

TEC Loyalist: 1

TEC Rebel: 1

Medium game before Titans:

TEC Loyalist: 1

TEC Rebel: 1

Medium Game with Titans:

TEC Loyalist: 0

TEC Rebel: 1

Late game

TEC Loyalist: 0

TEC Rebel: 1

Total:

TEC Loyalists:2 points

TEC Rebel: 4 points

So why again should I choose them?

If you want to rush... there is no advantage in choosing TEC Loyalist over TEC Rebels....but after the rush phase of the game is over TEC Rebels are superior to TEC Loyalists. Mostly because of their Titan but also because of their better late game techs.

Yes... you are right... none of the TEC Sins of a Solar Empire Rebellion techs are what one would consider powerful and game changing. All of them are indeed more on the weaker scale of things. But please consider.... all that TEC Loyalist really have useful is a armor increase and 30 % increase in firepower in their own wells....

Now.. 30 % firepower increase is nothing to sneeze at.... although most other Titans will eat away a considerable portion of that advantage in larger fleet battles, because the Ankylon has such puny guns. 4 armor points however are not going to make much of a difference in late game... at least not on anything other than your Ankylon or a Level 8 capitalship.

On the other hand the Rebels additional weapon upgrades grant additional damage.... anywhere on the map.... and btw.... they do affect strikecraft. TEC Rebels have better fighters and better bombers. They have a better Titan. And all TEC Loyalist get to stand against that is a unimpressive Titan... 2 starbases that will be bomber sniped anyway in most cases and the ability to a bit more Novalith-annoy your enemy..... I am sorry, but that is just not enough.

No. I said they have no offensive advantage over any non-TEC (not including TEC Rebels) faction. I find the weapon upgrades to be highly dubious investments, so IMO the Ragnarov is the reason to get the TEC Rebels over Loyalists.

I disagree. First of all, you tested in a FFA in a fairly small game. That type of game is not the type to use the Loyalists in. Novaliths are much better in the large team games multiplayer plays. One is that theirs a chance a TEC Loyalists player will end up in the eco slot, and here the early and much cheaper Novaliths can have an impact. Larger games have a larger number of potential Novalith targets, and if just one player on your team gets Novaliths, it forces all 5 of the enemy to starbase their important planets. You thus force your opponents to spend much more than you did on your Novalith countering it, and if you can survive having invested Novaliths at the expense of military for a half hour, then they pay for themselves nicely.

Further, in a team game you'll have other players with an Eradica or Ragnarov that can compensate for your titan not having destructive AoEs. Thus the Ankylon becomes much less of a handicap.

If you like the TEC base faction, have a buddy that can build a better titan, and are confident you will survive to late game, I don't see why not. Perhaps the better question is why pick the TEC Rebels? It's either Truce Amongst Rogues or you want a Ragnarov. When it really comes down to it, the TEC Rebels and Loyalists both rely on their base faction more than the other two races, they have little subfaction specific incentives compared to the non-TEC factions.

Now the TEC Loyalists have problems, but its not as bad as you think.

1. Yes, the Ankylon is still on the bottom of the titan roster. A couple of its weaker abilities could use a lift, or maybe just increase its base stats.

2. Their tech tree is better than the TEC Rebels IMO, but it is extremely backloaded. They're almost identical to the TEC in Diplomacy until you hit 6 military labs for militia armor/weapons. And unlike the Vasari, none of them are game changing enough to justify rushing for them. Okay they have some average civic techs around 3-4, but none are particularly worth building the civ labs for, and are just situationally useful should you happen to have the labs for them already. Unfortunately it will be hard to tweak this problem away, but bringing a few of these techs to tier 1-2 so that they'll be available as soon as they get trade, or buffing them into something really worth while, could aliaviate this problem a little bit.

I disagree.  Playing defensively doesn't have to entail wasting a ton of money on defensive structures and slowing your expansion.  Doing this is foolish on any faction and it's not really reasonable to expect a few factional techs to make such an enormous divergence from the core gameplay viable.

The same goes for starbases- Just because the TEC loyals *can* build 2 starbases doesn't meant hey should be doing so all over the place.  Like everyone else they still should only be putting starbases where they are actually needed, and only putting two where one might not be able to do the job.

Honestly I think a more reasonable expectation would be for the TEC Loyals to specialize on homeground battles using the same minimalist defenses every other faction employs- they just would be able to manage those defenses much more easily then other factions.

They already have a number of tools that strengthen their ability to do without slowing their economy by overinvesting in static defenses- such as counterdeployment, both militia upgrades, the Ankylon, and War measures Act.

These tools may not be strong enough incentive, but they surely exist.  I get that people see "defensive faction" and want to go gung-ho with the fortifications, but it isn't and never will really be viable to sacrifice early expansion and economic growth to throw up a ton of superfluous defenses.

With that in mind, the only real way the TEC loyalist's economy is weaker then the tec Rebels i TAR- which can only really be used in pure eco spot anyway.  it's certainly a meaningful gap- as I said in my OP, one of the TEC loyalist's main issues is they lack a gamechanger on the level of TAR.  But my point is you exagerate the quantity of advantages the TEC rebels have- they are more viable pretty much entirely because of the ragnarov and TAR.

Honestly, while some tech buffs would be nice too, I think some significant buffs to the Ankylon would go a long way.

You cannot balance a game like Sins for 5v5 situations. Like in most RTS 1v1 is the only reasonable source of balancing. And I am not a fan of 1v1 mind you. This FFA just developed into one.  You see if you follow this line of thought you could easily argue that the jumping Orky was never op. After all, I am certain that 3 or 4 Titans awaiting it at its destination would make short work out of it and any fleet that jumps with it. But we all know the jumping Orky is/was op.... because it allowed ONE player of ONE team to effortlessly dispose with ONE player from the other team. Other thought: Jumping orky is not op.... because we have a team game... where one team mate just builds 50 Ogrows.... now I am certain this fleet would solve any Orky trouble permanently, but of course it means we have one teammate that doesnt do anything useful besides that due to economic limitations. If his fleets dies for some reason and we have another incoming SB... we are doomed.

If something is op in 5v5 games, it will likely be op in 1v1 games. The opposite is not true because allied forces can compensate for certain weaknesses. One could argue that Phase Missile bombers are not op.... after all Advent ships survive them easily - when supported by hoshikos and overseers. 

You cannot balance the game for team games. It just doesnt work. You have to balance it for 1v1... then it is balanced for team games automatically.(with very few exception for particularly murderous team synergies)

If a faction cannot hold its own in a 1v1 situation, the faction is to weak. If now under highly situational circumstances the faction may be slightly better than the other faction of the same race (TEC) that doesnt mean it is well balanced.

If you need 4 allies as crutches to be remotly useful (beside the early game rush who is equal) there is something fundamentally wrong with the faction.

Besides, what makes you think you will be so lucky to end in your favourite cozy eco spot all the time? You may very well end up in the suicide spot.

TEC Loyalist suicide spot:

Early game: Survive survive.... not more difficult as for any other faction but not better either.

Medium game: For the sake of argument lets assume you managed to get to 5 military labs required for Milita. Does that mean you can defend much better against the odds? Not to mention that any 2 titan combination will easily toast your Ankylon... should you actually have built it.

Late game: Wow... you survived..... Just pity that you cant do anything besides that..... not enough space or slots for any superweapons, you are happy to hold the line.... barely.

Late game variation:

Wow, your team killed one of the opposing team, giving you space to breathe.... now it is time to crush the enemy team.... oh wait... you still got a low level crap titan.... that not very good support.

TEC Rebel suicide spot:

Early game: Survive survive.... not more difficult as for any other faction but not better either.

Medium game: Defense with TEC Rebels means 3 things... Ragnarov, Dunov and enough flak to reduce any corvette fleet to dust in no time. Sure, you cant go offensive.... but you at least make them rethink entering the range of your powerful Titan. Yes.... 2 vs 1 Titan will not end well for the Ragnarov.... but it has a good change of taking one of them with it.... a price the other team may not be ready to pay for your destruction.

Late game: Wow... you survived..... Your team launches an all frontal assault.... and right now the last thing they enemy team needs is a Ragnarov on rampage on their backworlds..And it is very difficult to contain.... a starbase is not enough.

Bottom line.... in the early game suicide spot, it makes no difference which TEC faction you are. However later on it makes a very large difference. To be fair... as long as you are fighting for your very life TEC Loyalists are somewhat better. I just find that a faction that only shines when hopelessly outnumbered hasnt much going for it. The moment however you are not anymore, TEC Rebels again are superior because their Titan can far better turn the tide of any battle and can actually wreck havoc when on the loose.

Yes thats true, both TEC faction rely heavily on base TEC. This is why the TEC Loyals are the odd man out... a - intended - late game faction for a an early/medium game race. Generally I can live with that concept... assuming their late game is worth it.

But to get back to your above examle... we should just choose both to play TEC Rebels. Two Ragnarows will easily deal with 2 Ankylons.... there is just nothing that can stand against firepower of this magnitude. On the other hand, 2 Ankylons firing on one Ragnarov will need arround 5 minutes to bring down its shields..... With abilities of course. We have fewer Novaliths... so what? 8 Novaliths dont do much more damage than 4..... once the enemy has SBed his worlds, Novalith effect is minimal... especially at this stage of the game.

The problem is that leaving the equal early game aside the TEC Rebels are superior. Yes 95 % of that superiority comes from the Ragnarov.... but that knowledge doesnt help me when playing TEC Loyalists. The remaining 5 % comes from their higher flexibility.

You see, one starbase + Ragnarov = the same threat level as 2 starbases + Ankylon..... with the very significant difference that mentioned Ragnarov can actually go on the offensive. The Ankylon is a supreme defense weapon.... but that is all it truely shines. The Ragnarov may be a somewhat weaker defense weapon..... but it is much more flexible... something of high value in a permanently changing game.

Much of this discussion roots from the fact that the Ragnarov is so awesome. Now, we can nerf it into oblivion and be stuck with two weak TEC factions or we can think about way to buff the Loyalist up the competive levels. Most of this will include considerable buffs to the Ankylon, but some other changes are also required.

It is so backloaded that by the time you resarch those the game often will be over. Also all of those techs are entirly defensive in nature putting you in a difficult situation when the game demands offensive action. For TEC Loyalist better defenses to be of any value you need something to force the enemy into attacking them. Novalith rush wont work under most circumstances.

Mate... if you intend to play offensivly you have to choose TEC Rebels. Period.

I shall say it again:

Offensive capability of TEC Loyalists compared to TEC Rebels:

Early Game: Both TEC factions are equal.

Medium Game without Titan: Both TEC factions are equal, when TAR is not an option.

Medium Game with Titan: TEC Rebels are superior.... much stronger offense due to Ragnarov

Late game: Level 1 - Level 10... a Ragnarov is always better on the offense than a Ankylon on a similar or even higher level.

TEC Loyalist cannot lead an offensive as good as TEC Rebels the moment Titans come into play....

and thats fine... it really is.

But dammit give them something to make up for it. Right now they have very little.... and so they fail.

I disagree. A job that cannot be done by one starbase rarely will get done by two. Because the preffered solution against starbases is... you guessed it... bomber spam. Having 2 bases just doubles the - not very long - time it takes to destroy it.... allright, you can buy 2 minutes with BRB..... but thats about it.

Yes, of course they shouldnt build starbases everywhere. You are right about this point.

They are specialised in home ground battles. The problem is that

• their homeground defense isnt particularly more effective than that of the TEC Rebels.
• That their defense is the ONLY thing they do BETTER than the TEC Rebels.
  
  

If you play offensivly.... there is NOTHING you gain from playing TEC Loyalists.... NOTHING.

However if you play defensivly... for what reasons ever.... they are only SLIGHTLY better than TEC Rebels....

And those two sentences sum up the entire problem of the faction.

They offer very little reward for very high a cost compared to choosing TEC Rebels.

And this reward is even highly situational.

Yes, if you play "expand explore conquer" and leave TAR aside for a moment, of course you can have the same eco as TEC Rebels.

The problem is, what happens afterwards? Because the game will go on and Titans will be fielded. The slightly better performance of the Ankylon when it is "at home" does not justify the major weaknesses it has when not.

I agree.

but those buffs should be focused on making a realistic strategy viable-  any buffs that made it viable to overinvest in static defenses and starbases will make the faction overpowered for a player not making that error and puttting down the minimum in defenses necessary to hold the line(and investing the money they save into their economy or novaliths).

That doesn't change the fact that it's a bad idea to build 2 starbases at a location which doesn't require that much investment to be held.

Again I don't really disagree with you.  The only point I ever really disagreed with was your claim of "slower expansion even without TAR."   The tec loyals should be doing everything in their power to expand early- just like everyone else.

The only difference is that they settle into a defensive role once the borders of their empire are established rather then beginning to conquer adjacent enemies.

Honestly despite our long quote-war I think we by and larger agree with eachother.  The only point I ever really contested was the tec loyals having slow early expansion- they don't if the player doesn't overinvest in static defenses early, a mistake may tec loyals players tend to make.

All I have really been arguing is that since expanding fast suits them just as well as every other faction, the buffs should be focused on the assumption they are defending with minimal tactical structures, as will be true for much of the game.

And of course one of the biggest issues as you seem to agree is that the Ankylon is frankly underwhelming as compared to the ragnarov- and I still think a few significant buffs to the ankylon would go a long way.

Indeed. There is no technical reason for a TEC Loyalist player to expand any slower than a TEC Rebels. Until titans or TaR are used they can play almost identically.

Why not? There really isn't much difference there. Jumping Orkies and phase missiles are unbalanced in 5v5s as they are in 1v1s. I don't remember if you play multiplayer regularly but suggesting those things aren't OP seems ridiculous.

Yes I realize there will be difficulties balancing the game entirely on 5v5s, as having players capable of developing or rushing techs without issue in large games was basically the main reason Stripped to the Core was so bad. But balancing the game purely in 1v1 or FFA is going to greatly reward military prowess at the expense of everything else, while in any other game mode those "everything elses" might be game winning. Again, we don't deny the Loyalists need a bit of a boost, but you're seem especially harsh on the advantages they have while thinking the TEC Rebels have some base advanage besides TaR and the Ragnarov that they don't have.

When it really comes down to it, if SC2 cannot be balanced for 1v1, Sins won't be either. The best we can do is come up with a "line of best fit" of balance that works for as many different styles of games as possible. Thus the goal isn't to be perfectly balanced in every situation, but be acceptable in any type of game people play.

they should buff disruption matrix, and make all defense structures and upgrades 50% cheaper

that could solve the bad economy. and let the starbase be put down faster in enemy lines and let it bomb planets.

this would let them go for a "Secure, Assimilate, Develop" style of play

they should significantly buff the titan attack, including buff the friendly well attack and the enemy well attack

argonevs should also get flak cannons against bomber spam for loyalist only, and they should get a small tribute from a newly colonized planet. the tribute will need a tech called Trader Reunification or something like that. it will be tier 2 with no prereqs

sorry for quad post, but i think they should also get 1 turret and repair platform on each planet they have for free without using any tactics slots

This thread seems like splitting hairs to me.  The differences between TEC loyalists and rebels seem relatively minor overall.  Yes the Ragnarov is better than the Ankylon, however....

TEC feels like the gimp faction in general in this expansion.  Both advent and both vasari factions seem like better performers.

First let's compare titans.  Both advent titans are better than both of the TEC titans.  The Coronata will eat a Ragnarov for breakfast all by itself even when the Raganarov is backed by a fleet.  The same is pretty much true against the Ankylon it just might take a little longer since it tanks a little better, espescially on the defensive.  The Eradica is more or less the same story just for a different reason, as it demolishes the enemy fleet first instead of the capships and titan.   Meanwhile the vasari have the choice of titan that warps across the gravity well straight into your fleet to swallow it, OR titans? we don't need no stinking titans, we have mobile starbases bahaha equipped with a whole lot the best weapon in the game, phase missiles.

Fleet?  Advent fleets are still arguably the best performers overall.  Espesially with capship synergies and titan backup.  Vasari have the undisputed best strike craft, high HP bomber with phase missiles of doom? yes pls!  Both Advent and Vasari have gained significant military technologies that significantly improve fleet effectiveness, TEC meanwhile has not.

In a 1v1 or FFA matchup, amongst players with relatively equal skill it boils down to who is able to leverage a better economy into the late game.  There is no such thing as a stalemate.  There are so many game ender technologies it's not even funny anymore.   It's just that TEC has the least of them and theirs are the least effective in the late game, and this isn't sufficiently offset by their relatively minor economic advantages.  Their combat capability is just outright inferior because their ships are pretty much inferior given similar supply as an opponent.

In the late game scenario TEC become totally dependant on either having a grossly superior economy to the opposition to overwhelm them or just trying to create reversals using big red button.   Advent will win any fleet battle where the supply and levels of ships involed are similar.  Vasari win through tactical deployment trickey, with phase jumping starbase, rapid forward construction, Kostura backdooring or titan warping/maw stunts. 

TEC just doesn't have a late game trick that matches up to these.  Novaliths can be crippling to an enemy economy but only on the smaller scale before trade starts to totally dominate the income percentages.  And that leaves the only other trick they to win a fight as being the big red button.   This means they must go into a late game scenario having such a tremendous economic lead that the other factions can't afford to keep up with attrition rates or they'll have no chance of winning.

at high levels maybe- but only with relatively small supporting fleets.  But in large scale battles Ragnarov's AoE will turn the tide drastically faster then the Coronata's conversions.

And guess what? The ragnarov levels way faster due to it's AoE.

The Eradica I'll grant you is probably the best titan all considered i nthe game, but Ragnarov is easily the second strongest(yes vorastra is up there, but it's number 3 only because of it's weak first 5 levels).

The Ankylon definitely nees some love though.

The vorastra however has a very weak early game.  Much of the counterplay involves killing it before it reaches level 6, and if you can't kill it at least chasing it off from battles before it gains  much exp.

By contrast titans like the Eradica and Ragnarov will still dish out devestating-if a bit less so- AoEs right from level 1.

 Beign that that is pretty much the entire point of advent, yes, their late game fleet is friggen amazing.  They sort of fall short in every other regard to pay for it(worst economy, squishy capitalships, vulnerability to phase missiles).

And while a late game advent fleet will school a late game TEC fleet, it's hard to call their fleet "best" when their extreme vulnerability to phase weaponry puts them at a very significant disadvantage against the vasari- who also have a strong late game fleet and a better economy to replace any losses with.

 You mean all those new new military techs advent and vasari players don't bother researching most games?  The only new military techs they usually bother with are Wail of the Sacrificed and Starbase Mobilization.  Both of which are deep in the civic tree and the latter of which is so broken the faction is permabanned(which is to say is not the norm other factions should aspire to).

The primary way fleet strength has changed in rebellion is the presence of titans- and the Ragnarov is one of the best.

 That sounds pretty good so far for the tec who have a superior economy.

 The tec does certainly have the weakest late game.  This is not a balance issue- this is the basic design of the faction.  The tec excel at early-mid game pressure and have an economy that gets started faster and grows larger then any other faction- They also gain a number of tools for sabotaging the enemy's economy, making them ideal even late game for fighting wars of attrition.

 Minor eco advantages? Are you crazy?  The Akkan is by far the best early colony capitalship for building an economy and combined with techs like modular architecture and expediated permits as well as with the early T2 access to trade ports means & prereq-less terran planet population techs means the TEC economy starts fast.

Due to the nonlinear rate at which economies tend to grow, starting faster often means an economic advantage that lasts all game- but that's not where the TEC eco advantages end; They have the most trade-upgrades(it's worth noting advent gain no trade upgrades at all), get extra logistics from developement mandate, and late game Pervasive Economy is a massive boon to income.

The TEC has substantial economic advantages- it's nothing minor.

 Yes, late game it is.  It's supposed to be.  The TEC are not supposed to win full fleet battles late game.  They are designed to figth a war of attrition in which their superior economy is better able to recover their losses then the opponent.

Tools they have to facilitate this include Big Red Button, Novalith cannons, Ogrovs(make even small raiding parties a mortal threat to enemy planets), the new corsev battlecruiser, and a few techs like industrial Juggernaut(allows TEC to rebuild after losses faster then any other race.  The akkan's level 6 ability allows you to retreat effectively if you run into the advent/vasari player's main fleet, and if a Marza makes it to level 6, causing enemy casualties isn't too hard.

Standard tec late game tactics include things like: retreating from the enemy main fleet while hitting them on 2 other fronts with raiding parties including ogrovs- the enemy is almost sure to suffer some lost structures and will have to divide their fleet to defend.

The advent fleet due to it's synergies in particularly loses A LOT more from having to be divided up then the tec fleet does- ocne you're fighting on multiple fronts it becomes a lot easier to make trades with an advent opponent(and again you are much better equipped to recoup said losses then they are).

I'd like to rap this up by saying this is only late game.  Early-mid game tec fleets can fight head on as well as any other race(better then the vasari).  That is the stage of the game in which direct confrontation actually suits the tec.  

 Again late game this is how it should be.  The advent have the weakest economy and have a great deal of dificulty replacing their losses.  By contrast the TEC's superior economy & build speed bonuses mean they have the easiest time doign so.  

You don't need to win against the advent- just make sure both sides are taking significant losses.

Again as mentioned above, forcing the Advent player to divide up their fleet reduces the strength of each portion far more then it hurts the tec fleet.  Attack on multiple fronts with a few ogrovs to make the smaller fleets un-ignorable.   Retreata ny attacks that hit locations if substantial defenders show up and keep causing losses with the other attack fleets.

 Vasari have their tactical trickery, but they'll win in a straight fleet battle every bit as easily as the advent.  You rely on your superior economy and force them into a war of attrition- same as the advent.

That said you'll have a hard time witht he vasari.  They have a very weak early game, but if you let them survive to the late game without a decisive economic advantage they are practically impossible to stop for any race.  You need to put pressure on them early game when they are weak.

 novaliths reduce trade income by 100% at the targeted gravity well for 30 minutes- it can cause economiic damage on a wide scale if you spread shots around even if the enemy relies chiefly on trade routs.

Also raids on multiple fronts with ogrovs are a great way to ruin the enemy's trade network.

Exactly.  The TEC have a fast starting economy and excel at early game pressure.  Their weakness is and always has been the late game- if you haven't secured an economic advantage as tec by late game you're in trouble- this has been the case in every iteration of sins- it's part of the identity of the tec as a whole(much like the vasari are supposed to be the quintessential late game faction that starts weak).

In fact the addition of titans has brought the TEC(well the rebels anyway)lategame closer to the other races then it ever has been before being that the Ragnarok is on par with any of the other race's titans(by comparison to how TEC research, frigates, & capitalships wane a bit into the late game).

The addition of titans has also turned the Dunov into one of the best late game capitalships in the game- a trait utterly uncharacteristic of the TEC.  If anything the TEC late game is closer to the other races then it ever has been in any other iteration of sins.

Anyway we have gotten way off topic, but when it comes down to it, if you want to win clean decisive fleet battle victories, the tech shouldn't be you thing, they excel at a different set of tactics.

On the original topic, part of the TEC loyal's issue is IMO that their basic tactics lexicon runs counter to the core TEC battle strategies.

Here are my thoughts on TL vs. TR...

If you are eco, it is basically TAR vs. earlier/more novas...TAR is going to help you get map center and in the long run much better economy (and more planets = more novas)...novas coming at tier 6 with no prereqs is handy, but only when you are not forced to devote everything to feed...

Dual SBs with some other defensive techs can make breaking a TL eco a pain in the ass, but the TR eco with TAR would have had a better eco overall and was probably in better position to feed more...the only way TL eco is going to truly be better is if rushing novas wins you the game (but that early feed somehow wouldn't have)...

If you are frontliner or suicide, the only faction specific techs that seem remotely relevant are counter-deployment and savage thrill...those aren't easy techs to get super early though when in these positions....

In the end, it seems to always come down to which titan is best....Ankylon can be a bitch to kill, it's a tank you just park where you want and let it's raw weapons do the work...disruption matrix is your only AoE though and even at level 4 it does 1050 damage over 15 seconds...because the damage is not instantaneous, shield mitigation will make this ability pale in comparison to something like scattershot or chastic burst...Ragnarov has much better AoEs and snipe helps it deal with non-frigates much easier, though it's AoEs can be out-microed since they only affect the "frontal cone"...

Overall, it's hard to justify TL over TR....

All right... now I understand you....

But what strategy would you suggest?

Allright.

What would be your suggestion for a viaable strategy with TEC Loyalists?

"The minimum of defenses to hold the line"

From my experience static defenses do a poor job at holding the line. Turrets are generaly worthless, leaving aside the Vasari PM turret with extremely op Disruptor Nanites. That leaves Hangar defenses an starbases supported by repair platforms.... but this is not what I would call a minimum of defenses? Could you perhaps explain in further details?

QFT

Allright, now I understand what you mean.

So now we have to think about ways for them to hold those worlds. As they are not particularly good at "conquer" that means they suffer more from loosing planets as they may not be capable of reclaiming them. I think we need something that makes it considerable more difficult/far more expensive for the enemy to conquer a TEC Loyalist world.

To war, death and glory!

Indeed.

On a more serious note what strategy would you suggest with them? There is very little below a starbases that holds of a serious assault.

I agree

Correct.

There is the huge difference of team synergies..... see my example with the Eradica supported by hoshikos and Overseers. 

I play multiplayer regularly... of course they were OP! I just played advocatus diaboli in showing you that 5v5 games can mitigate several balancing issues from "OP" to remotly bearable. Also even more than 1v1 there is a even higher dependency on luck.

Vasari Loyalists are borderline op... as a Vasari in general. But in 5v5 their are bearable because

- they dont do a great job at disposing enemies until late in the game... often time the game ends earlier because their Team took heavy losses

- Vasari are op... but not so op that they could handle 3v1 or worse. Even the Maw can only eat so many carriers and there is a ammount of allied bomber wings that makes sure you dont use it more than once.

- Most of the time they dont make it into late game where they can steamroll about anything,

- More often, they will have a mirror enemy that is Vasari too... mitigating them.

Balancing is a very difficult thing. nobody will argue against that. And stripped to the core did work in 1v1... it was a very risky strategy but it was doable..... all you needed was 2 military labs for Orky.... then rush STTC,s strip all but one planet and then crush the enemy with a fleet 3 times the size of his. If the enemy early game pressure was not 110 % for what reasons ever, the enemy was dead.

This a a war game.... military prowess naturally plays a very important role. Furthermore most people want to have a active part of the game they are playing. As for any other game, I dont know any RTS game that has a - supporting faction - that is good at supporting but nothing else. And especially no such a faction in any game that is choosen by players regularly. Sitting at home and supporting your team with feed can be an important job.... but to come back to Sins this job is not particularly funny. Sure it gives you a nice feeling to support your team.... but it will rarely beat the fun of your 27 kilometer long rail gun beating the living shit out of the enemy and as such unless it offers very good support (which would lead to TEC Loyalists being a must have in team games which I not necessarly find a good idea) the faction will get choosen less and lesser. If it offers good support it would be at best players choice... but not players darling. Do you really want that instead of arguing just about team balancing and captains people in the future will argue what poor guy of their team should be forced to choose the - boring - support faction? I dont want that, I want that people ca choose their favourite faction in team games.... without hurting their team. 

There is also the issue of random starting positions and changing game conditions.... your support faction may find itself in a very uncomfortable spot any time in the game.... and then it needs to stand..... on an halfway equal levels with all other factions.

In short... making TEC Loyalists an team support only faction is imho not the way to go.

BTW... currently they are not particularly well doing said job.... an allied gravity well is treated as a neutral gravity well by the Ankylon... meaning its power is not larger at the support of allies than it is on the offensive.

I dont know anything about the balancing of Starcraft 2 so.....

Balancing is a very long term process and I dont think that there are more than 2 or 3 games worldwide that are entirely balanced, SC 1 being one of them.

There are however several games that are mostly balanced.... and this what we should aim at with Sins.

Again... you cannot balance an RTS which different faction for team games.... see Starcraft 1.... normally the early game is entirely balanced..... however if you support protoss early game with Terran Medics this combination becomes nearly unstoppable - in team games. Although it is balanced. Nobody screams to nerf medics into oblivion because of it. Some team combination are always going ot be more powerful than others.... because you cannot "fix" them without breaking the normal game balancing.

And even if you like me are not a fan of 1v1.... only in direct comparsion can it be decided of a faction/unit or strategy is op.

Vasari are OP lategame... because they have a hard counter to anything Advent can field in late game.... Now... since Phase Missiles are less effective against TEC, does that mean that Vasari are not OP and that Advent are UP in lategame?

No, it doesnt. Actually Advent are superior to TEC in lategame by a wide margin.... but then Vasari are highly superior to Advent in late game.... TEC has trouble against both but it is not screwed as Advent are against Vasari and so actually in longer games with all races may be the superior choice.

It doesnt help me a bit with Advent to know that Hoshikos and Overseers could save my Eradica from phase missile pulverisation.... because I am Advent... I dont have Hoshikos and Overseers.... so I need something of my own to stand a a change. If I dont have anything on that account that makes Advent UP against Vasari. And that means it needs to changed.

Because you cannot balance a faction arround needing crutches from other races. You can make it so that it does proft more from certain allies... like an TEC Advent Team where the TEC supports the Advents eco to allow the Advent to built a even mightier fleet. There is no argument I think that both TEC and Advent need to be capable of standing on their own - which if you leave the remaining balancing problems aside for a moment... they mostly are.

I hope I explained my point well enough.

Cheaper defense buildings dont solve the problem. The problem is not their price.. their problem is their limited effectivity.

Yes, Disruption matrix needs a good buff.... for one a considerable range increase and far more important a duration increase.

17 seconds of abilities disabled doesnt buy you much more than 25 seconds - even with group shield against the very powerful AOE abilies other factions can field.

I am fine with its current damage level... it should be an defensive weapon, not a second chastic burst. But it needs to make the enemies life a lot more miserable.

The Advent starbase can already bombard planets with Meteror Storm.... it is still not used in this capacity. Being unable to move makes an offensive starbase very easy to stop as an effective building position will put it into harms way.

Besides, we really dont need a second Orky. What we need is

1. a starbase that is superior compared to others

2. Something to force they enemy into running into just that starbase.... Novaliths were meant to be that... they are just not up to the job.

Good idea.

Love the flak idea and I find the tribute idea interesting.

You can always edit your posts

However without placing them on the right spot they are not going to be of much value. Nor is one turret going to do you any good. I usually end up with building just one anyway as I have just one tactical slot remaining on my fortified worlds.

Yes... but the same ragnarov might have scattershooted your fleet into oblivion just a few seconds ago.... now it will deal with any of your capitalships and then at least concentrate the entire firepower of its fleet onto the only thing remaining.... your Coronata.

Fighting against a Coranata means to try to say outside of the range of Supression Arua.... an easier task with the Ragnarov.

But yes, fighting against an enemy fleet with Titan makes the Anklyon look very poor... even on own territory.

Quoted for truth!

This is the second important reason after phase missiles why Vasari are absoluty murderous against Advent.

They have a better military and a better economy.

Current status:

Economic strenght:

1. TEC

2. Vasari

3. Advent

Military power:

1. Vasari

2. Advent

3. TEC

For Advent vs Vasari to be balanced the military superiority of the Vasari in late game has to go. And of course phase missiles need a hard nerf.

How it should be:

Economic strenght:

1. TEC

2. Vasari

3. Advent

Military power:

1. Advent

2. Vasari

3. TEC

While notably, the damage done is not enough.... and most importantly not high enough to force your enemy into attacking you at a time he really dont want to do that. This often means that can can continue to build up his fleet without any worries or delays.

True.

Yes, that is indeed one major problem.

I should have added this to my last post....

If I were to buff the Ankylon, I would focus on buffing group shield first, since it is a pretty useless ability...I'd make it a fire and forget ability with a large radius at all levels (let's say 8000)....I would then make it so that the cooldown and duration match....the only thing that would then be scaling with level would be the actual damage reduction value...since this ability isn't going to stop titan AoEs from absolutely raping frigates, it basically is a support ability to help SBs and caps (I guess titans too if you consider allies)...

If that doesn't help the ankylon enough, I'd consider changing disruption matrix...not sure what changes would be best though...as I noted above, the biggest problem with the ability is that it is damage over time, and thus much of the damage is wasted via shield mitigation...making it affect only hull (and of course adjusting the damage values accordingly) would solve that problem, though I'm always wary of turning to hull damage...

I like this idea... I like this idea a lot.

I agree about the need for a buff, but I disagree about buffings its damage. Imho the damage is the ice on the cake.... but not the primary function of the ability.

Speaking of the Anklyon also brings up another issue.

No other Titan suffers as hard as the Ankylon from drained antimatter. Yes, all Titans suffer heavily from it, but the Ankylon is the only one that moves down right to entirely worthless. Perhaps it should recieve an flat out antimatter restore with furios defense?

Currently AM draining ships like the Kortul have the following effects on Titans:

Ankylon: No abilities..... it is a durable but underarmed flying brick... it is never going to make as much as a dent into the Kortul or any other AM draining capship.

Ragnarov: No abilities, however it has tremendous focus fire firepower.... it can easily force the AM draining ship.... Kortul or not into retreat or outright destroy it. Once that is done it will regenerate AM and it is on the loose.

Coronata: No abilities.... make sure you hit any AM draining ship with Unity Mass as longs as you can.... but even if all else fails.... you have a powerful passive ability that at least helps your fleet to stay alive.

Eradica: Below Level 6 your in deep trouble.... a few chastic bursts are not going to impress capitalships and most certainlly no Kortul... above however Unyielding will evens the odds.

Vorastra: Below Level 6 you not necessarly want to drain the antimatter... but on level 6 the Vasari will have nearly absolute control about how and when the engages your fleet.... so you will never see in your scopes until the Vasari decides it is time. Naturally this time lays afterwards he ate your entire fleet so AM draining afterwards will at best hinder his retreat... which is unlikely since he just killed half your fleet and so you are propably the one dying.

Kulturask: Drains also Antimatter.... so very difficult to drain empty.... not to mention you want to limit yourself to capital ships..... that wont fare very well against his entire fleet.

If the primary function of the ability is going to be ability suppression, then its duration needs to be a lot longer...if the primary function is to be a damage AoE (which most titans have) then it needs more DPS or something to get around the shield mitigation problem (like hull damage)...

Idk which route is best but the ability is meh in even the best circumstances...there are ways to instantly make this ability awesome (instant kill SC) but we have to be careful because this titan is very very difficult to kill when properly supported...

Also, I am somewhat ticked that inspire and impair doesn't affect SC...

I should also mention theoretically the TEC Loyalists economy is larger because double starbases can also translate into double the number of trade port upgrades. If your conventional economy is large enough to support this on a large scale and your team is doing well enough not to need feed for a while, you can get some obscene numbers from this, though the large expense will take a little while to pay off, your unlikely as eco to be at risk of losing starbases anyways. I'm not saying its a good strategy necessarily but I have seen it done before and its certainly a nail in the coffin when it happens.

I was not ever referring to team unit synergies in my comments. You could have a team of 5 TEC Loyalists, and the fact that some of them would not be on the front line would help them. Alternatively you could be playing a game with diplomacy (that doesn't really work well in Sins as everything starts at war, not neutral but theoretically) or any other game where there's a bit of a delay in military action. The problem with 1v1 is that the other player is your sole focus of attention and thus you don't have any breathing room. That is not representative of other game types, and shouldn't be the only thing you take into consideration. As I said, you should make changes that improve the balance in the greatest types of game as possible.

Perhaps what we really disagree on is that you seem to think the TEC Loyalists cannot "Stand Up" to the other races. We all agree they need a little help, but I don't think its at the point where its hopeless to play TEC Loyalists. Heck, I saw a few play them yesterday online in skilled games.

I was thinking it also needed a duration increase, but that is a rather big hole in the ability that should be fixed as well.

I've always been partial to having Disruption Matrix disable the engines and weapons of strikecraft in the area for the duration(but not damage them)- It would give the TEC loyals something TEC players have wanted for a long time- a way so slow down bombers/fighters while their fighters/flak do their work.

As am I.  A level 6 titan ability that doesn't affect either of the quintessential late game damage sources: bombers and titans.  AT the stage of the game it becomes available you don't see combat frigates anymore.

It either needs to affect late game damage sources to soem degree, or it needs to buff/debuff more stats so that t's worthwhile for it's effects on capitalships(adding an ability cooldown buff/debuff could potentially help).

The other ankylon buff I've been rolling around in my head for quite some time would be fore Furious defense to restore hull/sec to all nearby allies instead of the ANkylon when the ANkylon's hull is over 95%- a smaller restore rate would do(maybe 10/15/20/25/sec), but this would give the opponent some reason to actually target the ANkylong; if they don't deal some hull damage it will keep healing it's fleet almost indefinitely.

of course it would likely be too much for enact all three of these buffs I've discussed- but they present additional options.

As for techs, over time I've though of a variety of ways various techs could become stronger; a few that come to mind are:

Counterdeployment: Additionally reduces the cost of frigates built in enemy-occupied gravity wells by 15%

[comments:  This would give incentive for a player to use counterdeployment, wiating to see the enmy attack before doing much of their building, rather then counterdeployment just becoming an occasionally used tool for emergencies when you need more defenders fast.]

Battlefield Promotion: in your gravity wells your capitalships/titans gain exp 7.5/15% faster and enemy capitalships/titans gain exp 20/40% slower

[comments:  For battlefield promotion to ever really make much difference your capitalships need to level noticeably faster then the opponent's, making long sustained assaults a bad idea for the TEC loyal's enemies.  SLowing enemy exp gain is particularly handy as it means the TEC loyals can make use of expendable combat frigates while defending without giving the enemy as much exp as other factions would..]

War Measures Act: Additionally increases the tax rate at your capital by 5% as long as any of your gravity wells are occupied by enemy ships.  

[comments:  This would allow War measures act to more reliably pay back it's investment if you stay under attack even at low pop gravity wells.  5% tax at home planet will generally be in the ballpark of 1 credit/sec, meaning when udner attack, the benefit will generally be high enough that sustained attacks will result in this tech actually reliably paying back it's investment]

Militia Weapons/armor: Grant 5% damage and +1 armor as inherent effects at rank 0 of these upgrades- cap stays same at rank 2, so adjust bonus per ranka ccordingly

[comments:  This would give tec loyalists a built in defensive advantage right out of the gate, improving their capabilities at early game defense a bit.]

Once again, I doubt all of these changes would be necessary together- but they are ideas that come to mind as to how the TEC loyals could be given some interesting new tools/mechanics.

nice topic and discussion here, keep it going!