Hacksaw Discussion

Summary (TLDR)
Hacksaw has a health/cost ratio on par with chainsaw, but has significantly lower health/cost than the similarly priced razor.

Hacksaw has dps/cost ratio that slightly outperforms chainsaw, but is only about 60% of the dps/cost of the razor.

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.



Introduction
I suggest giving the hacksaw a buff or rework.

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.

Hacksaw is tagged as an anti-bomber static AA, however when bombers are an issue, they are rarely used.

They can kill a phoenix or raven in a single two-shot burst or two of them can take down a thunderbird or licho.

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.

I'll be comparing the hacksaw to the razor and chainsaw across three categories, all with respect to building cost.



1) Range:
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:

Hacksaw
Cost = 220m
Range = 490 elmo
Area coverage = 750k elmo^2
Area coverage/cost ratio = 3400 elmo^2/metal

Razor
Cost = 280m
Range = 1040 elmo
Area coverage = 3.4M elmo^2
Area coverage/cost ratio = 12100 elmo^2/metal

Chainsaw
Cost = 900m
Range = 1800 elmo
Area coverage = 10.1M elmo^2
Area coverage/cost ratio = 11300 elmo^2/metal



2) Health:
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:

Hacksaw
Cost = 220m
Health = 580
Health/Cost = 2.64 health/metal

Razor
Cost = 280m
Health = 3000 (12000 closed)
Health/Cost = 10.7 (42.8 closed)health/metal

Chainsaw
Cost = 900m
Health = 2500
Health/Cost = 2.77 health/metal



3) DPS:
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:


Hacksaw
Cost = 220m
DPS = 66
DPS/Cost = 0.3 dps/cost

Razor
Cost = 280m
DPS = 149
DPS/Cost = 0.53 dps/cost

Chainsaw
Cost = 900m
DPS = 225
DPS/Cost = 0.25 dps/cost



Possible Solutions
Option 1:
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.

health 580 ---> 850
range 490 elmo ---> 600 elmo

Option 2:
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.
damage 500x2 ---> 1000x2
reload 15s ---> 30s

Option 3:
Remove hacksaw. It currently underperforms other AA by so much, it has no use in it's current state.


Thank you for reading! Let me know what you think!

Vote 2

Licho oneshot is 2 much. Loseing 2k M cuz of one small dumb mistake, maybe that 2 hacksaws oneshot licho and also revenant. 1k dmg sounds good, licho 2360 HP also some small AoE (I mean 1k dmg should pack a punch)

Im against makeing everything similar (Option 1), keep Things different.

I'd probably up the health to 1000 and reduce reload time to 5s. Making it the stardust of AA, able to defend against locust or raven attacks on a base but not much else.

Thresher counters air balls of any kind, hacksaw is more of a sniper, and I think a much smaller reload time wouldn't fundamentally change that, although it would certainly make it a lot stronger.

What if we take it's alpha to the next level, make it shoot 2 screamer-or-stronger missiles but with a reload time of around 60s?

I meant up alpha etc of Hacksaw, of course, not Chainsaw.

Berder, the problem with being able to one-shot a Likho is that it's range is already too short for that. A Likho can drop it's bomb from a longer range than any other bomber.

Personally, I think both air are already too weak so AA should be nerfed across the board. However, I think it's more a problem of non-dedicated AAA (anti-aircraft artillery for those of you who are new to military terms) units being so effective at AA. I'm specifically thinking of lob/scallops, ogres, faradays, most raiders, phantoms, jugglenauts, lances, knights and probably a few others I'm not thinking of right now.

Air should be like submerged scallops that cannot be hit except by torpedoes or a few AoE and ravens. Unless you have AAA, you should be a - well a sitting duck xD. As it stands now, once mid-late game hits there is so much AA that most air has no real offensive role and struggles even on defense. I know it is a balance because air hits so hard and is so mobile that it must be weaker than in real-life where it basically determines who wins a war, but I feel it needs a buff to its mobility or a nerf to non-dedicated AAA. One way that is done in RL is that AAA doubles as ground artillery and that helps off-set its cost.

Interesting fact, and I'll digress, AAA is such an effective anti-infantry weapon that the Hague Convention IV generally prohibits its use as an anti-infantry weapon because it was more brutal than necessary. Art. 23(e).

i suggest remove the unit

it is a difficult unit to use properly

Redundant planning is a thing.

quote: it can stay in active ZK aa list because nobody gets harmed because of it

You get harmed by building it.