i tried using sparkies for their jamming and fast reclaim during t3 / early t4 stage biggest sadface was realizing they don't get selected with drag select. I think it would be neat to have them slightly changed to work as anti-sniper army escorts, maybe the jamming range made a bit larger and their selection behavior changed to that of regular units? I know it's inconsistent with other build power units but would this change really hurt their other uses? Besides, they have a gun, let me use them as tanks pls

uhhhhhhh mega?

Yes is this proposed rebalance for team games (tg) on flat maps? Is that how FAF is balanced nowadays? Obviously long range direct fire units when they reach a critical mass are going to be powerful on such maps. But 1v1..? Also can you TML the shields?

What about just buffing the SACU rapid fabrication by increasing both the mass cost of the upgrade and build power, so it becomes a viable option on those maps where hives are good - i.e. it gives concentrated build power that doesnt cause pathfinding woes (since you wouldn't need many of them). Since you'd get a mobile unit with a basic combat ability it'd need to be slightly less efficient than a hive at building, but not much. For example, instead of a modest increase in build power from 56 to 98, quadruple the build power from 56 to 224, and also increase the build range slightly. Then set the mass cost of the upgrade accordingly to balance it. E.g. a hive costs 350 mass per 25 build power. Since the value of having a mobile builder with combat ability and basic resource generation is priced into the base SACU model, lets make the rapid fabricator upgrade as efficient as a hive in respect of the increased BP element. So taking the Sera ACU, and assuming it's roughly balanced at 2k mass for 56 bp, that'd mean you'd want the extra 168 bp to cost 2,352 (total cost of 4402 for 224 build power). By comparison, the current upgrade gives you 42 bp for 800 mass (so is significantly more expensive than a hive in terms of the additional bp). If this would be too powerful, then make it 10% more inefficient for the additional BP. Personally rapid fabrication feels really weak and not worth getting (I'd rather have 3 Sera SACUs than 2 rapid rabrication Sera SACUs, even if I'm planning on using them to say build a firebase or setup some SAMs) and I've never seen anyone get rapid fabrication SACUs, so it feels like an opportunity to increase variety a bit, it preserves the uniqueness of the hive, and it doesn't require work with creating a new unit.

@yeager can you provide perlay id. I kinda missed it smh

@scout_more_often said in Seraphim Support ACUs no RAS?: @maudlin27 said in Seraphim Support ACUs no RAS?: The sera sacu can also be used to eco. It’s worse than a ras sacu at eco but much better for combat, so gives a useful ‘jack of all trades’ option I genuinely understand that any Sacu can build mass fabs. I'm just curious why no RAS. I'm not saying it's a good or bad idea just curious. As it was said, they were originally designed to have no RAS. We can only guess... and i guess developers decided that RAS is boring and gave them more combat options instead. Their teleport can be very usefull in lategame. Tho i guess developers didn't really anticipate that it can be easy to defend against singular teleporting sacus by overlapping shields

Building something always takes time, hitting it with a hammer and taking to the trash takes a lot less time. I can see reclaim not being build time based as you are not doing the same operation to build it, just converting the material so you can reclaim it.

The Cybran cruiser already fires missiles which track, @Sprouto there is a difference between a tracking projectile and a missile, a tracking projectile requires merely one or two blueprint changes, only tactical missiles and nukes require a script to make them work, they are not tracking either

Seraphim walled PDs still largely useless (at least on Open Palms)

@cyborg16 said in Make the tactical missile from the t3 submarines more usefull: Not exactly. Cruiser missiles do damage over time, allowing plenty of time to build TMD near important targets. TML-subs could potentially be used for sneak-attacks on HQs, pgens, even ACUs, given a burst-fire mode (say up to 4 missiles in 2 seconds). This only works if there isn't already TMD however. It will almost never work like that in practice without making them insanely op. I already easily kill all of those things, other than ACUs, with sub tac missiles, and that’s without having to be incredibly tedious with manually launching missiles, and punished hard for forgetting to manually launch them. Honestly though, sonar should be nerfed to make subs better since the only real point of underwater ships it so hide them. No? The real point is both to hide and to protect from surface fire. Sonar is fine how it is.

300 x 55 mass is 16.5k, I see no problem here. What will 16k mass of Percy's do to a monkey?

@snowy801 said in Was this bad luck?: When you're not a god gamer and can reliably predict the enemy's com movement and ground fire it like Jip, staggering the timing of your nothas usually makes it near impossible to dodge all of them It isn't difficult to predict when the commander keeps circling after the first salvo. Select half your bombers and ground fire where the commander is circling. That way at least some bombers do damage.

There is an assumption here that mongoose and hoplites would be used to counter each other. I would rather use T1 bombers or a gun ACU. What percentage of 1v1 matches between UEF and Cybran have a fight between mongoose and hoplites? 5%? 2%? In mirror matchups, how often do we see mongoose vs mongoose or hoplite vs. hoplite?

Dudes be like “omg just go random” followed by “hey give me t3 aeon/phim/uef/cyb engies min 9 ok ty” Relentlessly shame all tech sharing players as the cowards they are.