Pathing stuff like this is really tied into the engine so there's not much we can do. I think you can't even make ACUs path over units because it would automatically apply that 1x1 footprint to all 1x1 units (all t1-t3). So a lot of it is wishful thinking unless you dive deep into reverse engineering. I think this would be a good thing as I dont believe players consider the known poor pathing in this game to be a positive aspect. The bad pathing has cemented itself in the game's balance and micro so for some it is a positive aspect just to diversify supcom from other games, even though it has its frustrating moments.

If you limit the number of SACUs a player is allowed to summon from the gates (like in, the command doesn't allow you to risk these "student" commanders too much), you can make them stronger than other units for similar cost.

@crustaceanMODE Recall should be fixed after the recent patch 3815.

@Nuggets said in Siren and Command missile defense: In an actual game it seems like the cybran cruiser tml or defelection doesnt exist. It MAYBE useful against 1 early tml or billy but thats it. What is even the point of redirecting missiles in a navy fight? You gonna redirect cruiser missiles at cruisers (while not even catching all), which just get destroyed? There's more to the game than pure functionality - it is also aesthetically quite pleasing to see in my point of view. It just adds a bit of faction diversity. If I recall correct it was just a production test to see how the defense would hold up in practice. It's up to the balance team to keep it or not. Just a pull request revert away and then it's back to the old zappers .

@arran i dont have much time currently and not really intrested in deep research of other units unless i'll see some really bad stats like vulthoo buildtime, i am not a balance team member after all (coding veto system rn)

Isn't the sub almost three times faster as well? Move speed is super important in navy battle. I've never seen bricks crush navy at all btw.

@Firv, with other late-game upgrades, you get maybe a few minutes of value before the armies become too big to face, whereas billy you can potentially keep using to good effect almost indefinitely right now, sitting cozy under shields behind percy walls, lobbing rockets across the map. The risk hardly increases as the game progresses, like it does for other com upgrades, since there's not much incentive to get anywhere close to threats in order to use it. In addition, because armies tend to get bigger and less wieldy, the care you have to put into your aim actually goes down as time goes on. Plus, you can pair it with t3 which is a defensive upgrade. The change I suggested wouldn't mean you absolutely must bring the com into knife distance either. Also, it doesn't impact tele billy at all, because in that scenario you're shooting at helpless and static targets. If you're hunting armies, teleporting is actually worse than airlifting because you can't adjust your destination as the move orders shift around plus your fire rate is shit.

@FreadyFish You are a legend! I'll try it out VS Ai first then see if I can get people on discord to try it out in my games. EDIT: Thank you for adding helpful comments as it really helps me understand the code.

Also, add an energy cost to the Satellite that increases as the Satellite gets further from its command centre. Reason: Teleportation range has been nerfed with a variable energy cost and charge time depending on range. This was because unlimited and unrestricted range was too strong. The Novax Satellite having unlimited range is a similar problem. Credit for the idea: https://forum.faforever.com/topic/7080/satellite-overperforming/44

That is absolutely the case of skill issue despite rating. Source: me, a 1.9k-2k player who has permanent skill issues every time I try to play

Nobody in FAF has a problem with a lazy way of reclaim, that’s why it already exists and costs minimal apm. What people had a problem with is making the lazy way of reclaim much stronger which in turn removes one of the tradeoffs of apm in the game. For loads and loads of players it is actively better to spend 0 apm and just zoom out and look at the map for 10 seconds to figure out the next 50 seconds than it is to spam clicking for 10 seconds on units, reclaim, or anything else.

I have just created a mod that rebalances the tml.[image: 1722345348931-zgdhnbsdhjnsrt.jpg] problems with the tml as I see them; 6k damage for very little cost no risk vs reward factor, if tml doesnt work you risk/lose nothing and can reclaim the tml tml can be fired way too quickly and kill an opponents whole base in about 10 seconds spreading tmd around takes time Key changes; -Missile energy cost's have been increased significantly to create a risk factor of energy stalling when making tmls." -Missile mass costs have been slightly increased. -Missile damage has been reduced to 2k so that it doesnt kill the reclaim but still enough to snipe t2 mexes -Capacity has been reduced to 1 other than cybran as their launcher has 4 launch tubes so makes sense -TML build rate has been increased so that assisting is less powerful. -TML explosion damage has been increased to match missile damage at 2k, so dont stand near it if it gets destroyed, again creating a risk factor for tml use."

In ta it's balanced by arm having the fark, fast assist and repair knot, so having a necro sacu for cybran while uef gets a pretty slick engineer sacu probably would work out.

@mopeytotem the next meeting were going to trial a discord stage where people can join and listen in but game and balance team can still talk.

Alright, seems like there are relatively few objections to this. I've notified the people who might work on this to pay attention to this feedback.

TML com is not rare, it is however quite expensive and requires alot of power. TML launcher is alot cheaper

For me it's not a problem that T3 subs are strong against water units, but the anti-air ability is just op. I would take the anti-air away from the T3 subs. The current situation is that if your opposite T3 Sera Subs, you basically have to do the same or you lose.

@sainserow said in Make obsidian shield regen useful: Alternative proposition for Nomander (copied from Discord). Losing 300 HP is also too much so we can try to go for something that keeps its HP but makes the regen more comparable to recharge: Shield Regen Rate: 2 -> 9 Honestly I think this idea is even better than my original one since cutting of 300 hp can be indeed too much even in spite of higher shield regen. Maybe it can be balanced with a little bit higher power drain but no hp/shield nerf.

I'm pretty sure that's true at every level. t1 is more mass efficient than t2, t2 more than t3, t3 more than t4. This is also why you can't balance purely off of a spreadsheet though, there's so much more to it.