• TMD could be cheaper

    37
    0 Votes
    37 Posts
    2k Views
    F

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

  • sera t3 subs have become op?

    13
    0 Votes
    13 Posts
    1k Views
    S

    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.

  • Make obsidian shield regen useful

    Moved
    9
    1 Votes
    9 Posts
    745 Views
    S

    @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.

  • Soul Ripper

    7
    0 Votes
    7 Posts
    634 Views
    E

    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.

  • T3 Land is kinda unbalanced now

    8
    1 Votes
    8 Posts
    806 Views
    TheWeakieT

    @toka said in T3 Land is kinda unbalanced now:

    What I do not really get is the build cost nerf.I do not get why sera snipers got nerf in build cost more than the aeon ones and the difference in nerf is 10%!

    This was probably done (don't exactly remember since it was 1.5 years ago) to make both snipersbots have the mass mass to bt ratio. The buildtimes were always the same but the sera sniper has always been 10% more expensive than the aeon one. (more dps, more hp, more range in 2nd fire mode + the best mobile shield in the game to support it). The general rule of thumb when deciding on unit bt is for it to have similar/same ratio's as similar type units. For example each frigate has a different mass cost and bt but each of them have the same ratio. You can see this as "sera sniper was always supposed to have more bt but it didn't, this fixed the wrong stat".

    @toka said in T3 Land is kinda unbalanced now:

    Together with the patch 3750 the energy cost was increased three times and mass cost was decreased by 10%. I do not feel this was needed that much. For example in case of sera, sniper was the best unit on t3 stage not because it was imbalanced, but because t3 tank is not as good compared to percivals, harbs and bricks. However, when we get an army of percies against army of snipers, together with t2 shields u make just a little bit of balance when percies attack, because tons of shields absorb damage and recharge, allowing percies to barely suffer damage when they get to the target. Only bricks used to have no real counter against snipers. Ok, this is just my opinion, can be argueable.
    But the damage radius nerf was something that was reason for not seeing snipers in lobbies anymore, i literally almost never see people spaming them, specially for sera, cause it makes barely sense now to use them against any other faction, UEF counters them easily with t3 mml (they are faster and have more range then snipers and tbh I have never seen someone doding anything with snipers, cause they are not moblie, logically), about bricks I will talk a bit later, cause I have more to say about them.
    Summing up, we see that snipers were nerfed with no real compensation for that, cause the nerf was way too strong and the other units were buffed in the patch 3775.

    Just to give you some insight: The old snipers were close to an autowin tool in high lvl lobbies and completely unfun to play against. You could not catch them because they would kill everything trying to chase it down and often the only potential counter would be a specific t4 (fatty or ahwassa) or a t2 arty base. The issue however was that you would start scaling your sniperbots from the moment you reached the t3 stage and they would snowball farming free damage over time. I remember seeing yudi making such an obese sniperbot/shield stack that even a mega getting close to it would live for 15 seconds before it would die to the second sniper volley.

    The main idea behind the patch 3775 change was to revamp it in a way to make it more fun to play with/against it.

    Increase the e cost by a lot for 2 reasons:
    - You can't blatantly rush t3 land and instantly start spamming snipers. The idea is that you should build main t3 tanks instead and only after you build your first t3 pgen you can start spamming snipers. This prevents the snowbal sniper blob from forming this early into the game.
    - It makes it harder to maintain a massive sniperbot stack since it requires a lot of shields with e drain + it requires extra e drain on the factories making more sniperbots Decrease the max radius and unit movement speed so there should be a lot more active gameplay involved when playing with or against sniperbots since you won't have as much room available to move around (just for reference aeon snipers still have almost double a percies range + higher speed). The goal was to make sniperbots feel more similar (to some degree) as how you would use mongoose, where you can abuse the higher range and relatively fast speed on them, but you have to pay more attention since the difference in ranges is smaller. Compared to the previous sniperbot gameplay of having a massive stack slowly move forwards while everything runs away from it this seemed like an improvement to the gameplay.

    The lowered masscost was supposed to counteract these changes. I did however just now when writing this post realise that buildtimes weren't changed together with the masscost. I don't remember whether that was done on purpose or not, but it is important to note that with a bigger unit revamp like this it's impossible to foresee all the consequences of said change. I do think that lowering their unit bt by a bit would make sense though since you still wouldn't be able to rush them out (since lowered bt would increase the e drain on the fac even more).

    I don't really recognize some of the problems you describe though. Percies with shields pushing into snipers with shields still is no easy thing at all. A very important thing to keep in mind is that you need to get close with your percies, but othuums and harbs beat percies mass to mass in close range (especially with your own mobile shields). And even if the percies win the brawl with the harbs/othuums your snipers are still at the back doing free damage over time. The brawl most likely got most of the percy shields down so your snipers can finish them off. If the percies don't commit to the brawl and back off slightly when the harbs are coming for them you can just copy his movement with your harbs. This leads to a lot of back and forth movement while your snipers keep doing damage (i know you said there's a shield stack, but realistically speaking you should not have that many shields to just prevent damage for free and if you do your opponent should have a way bigger army).

    @toka said in T3 Land is kinda unbalanced now:

    You can say that they got buffed, but looking to other units, except for harbs, percies and bricks have gained more buff in speed, looking for a percentage, you can calculate if you want, whereas harbs have gained almost same speed buff.
    Now let's talk about bricks, why the hell they got buffed so much? I literally see no reason for that. Compared to percies, they can be used against t1, t2,t3 and t4, whereas percies are used mainly against t2-t3 and can be countered by t1 spam. Percies used to be better in the case of the battle against t3 and t4 units, because of the range, but now bricks:
    A) have same range
    B) have more hp
    C) have better speed
    D) wider range of use
    This even not talking about bricks against othuums and harbs. Harbs in general are not bad.
    The main problem I have seen in cybran is lack of mobile shields, but this can not be balanced just by making bricks op.
    So this is my opinion about the t3 units.
    It would have been a bullshit without my personal suggestion on balance.
    My suggestion would be following:
    Nerf bricks and give cybran mobile stealth generator an ability of regen aura (I think this is a good fit for cybran cause all the mechanics consider them having low hp but regen). This might be too strong, so also making a new unit (regen aura generator) is not as bad.
    About othuums I have just an overview of how they whould be. Eather make them very fast or make them having more hp.
    Snipers in my opinion should get the old range of attack, cost can remain same.

    First of all the easy things. The speed buffs were more of a "lets increase t3 land unit general effectiveness vs t4's by a bit". This followed a 0.1 speed increase for almost all t2 land units over a year ago btw. Aside from that i think this change can be mostly ignored for t3 land balance.

    The brick range was simply needed since the lack of mobile shields made bricks almost unplayable in teamgames. I remember some games vs blodir where i had a gun/nano uef acu (early game upgrades) and i managed to kill 20 to 30 bricks with it. Now imagine an acu with a shield upgrade as well. There is just nothing cybran could do against it. I know there are issues that the +2 range causes, because outside of acu's bricks were already a solid unit even without the extra range increase (i dislike the change myself as well, but think it's a necessary evil until we have a better solution). This change is supposed to be (partially?) removed when the cybran absolver is there, but the details on that are yet to be decided.

    Othuums i agree are too bad to properly compete currently, hence why this is currently on fafdevelop.
    https://puu.sh/K8SKc/c0a3602617.png
    Not saying this is the only change they will get (after all balancing is a continuous process) but othuums are definitely on my radar as a problem child.

  • Novax needs to be nerfed, here's why.

    Moved
    100
    0 Votes
    100 Posts
    9k Views
    D

    If you are in a game where anyone builds 8 novax uncontested then you should be very happy when that game ends no matter what team you are on.

  • T2 gunships hit inties

    7
    0 Votes
    7 Posts
    506 Views
    ZLOZ

    people make their soul ripper or CZAR to fire ground on purpose to have them "accidentally" hit inties

    in fact i remember soul ripper easy win vs 600 t1 inties (unless you make inties move around on move command so they don't clump up)
    this problem was fixed for CZAR and ASFs by applying special armor on ASF against CZAR laser

  • Talking about the Fatty

    94
    2 Votes
    94 Posts
    9k Views
    SaverS

    @krapougnak THX 🙂

  • Deconfuse Aeon SACU torso upgrades

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    298 Views
    T

    I've used Nano before, but I've never directly compared performance of the first personal shield upgrade to Nano. Nano was good for raiding, as long as you can yoyo the SACU in and out of combat, but by the time SACUs hit the field there are also T3s. It reminds me of the Nano/T2-T3 upgrades for the UEF commander, how they have their uses.

  • wrecks

    8
    0 Votes
    8 Posts
    432 Views
    JipJ

    Wrecks for finished experimental units appear again 👍 , see also:

    https://github.com/FAForever/fa/releases/tag/3802
  • Satellite overperforming.

    44
    0 Votes
    44 Posts
    4k Views
    P

    Sat scaling is the main thing that really makes them hard to manage.

    What if they had a power drain as a limiting factor-? This isn't a major change, just a response to scaling.

    Won't break the unit, won't make it unviable, just respond to scaling issue.

  • T3 air and SAMS

    1
    2 Votes
    1 Posts
    277 Views
    No one has replied
  • Is it only really me who finds the cybran t2 destroyer op?

    11
    0 Votes
    11 Posts
    832 Views
    T

    The only times I can think of were myself or friends have used a Salem on land was to transfer them from one pond to another, impromptu point defense, or early siege tactics with some kind of backup. Direct assaults with these have never been good. Perhaps if the torpedo launcher doubled as a short range rocket on land, but that's just getting weird.

  • Absolver

    66
    6 Votes
    66 Posts
    5k Views
    maudlin27M

    While I'm ok with Cybran gaining a shield disruptor unit (per my post a long time ago in this thread), I really dont like the idea of also removing the absolver from the game, which seems to be the current plan.

    FYI for those viewing this thread, there's a discord thread which discusses this aspect (the Absolver removal, as opposed to Cybran gaining a shield disruptor unit) further:
    https://discord.com/channels/197033481883222026/1205788137742274600

  • T2 used for sniping just makes for a sad game

    28
    -2 Votes
    28 Posts
    2k Views
    veteranasheV

    Back when I used to play gap games and someone's com was out front too long I would just start moving engies to their base, get out ahead of it.

  • Air Balance Mod

    4
    1 Votes
    4 Posts
    491 Views
    IndexLibrorumI

    Well done! Changes sound sensible, I highly approve of you trying to increase faction diversity, and carefully agree with your stance on the balance team consisting of mostly 2k's. We'll have to see if these changes play well.

  • This idea will make you angry (don't read it)

    6
    3 Votes
    6 Posts
    828 Views
    F

    @thomashiatt said in This idea will make you angry (don't read it):

    Most 1v1 games you ma

    The second half of the idea is (soft) requiring a T2 pgen for T2 mex upgrades as well.

  • 0 Votes
    14 Posts
    993 Views
    ArranA

    What if, when replacing an upgrade, you didn't immediately lose the old upgrade, only losing it when the new upgrade is complete. This would make switching and having to cancel the upgrade less punishing.

  • Thoughts on the lots games and balance implications?

    15
    2 Votes
    15 Posts
    1k Views
    Karl-K

    @indexlibrorum wait a minute isnt the whole point of the balance team that they are pros and arguing for the balance changes from the top looking down

  • Improve mass storage utility in game

    8
    -1 Votes
    8 Posts
    451 Views
    FtXCommandoF

    Losing mass in storage is false depth, nobody is making attacks on the notion of how far “up” your mass storages are to gauge whether it makes putting extra resources into the attack worth it or not. If it has zero impact on player attacking decisions, it serves nothing besides some “wouldnt it be cool” factor.

    You need entirely new ui elements that make it clear what mass is in storage to make that reasonable.