Have you tried using the unit called the tech 2 torpedo bomber? It may be useful in this scenario.

@spcr said in Jamming proposals:

make jammers switch the spotted unit with any of the fake ones make radar identifications be lost once visuals are gone make the jammer blobs move in random directions switch radar ID's around (aka a T3 Air fighter could be switched with a T1 scout) and be kept like this until visuals are obtained or the unit leaves the jamming radius, ideally this should mess with defense targetting priorities .

I believe currently these all require modifications to the engine. Position and movement of jammer blobs (1.,3.) is determined in-engine by static values from Lua. I've attempted to change a strategic icon in game (4.) and met with no success. Changing intel status (2.) likewise is an in-engine thing.

Could do an entire re-implementation of jamming in lua with invisible dummy units ("light weight baby").

Ngl intel weapons sound pretty cool.

@sylph_ Originally, the tracking was quite good. As I recall, the strength of the tracking is determined primarily by the projectile's turn rate (in degrees/sec), so simply reducing the turn rate to a very small number can produce interesting effects. For example, in a mod, I once made submarine cruise missiles track moving targets, but with a low turn rate. As such, they were useless against frigates, but effective against carriers and battleships, but a battleship could still dodge the missiles when microed to dodge or stop/accelerate repeatedly.

I think modifying MMLs to have limited tracking like this during the terminal phase - a lower turn rate of maybe 2 or 3 deg/sec - could make them more effective against large and slow-moving units, whilst still ineffective against small/fast units.

As an aside, an interesting note about limited tracking like this is that missiles which miss will tend to hit behind and to the side of the target. Increasing the missile damage radius could also help ensure that missiles which fail to impact the intended target nonetheless hit something else behind it.

@comradestryker said in Non-Cybran stealth:

and just delete their ACU as soon as the match starts so they don't build anything you don't want them to build

That's what I've been doing.
The deleted-ACU AI still meddles from time to time, like occasionally ordering units to attack a base or similar.
Such delected-ACU players seem to upgrade T2 radar to omni once they have more than +90 mass income (and similarly high energy, I assume).
(Once I 'stop' to cancel deleted-ACU-player's omni radar upgrade, they don't seem to re-upgrade it unless I rebuild a T2 radar from scratch.)

I didn't realise they were getting upgraded until I re-visited this topic, having been corrected!

@waffelznoob said in gunships/transports landing on water:

I've noticed u cant target things with gunships landed on water and have to first move them off before being able to give a focus attack order. Bit short on time so can't fact check as im not 1 billion % sure

We can fix that 🙂

Hey guys i lost a battleship because 30 frigs showed up and killed it so I will never make battleships because 30 frigs can kill the battleship.

@warning_potatopc Yes, I always feel that It's akin to aurora vs striker/mantis/thaam, except much 'closer to the wire'. I find that interaction very fun.
(Still, I don't understand these people that build 30 selens and hit the field with them!)

Tactical missiles are literal cheese, sniping HQ or comander or making so many that they easily overwhelm defenses because they are so cheap, build quickly and do massive damage and easy to hide becouse of long range and kill mass wrecks.

I have a hard time using the Solace. If I need to hit something that's behind a lot of AA, I might consider it, but mostly the pure strength in numbers of skimmers.

FWIW, this game is one of the biggest candidates I've seen for 'DPS' (+cost+HP) being factored against 'other stuff'. Particularly how the 'alpha damage' tends to make a unit better against its own or a higher tech level, but often worse against lower tech! Not to mention 'AOE', speed, range, and so many other factors!

I love how even something as universal as DPS is so called into question in FaF.

When I look into balance comparisons between units like harbinger vs othuum, I just love how the DPS and hitpoints get adjusted by AOE, alpha damage, shields, move speed, range, and even abilities like reclaim!

I think it's a great indication of the fact that the ultimate 'test' of balance is often (though not immutably) how often they are used in high-level games, with important consideration for game-type... Rather than just entering values into a spreadsheet and comparing. 🙂

(Regarding harbinger vs othuum, specifically, I imagine it goes something like:)
Othuum > harbinger...
Except when aeon player uses range to deny side-weapons of othuum...
Except when othuum uses target-fire and movement to leverage AOE...
Except when harbinger uses speed to deny the above
except when othuum uses terrain to deny the above
except when harbinger avoids terrain to deny the above
except when othuum uses walls to deny the above
except when harbinger uses reclaim to deny the above.

(Or something to that effect).
I basically just love how much more goes into just about every unit interaction that just cost, DPS and hitpoints.
(Though cost, DPS and hitpoints are certainly some of the most important stats agreed!)

Can you point me in direction of "good" air players whose replays I can watch? Every game I've played I see people in the upper 1k range circling ASFs still and I don't pay enough attention to the top level of players to even know who to watch.

As Nex said, if you already know you're behind it's only logical to get a shield and a SAM as the airplayer and your base turns into an anti-fly-zone. The first ASF can usually snipe the strat then.
Besides that, it's known that t3 air is still pretty oppressive and the balance team is working on fixing that. However the priorities are not only the t3 air so it's not an immediate change since it's not an easy thing to solve besides everything else.

I agree with the Mercy being a stun weapon. That's a cool idea.

Alternatively, maybe it could just do incredible damage, like 30,000, but only against shields. Similar to the rarely used t3 hover unit.

Well - that is just one solution. The other is to 'fix' Sera to behave the same 😄 . Which I think is what was done

Vision changes probably make it harder or no longer possible to maneuver a stealth drop behind enemy lines as Cybran. I didn't check that ingame, but it sounds like +20% vision to everything puts an end to that strategy.

(Torpedo dmg increase or not, I don't see wagners working like submarines, currently. I find the comments about wagners necessitaing torpedo bombers to be really misleading, since if the wagners are doing much of any damage, they are vulnerable to the usual air-to-ground solutions that work against hover units. gunships, bombers etc. If wagners are using torpedoes to clean up submarines and the like, then I stand corrected - but I can't see how it'd happen, currently.)

@tagada I totally agree with the idea that wagners are simply too different from hover units - it seems that comparisons between wagners and hover units are basically not useful.
At the end of the day, the final metric, I think, just has to be whether wagers are:

dominating games, used-but-NOT-dominating, or underused.

My very personal experience is that they are underused, but it's not an important opinion - I'm not pro and have limited experience, so I defer to the opinions of other players. Ultimately, though, I think it's just important to adjust them based on whether they're overperforming or unused, rather than trying to draw parallels to hover units.

please dont flood my post with incorrect takes

That doesn't answer why. What problem exists that this is attempting to solve? And how would it solve it better than balance changes? So... make these mods and play them as mods. Why push them to default game?

Nuke is bad