@comradestryker said in Sparky Rationalization:
It's literally in their name! "Field Engineer"! Their role is to be within the mix of your units, (especially with the Jamming ability). A Sparky is not a backline engineer. Building front-line factories should be an ability it has, rather than leaving that job to standard T1 engies in the back.

I totally understand your point. We simply load the term field engineer differently. For me, engineers at the front secure reclaim and build intel, possibly a firebase. Therefore it is logical for me that he should build T1 factories because we don't build T2 reclaiming factories that build Sparkies for that.
Since the most dangerous part is gaining reclaim (when not factory reclaiming), not building the factory. I simply see it as a quality-of-life change, which is good, because currently, the unit sucks.
For me, he is aggressive, because he can not be used for base/eco building.
That was my main point towards people who say Sparky is not allowed to be buffed because he may replace T2 engis.

My point of view is based on the belief that every unit should have a practical purpose and if you guys fear balance issues I would like to add, that if this would we the case, we may buff other factions in their identity or nerf his other stats.
I favour a buffing balancing approach, especially if we are able to give more features not stats. This way FaF feels cool and fresh and is able to deal with (upcoming) competitors.

@tankenabard that's true, I'm really happy to see this change 🙂

SACU rebalance is old enough to read by this point

I'm also against adding radar to all units for performance reasons.

@pearl12
This has been driving me batshit lately. It didn't use to be a problem, or perhaps I simply haven't noticed it, but recently I've seen factories just idle for a good half minute before they decide to go to work.

@accidental_aeon said in Torp bombers are too strong vs subs:

I am a 1600 Setons player and Torp bombers seem pretty balanced to me. One potential nerf to Torp bombers is to increase the value of their mass reclaim. As it stands, when a torp bomber dies above water, its mass reclaim is reduced compared to when it dies above land. If we removed this difference then Torp bombers would be a more significant mass donation when used.

All air-to-ground units are inherently mass donations. By definition, when the air-to-ground unit dies it is above hostile ground forces which could reclaim its wreck. The key downside to torp bombers is that you have to push with navy or hover to get the reclaim from the fight. Otherwise, they are just as much a mass donation as gunships or bombers.

Due to its very long distance between navy spawns and the complete lack of anything raidable by navy, setons is not a map where the torp vs early game navy (think subs, frigs, a few destros) dynamic exists.

great team 🙂

Give me access to the secret discords and I'm in.

@xayo said in Suggestion for hoplites and mongoose.:

I am curious to hear what higher-rated players think about this. At my rating (~1800), I find that the unexpected behavior of units & ACU not shooting while turning makes engagements more unpredictable. I do not like this unpredictable element in RTS games. Due to the low tick rate of Faf, it's also not possible to fix the turning-mismicro once it occurs. But maybe some Godgamer will now tell me that's just a skill issue on my part, and I should think about turning times and movement radii before issuing movement orders.

Yea I'm not a big fan of the behavior either, so I sympathize with the OP. Idk about the proposed numbers though.

I suppose you could also let them build naval yards.

That doesn't feel as thematic though.

@melanol https://github.com/FAForever/fa/pull/4225

I want to have a aoe and damage anything over time aspect as well as volatility. Think of the damage effect beging similar to a uef t1 bomber and if the mercy gets shot down it still does the damage wherever it lands at. You could still snipe acus but you need more. You could hit t1 armies and even they get shot down in progress it still might do damage. If it's headed to a acu or a t2 pgen and gets shot down it will probably miss.

An aircraft just sitting there would be shot down easily that's probably why it's not standard behavior as a bomber is supposed to drop first and then it gets shot as it passes over while a gunship gets shot at the whole time.

Thank you for this craptonn of work. amazing stuff so far

Wanted to know, is this any way to ask AI to share a unit? Like a T2 engi for Cyb hive or sacu

Also does it understand map pings?

Jamming on scouts and strats should just be a given tbh

@maudlin27 said in Shouldn't T1 Torpedo Launchers have some advantage over T2?:

T3 mobile arty is in no way comparable to a destroyer in terms of its role and functionality though.

I think they are quite comparable, as a destro also needs support frigates or it will just be overrun. So the destros role is breaking the stalemate between two frigate forces, as you are able to attack from farther away. They also deal with subs, but they are kind irrelevant. If they were good torp launchers would also be more useful.
So making the pd outrange the unit, that's supposed to break the stalemate, will create boring situations where people just stare at each other.

@maudlin27 said in Shouldn't T1 Torpedo Launchers have some advantage over T2?:

Giving +10 range to T2 torpedo launcher would mean 2 seconds extra firing against a destroyer (who move at a speed of 5), a less than 10% boost

Assuming the destro rushes head on at the torp launcher, which would be suicide if your opponent has frigs nearby. So you are forced to stay out of range, and nobody can shoot. Or you would need an overwhelming force to break the position.

Imagine you get vet on the loya after microing it heavily and then it... slows down?

Give increase build power or reclaim range to vetted engi so that even late game T1 engi can at least reclaim wrecks and wreck fields really fast

If it applies to ACU's it could be balance in two ways.

By buffing the vet bonuses because they take longer to earn. This would also reward "courageous" acu positioning, or very good acu control when unupgraded. Excluding ACU's from the change. This would be the most simple logical solution, but there might be technical issues with implementation.

If you can somehow achieve a tac snipe (which is extremely hard), cant you send 1 t2 bomber / t1 bomber to just drop one bomb? 99% of the time most ACUs have taken damage so it really shouldnt be an issue