Why so gay thing exist?
-
Give a replay of them being OP before calling them OP.
Also moved this to the balance forums.
-
@FtXCommando said in Why so gay thing exist?:
Give a replay of them being OP before calling them OP.
-
@Pearl12 That's the thing. I watched the games and if your opponent allows you to spend 72k mass in novax without losing air or doing anything significant then it's not the unit problem but the misplays of other players. A nuke would do way more damage and in mere seconds force at least 40k in mass from enemy team just from existing and then draining even more eco as time progresses.
I didn't just say he's trash after seeing his rating, I watched the goddamn games and I can effin say that it's not the unit's fault for others being the perfect examples of why global is bad for the game.
"Its annoying to shield stuff" - Well, I invested 36k mass in tickle machine, you better be inconvenienced a little.This stuff is useless(or was) compared to arty when it comes to breaking bases. And defending against it was always easier from what I can remember.
And ffs it's still 36k mass, just go and do something fucking useful with it like killing your opponent. Instead of bitching about how it's OP cuz he made a weapon while you made t3 mexes or fucking ras lads.
About counterplay, I threw it once to the balance team but dunno if it went anywhere. But smd should be just able to deny novax, either with normal smd missiles or new setup that would allow to balance the missile cost without affecting the sml/smd ratios.
@Cascade Well no fullshare already fucks up the balance a fucking lot. Like way to much to even discuss it, as it stops being proper seton's game.
Abusing people who are fighting the game instead of enemies also should never be part of equation when it comes to balancing the game.And again, you better be effin annoyed when I spent 36k mass into tickle laser.
-
To be clear, I'm not saying it's OP, I'm just playing devil's advocate. Because it sure as heck is annoying.
It's 36k mass, not 72k. And it completely wrecked ez's eco. A nuke would not have done way more damage, those mexes are too spread out. The Novax killed every single mex not under a shield, at least 200 mass/sec worth of eco and would have been more if they'd all been t3, a nuke would have killed 4 at most.
The "inconvenience" of making shields is fine on a map like Canis; on a map like Seton's... do you know how long it would take to march engies all around and make all those shields? How much power it would take? And still they would die to Novax, it would just take some extra time. Do you really want this game to be about that kind of minutiae?
-
I'm speaking about replay of nancy against bartemaus trying to be Yudi.
And please, don't take that game too seriously considering what was said after the game happened. Especially by Mozy. -
He really only needed 1 shield over air/beach spawn and the expansion for beach and he would have saved 12 extra mexes from the novaxes.
Honestly turin could have just invested the 80kish mass he spent on 2 novaxes into an air win and killed all the mexes with strats like 6 minutes faster.
But yeah, this is basically the best possible case for novax. It's an extremely intensive map which makes preparing for novax to be painful compared to simply sending it to attack outlying mexes. I don't see why it being strong here is some mark of it being OP. Zthuees are strong on dark heart as well, but that doesn't mark them as OP.
-
zthuee strong on any map with water, wdym?
-
fyi you can use mobile shields to stop novax from killing stuff too, they build and move way faster than engineers building stationary shields
-
@FtXCommando said in Why so gay thing exist?:
Show me a replay of novax being the deciding factor in a game.
classic one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQl544Y1uWE
Fairly recent one
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Cm1-IwTREgthe problem is that in both of those games novax is kinda OP
But on something like astrocrater or gap novax will be mostly usefull to kill shields when they are falling under arty fire and not much else at all. -
How is the LotS game an example of novax being OP? There’s like a list of a dozen errors that lost the game before novax even comes into the analysis. It’s cost efficient on the map yeah, but it hardly ever is the reason a game was decided. If it were, Cybran wouldn’t be the common pick on ditch and Seraphim wouldn’t be the common pick on sentons.
-
@keyser said in Why so gay thing exist?:
well that is false. It's true only if you kill the missile with the lazer, but this is bannable.
This issue should be fixed rather codewise.
Nuke projectile should get special armour, as was on ASF, and then set up special damage resistance for this projectile that will be damaged only and only by anti-nuke projectiles. It is not hard to do and it's better as ban people for doing something that game allows.
-
@keyser Why not just make the Yolona nuke invincible?
I never understood why natural parts of a 3D physics simulator sandbox RTS game were bannable.
Its like how they patched out bombing of ASF. Really nonsensical.
Just make asf fly higher than the bomber.
-
plot twist : https://github.com/FAForever/fa/pull/3155
-
Here are my thoughts on the discussion at hand, and some suggestions.
To assess something you need to analyse facts, not opinions. Calculate the correct mass cost for the HP of the unit by comparing to 'balanced' units of similar function. Assess the worth of omni + radar as a numerical mass value while factoring in the radius of the intel provided. Apply comparative analysis between DPS of unit to be assessed with counterpart equivalent. Etc... I'd do this myself by I can't be bothered.
Some feedback on some of the main participants of the discussion:
myEmperor. You started off the discussion by quoting facts. Good start. However your arguments could have been stronger by applying constraints to what should be considered. This would have mitigated a portion of the misinterpretations and deviations from the issue of "is this unit priced correctly?".
Pearl12. Nice impartial arguments. Low use of emotive language was good to see.
FtXCommando. There was a fixation on the idea of "OP" which is different from imbalance. Additionally, you failed to set clear criteria for what would be necessary to prove if something was OP or not. Lastly, individual replays should not be used for assessment. Instead use metadata pertaining to aspects which are not assessable via the unit database.
Khada_Jhin. Excessive use of emotive language. This polarises the argument and provokes unnecessarily charged responses. In the future can you please explain how you obtained the facts which you quote? -
Cringe post stop writing like you're defending a dissertation.
