Aeon T1 addition: heavy tank
-
though I believe it's still under-represented in tournaments
Isn't that because it's the most banned faction?
-
I was unaware aeon t1 stage was so bad they needed a whole new unit.
-
On discord it was earlier discussed to give Aurora a personal shield.
If the LAB becomes a LSB (Light Sniper Bot), the Aurora could get a range nerf (to 19?) and 100 hp / 1 energy personal shield. The aurora is still a tad weak, but the LSB should be better support than T1 arty is for other factions. In addition, micro is still rewarded. You could micro shield depleted Aurora to the back to regenerate before they die.
-
aurora can win in small number vs other tanks if microed do dodge every shot by wiggling
Forumpros doing balance https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wTcguJZh3A .
When a canis player remembers to build more than 3 units https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hjp8xJHuyA . -
@turinturambar really? - awesome
Will try to do that until this is patched in
-
well,that's really the entire point of aurora,not sure why it has to be patched
-
You have a lot of good reasoning and thought put into your suggestion, and I am 100% for new units to an obscene degree (even came in second in last year's new unit competition, which I will bring up constantly). But I don't think this new tank would fit in well with what I think the "vibe" of FAF is.
Aurora are quite strong, and perfectly adequate for the T1 stage, not to mention their performance carries over better to T2 than other factions t1 tank once they get mobile shields and their meat shield, obsidian. They are even unique enough to have their own tactics, attacking from over water out of enemy range, and raiding engines building naval factories. Remembering to make t1 scouts to go with them, and to do the most basic micro of kiting them back (and this is coming from the anti-micro guy), is perfectly fine.
Again, I love new units. Make a mod, it would be awesome. And what war is complete without an arms race? The new small arms every week of WW2 are half the fun. Imagine some long term chromehounds esque multiplayer campaign/tournament where each faction voted every week to add a unit from a mod to their faction roster. Baller.
-
aurora can win in small number vs other tanks if microed do dodge every shot by wiggling
Thanks for your input Turin. In case it wasn't clear, I'm a little more concerned about more average players than yourself (who often struggle to micro effectively and keep up with everything else). Of course it's an open question whether balance should reflect only on the top players (this seems to be Jagged's opinion if I understand correctly) or whether lower-ranked players should be considered (this does have a caveat: under-representation of Aeon at lower ranks may in part be because new players who do well with Aeon advance more quickly than with other factions — but this is pure hypothesis without evidence).
Aurora are quite strong
Well, yes. My point above is that they are too strong in large numbers and too weak individually (though Turin clearly disagrees with this part).
-
@cyborg16 idk about individually, I have not run that test. They seem fine to me, but I'm struggling to get to 900 on global. Is this because I only play Aeon? Maybe. But moreso I play maybe two games a week and it's just Gap.
So, could you stat out your unit? I'd like to see what you have in mind.
-
@KaletheQuick Gap maps are quite different from other types of play with basically no raiding. If you want to get good, 1v1 ladder and replays are your best tools.
I did give a rough idea on stats for the "heavy" T1 tank above. Tuning will be required; perhaps the following will do as a starting point:
Bear: T1 heavy tank
HP: 450, Cost: 90m+400e+420t, vision: 20, speed 3, turn-rate: 90
Weapon: range 0-18, 40dmg / 1.2sec (33.33dps)Aurora: T1 sniper tank
Buf range: 0-29 (from 0-26)
Buf speed: 3.1 (from 3)
Buf HP: 180 (from 155)
Reduce turn rate? (Currently 310 vs 90 for most tanks.)
Reduce DPS: 30dmg / 1.9sec (15.79dps) (from 40/1.7=23.53)Flare: keep the same or nerf slightly? (It's currently the strongest LAB which is okay, but not so necessary with my other changes.)
-
@cyborg16 I know, I am just short on time. Gap is time efficient and less stressful. Easier to relax. Anyway.
Let's summarize your goals here. This thread kinda forked from the "Why noone play Aeon" one, and iirc your goal was to make aeon T1 land more approachable so more people would play it starting at lower levels, right?
-
There is also a very easy and not fun way to adress those problems that you pointed out.
Rise the hp and reduce the range of Aurora. Makeing it similar to other t1 tanks. Same range, and (more or less) same hp. Keep the hover to go over water and dodge, keep the fireing problems related to elevation and slow speed. It will still be faction specific unit.
Not sure if this is good idea, but it might make low-to-medium level players use it as they use other nations... Also almost no balancing to do, and easy to learn for players. -
@wikingest make the extra hitpoints part of a shield, that helps as Aeon is thematically associated with shields
-
@wikingest Kinda reminds me of the "turn off faction bonuses" setting from AOE2. Lol.
-
Aeon, "thematically", has single-purpose units. I feel like a heavy "meatshield" tank (without a range advantage) plus a "sniper" fits this theme. Bombers will still be the bane of Aurora, but now plain Aurora vs other tanks won't work so well. OTOH Aurora as ACU support will still be great. The Aurora as it is today has way too much DPS for its range.
@wikingest equalising range is the easy way out, yes, but boring.
-
Just make a new "Heavy storm bot" that's just a flare with half the DPS and double the HP... And a big fat head
Call it the "cherub" because lol. Doing this avoids the "yet another tank" problem. Though it plays into the "yet another combat bot" problem.
-
@cyborg16 said in Aeon T1 addition: heavy tank:
Aeon, "thematically", has single-purpose
That could advocate seperating the damage dealing from the tanking
-
@kalethequick It seems more for me like "turn off one shortcoming for one nation. Shortcoming that is ruining this nation for most users." I am basing my words on this post and this one https://forum.faforever.com/topic/2673/why-is-aeon-1-disliked-2-inaccessible-and-3-most-unfun-units-but-4-most-fun-units/33
Now if this type of change will end up making even less players use Aeon, then of course, this was a bad idea. I might be wrong.
@Cyborg16 As I said: "very easy and not fun way to adress those problems". In the same time, no law obliges to add more and more complexity all the time. Game is seen as quite complex already. We have sniper gameplay already in t3 level.
@Valki Having shield would certainly add in faction diversity. Making people protect power and avoid stalling. In the same time not makeing nation impossible to use on big open maps.
-
@wikingest I didn't mean to imply you intended to remove all faction diversity. Just that it reminded me of the feature from another game.
And is aurora actually that bad?
-
@kalethequick "is aurora actually that bad?" This is THE QUESTION. If we could answer that objectively...
I play quite a lot of Aeon on multiplayer. But not because of Aurora. I like other parts of this nation. Aurora losing range and earning hp would not bother me at all, I would rather be glad.
Now personally I dont see myself playing Aeon on big open map on 1v1. As on 1v1 you dont choose the map, I would not use it at all on 1v1. Changeing aurora could change that. (There is still problem with t1 navy, but this is minor compared to Aurora.)
I think changeing Aurora would reduce game's diversity( as nations diversity), and as more people would use Aeon, would add on games diversity( as games played would have more diversity, more Aeon involved) . This is only my opinion. It might apply to some other players, or not.
