@ftxcommando said in Game version 3741: Sneak peaks:
That TMD change seems like it hugely shifts the balance of basebreaking back to the defender since TMD is way cheaper than cruisers and part of the reason you could eventually break bases came from the fact dumping a giant line of TMD was never efficient and you had to both waste space so they wouldn’t shoot the same thing and waste buildtime as your engies move from isolated TMD to isolated TMD. It also encouraged slowly breaking TMD since them being spaced out meant all TMD aren’t covered by all other TMD.
This could make it orders of magnitudes more painful to break bases, especially competently shielded ones.
My take on this:
- It's about navy vs base. This has never been balanced, excepting that "navy should be OP vs land to prevent stalemate".
- Worse, it's about a specific case of cruiser TML vs base: only two factions have such cruisers anyway. The proper solution vs bases is battleships, or maybe the Aeon missile ship.
- Aren't cruisers massively OP vs TMD anyway? The biggest issue is when those TMD are shielded too. But this is where battleships are (again) better: they aren't countered by TMD.
- Cruisers' primary function is AA, and secondary is TMD. Having them able to kill distant mexes etc. is an interesting addition, but having them somewhat cost-effective at destroying base defence too is weird (too many roles).
Hmm... maybe we should have T2 missile ships, or cheaper variants of the T3 subs or something, just for missiles, and remove the cruiser TML completely? That way navy players must choose between building AA and missile-launchers. Otherwise, at least let TMD properly counter cruiser missiles.