Titan shield recharge after collapse OP.
-
@rezy-noob @Terminal Lol Titans doesn't lose mass for mass vs harbs because they can choose when to engage because they are faster so your point is kinda nonsense too
-
So harbs don’t lose mass for mass against percies, glad we got these balance issues sorted.
-
@giebmasse
OP was a sensationalist post.
Balance threads like this never have meaning. BTW OP only lacked ETHOS and JUSTIFICTION. ETHOS can be "I'm a X rated player (not 2000+ so no one will care about anything written thereafter). I play Aeon (bias confirmed). The Titan is OP because it trades better than literally any other unit. Post written with 1v1 and team games in mind." JUSTIFICTION can be "Make Titan ShieldRechargeTime = 18 seconds. This keeps it better than the Harb (for no good reason other than to pander to UEF sims) so as to keep its viability as a raid unit, compared to a core combat unit (see the logic flaw yet?). This increase/nerf will not affect its in combat performance (a lie bc 12sec is enough for recharge during fight) while hampering its sustain potential, allowing Titans that have snuck through into the back lines to be more easily cleaned up. As it stands it is too hard to clean up a titan run by because of their shield compared to the loyalist with no BS super quick recharging shield (true fact). This 6 second increase will greatly help (it might, but we'll never know bc balance posts are almost as useful as screaming in a vacuum) balance this aspect of the game."
As one of the people who used the guidelines before they were made and was happy when they were made, I'll just say that they don't work and I don't see the point in making the effort anymore. Sure they make the OP nice, but the trash comments which follow are demoralising. You spend over an hour fact checking, making evidence, only for Joe Blog to say something dumb like, "you can't compare between factions" or some other BS riddled with flaws that clearly didn't take an iota of time compared to your OP.
Some responses (because it's fun poking the beehive)
@Dragun101 Nice post. Just missing anything concrete. Why for instance, would the titan be broken, unusable if it took 18 seconds not 12? Would it not still be almost as good at before? If the balance team had made this change without telling you, would you have noticed? (the answer's no)
@Terminal Statistics is in game balance. If it wasn't, what are we even talking about? Titans lose to harbs, and loyalists and strategic bombers. The only relevant comparison among those was the loyalist. Even that has nuances. Like only winning with ~200hp. Also this was only because of alpha damage. Lastly, you didn't notice that had the fight lasted ONE SECOND LONGER the titan would have gotten its entire shield back and won instead? "But that didn't and won't happen" you'll say. With micro and a big messy battle, dropping out of range for 1 second is very realistic. In fact, it's very common. Who am I? Not a 2bit hack.
@Nex Harb buff you think I ask for? What folly. They would be high as the sky OP if they got buffed. Rather, I ask for a Titan nerf. Just so happens that loyalists don't have shields, so my next closest point of reference is the Harb. I do not want titan=harb. I want titan=loyalist. Cybran needs a leg up in T3 land when against UEF, or do you also disagree with that.
Please, anyone, give me a good REAL reason why the Titan NEEDS to be kept the same. Why it is essential that Titans have a vastly faster shield recharge than any other unit.@ftxcommando said in Titan shield recharge after collapse OP.:
Why does OC depleting a harb’s shield not instantly kill it but it instantly kills asylums? Change it immediately.
I don't often agree with what you write, but on this instance I agree (leaves a bad taste in my mouth). Not completely agree (no pink flying elephants yet). Just agree enough that damage should carry over from the OC onto shield, into HP.
Can anyone tell me the last time the UEF got nerfed? Just asking for a friend. I wonder why I can't remember. Looks up in the thread... Ah... The warriors.
Also yea, @Giebmasse, lock the thread if you want. Also make guidelines for posts in threads while you're at it. -
Cybran has Monkeylord/Cheap Land Based Frontline Experimental. And one UEF Design schemas is conception of rotation unit shields during engagements.
And you’d be surprised by random shit I notice or note tbf
-
Salt and topic deviation. Ah. I missed the forums. Feels nice being on the immature side
"Come to the dark side, we have salt and cookies". - Forum salt miners. -
UEF nerfs:
drone bug fix
drone cost increase
ACU nano change
ACU hp change
ACU suite bp change
ACU shield change
ACU nano change
shieldboat
percy rebalance
t1 bomber nerf
pillar nerf
mongoose nerf
parashield nerf
ravager nerf
ambassador nerf
t3 gunship nerf
T3 navy stage in general since Aeon has the overall stronger T3 stage atm. -
I was being sarcastic, but now we're here - didn't the janus also get nerfed at some point too? [more topic deviation]
-
@arran said in Titan shield recharge after collapse OP.:
Dude please use some interpunction, this garbage is literally unreadable. -
haha! Yep. I can't even read it, and I wrote it!
-
Loya are supposed to close the distance and theoretically scale better than titans as a group of units due to the stun effect on death. Individually titans are supposed to be ever so slightly better if micro is taken into account.
Main issue is that Cybran has no synergistic early t3 stage ACU upgrade for survivability like UEF so keeping ACU around during large loya/titan combat is way more risky. Cybran also doesn’t have a parashield to provide survivability for their loyalists against harbs/othuums.
-
@arran said in Titan shield recharge after collapse OP.:
If the balance team had made this change without telling you, would you have noticed?
Then why are your requesting this change, if people wouldn't notice the difference?
-
Titans were garbage for years, there's nothing wrong with them currently. Never saw anybody complaining about them on their own, it's only when people look at X faction and then foolishly try to make some false equivalency that these debates even start.
-
The list grows on.
-
Problem
The Titan has less DPS per mass than Harbinger allowing the Aeon to walk over UEF during the early T3 stage when Percies are not yet viable.Data (from Unit DB)
Harb DPS/mass = 0.381 Titan DPS/mass = 0.3125Yes. Harbs get over 20% more DPS/mass than Titans. This is unacceptable!
Fix this.Solution(s)
Options:1.) Reduce Harb DPS to 262.5
2.) Increase Titan DPS to 182.88 (same DPS/mass as Harb).
Or anything in-between options 1 and 2 which are extremes. -
Locking the thread since the OP didn't provide meaningful arguments for this nerf/buff.
The titans (& loyas) will already get nerfed upcoming patch because we are reverting the BT buff they received in the last patch since it allowed them to get onto the field too quickly harming the T2 stage too much. -
T Tagada locked this topic on
-
28 replies in 8 hours?
Damn I wish my weekly discussions got that kind of activity.
-
A post for clarification:
The current status of the shield of the Titan is very much intended. Their strength is supposed to be speed and a shield that allows you to take short engagements, kill lower-tech units then kite away while not losing HP. This is by design and is supposed to reward good micro and using your units to their strengths. On the other hand, Harb is a hybrid between a raiding unit and a frontline tank. It has more HP, more DPS, and absolutely wrecks Titans mass for mass in a direct engagement. Both of these units have their strengths and weaknesses. You can't just take 2 stats and compare them to each other. You need to not only take into account the whole units but whole unit rosters (need to think how the "power budget" is distributed among the faction's unit roster. Eg. how strong Percy is, and how strong Snipers are). Even if unit A is a bit weaker than unit B perhaps the faction that has unit A also has unit C that is stronger than its counterpart. As long as units serve their specific purpose then there is no reason to make all units equally good.
