Balance Patch 3750 - Feedback

first things first.. thx for the work guys.

maybe i need more games to get used to the new patch. 90 % is great and make sence. but messing with the buildpower means u lose every feeling for timings. its not like u make diffent things with old tools. its more that u have diffrent tool now. i am not a fan of that.

Wdym by messing with the bp? Which changes are you referring to?

especially the hives...

Almost every past bt/bp change was more impactfull for timings than the current hive change. The only hive bp "timing" change i can think of is nukerush on dual gap and that's it.

well i am a gapplayer. this map shows u what is imba. is gap balanced is everthing else also balanced.

It was clear that Aeon needed a nerf in their t2 phase. Not because of the Asylum but because of cough cough Chrono dampener. I am VERY happy with this change. The sniper bot nerf was a long time coming. Good change but I fear this may be a little too harsh of a nerf. Lets wait and see.

The kennel buff is a straight up buff to the paragon (which was needed imo). In a team game it is now easier than ever to get kennels and spam units with a paragon.

I have no clue how the Soul Ripper rework or the Bulwark rework will function. The tempest is infamous for its ability to melt shield boats. I think we may see similar behavior for other battleships now which makes the tempest less special.

My only problem with the patch is the hives nerf. Cybran shielding is balanced around hives assisting. Nerfing hives means nerfing cybran shielding which is already atrocious. Without buffs elsewhere this looks like a straight up nerf to Cybran in almost all situations with no buffs elsewhere. I am no fan of Cybran and this doesn't make me happy to play it anymore.

@lord_asmodeus said in Balance Patch 3750 - Feedback:

T1 bombers are good in t1 stage yes especially for engi snipe but with new engi mechanics lets wait and see if you can dodge easier.

What? Can you elaborate, i must've missed/forgotten something

@waffelznoob
Engineers
Engineer pathfinding is one of the most frustrating things in FAF. With the changes to their Turn rate, Back up distance, and Acceleration/Deaccelaration we hope to finally alleviate those issues. These changes will also make engineers more micro'able, especially in the early stages of the game eg. vs T1 bombers. If you want to read more take a look at this PR that Jip made.

We are also buffing the efficiency of higher-tech engineers. They will now get more bp while having the same cost.

T1 engineers 10.4 mass/bp
T2 engineers 10 mass/bp
T3 engineers 9.6 mass/bp

-well as i told before - zero nukes hit any base after patch. nukes were nerfed too much. Bringing so big changes to the cost always ruins overall balance and will require cost change again. I offer change to cost in mass to 15000 energy 310 000 and small reduction in mass cost to sub nukes too.
-sattelites cost or specification were not changed meaning they are much cheaper and effective than arties. I offer Mass cost change +15% (they are too cheap) and energy cost + 35%.
-all T4 buildings cost should be recalculated. because stupid rush of these kind of building is the most simple way to win requring zero brain and skills from a player.
Paragon: Mass 275k energy 8m + reduce mass output to 7000 mass\second
Mavor: Mass 255k energy 7m + slow down firing rate by 1 second
Salvation: Mass 240k energy 6m
Scathis: Mass 230k energy 5m
Yolona Oss: Mass 195k energy 11m

I got nuked just yesterday after a corsair hit-squad suicided on my smd. That nuke killed 56k mass, without leaving any reclaim. The nuke still has great value. Just instead of trying to overwhelm the opponents ability to defend with SMDs by rushing more nukes quicker, you now have to integrate this strategy with other tools.

Aeon frig felt great the first time I used it. But I am afraid with some micro practice this might get very oppressive.

@xayo said in Balance Patch 3750 - Feedback:

I got nuked just yesterday after a corsair hit-squad suicided on my smd. That nuke killed 56k mass, without leaving any reclaim. The nuke still has great value. Just instead of trying to overwhelm the opponents ability to defend with SMDs by rushing more nukes quicker, you now have to integrate this strategy with other tools.

Aeon frig felt great the first time I used it. But I am afraid with some micro practice this might get very oppressive.

I know you play high ranked games but still most of u rely on single smd which is always weak point. noob gappers of 1000+ rating does not do mistakes other 2k players do every time - this is quite funny.
Your own mistakes not a reason to high nerf of nukes. They became almost obsolete after the patch. I could barely use them - there is almost no point to do land nukes at least.

You playing dual gap no longer able to do 1 strat of min 15 nuke is not a reason to revert nerf.

@waffelznoob In latest balance patch, the acceleration/deceleration and turn rate of the engi was changed for better pathfinding. This may also help make dodging bombers easier as they move better.

@t_r_u_putin said in Balance Patch 3750 - Feedback:

noob gappers of 1000+ rating does not do mistakes other 2k players do every time - this is quite funny.

there is a reason gappers don't do those kinds of mistakes - because there is little to nothing else for them to think about during the game, unlike on real maps

at this point I think gaps should use their own "balance" mod that is designed around that particular map because no one except gappers wants the game to be balanced around gap, afaik it is possible for a sim mod to be made ranked?

Nukes in general should only be killing main bases assuming gross misplay from enemy. That’s healthy. It’s like 25k mass for the first sml and nuke. 25k mass is not total base destruction + reclaim removal levels of mass when t3 arty does nothing as immediately painful to bases for triple the mass.

Nukes should be operating as strategic denial of pushes or nuking lower priority 20-40k mass targets. That’s healthy.

Or you hold onto it as a potential win condition, same as holding onto t4 as a push win condition.

Operating as some sort of skillcheck on whether you realize the 3rd t3 structure you’re supposed to build is an smd is only normalized and expected on dual gap and in turn only a healthy interplay on dual gap because there is zero room to nuke anything of value beyond the main bases. In actual games, there are like 8 viable targets to nuke with your first nuke and the biggest skill aspect is deciding which of the 8 is the most ridiculous return on your investment.

Big fan of the engi changes, would honestly like to see the same treatment given to ACUs. It is absolutely infuriating to be fighting with your ACU, telling it to move right and it stubs its toe on a tree and turns left instead. ACUs feel so incredibly unresponsive and like giving them orders is subject to RNG.

@t_r_u_putin i was his mirror in the discussed game. He was front, his whole team could have smds and his smd dying would still result in his base being lost. Honestly just so stupid to act like gap players are good at the game.

@ftxcommando What about making SMDs a bit cheaper to build/load, but remove the "strategic launch detected" sound?

Then nukes would be less effective at killing main bases or sniping ACUs but they'd be better at killing armies.

I don't really like it because the sound makes it possible for you to scout the nuke early and see where it is going to then split an army in that direction. It has risk mitigation and counterplay beyond just creeping smds which is kinda slow and residentsleeper gameplay.

@arma473 said in Balance Patch 3750 - Feedback:

What about making SMDs a bit cheaper to build/load, but remove the "strategic launch detected" sound?

imo it shouldn't play the sound unless you have intel over the nuke when it launched, and only once it reaches "space" layer, instead of as soon as it leaves launcher, unless it is a friendly nuke in which case you get notified on launch immediately of course, because it is a "how are you supposed to know this" scenario equal to the bugged building icons you have no intel over revealing that enemy upgraded/destroyed them because for some reason they change color

Then nukes would be less effective at killing main bases or sniping ACUs but they'd be better at killing armies.

I already suggested elsewhere that nuke submarines should be able to build cheaper short range nukes that do lower but still significant damage, to fill in role of nuking smaller stuff that wouldn't pay for the cost of the launcher nuke, instead of just being a worse but mobile nuke launcher