Pending Balance Changes Feedback Thread
-
Also when is tml going to cost 4x as much as it currently does because it is one of the top 5 most broken units in the game. I find it to be an absolute absurdity that 1 mex kill is enough to make it pay for itself especially if your aeon you have to make 2500 mass in tmd to protect everything while tml only cost 800 mass. with tmd costing as much as it does the current balance regarding tml could seriously use some work.
-
@thewreck said in Pending Balance Changes Feedback Thread:
I am also not a fan of the reclaim changes, especially for navy. The czar height change is also too much because the czar relies on the asf being underneath the thing so that it can be groundfired to kill them. Changing the height difference from 5 to 2 massively decreases the value in making czars which is a change I don't like at all. Also, the last balance change introduced a large nerf to the aeon destroyer so why is its frig getting nerfed now? Also simultaneously buffing cruisers and nerfing torps seems like massive overkill to me given that you generally have to win air for torps to be useful in the first place. On a separate note air is already super weak past 30 minutes on pure land maps because of how strong sams are. Typically the only time you see air grids larger than 15 factories are on maps with water because air is actually good against navy. I do like removing the stealth from harms not sure if it needs an hp nerf on top of that. The atlantis buff is definitely a good change in my opinion.Cybran navy definitely needed a buff considering its destroyer is garbage and the nerf to frigs was to strong. the change to mercies will be welcomed by anyone with a brain although I have not actually seen them in use yet.
That is not the main job of the czar tho, that was just a "neat mechanic" of SCFA.
I can't speak on the aeon frigate, but i know it was the best frigate by far due to mass per dps or something like that. Aeon imo is still insanely strong navy wise but thats just me.I can't think t2 subs are op, i've been playing a crap ton of beta balance and giving replays to Spikey and such. I think torps are actually perfect now they dont instant one pass everything unless its a huge number which is better gives cruisers a chance.
I actually had a chance to use mercies , they are freaking awesome now and i definitely will mix them in even when on t3 air i feel like they do a good job at slowly picking away armies.
I don't have an opinion on the air, because Air being op and then being insanely weak vs sams is too much of a swing.
-
Main mechanic of czar? lol one of the strongest parts of the czar is its ability to beat asf. especially if you have large numbers of them and the height difference + the laser is a big part of that.
-
@thewreck said in Pending Balance Changes Feedback Thread:
Main mechanic of czar? lol one of the strongest parts of the czar is its ability to beat asf. especially if you have large numbers of them
i guess but i mean at that point why was the AA long range added with AoE if you are trying to lure ASF into that since its the main weapon in your opinion? also the fast rechargable shield, the czar is designed for skirmishing look at the weapons and utility
-
The long aa is a component of the czar's utility for sure but one of the main reasons to spam czars is so that if you get 5 of them you can beat large quantities of asf but without the laser, it simply isn't possible for large quantities of czars to beat 500 asf. I cant speak for everyone but spamming lots of czars is a lot of fun and I would be disappointed to see it no longer be viable.
-
@thewreck said in Pending Balance Changes Feedback Thread:
The long aa is a component of the czar's utility for sure but one of the main reasons to spam czars is so that if you get 5 of them you can beat large quantities of asf but without the laser, it simply isn't possible for large quantities of czars to beat 500 asf. I cant speak for everyone but spamming lots of czars is a lot of fun and I would be disappointed to see it no longer be viable.
yeah i think czar is really weak if you are looking to use it to win versus air with ASF only time its ok when its equal and you get czar, its ground weapon is good but idk i just feel like im gifting mass but its way better now since its gifting 30% less now so i do use built it a bit more in my beta games.
-
@comradestryker intltirs are getting updated too just the changes aren't in yet
-
@TheWreck It's still able to kill ASF? Czar got reduced to 20 but ASF got reduced to 18, meaning they still fly beneath it and therefore get killed?
-
The CZARs killing ASF won't work against anyone that is aware of such a mechanic since they just won't right-click the CZAR and instead just fly around it so I don't see it as some game-breaking change. The CZAR's ability to kill ASF with its beam is more like a nice little feature/gimmick than then important part of the unit. Also, someone would need to confirm but I suspect the elevation difference doesn't matter as long as ASFs are below the CZAR.
-
With this patch I feel like navy will be op general and can be barely stopped by any other units (land and air). In the late game there was often situation where both teams have 300-400 asaf and as soon as someone lost air everyone is able to build a lot of aa. Air could have dealed damage, but for a short time. Now air will be much weaker as it was, and navy way stronger. No other units will be able to stop navy, land could not have done it either, for air it will be too expensive now. But navy instead was always able to stop land attack, even some t3 units were sucking against destros, on the other side t4 exp has no chance against t3 navy, mega can just hold a bit. I guess with this balance patch the balance is in favour on navy units and they will become op.
-
@tagada said in Pending Balance Changes Feedback Thread:
Also, someone would need to confirm but I suspect the elevation difference doesn't matter as long as ASFs are below the CZAR.
They're not below the CZAR when you tell them to attack it. All interceptors (or asf) move towards the elevation of their target.
In this example units deal no damage. The CZAR is at a height of 50. The interceptors are initially not, of course.
Then at some point in time they are (all) on the exact same height.
And here we have the CZAR ground firing, which hits the planes:
Which works because the beam still intersects with the collision shape of the interceptors:
And after giving them a movement order they go back to their current elevation within a second or two:
-
So, to sum up. Changing the elevation of ASF doesn't matter for this mechanic, right?
-
Yes, it doesn't matter at all.
-
@tagada Even if you manually micro asf there is no way to avoid flying underneath the laser when there are a large numbers of asf and czars involved. especially if the fight also involved asf from the person with the czars because the standard way to fight large air battles is to press the stop button in which case asf will fly underneath the czar beam. Regarding the height difference, the beam is slightly below the czar if I'm not mistaken so having a height difference of just 2 will probably make the czar beam less effective especially if there's any hills involved.
-
I have tested yesterday in game lobby and the pending patch, and the barracudas(tech 2 cybran subs) now need 4 torpedo bombers to kill it, which is op in my opinion, assuming that it has stealth. Not considering that u need a scout to torp it but just cost ot the torps and subs. 4 torps 4 * 270 = 1080 mass and 4* 32000 energy. barracuda 1100 mass and 8800 energy. This is a really huge difference. Pls fix the hp of the barracudas accordingly in order to make 3 torps killing it, it fill be fine then. It is 2 torps before pending patch.
All the other subs were buffed so that u need 1 torp extra, whereas in case of t2 cybran subs u need 2 torps extra, which is a lot.
-
The torpedo bomber nerf is getting reverted so don't worry about barracudas.
-
@tagada Sorry, didnt see it
-
I am pleased to see this development finally coming to fruition.
I have been anticipating this for quite some time.Though, now that it is here, I have some concerns regarding the relatively low costs associated with the shield upgrade and its corresponding shield hit points.
Would it not be more logical for the shield to be far greater in durability and incur a slightly higher resource cost?After a brief overview, I must admit that I find myself favoring Spikey's original implementation of the upgrade changes.
That change aligned more closely with an advanced upgrade suitable for late-stage front-line use, as opposed to mid-stage use.
I hope this change has not been firmly set.
Then if so, more tweaking could be done before it goes live.If I may suggest, this could be mitigated by introducing another upgrade option for the bubble shield.
This additional upgrade could be designed to align more with a mid or late T3-stage, as well.
This would also keep the Bubble Shield useful as it currently is in live games - Shielding a valuable building and whatnot.
Nonetheless, I extend my gratitude for the remarkable efforts put forth by the FAF team.
I can't wait to see it when it goes live!
~ Stryker
-
I had a thought for reducing the "volatility of t1 navy" aka navy lock. Why not give frigates and destroyers a speed nerf so that hover has better chances of running it down?
-
I think cybran acu getting nano is a bit odd, just doesnt quite suit it. 20 H/s regen on a base acu is also pretty crazy, for 5km 1v1 especially. Additionally, im pretty sure vet scales multiplicitavely, and the first level adds roughly 50%, meaning just one vet would put it near 30 H/s. Add stealth, and it'll regen 50. This is almost on par with the uef nano, for a lower cost, and added stealth.
These number are not entirely correct (uef vet brings regen 10->15, cyb vet brings regen 15->21, not quite 50%) so im not sure this'll be the case, it's just something im worried about happening. If someone knows more on how vet/base regen scaling works, i'd love to hear
frick snoops!
