AEONS are GARBAGE!
-
@Evan_ said in AEONS are GARBAGE!:
In fact if you use up the hp on your shield it will recharge to 8k hp in 75 seconds which is over 100 hp per second. That is much more effective hp and regen than Seraphim's nano, which by the way is more expensive.
It’s incorrect approach. You may get 100 hp/s while recharging, but you don’t get it while not recharging. Meanwhile regen upgrade works all the time. You cannot compare them this way.
-
@Seraphim-Noob said in AEONS are GARBAGE!:
On T2 you have the fastest Hover Tank
Nerfed to Sera hover tank's speed, no longer fastest land unit. Also, took away 10% of their HP for... adding a turret? Keep your turret.
@Evan_ said in AEONS are GARBAGE!:
Aeon have the longest range gun ACU
Nerfed into oblivion with 900 mass cost.
-
I wish people were interested in 1v1... auroras are only the strongest T1 tank if you are an AI with infinite micro potential, if you are a human, they just die to everything.
-
@Kilatamoro It is still the fastest tank together with the sera hover tank. and the 2nd range upgrade is still totally worth it. Its not as strong as before but surely strong enough to compete with the other ACUs
-
aeon player shaking and crying rn because they no longer have a pillar equivalent faster than a mech marine and a min 5 acu upgrade that makes you the only acu to hard counter gun upgrades and bricks/percies
they might have to actually watch the map as they play instead of interact with the subway surfer on their 2nd monitor, unlucky
-
@Evan_ U You need a lot of energy to upgrade everything and finally use it in combat.
Meanwhile, your enemy has already built GUN, T2, and some PDT2 to protect the area.At this point, your T1 units are completely useless.
Advancing against a "FIREBASE" minimally defended by a few units is practically suicide.
OBSIDIANS, although I consider them one of the best tanks in the game, won’t perform miracles in small numbers.What I’m pointing out is a FACT... Most players are literally ABANDONING the AEONS because, overall, it's an extremely useless faction for a good part of the game, especially during the first 10 minutes. They can’t "tank" efficiently against any other faction.
They can’t advance because T1 units die easily to PDT1.
And the ACU doesn’t regenerate enough health to be combative, nor does it have the construction bonus it used to have.
And with the crappy PDT2 not having the area damage it should, a few T1 tanks can easily destroy the PDT2 because it wastes DPS at a rate of 2x to 3x more than necessary to kill the respective unit.They KILLED AEON gameplay for team games, where most maps are 10x10+.
-
@Seraphim-Noob IIf I were wrong, more players would certainly choose this faction to play.
But guess what??
The ones who usually pick it are the noobs who don’t understand that you have to use the ACU on the front lines.The majority... the vast majority... the absolute majority of players...
Choose one of the other 3 factions... And they get upset when they end up with AEONS in random mode! -
@FtXCommando If u need AEON COM to hold BRICKS or PERCIES... U are wrong, cause you are taking a HUGE risk and cant be on everywhere.
-
The huge risk being OC’ing them before they can shoot or what? This whole post just sounds like you dunno what you’re talking about
Aeon is the generally best t2 land, best t3 land, best t2 air, best t3 air and basically 2nd best across navy now. You could even argue they have the t1 air advantage since they have like the quickest loading transport and the best lab to put into it alongside an AOE bomber that granted has some micro quirks.
-
@FtXCommando said in AEONS are GARBAGE!:
bomber that granted has some micro quirks.
Was fixed, it no longer flips out when you try to micro it.
-
gg that was the only thing sera air had over aeon on t1 stage
-
@Sainse said in AEONS are GARBAGE!:
@Evan_ said in AEONS are GARBAGE!:
In fact if you use up the hp on your shield it will recharge to 8k hp in 75 seconds which is over 100 hp per second. That is much more effective hp and regen than Seraphim's nano, which by the way is more expensive.
It’s incorrect approach. You may get 100 hp/s while recharging, but you don’t get it while not recharging. Meanwhile regen upgrade works all the time. You cannot compare them this way.
Yes this is a good point, and while it is strong when recharge does happen, you are right that they can't be compared that way. In fact another disadvantage is that being hit temporarily stops shield regen, which I did not mention.
I still believe shield is a viable and affordable upgrade, cheaper and more upfront hp than nano, that allows Aeon ACUs a good degree of survival when pushing. And stacking the extra range on top makes Aeon combat ACU very effective.
@AYAHUASCA_Dest said in AEONS are GARBAGE!:
@Evan_ U You need a lot of energy to upgrade everything and finally use it in combat. Meanwhile, your enemy has already built GUN, T2, and some PDT2 to protect the area.
You don't need every upgrade to use it though, Aeon first stage range and speed gun has the same functionality as other factions gun upgrade but is 3k energy cheaper and you can stagger the cost. Other factions ACUs get just gun and walk towards their opponent
all the timeoften. Getting T2, gun, and some T2 pd is quite expensive early on, and certainly not something you can do while under fire from an opposing gun ACU. At the very least they will have to get it on their side of the map rather than in the center where they can lock down resources.Aeon does indeed have weaknesses, I don't find them to be stronger than other factions, but they certainly aren't bad, and I see them regularly enough in 1v1, 3v3, and casts to say that players aren't abandoning them as you say.
-
@FtXCommando Please… Don’t say nonsense… I’m just giving suggestions, and you’re acting completely rude, unwilling to accept that the MAJORITY of players, I repeat, the MAJORITY, despise the faction.
I repeat and reiterate, if it were a satisfactory faction to play in most matches, which are team-based, the general average of players would choose it.
This is different from only playing 1v1 or even needing to use players with high scores to make good use of it. -
@Evan_ If people are aiming to get to T3 and T4... they definitely love COLOSSUS.
But getting to that point is a real struggle.Take the stats from any FAF player, and you'll see that Aeons are the most despised faction.
-
@AYAHUASCA_Dest said in AEONS are GARBAGE!:
@FtXCommando Please… Don’t say nonsense… I’m just giving suggestions, and you’re acting completely rude, unwilling to accept that the MAJORITY of players, I repeat, the MAJORITY, despise the faction.
This has not been my experience. Aeon is frequently played.
I repeat and reiterate, if it were a satisfactory faction to play in most matches, which are team-based, the general average of players would choose it.
This is wrong. Cybran is currently quite strong. Consequently, you'll find Cybran being picked very frequently. If a large group of players play often with cybran, that already means none of the other 3 factions are picked by 'the general average of players'.
In any case, some numbers. I looked at the 25 most recent replays of games that have at least 6 players. Here are the numbers:
Doesn't look like the kind of numbers you'd expect from Aeon being a garbage faction. Which makes sense, of course, because it isn't.
You're free to check if this pattern holds up if you look at a larger number of games to see if what you say suddenly starts making sense, but I think a sample of 25 is more than enough.
"Design is an iterative process. The required number of iterations is one more than the number you have currently done. This is true at any point in time."
See all my projects:
-
-
@IndexLibrorum in the world of statistics a sample size of 25 is actually not very good considering the large data pool of games. (I'm guessing a thousand games every 2 to 3 days)
Also does this sample size of 25 include games like dual Gap and Astro? If so I would argue that those need to be separated and compared to map generated matches. (Or delete it from the data pool entirely)
In my experience the players who frequent map generated games are far more likely to choose random faction than dual Gap players or Astro players (especially at the 1.2K plus level) who tend to pick a faction based on a position on the map, and to ensure that a team has at least one of each faction.
Also I believe that players in dual Gap or astro type games always make sure they have at least one aeon on their team specifically for the eye (and in many cases the para) with the point being that these statistics would be skewed based on the intent behind their selection of aeon.
Not to over complicate something that does need to be over complicated because I truly believe that aeon is fine as is.
I personally choose random faction 99% of the time and I like when I get Aeon but I can't stand it when my lane opponent is Aeon because my skill set finds it a lot more difficult to counter them than other factions between 0-30 mins.
-
I would not even be so sure that last 25 games were actually rated. It’s not specified. Could as well be 6 players survival.
That’s the general problem which was brought up on many occasions inside faf statistics megathreads for example. Most raw data is meaningless until you apply a multiple filters to it. But if it was, the result of additional work would likely far exceed quick forum reply format
-
Always the same classic, something is unpopular for one reason or other but not due to being weak. And somehow everyone thinks that buffing that shit is gonna fix the problem...
Hell, people are still gonna play cybran and Uef due to them just being the cool dudes that people like thematically. Even if they were weak. -
@Dorset said in AEONS are GARBAGE!:
@IndexLibrorum in the world of statistics a sample size of 25 is actually not very good considering the large data pool of games. (I'm guessing a thousand games every 2 to 3 days)
Also does this sample size of 25 include games like dual Gap and Astro? If so I would argue that those need to be separated and compared to map generated matches. (Or delete it from the data pool entirely)
You're free to share your own analysis
. I'm not feeling the urge to spend several hours on data wrangling in Rstudio to get paper-ready data. You'll note I didn't include confidence intervals or whatever. This is good enough for a quick look at the data.@Sainse said in AEONS are GARBAGE!:
I would not even be so sure that last 25 games were actually rated. It’s not specified. Could as well be 6 players survival.
That’s the general problem which was brought up on many occasions inside faf statistics megathreads for example. Most raw data is meaningless until you apply a multiple filters to it. But if it was, the result of additional work would likely far exceed quick forum reply format
Didn't specify, but yes I selected only rated, non-modded games with at least 6 players.
@TheVVheelboy said in AEONS are GARBAGE!:
Hell, people are still gonna play cybran and Uef due to them just being the cool dudes that people like thematically. Even if they were weak.
That's my understanding as well. UEF is not in a terrific place right now, but from my quick review looks like it's the most popular faction. Style and the factor of COOL counts for a lot, I suspect.
