T2 torpedo turrets are awful
-
I could see letting sera T2 torpedo defence move, since their T2 sonar already can. The other factions not so much
-
@rampeer Movable t2 torpedo is called destroyer/sub hunter. You cannot more torpedos for the same reasons you cannot move your PD
The only way the could be movable is if they can either move or fire, similar to mobile t3 arty. But that’s unlikely to get implemented
-
@rampeer It sounds strange, but I can understand why. When I have time again, I could design a test mod for this too. However, I would limit it to the T2 launchers.
-
Why are T2 torp defs outranged by destros anyway? Shouldnt they be the equivalent of T2 PD for land, and so outrange the main damage dealer of that tech? T2 torps being outranged only by (missle) cruisers would make more sense.
-
@IndexLibrorum said in T2 torpedo turrets are awful:
T2 torps being outranged only by (missle) cruisers would make more sense.
This is already the case for UEF and Sera. Their destroyers have equal range to T2 torpedo defence because they have missile cruisers for long range damage. Aeon and Cybran don't have missile cruisers so they have longer range destroyers.
-
@Deribus said in T2 torpedo turrets are awful:
@IndexLibrorum said in T2 torpedo turrets are awful:
T2 torps being outranged only by (missle) cruisers would make more sense.
This is already the case for UEF and Sera. Their destroyers have equal range to T2 torpedo defence because they have missile cruisers for long range damage. Aeon and Cybran don't have missile cruisers so they have longer range destroyers.
i get why thus destroyers dont outrange torp defence, but surely that woudl then beat the use of torp defense, what do you build it for then?
Aeon can still beat torp defense with floaty, cybran is just fucked I guess XD
-
@Deribus Sure, but it would make more sense for all destros to not outrange the T2 launcher, and all cruisers to outrange it. The low DPS cybran cruiser direct fireweapon can stand in for a lack of missles, and its inability to properly deal with T2 launchers be part of its faction weakness, to be compensated for with stealthboats.
-
And why does that make sense? How has it improved gameplay to have 85 range torp launchers?
-
Agreed would be nice for a range boost (so they have at least the same range as the best destroyer range but cruisers and battleships would outrange them), - could always buff the Aeon cruiser range slightly since its a weak attack anyway to compensate/provide Aeon with a T2 counter. That way there'd both be more unit variety and unit counterplay.
Land combat has T2 PD that outranges T2 tanks, but is outranged by another T2 unit (MMLs), which in turn can be defended against with TMD, and the game feels more interesting with that as an option than if say T2 PD were outranged by T2 tanks. Even with fixed shields being buildable on land to cover T2 PD, and T2 arti being available (that outrange any land unit) firebases aren't oppressive (while for naval maps outside of protecting your naval factory and the occasional pond with a chokepoint, there'd be less value from a 'naval firebase' than on land, so less risk of it being too powerful).
Another nice sideeffect is it'd provide a potential (defensive) counter option to sera subhunters (who currently outrange torpedo launchers other than HARMs)
-
Buffing T2 torps range will disadvantage Cybran navy (unless you buff it up to 70-80). Also, doing this leads to increasing already good range of HARMS (otherwise, what's the point). That's why I suggested making them movable, as it makes them a bit more versatile.
By the way, these two options are not mutually exclusive - why not both?
-
Why is it just being implicitly taken to be a good thing that more static navy gameplay is a great thing? Why would you even bother with uef destros if uef had a 85 range (salems outrange cyb cruisers btw) t2 torp launcher?
Why do you need more reason to make cruisers again? Why are people talking about unit mix as though navy isn’t the most healthy theater of the game in terms of unit mix already? How is buffing torp launchers that already currently are problematic for sera destros, will obsolete uef destros, and god knows what else to aeon/cyb gameplay a good change?
-
If anything td p2 are op and should be nerfed. The current balance for t2 torps is way healthier for gameplay and theyre not bad to make at all
-
Do you have any high rated replays of T2 torpedo defence being built? Might be good to have some context in what situations you might want to build them
-
@FtXCommando okay, let me re-explain. My point is NOT that T2 torps are weak / underpowered.
My main point is that T2 torps should be changed. They rarely appear in games, and are mostly built by new players, by my experience. Now, T2 torps just do not fit in navy battle kit available for players. And there are very few units/building that are that misfitting. Can you disagree with that?
What's the change is a different question. Personally, I prefer movability over range. It's not a big buff, but makes T2 torps more versatile (moving towards to halt the enemy attack temporarely, supporting your attack, intercepting incoming annoying t1 subs on maps like dual gap, micro them to avoid some fire, etc.). Right now, they are just a static obstacle which says "hit me with your t2 destroyers / cruisers a bit before entering my pond". Compare these two situation. How it a better gameplay? In my opinion, first one (imaginary, yes) provides richer decision-making both for you and your opponent.
Also, in my opinion, this quite fits overall idea of balance in FAF: it's quite uniform, but almost all units have some quirks that distinguish them across races / tech tiers. Let T2 now-static torp launchers have their time to shine, their place to fit in the players' toolkits. Now, they are like t1 torps, but crappier.
-
@Saver Please do! It would be interesting to actually test it out.
-
@rampeer ok, I will create a mod for this test in the coming week . Is there an estimation of what speed the launchers should get? similar to the T3 Sonar? or lower?
