Make t3 navy more exciting!?!
The question is whether there is somewhere more fun to put apm in giant navy fights, not extrapolating that being able to groundfire subs = you hate the idea of build queues.
Like by the same slippery slope in reverse you can just accuse the people that want to do this to also want a button that tells your units to automatically dodge enemy projectiles.
@sinforosa Torpedoes, depth charges, stomp damage, crash damage (falling czar), nuclear blasts, energy beams (monkeylord/GC/ACU) . . . but yes, that sounds like a good idea
@randomwheelchair said in Make t3 navy more exciting!?!:
It's not exploit, not to mention that it should stay in game as it's quite good skill expression. The only thing that really suffers from it is atlantis.
Sure, skill expression, like pressing ground fire in a blob of units is something skill intensive...
It makes sense with T3 mobile arty, it makes sense with some T2 PD to increase range but it doesn't make sense to a battleshit to sink subs by shooting at the water. I only play UEF, I do groundfire subs and I quite believe this being a thing is what makes T3 stage a sluggish BB spam fest. Why would I build subs to counter BBs (intuitive) when they can just ground-fire in the moment my subs are still or sailing in a somewhat straight line?
If I recall it right, it was a limitation from the engine that subs can't change depth dynamically and I am not that up for the armor solution because in shallow waters it would make sense to ground-fire them but to be clear, giving armor to subs so they don't get splash damage seems way more reasonable that the current state.
I'd say that using APM to increase effectiveness is desired.
Using APM to prevent a counter is not.
In Starcraft 2 all pro terrans split marines vs. banelings, but banelings are still a counter against marines.
A baneling army attack oneshots marines. Player APM determines how many marines survive, but if they survive they are in no shape to immediately attack.
Subs come in 0.1 dps/mass, battleships at 5.1 hp/mass - it takes almost 1 minute for subs to kill a battleship, not accounting for the sub army DPS dropping as subs are destroyed. Taking 1 minute to kill something is already bad in an RTS for a close range unit.
Don’t forget it takes torps only 5 seconds to kill all subs on the map. Interesting way to look at things, but I think since the time it takes to build a unit increases a lot at higher tier navy it only seems reasonable that these units take more time to die. Also in terms of realism tanks and planes die much faster than navy vessels, the former usually exploding after a single direct hit, the latter being able to take multiple hits and being able To conduct damage control. Back to the topic: I too agree that t3 navy micro is incredibly dull and I almost never go to that stage as a result and only play on the basis of timing all ins and navy build power suppression. I think that increasing projectile speed is a nice idea, but that would make it hard for Land things like Acu to dodge incoming navy fire. This would in my view spell a death sentence to acu once in range of navy, which is acceptable but welp. I kinda liked the fact that you can dance out of navy range. And I think the projectile physics are something unique to faf and a big reason for its Charme.
My idea would be to make battleship on battleship salvos “homing”.
Either by increasing battleship hit boxes or by really making the projectile homing when firing on another ship or even any ship. That way Bship wouldn’t miss frigates so much and not waste their Dpm so much and the frig Bship balance would improve.
Even though the OP raised some nice points the conversation quickly derailed and achieved nothing. Stop with all of this quoting and arguing back and forward, especially about something that's not the topic of the thread. From now on I will be deleting a lot more posts that derail the discussion or serve as a platform to attack/argue with another person. Since we now enforce some standard for the thread to be made we will also ensure that the discussion has some merit and it's not pure shit posting and arguing.
I'd like to go back to my first point here. Ground firing subs is now part of the meta, predicting what happens is difficult. We can just let it happen and see things develop, so:
- Prevent ground-fire from killing subs
- ?? - let meta develop
- Rebalance navy if needed
Worst case scenario: T3 navy is broken until next patch, but only for high level players who won't leave over it. - low and medium level players are unaffected.
And stopping them from being ground-fired would be a net good because.....?
Presumably sub viableness be increased
I’m a shitty 1k Global. Any balance or gameplay suggestions should be understood or taken as such.
Project Head and current Owner/Manager of SCTA Project
Safety from surface guns is the entire reason for submarines. That's why torpedoes were developed. The idea that you can sink submarines, under the water, with any kind of surface gun is bizarre, and makes the entire class pointless. If you support that kind of thinking, simply removed the subs from the game - and just have 'water' units - and go the final yard towards simplicity.
Except subs still have a game usage beyond alt clicking at a battleship and seeing who wins the boxing match.
You use them to raid underwater mexes and bp on navy heavy maps like Maridia or Drunken Beetles as they are harder to spot and respond to. You also use them to counteract Seraphim or UEF destros.
Just because a 10k mass unit is capable of killing a 1200 mass sub hardly means the unit is irrelevant and could be replaced by some surface ship. And even then, there is still the fact that a battleship user has to both expend the apm to keep targeting this moving targets while also losing his battleship dps doing this while an enemy battleship could be getting free damage on him.
Honestly the only sub that actually feels the doom-and-gloom in this thread is the Atlantis because it is neither sneaky nor maneuverable.
I would counter that by saying we see anything underwater being taken out with ground fire - so it's not exclusively the domain of submarines - which would be a natural conclusion. The only time we don't see that is with water depths greater than the AOE radius (and then some since those units are often a couple of units high themselves).
The AOE radius is truly the culprit - and no real analysis has ever been done to associate the range of AOE with the accuracy of a weapon, and that's especially true of all the large battleships - and - more important - just about every modded unit that's been introduced. The proliferation of AOE - on even the smallest units, is another subject though.