cybran t3 navy

@banan3 said in cybran t3 navy:

@randomwheelchair dude, speak for yourself. Ffs, He is a new to our game, how would he know that. The guy wanted civil discussion about navy and you go saying dude you dont even know we play random, that really says alot about community.

He's not even new to the game, he's been part of the community for over 2 years and have over 100 ranked games. That's not new, he have spent at least 50 hours in this god forsaken game playing ranked game's(funnily enough mostly on non navy maps).

And sorry but how am I supposed to take him seriously when he's still lacking basic knowledge about how the game is played nor does he make actual tests that involve other important factors instead of just right clicking into enemy BS?

Really, go white knight somewhere else.

@randomwheelchair 2 year old account first game plyaed 5 months ago, played vanilla 8 years ago and not since, made faf account and started playing again because of community casts, dunno if that makes me not new. i stared looking at unit stats in the client to understand navy, that plus cast led me to posting this, then watching replays reeinforced my sentiment.

u made some sick tests today aswell, testing how many tac defenses you need to confuse the missile or that cybran aircraft carriers cant hit spyplanes, guess they really do suck ?

and hey you playing 5 games in the last year makes you ontop of the meta rigth ?

Galaxys are fine, i´ve killed plenty of tempests with those ships, they are better at killing frigates than UEF battleships.
The torps are low dmg but they always help you saturate the enemy anti-torps.

Cybran, one of the biggest advantages, is their stealth option. And not even once is that mentioned in OPs wall of first text.

Comparing some raw AA and hp values and coming to the conclusion that they are different does not make them unbalanced per se. Cybran navy was even buffed a little in the last patches.

The community and the balance team is open-minded for balance discussions and even welcomes it. If OP provides several replay IDs which underlines the unbalanced problematic with some clear bullet points why XY should be changed, then we can have a proper discussion about it.

But an unformatted wall of text with some raw value comparison, mixed with some personal feelings, is the wrong approach to start a topic about balancing. It will just end in misunderstanding and backbiting, because everyone assumes he/she/it knows it better, because of different game experiences.

I would suggest to OP that you play a few games where you show us the problematic with real game examples and start a new topic about that, with the IDs and bullet points. I would be happy to take apart in that discussion.

you want proof and replays then come let us make some tests.
1 vs 1 me navy 100k mass vs 100k
Rules: no fog of war(this is a disatvanage for cybran since they lose stealth but if wanna claim thats why you cant win, i think your argument is shit), no more then 25k mass of submersiable units (this allows fielding a tempest and hopefully prevents winning by submarines only[this isnt a test to show who has the best subarmines], also limits the amount of seraphim destroyers), only units of one faction, no units produced from land factories, no air units, no nukes, no engineers(no acu or sacu). Before we start i need your army list and need to check the math. Ill be comepeting using uef and not use bs. if this test turns out to be too biased im open to changing the rules and faction i compete with. ill keep track of results and post them alongside replay#. anyone is welcomed to participate or run theyre own tests (i can only participate 1 match at a time). lobby is open for or running the next few hours.

This is like arranging a contest between two MMA fighters to find out who is better.
But, instead of having a regular fight, you tie them to a chair within reach of each other with one hand free, and only allow them to do jab punches.

Effectively negating everything that actually would decide who truly is the better fighter. Instead you get the better jabber from that specific and restricted sitting position than the better fighter.

@giebmasse then tell me how do you suppose to fix this ?
because until you got an alterantive that is scientific and replicatable this is the best anyone in this post has shown so far.

Listen to the experience of experienced and highly skilled players, whose gameplay is a part and continuance of thousands upon thousands of iterations of "real world tests" in the form of actual matches since the game has been released.

@giebmasse on the base of changing patches and copious amounts of cheese, mental breakdowns, and player skill and eco imbalances, this is why you experience is biased and hardly basis for actual analaysis if u wanna prove me wrong fucking do it using a test istead of telling me my lack of experience makes anything i say invalid because im telling you my lack of experience makes these points more valid

Hello. I just discovered FAF two days ago, I’m greatly enjoying this game, and the community is great. I have a professional SC2 background and I was gifted with enormous dexterity allowing to be a perfect specimen for RTS competitive gameplay domination. I have watched every single Gyle and BRNK video up to date saturating myself with deep lore and gameplay knowledge. I have finished at least 2 coop missions on Hard and played 3 games vs Sorian AI Adaptive and 2 games vs Sorian AI Rush with a perfect score and finishing the games in under 50 minutes. If I were to guess I would say I’m pretty decent at most gameplay elements, in particular I'm really good at micro and usually dominate my opponent in a straightforward fashion. Also I’m really good at ecoing but I’m struggling with this one thing... Could someone please tell me when to upgrade my Mass Extractors to Tech 2? Thanks in advance.

People listened to what you had to say, took your arguments seriously, and explained why your arguments are wrong. They explained why your spreadsheet math doesn't take into account so many things that affect game balance. Your arguments were not misunderstood or mischaracterized. The explanations they gave you contain a lot of insight that you could use to improve your play and get your rating up.

You don't want people to take your arguments seriously, you want people to take YOU seriously, even though you haven't done the work to get even 1000 rating let alone 1500 rating. People who are rated 850 should focus on improving their own gameplay, not on trying to change the game balance. It's the wrong attitude.

The game cannot be balanced around anything except the reality of how high-level players play. You can't balance the game for 800s or even for 1400s. By definition, people who are less than 2k are messing up. If you try to change the game balance to help 800s do better against 2ks, you would end up changing the meta, but the 2ks would still dominate. With the change in meta, there would be new ways for 2ks to flex on 800s. Good players take advantage of opportunities available to them, and weak players make mistakes. Changing the balance won't change that fundamental truth. If you dumb down the game to where there are few opportunities for interesting play and few opportunities for mistakes, you could make a game where 800s have a better chance against 2ks, but it's not a game that anyone would want to play.

@lorem_ipsum said in cybran t3 navy:

you want proof and replays then come let us make some tests.
1 vs 1 me navy 100k mass vs 100k
Rules: no fog of war(this is a disatvanage for cybran since they lose stealth but if wanna claim thats why you cant win, i think your argument is shit), no more then 25k mass of submersiable units (this allows fielding a tempest and hopefully prevents winning by submarines only[this isnt a test to show who has the best subarmines], also limits the amount of seraphim destroyers), only units of one faction, no units produced from land factories, no air units, no nukes, no engineers(no acu or sacu). Before we start i need your army list and need to check the math. Ill be comepeting using uef and not use bs. if this test turns out to be too biased im open to changing the rules and faction i compete with. ill keep track of results and post them alongside replay#. anyone is welcomed to participate or run theyre own tests (i can only participate 1 match at a time). lobby is open for or running the next few hours.

First off i tried to get u a replay yesterday,i ended up making a navy nuke and killing all bp lol. But i would gladly accept your challenge. What time do u want to do it? Also i will play with your terms if u agree to not use shield boats, its only fair since stealth boats will be factored out. Or u could just keep intel off idc.

Also to everyone else, im just really bored. Ik his argument makes no sense but why not just try it.

Ok, just lemme get my FAFlive credentials and we are all set for this epic 1v1.
Offcourse betting is ON!

@randomwheelchair the greatest game in faf history!

This probably should be moved out of balance discussion imo. It stopped being a balance discussion as per the requirements for that a long time ago.

That being said, the test @Lorem_Ipsum wants to do doesn’t exist in the way he wants it to. Taking away stealth from cybran is just dumb. At that point take away UEF shield boats and force aeon to make the same ratio of frig to bs as cybran in mass. It’s not a test of anything. A 2k player will destroy simply because of better micro and unit comp over a person with 100 games. I’ve literally played more games as Cybran navy than you’ve played games period.

You need air to balance out Cybran stealth which has its own whole can of worms when it comes to balance. Often torps are often best counter to barracudas if you’re UEF and don’t feel like making coopers but if you’re Aeon then just sit a destro on them. Tempest crush cybran bs but then cybran frig swarm can crush tempest as long as you micro frigs well. Usually you need t3 to counter Aeon destro spam since they snowball hard. It’s not a case of “oh this one unit is slightly weaker than its counterparts, must need a buff” it's how the whole thing works together.

@spikeynoob i rly wanna use shieldboats they are an integral part of uef navy and what imo makes use of bc over bs viable, when you want to use stealth that badly we can make normal fog of war basic radar coverage the terms of engagement, wanted to do this when it is clear that under previous rules cybran cant compete but if thats the only way to make this happen im willing to try.

@Exselsior a tempest can beat an infite number of frigs when it submerges, i can also do this to bs since it outregens the torps fairly quickly.

Then the frigs and bs crush all build power and the tempest barely does anything. Tempest then dies to ground fire from cybran bs. Also you’re saying you need shield boats because they’re an integral part of the navy for UEF while at the same time taking away stealth from cybran??

Yea def should be moved from balance section. Mr ipsum can u explain what this means "wanted to do this when it is clear that under previous rules cybran cant compete"

@spikeynoob i wanted to give myself an advantage knowing ill be playing ppl double or triple my rating, give me break okay, an advantage btw containing to a single of 4 factions and the removal of which will enable radar jamming of uef frigates as a counterpart

https://kapwi.ng/c/2lW_thsStJ