Let's talking about HARMS

0

I understand how players use HARMS and how to fight against it.
I'm just trying to convey that it has a very strong damage for a very small price, while building faster than a t2 ship

Sorry for my English)

0

And a very high price for becoming useless at some point.

1

@spikeynoob this is exactly the point, why is the only really viable strategy against them groundfire? Why do people think this is good gameplay? When my opponent starts building harms I prefer to quit.

0

I had a game where i won navy (rush T3 battlecruiser as uef) but the eco ennemy got 3 ras sacu to build harms and sams. Even with 4 summits and a tons of torp bomber i wasn't able to break through. Idk what i could've done

0

@bangernoob i can understand ground fireing being annoying as the only counter but doesn’t hover spam accomplish the same counterable large mass investment to delay navy loss. As cybran had no hover wouldnt it be fair for them to have some solution to delah a navy loss? I could be wrong to compare the teo but they seem to accomplish the same goal to me.

0

@spikeynoob I'm not mad cause it is able to delay the naval crush like hover, I'm mad cause it is an absolute apm drain to deal with. This is bad game design imo.

0

I agree that HARMS = aids. Newer players get absolutely destroyed by them, and the APM drain is atrocious. You destroy one and another one pops up.

I understand they are not op and have a cost but for the average player, the window / tactics to punish someone building HARMS is to short/difficult.

Even on other game modes like phantoms, it’s a meme to just go Cybran because HARMS can completely stop a phantom / navy invasion very quickly. (Not here to talk about meta or phantoms, simply that people pick Cybran often because building HARMS takes seconds but getting rid of them takes a lot of minutes and effort).

FAF = Femboy Alliance Forever
Come check the draft of the FAF website 4.0! https://www.test.faforever.com/

0

@femboy Nah harms bad because bc outrange them so as long as u have sonar and decent navy compostion at this stage u absolutely crush the guy who do that

0

@unknow yes but average player + trying to chill in a game, don’t want to try hard having to manual fire HARMS. I want to play FAF, not find the HARMS and ground fire it until it dies oh wait there is another one now and now they are rebuilding the old one

FAF = Femboy Alliance Forever
Come check the draft of the FAF website 4.0! https://www.test.faforever.com/

2

When groundfire is the solution, you might as well put it above water.

The idea of the unit being underwater imo is that you can't hit it with surface weapons.

Perhaps place it above water and give it stealth and or cloak. Then you still have the ambush element while not being a pain to deal with.

Check out my maps here:

Madness 1 - 9

https://forum.faforever.com/topic/480/h-master-s-maps

0

@bangernoob not that it totally disagree, but wouldn’t hover require similar effort to deal with since u need to micro frigs and make sure ur bs dont get swarmed. (Ofc bc and sera destro but lets assume they are not in play) I do agree that using apm to kill hover is intended gameplay while ground firing feels more like abusing a bug.

0

@femboy Quite impressive skill issue here u just like if your opponent could make boys and harms into the navy u did something quite wrong not crushing him before or u eco even more and don't make navy so harms are useless, average player wanting to chill just ignore harms and push all in because he has more navy and crush his opponent and with navy won u just send a few torps to wrap it up no more deal about it

0

It’s like saying micro’ing your ACU so you don’t die to notha is bug abuse that requires ground fire to solve and it isn’t fair to average skill players.

The hover example is the best comparison, a person makes a counter (hover) to your unit mix (frigs) unless you spend the time to actually maximize your units (frigs). Same as a person makes HARMs to counter your late t2 or t3 navy unless you spend the time to maximize your units (destros/cruisers/bs/mermaids). You can play chill casual if you want, you just failed to take the tax of effort expenditure that your opponent pushed you into when they spent the mass on long term losing units. Go find another way to win if you don’t want to meet it, or complain about how hover tanks crush unmicro’d frigates too.

4

Is it possible to change the target ability of harms so battleships can target it normally?

0

@veteranashe that could be interesting, add like a dummy unit or smthn.

2

I was going to make a new thread, but I see the idea was already floated here: make a dummy unit that sits above HARMS

This unit would only be targetable by units that have sufficient splash damage to hurt the harms underneath

That way, units like battleships would automatically target the HARMS even without player input, and they could easily be given orders to target HARMS. Strat bombers, missile cruisers, etc. would have an easier time killing HARMS without the APM cost.

But obviously it wouldn't be targetable by things like: torpedoes, depth charges, guns with no splash, guns with not enough splash radius

0

@arma473 I believe this was tried for a patch. And for a few different varieties of submerged unit.

Other balance ideas:
~ Make it's salvo size smaller. So anti-torpedo is more effective.
~ Make it take mass to shoot, maybe even manual fire or a limited magazine. Like a torpedo TML. So it's effectiveness is partly because of supporting engis reloading it.

I like the idea of HARMs, but find them very annoying to counter. Though I must admit that is because I play Dual Gap a lot, and that has essentially the perfect naval funnel there. On other more open maps it is probably less annoying, as it's harder to mass AA around each one.

You must deceive the enemy, sometimes your allies, but you must always deceive yourself!

8

In my opinion the only proper solution is that sufficiently submerged units (aka, subs when dived, harms when completed) should not take damage from surface damage. And with that notion, the HARMS should be rebalanced to take that into account.

A work of art is never finished, merely abandoned

0

@jip Is that so hard to do or why is it still that subs are getting hit by bombs and asf aren't.
I would have thought it would be normal for subs not to get hit and before reading it i would have never assumed they would get damaged.
I always believed this was a design decision, as i didn't expect it to be hard to implement.

0

Umm, I'm quite sure ASF can still get hit by bombs and other stuff. They are you know, just high up there in the sky so it's kinda hard to hit them randomly but cases of strat bombs or other stuff hitting asf flying through the air have been documented.