Let's talking about HARMS

1

As we all know HARMS is a unique t3 torpedo system. And it is imba.

It costs x3 less (only 3k mass + very little build time) than a t3 battleship and even 1 such unit can hold back the entire enemy navy. You only need t3 ACU or SAKU to safely build HARMS and t3 aa (which are 2 times cheaper than cruisers and will not let you kill HARMS or builder with torpedoes)

I suggest 2 ways to make it less imba.

  1. Make it 1.5x more expensive, increase build time
  2. Make it a surface system like other torpedo systems on t1 and t2 stage

Sorry for my English. I use translator

1

U can just ground fire harms, they then become just an expensive waste of mass. Cus afaik a cruiser missle damages it so thats a tiny mass cost to kill the thing, if they make tmd use a battleship.

0

@spikeynoob Yes we can ground fire harms. But only if the enemy has no t3 navy at all and only HARMS, but if he has his own t3 navy and a few SACUs underwater to build, then what?

Sorry for my English. I use translator

0

HARMS can build any cybran with t3 technology from any spot. You can have active battle on the t2 stage, but as soon as 1 HARMS (which costs not much more than a t2 destroyer) gets involved, the entire t2 navy becomes useless

Sorry for my English. I use translator

0

@skrat As far as sacus, those are investments that need to be taken into account as well. Without the sacu to build then the engis can just be sniped by bs. As far as countering large amounts of bois and harms vs t3 navy just groundfire harms with bs then spam subs/coopers to kill the bois.

0

Harms are bad meme gaming navy wise if u die to harms u should go on setons looking how to play navy

1

Only real bad thing about HARMs isn't really a HARMs problem but more the fact you can get nano repair on Cyb SCUs and have things with 500 hp/s building them underwater which takes like 12 t2 subs or coopers to overcome.

0

@spikeynoob I know how to fight against HARMS. I think they should cost more

Sorry for my English. I use translator

0

I hope you do realise HARMS was never strong offence capable instrument but more likely a great tool to STALL for time. It is just a heavy mass investment to STALL for time.

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. I use translator

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.