@ftxcommando I mean not all factions were meant to have the exact same values. UEF has better T2 and T3 land than Cybran, so should we just buff Cybran t3 land to be as good as UEF t3 land?
And jamming is pretty crazy on t1 navy when you don’t know if it’s 2 or 5 frigates
FAF Website Developer
@jip said in The Problems With The UEF - Part 4 (Ambassador & Blackbird):
If you want to talk about the cybran strat, make a new topic. Someone even made guidelines for you to follow, but I'm sure you're already familiar with them
What I think about the Cybran strat is wholly irrelevant for this topic ? The OP wants to add jamming to the spy plane and the strat, it feels to me adding it to the strat is too strong.
I dont see why its weird to talk about cybran (or any other) strats here. Its clearly relevant to the topic, especially since you shouldnt talk about balancing units in isolation.
The OP even mentioned cybran and used it as a point of reference to come to his conclusion.
@javi said in The Problems With The UEF - Part 4 (Ambassador & Blackbird):
@ftxcommando I mean not all factions were meant to have the exact same values. UEF has better T2 and T3 land than Cybran, so should we just buff Cybran t3 land to be as good as UEF t3 land?
This is such an overused line thats so vague and can be literally said about anything.
insert any unit that sucks but why would u buff it cause this faction has a stronger xyz stage!
We would literally be stuck in 2012 balance
@thewheelie said in The Problems With The UEF - Part 4 (Ambassador & Blackbird):
I dont see why its weird to talk about cybran (or any other) strats here. Its clearly relevant to the topic, especially since you shouldnt talk about balancing units in isolation.
The topic is about t3 uef strat and scout, if u wanna talk of any other t3 air unit or group of unit u kinda need another thread.
Anyway balancing is already done in isolation so why would it change anything xD
@thewheelie said in The Problems With The UEF - Part 4 (Ambassador & Blackbird):
This is such an overused line thats so vague and can be literally said about anything.
It's often said on these forums because the fallacy it rebuts is also often brought up.
put the xbox units in the game pls u_u
If you want to decide if a unit is too strong or too weak you obviously need to compare it to other units in its category. After all unit's strength is relative, not absolute.
If you want to have an interesting game you also need to compare whole rosters of units between different factions. So for example the strength of an UEF strat is influenced by UEF having Broad Sword, not having Air T4 etc.
That's why comparing the UEF strat to the Cybran one is valid. Even more important is looking at the whole roster of units and trying to figure out if UEF is already compensated for their strat being weaker then cybran one and what would be the effect of adding jamming to UEF strat. How would it impact the T3 Land stage, how would it impact strat rush, how would it impact the ability of UEF to snipe heavily shielded targets etc.
I guess when I suggest to buff UEF to have an aoe of 12 I can tell people that explain this would allow the strat to immediately kill 4 t2 mex on any map that t2 mexes are irrelevant and the thread is about the strat bomber.
Just such a ridiculous idea that something as inherently relativistic as game balance cannot involve relativist comparisons across various areas of the game.
@javi said in The Problems With The UEF - Part 4 (Ambassador & Blackbird):
@ftxcommando I mean not all factions were meant to have the exact same values. UEF has better T2 and T3 land than Cybran, so should we just buff Cybran t3 land to be as good as UEF t3 land?
And jamming is pretty crazy on t1 navy when you don’t know if it’s 2 or 5 frigates
I am aware that UEF frig is a great use of jamming, it’s literally the only good use of jamming in the UEF roster. Doesn’t change that UEF frig is 3rd place in the frig tier list tho.
Cybran strat would STILL be better than UEF strat. The boon of Cybran strat is the aoe it does, not the stealth. I would rather counterintelligence BECOME a greater part of balance BECAUSE it raises the margin of error in unit positioning as well as the benefit of proper intel gathering which are huge parts of what makes FAF gameplay interesting to me. This is why I would want jamming to extend to more units in UEF roster and Aeon and Sera to get their own counterintelligence aspects so intel gathering becomes a secondary battlefield itself.
I dislike how easy it is to get away with lazy scouting and I see things like stealth and jamming as ways to punish it.
@ftxcommando said in The Problems With The UEF - Part 4 (Ambassador & Blackbird):
@zeldafanboy said in The Problems With The UEF - Part 4 (Ambassador & Blackbird):
My whole point was that if UEF T3 air was as good as Cybran it would make UEF unbalanced. It already has the best T3 naval (Neptunes are anti meta because they are good against frig spam) and the best T3 land that synergistically fills in the weakness of its siege T4 land unit. The game balance is supposed to be holistic, every faction isn’t supposed to be equally powerful in every arena at every tech level…
Also just wanted to quote this cuz I almost forgot about it. Nowadays UEF is definitely not the best t3 naval. UEF t3 navy is honestly quite hard countered by Aeon t3. Both exodus/shields or Omen are brutal against neptunes and Tempest is very painful for summits to properly deal with, especially since tempest kills all shieldboat protection in one volley.
That isn’t saying UEF t3 navy is trash, really every t3 navy stage is decent and has varying situations they’re solid at and it’s up to players (and maps) to make it possible to make those situations happen. Summit for example is horrible early on (slow, takes forever to shoot, easy to dodge) but is the best bs in terms of production scale combined with the shieldboat to compensate for their inability to dodge. Only tempest spam can really compare. But this is a highly specialized segment of navy combat that requires situations like sentons rather than something like Point of Reach or even Metir for navy combat where you rarely see more than 5 battleships per side. That’s where other factions are superior. When it comes to neptune, they’re fine (so long as no sub spam) but that comes at the cost of UEF t2 stage being total trash so you’re forced to rush them or slowly lose.
I also don’t see why UEF t3 land is the best for the same reasons just reversed. UEF needs to do enough damage with titans to either win the game through them or build up a snowball that then allows local advantage in the form of percy, t4, or SACUs to win. As it currently stands snipers win any sort of stagnate t3 game and therefore Aeon/Sera have the significantly easier to use “passive buildup” t3 stage. If you don’t pressure with UEF or Cybran, you’re just dead.
These are actual, healthy areas of the game where it doesn’t come down to “this faction is autowin at this stage” but instead it comes to forcing game states through play of the game. This is much healthier than something like being forced to rush neptune since players actually have an advantage to play for at that tech stage.
It’s also why I get sick of reading dudes say one faction “deserves” to autowin something (hello cybran frig) because of “holistic” balance when that’s just terrible game design. This situation of a faction “deserving” a shittier strat for “holistic” reasons is the same.
This in turn is why I would want all T3 air to have unique counterintel aspects, because you can’t make one faction “stronger” or “weaker” when they all basically have the same units barring the unique Aeon ones. If you gave ASFs counterintel you can then make some weaker or stronger forced depending on the air force size, or if not, then you at least introduce spy plane dynamics into air fights and punish lazy players that just make two blobs fight.
For what it matters Sera unique counterintel if you had to force it is is “weirdness” or more accurately having go invisible under certain criteria (submerging Destroyers & Selens basically)
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
Not that it matters, but I like that people like ComradeStryker try to increase racial diversity and keep FaF young. Like FtX said it might not be the biggest deal.
I wish we all are more open-minded to keep FaF as an interesting, complex RTS that even attracts new players. This is not about UEF or a specific race. I would appreciate it if we are a bit more courageous to change.
@god-emperor said in The Problems With The UEF - Part 4 (The Ambassador & Blackbird):
Tell you what, ill give you jamming on your UEF t3 strat if my AEON t3 strat gets shielding
That's a cool idea, but overall, Aeon has great air.
They have the T2 Swifty, T3 AA gunship, The Czar, too.
Shielding the Strat as is would just offer more strength to a faction that doesn't need more strength in air. UEF on the other had is quite the conundrum.
If anything, shielding a strat would likely hurt the unit overall, as if it has more HP than the standard Strat HP - then it would make the unit way too tanky. So, to keep it balanced, if it has just as much HP as it currently does, that means sacrificing unit HP for shield HP and that means an energy cost as well as a chance to lose that HP when you power stall.
It worked for the Czar, back when it had 60K HP and no shield, vs now that it has 40K HP and 20K shield, but it only worked as the unit had such a large HP pool. With a strat that has only about 10% of the HP pool, that is so much more difficult to work with.
But, again, decent idea. I'm sure it could be balanced in somehow. Just gotta find something for Seraphim.
~ Stryker
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Neither of those ideas are intel based buffs. They're just literal straight stat buffs to already strong units.
@stlng said in The Problems With The UEF - Part 4 (The Ambassador & Blackbird):
Sera strats should drop ion storms. Or, leave ion storms when they die.
@ftxcommando said in The Problems With The UEF - Part 4 (The Ambassador & Blackbird):
Neither of those ideas are intel based buffs. They're just literal straight stat buffs to already strong units.
What about leaving intel wherever it dies similar to the T1 air scout it has, Or it leaves a lasting vision where it drops its bombs?
-Stryker
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
A weak ion storm with vision would be interesting. Would have to adjust bomb damage to compensate for the ion storm damage.
@comradestryker said in The Problems With The UEF - Part 4 (The Ambassador & Blackbird):
@stlng said in The Problems With The UEF - Part 4 (The Ambassador & Blackbird):
Sera strats should drop ion storms. Or, leave ion storms when they die.
@ftxcommando said in The Problems With The UEF - Part 4 (The Ambassador & Blackbird):
Neither of those ideas are intel based buffs. They're just literal straight stat buffs to already strong units.
What about leaving intel wherever it dies similar to the T1 air scout it has, Or it leaves a lasting vision where it drops its bombs?
-Stryker
I don't think it's very useful for a strat bomber compared to jamming or stealth. Best thing I could come up with for Aeon/Phim is something where they had some "drone" ability that produces like 5 hp aircraft that shows up on vision but not radar, but I don't know if it's possible to assign something no icon on the radar map. That way it punishes no radar coverage/makes sniping radars more valuable while UEF and Cybran are more about abusing people that only rely on radar.
Vision after crash for Aeon is on theme with Eye of Rhianne but @FtXCommando makes a good point that it's not directly useful to the unit. Could be useful if you weren't sure you actually killed what you thought you did though.
