My thoughts about balance
-
Can a downvote button be implemented?
-
I don't know. I got left on read when I asked about it on zulip a while ago
-
It is implemented already, default feature in this type of forum. Just a question of it being enabled or not.
Forum had it for like the first day, but then a zulip post said it could get used for toxic brigading and that was the end of it.
-
@ftxcommando well, it is time then
-
your suggestions are garbage
"As t1 subs still get crashed by t1 torpedo launcher (except for sera), I feel that they need to be cheaper OR they need to have more DPS. Both of the options causes an agressive and more open gameplay compared to HP buff."
"The hover ability of aeon can be removed or not, does not play any role for me, but I think auroras should be buffed in movement speed, in order to allow them to move faster to catch those raids and to dodge against t1 air. Someone can say that in that case they can become too powerful against other tanks. But I can include in my spam some arty with tanks and the range will not play so big role, cause aeon has the worst arty in case of attacking mobile units. It is very good againsts buildings usually, like facs or pgens."
"Bring the aeon destro range back or at least to 75, so that it will not lose so much dps, when fighting against sera or UEF."
"To buff an anty navy weapon for aeon, so that it will also impact battles."
"I do not see any compensation for sera not having t3 gunships. Why do not they have?"
"No idea, but the unit is just no present in the game"
"Honestly, I have no idea how to balance it, just want to point out the problem."
-
@dmitry11 said in My thoughts about balance:
@gabitii I agree with the majority, but unfortunately under this thread there will be two clowns talking nonsense: Mr. 25 Janus and Mr. Groundfire against the stealth fleet, which will nullify all discussions
Your the one who sounds like a complete clown with this comment.
-
@peavywagner said in My thoughts about balance:
your suggestions are garbage
"As t1 subs still get crashed by t1 torpedo launcher (except for sera), I feel that they need to be cheaper OR they need to have more DPS. Both of the options causes an agressive and more open gameplay compared to HP buff."
"The hover ability of aeon can be removed or not, does not play any role for me, but I think auroras should be buffed in movement speed, in order to allow them to move faster to catch those raids and to dodge against t1 air. Someone can say that in that case they can become too powerful against other tanks. But I can include in my spam some arty with tanks and the range will not play so big role, cause aeon has the worst arty in case of attacking mobile units. It is very good againsts buildings usually, like facs or pgens."
"Bring the aeon destro range back or at least to 75, so that it will not lose so much dps, when fighting against sera or UEF."
"To buff an anty navy weapon for aeon, so that it will also impact battles."
"I do not see any compensation for sera not having t3 gunships. Why do not they have?"
"No idea, but the unit is just no present in the game"
"Honestly, I have no idea how to balance it, just want to point out the problem."
Message has no content, just points that this guy has read the message.
-
This post is deleted! -
@peavywagner said in My thoughts about balance:
@gabitii
Oh yeah? your post is just shit, there is something wrong with the balance of the game, do a balance patch bitch and after that enjoy the forum posts about how your work is shit instead of whining that the game is unbalanced and pointless balance ideasWhere did I say that the balance is shit? I pointed out the problems for my experience on playing the game. I think either u have reading or english problems, cause I have never said that the balance team’s work is a shit. Why the ideas are pointless? Unlike you at least I analysed and tested before writing this post.
-
@tryth wow, is Mr. groundfire against the stealth navy really found? Or is it not him? hmmmm. Who is it?
-
T1 subs subs are so easy to deal with, they may as well not be in the game.
-
@snaggs said in My thoughts about balance:
T1 subs subs are so easy to deal with, they may as well not be in the game.
not when u have 30% of ur eco under water. But in general I did not say they are good. I said that they needed another buff.
-
I agree with @gabitii that the t1 sub change (along with torp def change) often leads to very turtely navy gameplay. Yes, rushing a frig to kill bp is still good. Yes, having some frigs to go raiding and for radar is still good. But on smaller maps without a lot of frig raidable mexes, spamming subs is now the way to go. In many of my recent games the player that build more subs at the cost of less frigates than their opponent won early navy control.
I also agree that the aeon destroyer is no longer good. People who think its a good unit haven't played in 2 patches. Especially in destro vs destro battles sera and cybran are for sure better.
-
funny discussion. trust in the balanceteam. they know what they doing. cough cough
-
If it's a small map without frig raidable mexes, why are you making navy in the first place?
-
@xayo said in My thoughts about balance:
I agree with @gabitii that the t1 sub change (along with torp def change) often leads to very turtely navy gameplay. Yes, rushing a frig to kill bp is still good. Yes, having some frigs to go raiding and for radar is still good. But on smaller maps without a lot of frig raidable mexes, spamming subs is now the way to go. In many of my recent games the player that build more subs at the cost of less frigates than their opponent won early navy control.
I also agree that the aeon destroyer is no longer good. People who think its a good unit haven't played in 2 patches. Especially in destro vs destro battles sera and cybran are for sure better.
Spikey tested Aeon destro vs Cybran desto and Aeon won every time I believe.
-
@tryth said in My thoughts about balance:
@xayo said in My thoughts about balance:
I agree with @gabitii that the t1 sub change (along with torp def change) often leads to very turtely navy gameplay. Yes, rushing a frig to kill bp is still good. Yes, having some frigs to go raiding and for radar is still good. But on smaller maps without a lot of frig raidable mexes, spamming subs is now the way to go. In many of my recent games the player that build more subs at the cost of less frigates than their opponent won early navy control.
I also agree that the aeon destroyer is no longer good. People who think its a good unit haven't played in 2 patches. Especially in destro vs destro battles sera and cybran are for sure better.
Spikey tested Aeon destro vs Cybran desto and Aeon won every time I believe.
dont believe, just look replays
-
@tomma Regarding Aurora : I need to better understand what aeon is supposed to do against a pushy commander!
I love the fact that their T1 tank works differently than other factions.
I felt that the buff to vision range was an indirect nerf to aurora (since aeon just ALWAYS have scouts no matter what), but I've so-far been ok containing raids and the like; meaning while I can't quite experience what gabitii is saying, I at least have some head-scratching moments about aurora use:Where I struggle is when I have to challenge an enemy commander (for instance, when they're on my side of the map, stealing my reclaim). In this situation, the intended use of the aurora (kiting the enemy, restricting their damage) just doesn't seem to work - all that damage just goes to my commander instead. It feels as though it just forces aeon to give up important ground.
I've been working around it with an extremely early gun upgrade (fire-rate increase), but it doesn't work when the enemy just does a gun upgrade of their own, and tends to lose important ground before I get the chance to upgrade.
I'm interested to hear the ideal ways around an enemy commander push when I'm using aeon.Slightly tangentially - I'd personally like to see something of a little buff to LABs, perhaps making the flare tougher and the hunter do more damage, but it's only a passing thought that I'd like to flesh out with experienced players sometime in the future. (LABs feel a little weak to me ATM; except the mechmarine, which has a lovely combination of speed, DPS, and cheap cost going for it - it hard to justify building a hunter, and the flare just seems to have too few hitpoints for its cost, damage, and speed).
Regarding the other things being mentioned - the idea that the aeon cruiser is the worst in naval combat feels SO strange to me. I always felt that the UEF and sera cruisers were anti-air with an added anti-building attack, while cybran and aeon were anti-air with an added naval attack. Am I missing something? Likewise the ideas of UEF being helpless against seraphim destroyers.
Regarding T2 air - I find renegades super-awesome for their AOE, and would love to know how you're supposed to avoid AOE air attacks, particularly from Janus! (The answer is 'shoot it down', right?
)@ftxcommando said: "If it's a small map without frig raidable mexes, why are you making navy in the first place?"
Does this line of thinking apply to 'eye of the storm'?
Most of the frigate-raidable mexes there tend to be blocked by terrain, and I've been struggling with land-units on those maps while I build navy!Anyway, thanks for the posts everyone, I love learning from discussions like this!
-
Your ACU is supposed to soak damage for your tanks to at least some degree. Go for range before speed if you can only get one and then kite away. If your opp has gun though you should be able to get both not too long after they get their gun if things are fairly equal.
Flares definitely don't need a buff, they're already the strongest labs for the reason stated somewhere in this thread iirc, basically they are to try to augment the auroras weaknesses a bit at the aeon t1 stage.
EotS is neither a navy nor a land map, it's primarily an air control map. Land and navy are both secondary. Get air control, bomb early expanding engineers, and then with air control drop the corners and go t2 air. Then press the advantage with gunship raiding and or t2 bombers, but gunships are more typical.
-
@exselsior said in My thoughts about balance:
Your ACU is supposed to soak damage for your tanks to at least some degree. Go for range before speed if you can only get one and then kite away. If your opp has gun though you should be able to get both not too long after they get their gun if things are fairly equal.
Thanks for the feedback!
When playing aeon, my problem is that the enemy ACU just takes important locations. Trying to contest them makes for dead units, as is always the case vs early game ACUs; unless I involve my aeon ACU.
IF I involve my ACU, then the whole kiting with auroras thing just falls apart - auroras are supposed to make up for their lack of HP by moving back and using range, but when an ACU is involved the idea just falls apart: the enemy strikers/thaams/mantis just hit my ACU and win unless I retreat!I can't see how getting range before speed would help this. When I've tried it, it seemed to make the problem worse - my problem isn't the ACU's range, it's the fact that my ACU can't kite like my aurora can, due to slow movespeed. So trying to kite with aurora is ineffective, and the enemy army + acu just destroys my ACU. Longer range doesn't help my ACU retreat more quickly.
More damage/second does help me, in that my ACU can withstand the enemy tanks - but only until the enemy ACU upgrades their gun, and even that little window is usually far too late for me to have a chance of scooping up those critical map locations!(I'd question the notion that flares are the "strongest" LABs, definition of 'strongest' being important, of course. As raiding units, LABs want damage, speed, and cheap cost, right? Mechmarines have all of these things. Aurora might well have the most hitpoints and mass/combat effectiveness, but who on earth is building LABs to tank damage in a fight?
(And if the answer is 'aeon', then I'm not sure said aeon has a hope in hell of beating anyone if they're trying to tank with LABs while the enemy uses strikers/mantis/thaams!) )
