Static T3 arty stats need some tweaking
-
@ftxcommando You're right, I was wrong. I thought Aeon T3 arty was so accurate that it would never miss buildings as large as T3 pgens, while Cybran T3 arty does miss, and by extension lose potential DPS, while Aeon does its full damage consistently.
I've removed mentioning accuracy from my original post because with equalised dps (and assuming not 100% accurate), it is just as important as aoe.
-
@waffelznoob My bad, skim reading while queuing for a game, completely missed that!
In that case I agree, I've long thought Aeon T3 arti is far better than the others (even if my point about aoe is still relevant).
The main reason I think T3 Aeon fixed arti is too powerful is that two of them firing in sequence can overwhelm even a relatively heavily assisted shield, making them very good at breaking heavily defended locations (in contrast you need a lot more Cybran T3 arti to have the same effect, even if the Cybran arti is better at attacking more spread out and less shielded bases) -
@maudlin27 said in Static T3 arty stats need some tweaking:
(even if my point about aoe is still relevant).
yeah it is, that was a mistake on my part. i've removed mentioning accuracy from the main post, because acc&aoe roughly even out
and yes, i mentioned its doubled alpha plays a significant role in it being better at breaking shields, but that's ok, factional differences i guess. The other artilleries flat out being worse is just inexcusable though
-
Since hitting more than 1 shield bubble at the same time is often the way that shield bases go down, I'd argue that AOE is incredibly important when lobbing artillery.
Any hit on 2 shields will do full damage to BOTH of them, and this can only be done reliably with AOE. The more AOE, the easier it is.I've noticed that intentionally 'target ground'-ing in an attempt to hit more than 1 shield seems much more effective than just targetting a single shield in an attempt to overwhelm.
(Somewhat related: Although the micro is borderline impractical in all but the most stagnant games; you can use as few as 2 mobile missile launchers to destroy 2 shields with some clever target-ground micro, as long as you ensure that you hit both bubbles at the same time, to ensure they all go down together. This is easier done by targeting the edge of the shield bubbles, at a point where they intersect. It's even possible against 3 shields, but a player would have to be SO much better than me (I'm rubbish) to do that in a real game, since hitting all 3 requires more than just ground-targetting the intersecting edge (you have to fire into the very centre of the 3 where they intersect). 2 shields, though, is relatively straightforward if you have the time to micro.)
-
Yeah high AoE is strictly better than low AoE, but not if it's counteracted by low accuracy. Players hard assist one or two shields protecting the most vital parts of the base anyway, the other shields don't matter much. Cybran artillery will hit shields you aren't trying to bring down, and give more time to repair the shields that do matter.
There has never once in history been a game where T2 mml assisted a static T3 arty in breaking down a fully developed t3 base -
@waffelznoob said in Static T3 arty stats need some tweaking:
Players hard assist one or two shields protecting the most vital parts of the base anyway
When they do that, I think it might be good just to take the win - assisting shields like that tends to cost a player all of their income, from what I've seen.
There has never once in history been a game where T2 mml assisted a static T3 arty in breaking down a fully developed t3 base
Oh, I totally agree! That was why that sidepoint about MMLs was bracketed as an interesting little factoid! Still, it might be useful to break a forward firebase that's trying to establish artillery, way before the T3 artillery stage of the game.
And the interesting part, I thought, was how even a tiny AOE can take down shields effectively (in this case alongside great accuracy). -
Assisting a shield is the same cost as rebuilding the shield. It's just worse because half the benefit of having a bunch of shields is them turning on and off against across several intervals which is HP you don't pay for. That's why shield micro also exists during arty wars.
-
@ftxcommando Well, that, plus real-estate problems, and (importantly) you getting the mass cost 'for free' if your mass is already zero while assisting shields. From what I understand that's about the jist of it.
MY takeaway was just that assisting shields to keep an area alive is super-expensive, compared to the cost of artillery shelling.
-
Bully is correct I have spoken.
-
I read the original post and skimmed through the rest, apologies if someone already mentioned this but...
Firerate, AoE, and accuracy are a factor, too.
Less damage, but more consistent damage output is arguably stronger than alpha damage.The Cybran arty fires faster than all other factions.
This means shields will have less time to regenerate.
~ Stryker
-
@comradestryker said in Static T3 arty stats need some tweaking:
I read the original post and skimmed through the rest, apologies if someone already mentioned this but...
Firerate, AoE, and accuracy are a factor, too.
Less damage, but more consistent damage output is arguably stronger than alpha damage.The Cybran arty fires faster than all other factions.
This means shields will have less time to regenerate.
~ Stryker
Theoretical babble. I don't know why it's insisted that the EAON arty deals double damage. Every few weeks, there's a post claiming that EAON artillery is simply overpowered. You don't even need to do efficiency calculations to know that you'll lose 100% if there's an artillery race between EAON and Cybran.
-
please dont flood my post with incorrect takes