I am abandoning Aeon

@sladow-noob said in I am abandoning Aeon:

Aeon:
Autowin t1 on some land maps

I have no clue on why u consider this fact as "balance".

@sladow-noob said in I am abandoning Aeon:

Aeon:
strongest t2 phase, strong(est) t3 phase, decent exps, best t2 air, best midgame ACU, best frig, second best or best navy.

This all listed is very personal, not general. I mean I have no idea why u call aeon strongest t2 and t3 phase. If we consider blazes, they are very strong yes, but I do not think sera or UEF t2 worse. Sera has also 2 strong units, yenzyne and il shavokhs, which have also 2 same use cases as aeon (1 has big alpha and 1 can easily kill t1 spam). UEF has mobile shields, riptides (which have the highest hp among all hover units), and pilars are also not bad. I do not say they are the best, but having those facts, I can not accept t2 aeon as best, one of the best yes, but not the best.

T3 land for me is in perfect balance, I can not say that aeon also are strongest here, also good, but not best.

About exps, they are also quite good balanced, GC is very good against t3 army or other exps, like chicken or ML, but it is worse than chicken and MEGA when it comes to fighting against bunkers, cause it has no splash damage and very low dps, compared to other exps.

Frig is no way the best, it was very strong before the patch, but now it is way too expensive to call it the best. Of course it will beat every other frig 1v1, cause it is more expensive. But when fighting against cybran, you will have 14 v 13 frigs (both spending 3640 mass). Considering HP, cybran gets 25200HP and aeon gets 24050HP. Cybran gets 900 DPS and 764.66 DPS. Considering all this, I can not say aeon frig is the best. It has become way better cause of range buff, but it is still too expensive. Also add to that the fact that they do not have any AA.

On t2 stage, I have no clue on why u still consider aeon destros as best, cause they are in fact shit. Since the debuff, it is very painful to play with them against other destros, cause they miss way too much and 2 second worst torpedo attack to ON-WATER targets (after the UEF). We have tested a lot with spikey, they have almost no chance against sera destros, as they barely hit them, and super fun fact: if you submerge sera destros and come out in range of their cannons, they even start firing eariler, cause aeon needs more time for charging.

On t3 navy, I agree, aeon is strong. Having the highest DPS bship and also tempest.

Check the megathread-statistic post and see how often Aeon got veto'd in 1v1 pro tourney and how often they got picked if there were no vetos. Notice something?

There have been only few tournaments after those debuffs, and statistics is also more relevant if you consider the win rate AFTER the balance patch

Sera t2 stage will never be better than UEF or Aeon for the sheer reality it has no mobile shield. Aeon beats UEF t2 due to the sheer flexibility of being able to dominate regardless of terrain while having a slight disadvantage in a specific timing period where a pillar push can happen between a blaze/obsidian swap or due to sparkies. UEF hover is strictly worse than Sera and Aeon due to 1) no mobile hover flak 2) no mobile hover shield

T3 harb has the best utility across maps in combining bot speed with general combat strength. There are some incredibly open maps (painted desert, huge wonder open) where titans and loyalists are simply a win condition, but these maps are an outlier and also not as common as condensed maps where snipers simply defeat anything in UEF or Cybran roster besides a ravager/t2 arty base 10% into your own map control.

Percies and bricks are in a bad place since they require massive infrastructure investment while being slower than the direct fire t4s they are supposed to deal with, well percy is supposed to deal with. You either have the percies to kill a GC or chicken when it’s made or you lose because it is impossible to outmaneuver it.

Aeon frig range makes it win early navy fights, it doesn’t matter much for larger frig engagements but the torp defense it holds also makes torping both their destros and cruisers a massive pain in the ass. And no, salems still suck, uef destro has insanely huge weaknesses that do not make it reliable to spam, phim destro is solid but loses in large numbers to aeon destro.

@xejinord11

  1. See what FTX said
  2. Yes my list was without explanation since I matched the level of the original post. If the author doesn't care explaining why certain tech stages are bad except for sending his win rates, then I don't put in in the effort either and only respond with "your opinion? Cool, here's mine. Have fun with it"

Doesn't matter whether someone is on certain FAF teams or not, people shouldn't expect a long explanation/reply to something which doesn't offer the same.

Required rating for participation in balance talks when?

@ftxcommando said in I am abandoning Aeon:
From your logic, aeon frig is the best, cause of early navy fights:

Aeon frig range makes it win early navy fights, it doesn’t matter much for larger frig engagements

But now u say that aeon destro is the best in late t2 fights:

phim destro is solid but loses in large numbers to aeon destro.

But hey, if you say aeon frig is the best cause of early t1 fight, then aeon t2 destro is the worst, cause it loses early fights.

In my opinion, aeon frig is solid, but early t1 is relevant on smaller maps, cause when playing against solid players, you will probably have a 10 v 9 frig fight vs cybran. But when 1 destros comes into the battlefield, and I have aeon against sera, no way I can bit him if my opp just micros properly, thus it leads to the less destros amount in a late t2 stage, so aeon will not probably win this fight, cause it simply will have less destros. And if the game is full afk untill everybody has 3 destros, than someone can just make more eco and go t3 navy. I mean, in all the cases aeon is bad. The only case t2 destro is good is when u and ur opp are just afk untill everyone has 15 destros and then start fighting, which is not the real game scenario.

I consider Aeon frig the best early on, not in large numbers. Look at the chart above for my opinions.

Early t1 is relevant on all maps. Frigates are fast and cross a 20x20 like tanks cross a 10x10. Functionally double the speed. If your frigate forces a chase, it means the enemy frigate is defensive which means your engies are free to expand and it also means you are likely to win the fight because you do free damage while the enemy frigate has no opportunity to catch you. If you force 2 frigates to go to respond to your singular frigate, it gets even better and you can retreat to where your reinforcements are and snowball a win there.

The game isn't a bunch of sandboxes of mass equivalent situations. Variables of units which enable proactive play enable them to play around statistical inefficiency. This is why titan spam can be relevant all the way up to GCs existing. Doesn't matter if I lose to mass equivalent harbs if I get to choose when and where I want to fight and it isn't in mass equivalent numbers.

It's the same story with people sandboxing ints vs swift winds and discovering that swift winds can't beat a lower tier unit mass for mass. "Well why even tech up then" while ignoring the proactive benefits swift wind enables you to take advantage of during the game whether directly in terms of speed or indirectly in terms of needing less mass invested in bp to pump equivalent values of air.

You can pick and choose whether you prefer phim destro or aeon destro, I still prefer aeon destro for the flexibility of having nothing else to worry about because it is still a one-unit-does-all package against subs, destros, and frigs. Phim destro has the hole against subs while being better against frigs and slightly better off early on in aggressive play. Salem is a defensive destro in a predominantly aggressive navy faction and has a horrible time breaking anything and UEF has such a massive achilles heel against subs in their roster.

Didn't we already determine sera destros are fine against subs? I swear I just saw a post about that.

@redx said in I am abandoning Aeon:

Didn't we already determine sera destros are fine against subs? I swear I just saw a post about that.

yeah, I do not really know why ppl keep saying that sera is bad against subs. For me, sera has the best t2 sub in the entire game 😄

@xejinord11 said in I am abandoning Aeon:

@redx said in I am abandoning Aeon:

Didn't we already determine sera destros are fine against subs? I swear I just saw a post about that.

yeah, I do not really know why ppl keep saying that sera is bad against subs. For me, sera has the best t2 sub in the entire game 😄 And actually, this is the only t2 sub that can deal with coopers, cause it will just go on water and kill them, lmao.

@ftxcommando said in I am abandoning Aeon:

not as common as condensed maps where snipers simply defeat anything in UEF or Cybran roster

Is there any reasonable way to give MMLs their old homing attributes under limited situations?
I was thinking the other night about a potential gamestate where MMLs got guided missiles in omni range, or some similar late-game check.

It feels like the removal of guided MMLs (which was certainly done because guided MMLs were so damn strong) created a situation where snipers were 'so damn strong', and also just had no equivalent for UEF or cybran.

I'd love to hear whether faction balance would be broken if MMLs had a way to access their old guidance, in a limited form, to at least be a 'poor man's sniper bot' in the late game, especially for those factions that don't have snipers?
It seems, to this misguided (!) scrubby newb, that the removal of MML guidance might have contributed to the relative power of sniper bots in current FaF balance...

@sylph_ Originally, the tracking was quite good. As I recall, the strength of the tracking is determined primarily by the projectile's turn rate (in degrees/sec), so simply reducing the turn rate to a very small number can produce interesting effects. For example, in a mod, I once made submarine cruise missiles track moving targets, but with a low turn rate. As such, they were useless against frigates, but effective against carriers and battleships, but a battleship could still dodge the missiles when microed to dodge or stop/accelerate repeatedly.

I think modifying MMLs to have limited tracking like this during the terminal phase - a lower turn rate of maybe 2 or 3 deg/sec - could make them more effective against large and slow-moving units, whilst still ineffective against small/fast units.

As an aside, an interesting note about limited tracking like this is that missiles which miss will tend to hit behind and to the side of the target. Increasing the missile damage radius could also help ensure that missiles which fail to impact the intended target nonetheless hit something else behind it.