FAForever Forums
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Login
    The current pre-release of the client ("pioneer" in the version) is only compatible to itself. So you can only play with other testers. Please be aware!

    Please can we keep faction differences?

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Suggestions
    10 Posts 6 Posters 1.0k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • S Offline
      Squeeler
      last edited by

      I hear there's a new Cybran anti-shield unit being proposed, like the Aeon disruptor. Recently, Cybran coms gained the ability to have nano (in addition to laser). It seems the balance team (who do amazing overall, you know I love you) are pushing to make the factions too similar. IMO, the differences between factions make the game great. When choosing a faction, you should be making a tradeoff: some cool toys unique to that faction, at the expense of a lack of some other things that belong only to other factions.

      IndexLibrorumI 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 3
      • Sladow-NoobS Offline
        Sladow-Noob
        last edited by Sladow-Noob

        Originally the idea was to move the Absolver from Aeon to Cybran units.
        ppl voted / wanted to keep the absolver though. Therefore an addition instead of a swap.

        Faction diversity stops when there is a clear problem with the faction's strength aka. "just accept you're dead when opponent has XY". This was the case with both the nano upgrade and the cybran absolver.

        Inactive.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • IndexLibrorumI Offline
          IndexLibrorum Global Moderator @Squeeler
          last edited by

          @squeeler I'm a strong proponent of faction diversity, but I think an anti-shield option for cybrans is a very good fit. I would have liked to have the unit moved from the Aeon faction, but this is the best we'll get I think.

          As long as not every faction gets a shield disruptor, I'm fine with this.

          "Design is an iterative process. The required number of iterations is one more than the number you have currently done. This is true at any point in time."

          See all my projects:

          F 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
          • F Offline
            Firv @IndexLibrorum
            last edited by

            @indexlibrorum said in Please can we keep faction differences?:

            @squeeler I'm a strong proponent of faction diversity, but I think an anti-shield option for cybrans is a very good fit. I would have liked to have the unit moved from the Aeon faction, but this is the best we'll get I think.

            As long as not every faction gets a shield disruptor, I'm fine with this.

            Well now its just UEF that doesnt has a anti shield unit. GG i guess 😄

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • Regal_EagleR Offline
              Regal_Eagle
              last edited by

              UEF also has the Fatty who just says "What mobile shields", even though it's at exp stage.
              They also have Percies, which depending of the point of view could be considered a sniper unit. (High alpha and outrage anything besides Brick and other snipers), but keep in mind UEF also have parashields
              Cybran at least has the excuse to have no mobile shields at all.

              F 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • F Offline
                Firv @Regal_Eagle
                last edited by

                @valstrax said in Please can we keep faction differences?:

                UEF also has the Fatty who just says "What mobile shields", even though it's at exp stage.
                They also have Percies, which depending of the point of view could be considered a sniper unit. (High alpha and outrage anything besides Brick and other snipers), but keep in mind UEF also have parashields
                Cybran at least has the excuse to have no mobile shields at all.

                Except that Fatties don't get close to shields because they get mauled by t2 arty. And Percies are great but so slow that everything can just run away from it

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • Regal_EagleR Offline
                  Regal_Eagle
                  last edited by

                  I did say they get close to mobile shields not static shields...
                  Also they reduced range of T2 arty recently in a balance patch so Fatty is less criticallyw eak to them, and has more opportunities to get close enough to them and kill them before they kill it.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • F Offline
                    Firv
                    last edited by

                    Yeah problem with t2 arty range now is that its absolutly useless against navy. But thats a diffrent problem I guess

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • B Offline
                      BJ
                      last edited by

                      Wow just had a look, it went from 150 to 115 ...
                      Commence naval bombardment.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • F Offline
                        Firv
                        last edited by

                        yeah battleships outrange t2 arty. So if you lose navy, there is absolutly nothing you can do to stop battleships from pounding you now. Atleast when t2 arty had more range you could shoot back, but you cant even do that now anymore.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • First post
                          Last post