I have noticed a lot recently that if a player knows they are in a large navy slot they will opt for Seraphim.

If it gets to the T3 stage then 100% they start spamming T3 subs and you can only watch helplessly as they crush everything you have.

And as far as I can tell there is no equal to this unit.

Maybe you can out spam T2 subs or coopers but is this mass efficient?

Try and ground fire but they are far too fast for that.

They also crush the Aeon and UEF T4s

If you have air control torps work for a time but its not reliable.

and Destroyers get own by T3 subs, so what are you supposed to do against this braindead strategy.

HI all,

I have just had what i think could be a cool idea.

When the system detects a player disconnect for whatever reason, instead of the com exploding in full share games and killing units and engies around it, it would play the teleport effect instead, explosion would be only upon player killed.

What y'all think?

@Rowey scrap the new cybran unit - create cybran shield breaker sacu

also use the shoulder mounted gun ("sam" bone) on the uef sacu as an anti air weapon.

Does any one else feel like the gun upgrade is op, as in the cost isnt high enough for the extra damage and range and overcharge range it gives the com.

and to be honest im a bit bored with the whole rush gun or die meta, is anybody else the same or is it just me.

I think that just a range upgrade coupled with E storage would suffice as a good enough gun upgrade In my opinion it doesnt need double damage too. or should be more expensive as i see many players getting gun within 6-7 minute now.

@jip Hi, I have this set up and running however it seems that the offline part doesnt share the same file path for maps as there are only about 10 maps showing for me and non that i have downloaded from faf, any idea whats going on? Thanks.

@deletethis

Perhaps it could be a game settings option?

this is like comparing percies to labs, high damage and slow rate of fire vs spam = lots of wasted dps,

making frigates would have made all that spam useless.

A few reasons for me

1. the maps - this is obviously a personal preferance and will be different for everyone but i dont like small maps or large maps or navy maps so that puts me of playing because the chances of me getting a map that i would want to play on would be like 1/10

1.1 small maps are very micro intensive and usually result in very short meaningless games, large maps leed to long boring games

2. rating, i dont play many 1v1s so my 1v1 at the min is not reflective of my true skill and i can say the same for many others, i came across this guy the other day with 3 games rated at 400 but played like a 1400 at least, so you just dont know what caliber of player your going to be up against as its all over the place.

3. its just not as fun as playing with others, more so if in discord with friends.

4. you cant blame your teammates for doing random stuff

As with all things in life, it requires balance, saying large maps are for these people and small maps are for these people I believe not for the best.

another way of looking at this is that small maps require more micro and therefor suite a higher skill, and larger maps require more macro wich is something most players are familiar with.

lower skilled players can manage eco and these sorts of things but do not understand how to best use those units when they have been made, for instance i often see 1k players make rocket bots but then just suicide them in with t1 ect aswell as undertsanding that flares can beat mech marines but if microed the opposite can be true this is not a low level thing.

small maps mean that the loss of every single unit counts and could mean the differance between winning or losing whereas on larger maps there is more room for error.

I believe a map size that would provide the best experiances would be 10-12km

the only differance i can see in skill required for a map would be how much water there is, having a third factor to manage ontop of air and land would increase the challange, even more so with faction diversity, low players would struggle when their opponent spams zues or aeon t1 tanks on a navy based map when they are uef or cybran.

For smaller projectiles I agree should miss sometimes or be random ect, but for something as impactful as a nuke, games are won and lost based on whether you load an anti fast enough, and then for it to not work is broken, that would be like making an megalith getting it half way across the map only for its legs to fall off or even if shields where to randomly just turn themselves off sometimes, its not a desired effect.

SMD missing is pretty game breaking to be fair.

I have noticed a lot recently that if a player knows they are in a large navy slot they will opt for Seraphim.

If it gets to the T3 stage then 100% they start spamming T3 subs and you can only watch helplessly as they crush everything you have.

And as far as I can tell there is no equal to this unit.

Maybe you can out spam T2 subs or coopers but is this mass efficient?

Try and ground fire but they are far too fast for that.

They also crush the Aeon and UEF T4s

If you have air control torps work for a time but its not reliable.

and Destroyers get own by T3 subs, so what are you supposed to do against this braindead strategy.

what sort of things influence how fast you load into a lobby.

my pc has an ssd and its always taken about 20-30 seconds to load into a game but now it seems to take even longer?

sometimes completely failing to connect at all.

Had an issue in a recent game where my units didnt fire, and they were not on hold fire.

any one else seen this before?

I was accused of "off Maping" in this game.

The only movement order I gave to the gunship was to attack the acu, but as it was right next to the edge of the map the gunship as it moves about moves off map and kills the com.

Im 99% i didnt do anything against the rules.

what do u think.

@Rowey scrap the new cybran unit - create cybran shield breaker sacu

also use the shoulder mounted gun ("sam" bone) on the uef sacu as an anti air weapon.

@FtXCommando @Jip @Tagada After reading these posts It seems to me that there are two groups of people

Group 1. People who like Supcom the way it is, and thats what makes it great.

Group 2. People who want to improve supcom so that it can be as good as it can be.

these two groups are abviously polar opposites and will never see eye to eye.

The solution?

Just as a player can choose between FAF, FAF Beta & FAF Develop maybe another option could be FAF classic where all the changes that have been highlighted as controversial can be reversed and therefor preserved for everyone and regular FAF that seeks to improve the experiance.

@Deribus thats interesting, I would have assumed the opposite was true

I have been playing around in sandbox and thought I would compare some units.

It turns out 20 Cybran Gunships is the equivalent in mass but hase no where near the same dps

also the combined hp of 20 gunships is 118,00 compared to the rippers 75000

so my question is, what role does a soul ripper have? if it is completely out performed buy its t3 counterpart?

The picture demonstrates the dps of t3 gunships compared to the week ripper, the gc on the right still has 65000 hp

T3 gunships are more expensive on energy but seeing as having a large air grid also means lots of energy i dont see this as being an issue