Can we get it off ladder please? Nearly everyone I play on it tells me it's a boring map and I strongly agree.

Another possible option on battleship balance: make them less effective direct fire (unit-vs-unit) weapons, thus only really useful for bombardment. Keep T2 destros (+ UEF T3 destro) as the navy mainstay. This could perhaps be achieved via damage classes (reduced damage, with bonus vs structures)?

That might also help reduce splash vs subs without affecting splash vs harms.

Honestly though, SC navy would need a lot of work (and probably a lot more units) to be properly balanced IMO.

The proper solution would be to create an intel entity which drops from the aircraft, every few seconds, and if it lands in water, becomes a short term sonar buoy. The code for that too, is already in the game - it's used in the Aeon Eye of Rhianne, which creates a vision entity. This would be an adaptation of that.

That might actually work okay. Can such a temporary entity be targetted by subs/ships?

And what about stealth? Should there be stealth subs which only show up in vision radius or is that too insidious? Would they be visible to scout planes anyway due to vision + radar?

Perhaps a better alternative:

• all water-based sonar are actually short-range omni + long range sonar
• all subs (even all underwater units?) automatically stealth when not moving
• (maybe) no underwater vision; enemy units are only visible as sonar icons: this could make nuke subs a key part of T3 navy

So Farms is saying air is boring because it has few units? Sure, more faction diversity might be interesting... well, Aeon already has swifties, mercies and restorers.

Back to navy, bias said:

Submarines are entirely boring units, they have no real solid mechanics associated with them

So make them interesting. Add a "stealth" button like the Selen and let them lurk, maybe, then try luring your opponent's ships to your subs.

But it's kind of hard to make "hide and seek" tactics work given the pace of the game, plus the way target locks work through the fog of war.

Added feature : preselection of mex when selection engineer and hovering the cursor over a mass spot

I don't like this so much. Is there an option to turn it off? It can require an extra click when doing the "assist mex" thing to build storages.

Honestly @BlackYps that sounds like good work. I've partly given up playing 2v2 due to bad experiences, but will have to try some more.

Slightly off topic: will the 3v3 and 4v4 queues share the 2v2 ratings or use new ratings? I can see why 1v1, 2v2 and global use separate ratings (team communication/coordination being a separate skill, and half of global games being gap/setons/canis), but TMM games are probably similar enough to share ratings?

I changed my Engies to have 1, 2, and 3 visible because I can't see the little tech lines zoomed out, but maybe that is also too much.

I'm looking at your screenshots and not totally a fan, but I do agree that with the default icons finding that T2 engy is too hard. Perhaps use the spanner symbol, then make it a double/triple spanner for T2/T3 engies? But the 1/2/3 icon is good enough to also make an option, if you are willing to make a few variants.

@Sheikah that can be traded-off against the reclaim value of wrecks. IMO it may be a little high (on land)?

Today: units have HP which is expensive and slow to repair (exceptions: high regen from upgrades and vet, air staging), and some units have shields which are free to repair.

Can we take inspiration from various other games and have both "core HP" and "armour", where only armour is fast and cheap to repair, and where "core HP" may affect a unit's performance?

I'm not sure how viable this is to implement on SupCom, but IMO it would be a much better incentive system for keeping units alive than the veterancy system.

Btw @Cyborg16 in 20x20

@loxpooig I was more talking about spread-out 10k maps. 20k isn't even an option at my ladder rating.

It is possible however you will always be able to see the map size when sitting in the custom game lobby though.

What about maps with internal borders though? Not that I particularly care for blind maps, but it allows more size options. 5km can have annoying issues with air and lack of build space on the edge; I imagine 8km would alleviate this while still feeling small. (I don't suppose we'll get the map-gen to do the equivalent of Cobalt Valley any time soon though.)

Personally I've enjoyed mapgen week (when I've had the chance to play). It has exposed some of my weaknesses (e.g. big open maps with lots of expansions, where T1 spam can work but travel time is significant).

Anyone looking for a 1300 global (1200 1v1) partner, PM me.

You should include some less important units in the pic for comparison.

@tatsu yes that's what I've been doing all along.