Navigation

    FAForever Forums
    • Login
        No matches found
    • Search
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    1. Home
    2. Deribus
    Deribus

    Deribus

    @Deribus

    31
    Reputation
    98
    Posts
    24
    Profile views
    0
    Followers
    0
    Following
    Joined Last Online

    • Profile
    • More
      • Following
      • Followers
      • Topics
      • Posts
      • Best
      • Groups
    Deribus Follow

    Best posts made by Deribus

    RE: New Balance Councilor

    The king is dead, long live the king

    posted in General Discussion •
    RE: Hives Need a Nerf vol. III

    The "hate for Dual Gap" is irrelevant here.

    You have (again) failed to provide an argument for why this should be a core balance change rather than just a mod. Hives are balanced just fine on virtually every other map. Nerfing them so they're balanced on Dual Gap would come at the expense of those maps.

    Hives were considered very OP in Phantom. You know what people did? They wrote a mod that gave hives to all factions. Problem solved.

    posted in Balance Discussion •
    RE: Weak Overcharge

    @Tagada said in Weak Overcharge:

    I really wish we would have a few guys that would be responsible for deleting all the stupid posts

    Ask and you shall receive.

    All posts that did not actively contribute to the conversation and/or contained personal attacks have been deleted. Keep it civil, keep it on topic.

    posted in Balance Discussion •
    RE: The Last Thread about RAS SACU Balance

    What about massively increasing their death explosion radius and damage? That way they're a lot more dangerous to chill in your base, and if you keep them clustered together they'll chain

    posted in Balance Discussion •
    RE: The Last Thread about RAS SACU Balance

    @Arkansas said in The Last Thread about RAS SACU Balance:

    How about just removing RAS from ACUs all together.

    Do you mean SACUs?

    Increase the volatility of a RAS ACU (lower hit points, bigger bang, makes it less useful in its other roles)

    This what I suggested as a first step, but I disagree with lower hitpoints.

    Upgrades universally improve upon the unit's capabilities. RAS reducing HP would be unintuitive for new players.

    Remove RAS preset

    @archsimkat said in The Last Thread about RAS SACU Balance:

    I feel like an easy change to nerf RAS bois just would be to remove all SACU presets.

    Not a fan of this approach either. Making something clunkier to use just makes the game more frustrating, instead of making a well thought out balance change that improves the game as a whole.

    posted in Balance Discussion •
    RE: T1 sub rebalance

    @keyser said in T1 sub rebalance:

    one player didn't bother making subs, while the other one, used his own subs for a long time and was able to deal quite a lot of damage through out the game.

    I actually went through that replay tracking the first sub with a stopwatch. Jagged's first sub spends no less than 7 minutes and 12 seconds actively firing at something, and it dies with around 1100 mass killed.

    At 360 mass per sub, extrapolating that means it would take an average of 2 minutes and 21 seconds of constant firing for a T1 sub to do its own mass worth in damage. I can't think of a single other combat unit that would have to survive in combat for that long to recoup its worth.

    posted in Balance Discussion •
    RE: for some reason aeon looks bit colorless any help?

    So first of all that's Seraphim.

    Anyway, what color is it supposed to be and what are your graphics settings? It looks pale purple to me but I agree it's pretty faint.

    posted in I need help •
    RE: Global ranking not accurate -- is there a way to reset?

    @KaletheQuick said in Global ranking not accurate -- is there a way to reset?:

    @lafindumonde If you want help tanking your rank I am definitely available! I have rank tanking experience.

    Do you now?

    FAF Rules:

    You will not manipulate your rating in any way.

    posted in General Discussion •
    Reclaim

    There has been a lot of discussion in the the last thread about RAS SACU balance about reclaim, especially dead land armies in the T2 through T4 stages.

    The core of the issue is that a failed assault at that point in the game leaves an enormous mass gift on your enemy's doorstep. This discourages aggressive tactics, and encourages strategies like nukes and T3 artillery, which in a worst case die quickly only for you to reclaim 81% of the mass back.

    There are countless ways to address this, but first I think there should be some guidelines to agree on:

    • Map reclaim should experience minimal, if any change. This includes unit wrecks like on Seton's. Most maps are already tuned with a specific amount of reclaim in mind, and updating hundreds of maps is unrealistic.
    • Players should be rewarded for fighting for and securing reclaim fields, but not to the point of becoming more important than mexes or creating an endless snowball.
    • Reclaim at the T1 land stage is relatively healthy, and should be looked at as an approximate goal.

    If you disagree with any (or all) of these don't hesitate to say so. I'm happy to change or refine these.

    With that out of the way, what are some ways to nerf reclaim?

    • Reduce reclaim speed. This has been done before but could be done again. I don't think this is the proper approach though, since the limiting factors for reclaim are typically the amount and the travel time, not the engineering capacity to grab it all. It also impacts map reclaim just as much as anything else.
    • Reduce reclaim value by tier. This is perhaps the simplest and most brute force method, but that doesn't mean it's the least effective. It would however impact map reclaim unless some kind of exceptions were coded in. As an aside, it could be interesting if T4s did their death damage a split-second after the wreck spawned, reducing the reclaim value.
    • Introduce a reclaim decay system. Make higher tier unit wrecks slowly reduce their reclaim value over time. This would encourage players to grab reclaim as quickly as possible. Again, exceptions would have to be made for map reclaim.

    What are some other ideas? What do you think about those above?

    Community ideas:

    @KaletheQuick said in Reclaim:

    • reduce wreck HP by tech level
    • add 'wreck' option to target priorities

    @arma473 said in Reclaim:

    • buildings should still leave 81%
    • Add "better reclaim view" and "unit selection cost" to the base game of FAF
    • Instead of reducing reclaim by tier, determine the % reclaim left after a unit's death based on the ratio of energy cost to mass cost.
    posted in Balance Discussion •
    RE: Nvidia driver performance problem

    @Doge20031 what about the Nvidia Fix UI mod?

    posted in Game Issues and Gameplay questions •

    Latest posts made by Deribus

    RE: How long should FAF keep old replays?

    Arma for The Giver 2021

    posted in General Discussion •
    RE: Increase T3 mex cost & reduce reclaim to reward aggressive gameplay at T2 stage

    Please have an actual discussion with defenses of your points instead of pointing fingers at each other and saying "you're strawmanning" "no you are"

    If this continues I'll have no choice but to lock the thread

    posted in Balance Discussion •
    RE: How long should FAF keep old replays?

    Would it be possible to look up the storage savings from the various proposed solutions?

    posted in General Discussion •
    RE: How long should FAF keep old replays?

    I think if we end up deleting replays (which I'm in favor of) we should have a poll on it first, since this is in my opinion a big change.

    posted in General Discussion •
    RE: The SCU Rebalance

    @Tagada said in The SCU Rebalance:

    The BP of the gateway was already increased (although obviously not as much as you suggested) to bring the SCU production time in line with that of t3 units. The BP of the Gateway is 180 compared to that of t3 land HQ which is 90. [Basic SACU and T3 land build time is similar] but it's much harder to assist the Gateways compared to factories.

    I'd buff the build speed of Gateways even further. Even with the buff they're even less build power/mass efficient than T3 land factories, and given the higher cost of SACUs they don't suffer rolloff time issues nearly as hard. For these two reasons it's still easier and more efficient to assist gateways than factories.

    I'm in favor of encouraging building more gateways instead of the 50 engineers/10 hives assisting one that we see all too often.

    posted in Balance Discussion •
    RE: Preformance issues Lag/statter

    @Swisscow if that fixes it then it is indeed the Nvidia driver issue. I recommend you either download the Nvidia fix mod or roll back your drivers.

    posted in I need help •
    RE: Preformance issues Lag/statter

    @Swisscow have you tried running d3d_windowscursor in the console?

    posted in I need help •
    RE: Ranks for everyone

    There was a leagues system that I believe @FtXCommando has been working on reimplementing. I could be completely wrong but either way he'd have more info

    posted in Suggestions •
    RE: The SCU Rebalance

    @FurudeRika said in The SCU Rebalance:

    you might have been building one of the useless presets where the SCU had OC but not range (sensors)

    Well, today I learned Sensors gives more gun range (for some reason)

    Since UEF already has percies they are not rly in need of another slow, longrange combat unit,the idea is to make it sth different.

    Sniper bots are a lot more of slow longrange combat units than Percies are

    posted in Balance Discussion •