Topics created by FtXCommando

I was also not happy with the cost of the additional 5 meters, but then I remembered that I use Aeon ACU as a mobile defensive overcharge turret hiding under shields late game dealing up to 15k damage to land units from 35 units away (colossus is 40), and... whatever, let it be. Additional testing will show if that's the proper cost.

We really need to just stay away from gun range, it's too important to fuck with.

Just tossing ideas coz I'm bored, but maybe have a com possess a 'flash teleport' instead of the regular? What how why?

The idea is, when you get a teleport upgrade, you can create a teleport charge (sorta like a TML) - and then, once charged, you can use it with very short delay (say 5 seconds or something) to teleport a very short distance away (like T1 PD range), after which a new charge would start charging. This could be used to evade snipes or cross some rough terrain - or blip into the enemy front-line and start wreaking havoc with your OC and whatnot. I'm not getting into the pricing of this right now, but ofc it wouldn't be so cheap and fast to recharge that you could just hop your way across the map while the enemy is still upgrading to T2 - it'd be a tactical positioning tool which while lacking in range, would compensate in speed of activation and being able to prepare it ahead of time (unlike the conventional teleport, which drains resources as you are teleporting).

Another could be AOE teleport - seems it could be fitting for Aeon, but it doesn't really matter. The simple idea is, it teleports some units along with the ACU to the designated location. Maybe have it 3 levels, which limit it to transferring T1/T2/T3 units, and with limited amounts (say 5/10/15 unit cap total). Also maybe have it not transport things that would appear too strong, like sACUs (though maybe why not?) and ofc experimentals (though that should be evident from the 'tech limit' of T3). Maybe the range could also increase with level (from a smaller range of say TML, up to global for last upgrade level).

While I'm ok with Cybran gaining a shield disruptor unit (per my post a long time ago in this thread), I really dont like the idea of also removing the absolver from the game, which seems to be the current plan.

FYI for those viewing this thread, there's a discord thread which discusses this aspect (the Absolver removal, as opposed to Cybran gaining a shield disruptor unit) further:
https://discord.com/channels/197033481883222026/1205788137742274600

You go BC or you die

There are obviously ways to win beyond sheer navy efficiency, like locking people out of navy early, a snowball from map control early on/great first engagements, torps, riptides, etc. But these either rely on outplaying your opponent through means outside of navy gameplay or using theaters outside of navy.

@melanol

Non factor. It's a transportable luggage unit with a script to add and remove ammo when added to storage. Payload and range can be whatever you want on either launch platform. Could even make the warheads able to self-destruct and transportable by ACU/SACU/engineer for a bit of ground-and-pound.

@Fichom

I felt that an idea to rework nuke subs fit perfectly in in thread titled "Nuke Sub Rework".

I suppose you could also let them build naval yards.

That doesn't feel as thematic though.

I'm having some unforseen issues with credentials with the mod client, I told the mod team the avatars I've been given:

Tagada/Sladow - get the unique avatar
AutoNoob - gets cybran faction avatar
Karateka - Cool Riley
Bullydozer - Kael

Everyone else hasn't contacted me so see either @Giebmasse or @Rezy-Noob about your avatar. I'm going to be away from a PC for the next 2 weeks so I can't handle it myself.

NOTICE:

Future teamgame events (the next one will be in 2 months and be 4v4) will be utilizing the respective tmm rating rather than global rating for determining seeding and applicability to play. Players will be able to qualify by two methods to determine the validity of their rating:

30 total games in the matchmaker. Met the 10 game minimum to have been placed in the newest league that started in July.

@nex

I agree, cloak is underused but we have to carefully balance this. I think Seraphim getting this would be interesting for faction flavor but they're pretty strong as is...

Perhaps the time limit would not be set in stone but would be random. That way, it's not as simple as "always turtle." If you know the match will never go past 20 minutes, it's pretty obvious when (as the lower-rated player) you should shift everything into turtling and you don't care if you lose 80% of the map by 19:30

On the other hand, if there's a 20% chance the game ends at minute 20, and a 20% chance it ends at minute 24, and a 20% chance it ends at 28, and a 20% chance it ends at 32, and it definitely ends by minute 36, and the players don't know which it is (20/24/28/32/36) until the game ends, the defensive player has to work harder to balance being defensive vs playing the long game. While still giving them a "free" win if they can hold out.

what would be really cool, is if the ACU 'shield field' upgrade did just that, and added a small, personal shield to units in the area around the ACU (not sure if it is possible to code this tho...)

this would work a bit like the Sera regen field, but would stack with mobile shields and bubble sACU.

Here's an attack with a bunch of mantis and they are going to go ahead and fall down.

If we really wanted to, we could add an option e.g. for game host to not save a replay. We'd have to do some coding (switch to new replay server, add rabbitmq to it, add some simple "don't record this replay" logic between lobby server and replay server), but if there is a lot of interest in it, why not.
Metadata is another thing entirely of course.

Building something always takes time, hitting it with a hammer and taking to the trash takes a lot less time.

I can see reclaim not being build time based as you are not doing the same operation to build it, just converting the material so you can reclaim it.

You're all banned for not staying on topic

Does anybody know why we have a proposal about preventing a hostile takeover by artificially restricting the capacity of individuals to accept Association members which in turn induces some weird game theory mechanics into accepting new applicants rather than just increasing the burden of proof required to be proven sympathetic?

I feel like that whole thread is people realizing a problem that comes from the completely lax and irregulated acceptance process and just skipping the obvious solution of, like, regulating it? Why in the world would you stop 9 qualified contributors from deciding to join the Association a month before the GM rather than just increasing application requirements it so a Board and non-Board member can't invite their 145 player clan because they thought it would be pretty cool but would actually need to point to something they do that is an asset for FAF?

Other solutions were presented but Jip's is the only one that I couldn't think of a way to break/abuse so that's why I focused on the issue that comes up with his solution in particular.

Give sera ras and hive to both sera and aeon for balance

Nice digging btw