Top 3 that would be surprising:
#1 Subterranean theater of war
#2 Weather & environmental effects
#3 5 minute setons lobbies
Posts
-
RE: Supreme Commander in 2020 MAY SURPRISE YOU
-
RE: Does FAF *need* Admin Access to Install
@Brutus5000 Just realized what you probably meant was to go to download the latest release .zip file from Git-hub, and extract to a local directory. 100% working thanks.
-
RE: Setons Opti Ballancing
@dorset said in Setons Opti Ballancing:
Wouldn't it be better for the lowest rank players to battle it out on air and have a slower building air game while the higher ranked players held the front line arc created by the other three positions?
It seems like that, but in actual fact- recovering a broken front is MUCH easier than a broken air.
-
RE: All the reasons Aeon sucks - T1 worst of all
I agee it seems odd that while all other factions have upgradable T2 -> T3 shields, Aeon does not. Seems a bit like a mistake and less of a unique faction trait.
Forgive my newness to the community, am I missing a past & lengthy balance decision here?
Also I was surprised to see the ACU Chronofield absent from @funkoff's list. I've tried it and is too expensive for early game, and late game, you've already lost if you're using it. It seems too situational and a false leg to stand on. Anyone have a replay where it was useful?
-
RE: Full game + computer crash
Thank you @Katharsas @Uveso and @Jip so far I've not had any crashes provided I have nothing else open. This probably confirms what Katharsas was saying in that maybe my computer can't handle FAF + x.
It's probably time for a new computer just holding on to the nostalgia tower abit longer.
-
RE: The Last Thread about RAS SACU Balance
@LittleBoyBennis said in The Last Thread about RAS SACU Balance:
This is not dealing with their fundamental problem: the combination of power and mass generation which removes the need to protect either generation in lategame, and their overall currently underpriced value proposition, they are too good for their cost (the little bp nerf doesnt cut it)
Would introducing diminishing returns mechanic make this viable?
Say first (5) SACUs are 100%, next (1) 125%, next 150%, etc cost? The 10th SACU would be 225% more (15k mass) which would be very cost prohibitive. Lore wise, that also makes sense as it's supposedly a human in each one...What of the Quantum gate? If SACUs are nerfed, kinda makes them useless. I saw one mod YEARS ago that turned them into Nydus Canal like structures or very rapid T3 factories... ...just saying if nerfed too much- what's the point of the QG?
Only 1100, sooo just some noob thoughts. Also...youtube vid of awesome gate mechanic
-
RE: The Last Thread about RAS SACU Balance
What about the suggestion about incorporating diminishing returns? Did I miss a response to that suggestion?
Seems like that would be easy to tune by the balance team and keeping RAS SCUs useful.
-
RE: Satellite overperforming.
Sat scaling is the main thing that really makes them hard to manage.
What if they had a power drain as a limiting factor-? This isn't a major change, just a response to scaling.
Won't break the unit, won't make it unviable, just respond to scaling issue.
-
RE: Another Novax conversation
@Nomander said in Another Novax conversation:
Satellite isn't unbalanced, it's just annoying to play against.
This.
But serious question- how much do I need to donate to patron to get something done about this fun killing unit?
Just leaving it as it is, means there's more than a 25% chance, every game of an unblock-able, perfectly accurate, no power costing, invincible*, fast moving, weak-but scalable 'artillery' unit.
-
RE: Another Novax conversation
@snoog You hit on something I forgot. With (1) sat, an entire team, needs to shield up their base, near, and far mexs to 'counter'.
A typical t3 shield is around 3000 mass and a typical 8 person map has 4-6 close mexes, 1-2 expos, and then whatever far mexes exist. By the time a Novax shows up, there's also probably a main t3 power grid; so conservatively a player has 3-4 places to shield.
That means the first Sat, can require an investment of 12-15k mass, and power drain of 1200-1600 per second; per player.
By the numbers then, to 'counter':
-
a Setons team- if they're each only getting (4) more t3 shields, 48-60k mass.,
-
a Dual Gap team - assuming there's some over lap, across 7 players, getting (2) that's 42k mass,
-
a Random Map team - assuming 5 players getting (3) each, that's 45k mass
ofc, that's plus power drain, cost of engineers going around, and mass to build power. And, that's with NO DAMAGE DONE, and only assuming 2-3 shields a player. So just by existing, a SAT almost immediately pays for itself.
Artillery is slow firing and inaccurate. Bombers can get shot down. Sats cost nothing once built and scale as a flock better than anything else.
-
-
RE: Another Novax conversation
@TwitchyMofo said in Another Novax conversation:
@Printer this is why reducing damage to shields would be an effective balance.
btw, I think I was maybe wrong. I was talking about the shield structure- not the shield bubble. And I think its just shield structures are so weak- is why it appears the sats kill them so fast. So I might have been wrong about the 'bonus' damage.
@YraCore said in Another Novax conversation:
@Printer bro 4 stats and you are dead? are you sure?...
4 Sats is close to 1000 dps, it takes a bunch of engineers to overcome that. So you can maybe stop a huge flock of Sats in one place (plot twist, 22 is unstoppable), but they can just move to another spot.
Sats don't have that opportunity cost unlike every other unit. This why I think they're not polished. The devs in vanilla used SMDs to shoot them down (I vaguely still remember being a kid, and having a Novax center and no Novax satellite- and building a few more before I saw what was happening...)-
Anyway, IMO maybe microing around SDM's wouldn't hurt. Hoping there's something cooking on this issue.
Edited after finishing replay