Posts made by TaxesAreTheft

I thought he spread the damage... but he just fired mass of 2 T3 maxes, mutliple times on one spot.
The idea is so absurd @IndexLibrorum that I didn't get the case.^^ Thx for pointing it out.

How did he does it? I can spread the missiles only when the missle stock is empty and they are still in production. Othervise the TML's reset their orders, if I give more than 3 targets via distribute orders?

Positively impressed arma.

@blackyps said in My Apologies from my behaviour in the tourney:

How is it cancel culture when someone apologizes?

Did I explain myself that bad???

All the things you do or not do have consequences. Apologizing to the crowd should be an unnecessary thing because turbo was the target of his emotions, so the whole thing was about him not us. When we get triggered by yudi it is our problem because we were guest in his his clash with turbo.
Ofc his reflection and his post is nice, but these kind of posts lead to the entitlement that this kind of behavior is unacceptable and we have the right to enforce a "better" environment, which we have not.

This may be the foundation of potential cancel culture. The corresponding thought chain I teased with "against the cancel culture" and it has nothing to do with yudi. The target audience are we, when we communicate, manage our expectations or try to moderate the aelus chat^^

To sum it up:
Reflection - nice
Personal apology - nice
This post - unnecessary

I know that this whole statement is controversial, but I try to be that kind of man that gives my opponent a credit when I try to decode/understand his message.
In communication it's our responsibility to make sure that we understand others right and others get our message. But we have no right to get not triggered, because failure will happen. All these things happened between yudi and turbo. Therefore the topic must be handled by them not us.
Ofc we may change our opinion to yudi based on his in-game chat, but I really doubt that this is the case for most of us, since most of us know him.
So this post is unnecessary and by recognizing it the reader passively forms the opinion that yudis in-game chat is of public interest and god bless it is not.
And like arma said I'm very happy that it is not my business.

"The road to hell is paved with good intentions." (And this is a thought teaser as well it has nothing to do with yudi^^).

I assumed that you know turbo since both of you are FaF veterans. And your apology personal and here are great, but guys this post is not necessary nor good in the greater view. Nobody of us was in your situation, we don't know your relationship or communication style. We were guest who are allowed to watch your clash. If I would start to criticize you, I would be the asshole. So please don't let us expect these post or even bump that. #Against the cancel culture.
Thanks for the matches btw.

I think the support from the community is fine and ofc there will be flaming people. The whole topic should be on the system, not the operators, cause we can't change them, nor should we.

What I found quite demotivating is the rating display of a negative rating. Maybe 0 should be the bottom line.

Just want to bumb this thread.

May we get a billy change regarding buffing the inner circle radius to 20. Don't care if this needs some compensation in dmg and increase the outer circle damage in some form. It bothers me that u see a nuke and the outer damage is neglectable.

@comradestryker said in The Fatboy:

I also want to point out that a lot of people kept recommending to me that the Fatboy come with some form of Drone assistance to escort it.

I can see the drones being useful... especially if they're the T3 drones that the SACU has - as long as they're balanced, obviously.

I guess it's a decent idea to have some form of Mobile Engineer assistance without the need of a physical engineer or SACU to tag along with the Fatboy.

What do you guys think?

Sounds way better than increasing its BP.
But buffing its utility will mostly be quality of life and marketing.
What needs to change are the combat stats and/or costs, maybe with build time.

That HP normalization fucks me up as well. And in defense it favors cybran which is per design an offense faction. It brakes with the faction identities and doesn't make sense to me. It's the same with mercies going from precision to aoe but the difference is that mercies needed a change this feels just random. I get the underlying idea but the execution seems bad, especially with the reclaim change.

UEF Bubble will probably be a meme, based on the costs. Otherwise interesting changes. Hope the naval experience is well balanced.

@ftxcommando said in Smol ACU Adjustment:

The difference is using OC is fun and should be encouraged as a micro mechanic, mass fab toggling is not.

OC is fun true, but I don't care if it's automatic or not. This is your opinion.
I like FaF because it is more macro heavy than other games. Strategy over APM. And I have already enough to micro. To be honest, it would probable be a nightmare for me to give my ACU all 4-5 seconds an OC order.
I can totally see that you like the skill expression and competition, but as an old casual player you would make the game stressful for me and competing to the starcraft kids a nightmare - I remember I played Warcraft III 20 years ago with ~160 APM...
When I watch FaF and exclude people like farms I see mostly people which can't cross the 1.5k border. Most players are below.
I seriously think removing or nerfing auto OC is a false direction - OC in general is an other thing.
PS: @FtXCommando this suggestion may hit the game and community but your latest approaches I really like. Creative, disruptive, out of the box thinking.

Since manual OC is already better (CD and targeting) there is no reason to remove auto OC.
Don't make the game more challenging for average players.

Nice to see these changes and it's good that many things are touched.
Feedback:

• Personal I'm unsure if we heard to much to the whining regarding loyas and titans.
• I would like more changes in the naval game, especially UEF and T3 Subhunters.
• I would like T3 Scouts abilities normalized (see forum, omni).
• I like T2 land buff, but would apprechiate a shift from T3 maa to T2, to make T2 stage even more viable (And parashields energy drain is toxic).
• And I would like changes to the concept of hives/kennels -> UEF has no clear identity/BP wise it's a noob trap and hives may be too strong.
• Another thing I'm unsure is the normalization of PD build time. I like the cultural appropriation of the aliens regarding our craftmanship and that this makes it easier for new players, but it doesn't fit their identity of conquerors.
• Overall I like the patch, more changes welcome

@tagada said in FAF Beta - Feedback:

Happy now?
Or do I need to give UEF Frigs hover ability as well?

Looks good, your list of possible changes looks great as well, hope you guys have the time and endurance for achieving some of that changes as well.
I have the impression that in this list and the current change log most points of the community are included. So thanks for your work so far and being here on display

So currently you have to pay 10.4 mass for 1 point of BP if you use engis.
The Hive has a mass/BP ratio of 14, which means BP-wise it is 74% efficient compared to building engis (no other decision factors included like pathfinding etc).
The Kennel: Mass/BP-ratio 22 and 47% after the patch 17,6 and 59%.
Conclusion for me: Kennel is shit and will be shit if used purely for build power.
The patch will be a placebo buff (elevation and rebuild are actually nice) but shit will be shit no matter what.
If the use changes towards flying reclaim this may be fine to give kennels a real use and identity. But this requires that their BP is not further degraded, because kennels are already a noob trap or a despair move BP-wise. Building them is mostly not beneficial for you. So you should either buff their mass per BP ratio towards the hive or bless their application with a real feature.

The simplest solution is a compromise in the form that the calculation depends e.g. 50/50 on HP AND mass. If necessary, you can still change the proportions.
My biggest concerns, however, are the rebuilding (reclaim & rebuild) of game enders, which could lead to more turtling.

@tagada may I ask for your thought on why not increase the energy cost of nuke missiles? Wouldn't this be easier?

My first assumption was naval balance, but regarding the sera BS I'm not sure that the planned chances are healthier/better (without unplanned side effects).

@comradestryker said in Sparky Rationalization:
It's literally in their name! "Field Engineer"! Their role is to be within the mix of your units, (especially with the Jamming ability). A Sparky is not a backline engineer. Building front-line factories should be an ability it has, rather than leaving that job to standard T1 engies in the back.

I totally understand your point. We simply load the term field engineer differently. For me, engineers at the front secure reclaim and build intel, possibly a firebase. Therefore it is logical for me that he should build T1 factories because we don't build T2 reclaiming factories that build Sparkies for that.
Since the most dangerous part is gaining reclaim (when not factory reclaiming), not building the factory. I simply see it as a quality-of-life change, which is good, because currently, the unit sucks.
For me, he is aggressive, because he can not be used for base/eco building.
That was my main point towards people who say Sparky is not allowed to be buffed because he may replace T2 engis.

My point of view is based on the belief that every unit should have a practical purpose and if you guys fear balance issues I would like to add, that if this would we the case, we may buff other factions in their identity or nerf his other stats.
I favour a buffing balancing approach, especially if we are able to give more features not stats. This way FaF feels cool and fresh and is able to deal with (upcoming) competitors.

@tankenabard that's true, I'm really happy to see this change

This is the most amusing thread I've read in a long time - full of straw man arguments. Without going into the argumentation of the other.
I'm glad the radar buff will make it. But FtX is correct from my point of view.
The Sparky is a cool faction idea and its stats are good, but the lack of essential blueprints leads to it not being used.
Does he need a buff to be used? Yes. But if we keep buffing his stats it doesn't change anything, see the thread.
Give him the changes (including factories) that keep players from using him is logical. By not being able to build power and maxes he even has a stronger identity as aField Engineer. Since he can now really do his job on the front, but does not help to improve your Eco.
And for the doubters, if he should be too strong, nerfs his stats.
I appreciate the thoughts of FtX that try to make the game better and I would like us to be a little less timid in our approaches.

Not that it matters, but I like that people like ComradeStryker try to increase racial diversity and keep FaF young. Like FtX said it might not be the biggest deal.
I wish we all are more open-minded to keep FaF as an interesting, complex RTS that even attracts new players. This is not about UEF or a specific race. I would appreciate it if we are a bit more courageous to change.