Forged Alliance Forever Forged Alliance Forever Forums 2013-03-25T00:20:44+02:00 /feed.php?f=52&t=3370 2013-03-25T00:13:36+02:00 2013-03-25T00:13:36+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3370&p=35464#p35464 <![CDATA[Re: Proposal: Novax rework]]>
As Mycen pointed out, T3 Arty is basically just as indestructible as the Novax, and the only way to stop it from firing is to destroy the building.

So, if the Novax is to have SMD counter, it could in turn be made "stronger" than arty, but in a clever way: staying in one spot continually firing its beam makes its damage (and maybe radius) increase with time, capping at some amount, say 4-5x its base DPS, turning it into a shield breaker, just like T3 arty, at a cheaper cost, but able to be countered by SMD.

Either make it unable to fire while moving, or just have its damage boost reset to zero continually while it is moving. In the second option, which I prefer, it could still follow units and fire at them, but in this situation it wouldn't be stronger than it is now (otherwise, navy with no SMD or an advancing ground army would just be fried fast by it). So the satellite would completely keep its current use as a harassment unit, especially against navy, while getting a new functionality similar to arty in a way.

Statistics: Posted by zolikk — 25 Mar 2013, 00:13


]]>
2013-03-24T22:45:35+02:00 2013-03-24T22:45:35+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3370&p=35438#p35438 <![CDATA[Re: Proposal: Novax rework]]>
Valki wrote:
Making the satellite vulnerable in any way will ruin the very concept of the Novax.


True. I think the satellite is very useable as it is. Although it doesn't really "feel" like a game ender experimental if you have less than three or four over an enemy's base, it gets the job done.

Statistics: Posted by A_vehicle — 24 Mar 2013, 22:45


]]>
2013-03-25T00:20:44+02:00 2013-03-24T22:25:13+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3370&p=35431#p35431 <![CDATA[Re: Proposal: Novax rework]]>
Valki wrote:
Making the satellite vulnerable in any way will ruin the very concept of the Novax.


Well, this "concept" of the Novax makes it either impractical, or OP if you buff it substantially. Basically, at the exact point where the Novax becomes viable and worthwhile to build, it also becomes OP.

To overcome this, the mechanics of the unit should change a bit. Give it some weakness/counters; for instance, as I suggested: SMD and limited air time. Then you can buff it so that it's worth making.

I don't see how this would affect the feel of the experimental - it's still an orbital death ray, it'd still work the same way. Or are you saying that the concept of the Novax is for it to be invulnerable but nearly useless?

Statistics: Posted by zolikk — 24 Mar 2013, 22:25


]]>
2013-03-24T19:10:58+02:00 2013-03-24T19:10:58+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3370&p=35384#p35384 <![CDATA[Re: Proposal: Novax rework]]> Statistics: Posted by Valki — 24 Mar 2013, 19:10


]]>
2013-03-24T14:00:28+02:00 2013-03-24T14:00:28+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3370&p=35337#p35337 <![CDATA[Re: Proposal: Novax rework]]> There might be some things about that change that need to be thought about so it doesnt have to big impacts on the gameplay.
Maybe we could put into the next balance patch.
The basic idea is quite good imo.
We would need some sort of mobile nukedef though. (What would be good anyway)

Statistics: Posted by laPPen — 24 Mar 2013, 14:00


]]>
2013-03-23T17:15:47+02:00 2013-03-23T17:15:47+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3370&p=35217#p35217 <![CDATA[Re: Proposal: Novax rework]]> Not feeling like an experimental.

Statistics: Posted by Arx — 23 Mar 2013, 17:15


]]>
2013-03-23T11:26:05+02:00 2013-03-23T11:26:05+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3370&p=35170#p35170 <![CDATA[Re: Proposal: Novax rework]]> Statistics: Posted by ColonelSheppard — 23 Mar 2013, 11:26


]]>
2013-03-23T08:47:30+02:00 2013-03-23T08:47:30+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3370&p=35148#p35148 <![CDATA[Re: Proposal: Novax rework]]>
I used it twice so far in 1v1's.

The first time it gave me invaluable intel and killed like 3 T1 engineers, game won.
The second time it killed over 10 masspoints, game won.

Would buy again.

Statistics: Posted by Valki — 23 Mar 2013, 08:47


]]>
2013-03-23T04:38:09+02:00 2013-03-23T04:38:09+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3370&p=35139#p35139 <![CDATA[Re: Proposal: Novax rework]]>
Originally, though, the Novax command center was supposed to be able to build multiple satellites as it has a build animation and a launch animation. Since GPG decided to give the command station only one satellite each, they currently play the build and the launch animation at the same time, when launching it's only satellite. Proof in the command center's script(XEB4202_Script.lua):
Code:
            # Play open animations.  Currently both play after unit finished, but will change
            # to play one while being built and one when finished       
            # Can't use PermOpenAnimation because of the satellite


Maybe the satellite should stay invulnerable, but when ordered to commit suicide the command center builds another satellite instead of also commiting suicide.

Or maybe not.

Statistics: Posted by A_vehicle — 23 Mar 2013, 04:38


]]>
2013-03-23T03:33:49+02:00 2013-03-23T03:33:49+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3370&p=35135#p35135 <![CDATA[Re: Proposal: Novax rework]]>
ShadowKnight wrote:
Can target aircraft - Solves ASF swarm problem in one hit


lol yes, because novax can catch asf.

Statistics: Posted by FunkOff — 23 Mar 2013, 03:33


]]>
2013-03-23T03:18:00+02:00 2013-03-23T03:18:00+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3370&p=35133#p35133 <![CDATA[Re: Proposal: Novax rework]]>
ShadowKnight wrote:
The only changes which can legitimately, and SHOULD, be considered are:

Continuous beam, same DPS overall
Can target aircraft - Solves ASF swarm problem in one hit

I second both of those ideas.

Statistics: Posted by LegoGuy — 23 Mar 2013, 03:18


]]>
2013-03-23T03:11:37+02:00 2013-03-23T03:11:37+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3370&p=35131#p35131 <![CDATA[Re: Proposal: Novax rework]]>
The only changes which can legitimately, and SHOULD, be considered are:

Continuous beam, same DPS overall
Can target aircraft - Solves ASF swarm problem in one hit

Statistics: Posted by IceDreamer — 23 Mar 2013, 03:11


]]>
2013-03-23T01:55:55+02:00 2013-03-23T01:55:55+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3370&p=35126#p35126 <![CDATA[Re: Proposal: Novax rework]]> Statistics: Posted by ColonelSheppard — 23 Mar 2013, 01:55


]]>
2013-03-23T01:50:51+02:00 2013-03-23T01:50:51+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3370&p=35125#p35125 <![CDATA[Re: Proposal: Novax rework]]>
Valki wrote:
Wakke wrote:Just thinking outloud here, but how about giving the satellite a huge energy maintenance cost to stay in the air, and in return buff that thing. If you can't pay the energy for 'x' seconds, the thing falls out the sky.

Kind of pointless, it's the same as making the Novax more expensive if you are going to add mandatory requirements.
Note that the novax is 7 times more expensive than a T3 power plant.

Not quite. If you make it more expensive, once it's built it doesn't matter. If it has ongoing costs, then it's like shields, where economic damage can bring it down.

This might also allow it to be cheaper, as if you need something like 3 or so dedicated T3 power plants, well, those can be factored into the cost of the unit/build time.

Statistics: Posted by Tavar — 23 Mar 2013, 01:50


]]>
2013-03-23T01:01:37+02:00 2013-03-23T01:01:37+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3370&p=35120#p35120 <![CDATA[Re: Proposal: Novax rework]]>
Wakke wrote:
Just thinking outloud here, but how about giving the satellite a huge energy maintenance cost to stay in the air, and in return buff that thing. If you can't pay the energy for 'x' seconds, the thing falls out the sky.

Kind of pointless, it's the same as making the Novax more expensive if you are going to add mandatory requirements.
Note that the novax is 7 times more expensive than a T3 power plant.

Statistics: Posted by Valki — 23 Mar 2013, 01:01


]]>