Good stuff in Equilibrium, why not in main game? + lil rant

[zeroAPM]

The radar jamming change is a major buff for UEF navy and i personally wouldn't want it in unless we nerf them in some other way.
Also the radar jamming reappears in the current patch if you lose radar/sonar coverage of the frigate so saying it never reappears is not entirely correct.

You can nerf the sub hunter and/or the destroyer.
Compensate the small range with the ability to, more or less, force the enemy to come into the destroyer's reach.
Also, fly a scout and target the correct blips as it gives vision?

[biass]

People are only listened to if their points coincide with the opinion of those who pull the trigger. "Balance" is wishy washy concept based on opinions. Data and analysis is never presented to scrutinise.

oh yes, tell me more

[Evildrew]

I use logic as my evidence farm

On a side note, what about wagners having some cloak effect under water unless they fire their useless torpedoes. Would be funny on a navy map to roll them under the navy and into someones base
I remember from those old war movies that when a sub would dive and lay on the ground (not sink), sonar couldnt detect it.

Further to my point about whether harms are OP. My anaysis shows on its own its not significantly imbalanced vs a weighted average of counters. The OPness as farm mentioned in combination with other units requires some strategizing. A battleship takes like 45 seconds to sink to 3 of them. However battleships could also target the sams out of range of the harms and free up space for torps. An easy counter to massed harms and sams is a nuke. The immobility of harms is a weakness not to forget. I just dont think they are OP. Cybran bs could be nerfted to make up for it.

[FtXCommando]

I use logic as my evidence farm

On a side note, what about wagners having some cloak effect under water unless they fire their useless torpedoes. Would be funny on a navy map to roll them under the navy and into someones base
I remember from those old war movies that when a sub would dive and lay on the ground (not sink), sonar couldnt detect it.

Further to my point about whether harms are OP. My anaysis shows on its own its not significantly imbalanced vs a weighted average of counters. The OPness as farm mentioned in combination with other units requires some strategizing. A battleship takes like 45 seconds to sink to 3 of them. However battleships could also target the sams out of range of the harms and free up space for torps. An easy counter to massed harms and sams is a nuke. The immobility of harms is a weakness not to forget. I just dont think they are OP. Cybran bs could be nerfted to make up for it.

In those 45 seconds you just had 3 SACUs build harms closer to the battleship. You retreat. Process continues. What do you know, you're in your naval yard unable to counter the harms.

Nukes are kind of a counter to everything, that's their point.

Wagners with cloak = can't build any coastal mex until you get a t3 omni. Really good bal.

War submarines are not capable of sinking to the ocean floor in our era, don't use modern weapons let alone movies to balance a game set 1800 years in the future.

[PhilipJFry]

Cybran bs could be nerfted to make up for it.

So you want to nerf an offensive unit to make up for the buff of a defensive structure? I thought you didn't like how the game got slower or something like that.

You can nerf the sub hunter and/or the destroyer.
Compensate the small range with the ability to, more or less, force the enemy to come into the destroyer's reach.
Also, fly a scout and target the correct blips as it gives vision?

I have no clue what you're talking about. UEF doesn't have sub hunters and nerfing their destroyer is out of question imho.

I'm not sure if the uef and sera cruiser can still hit the harm though.

All Battleships and all tactical missiles are capable of hitting HARMS in the current patch.

[Evildrew]

Phil, you can build a paragon by the time cybran harms creep gets close enough to your base on setons if that is what you fear.
You guys just think too linear and thats why balancing unit for unit is a terrible approach for a strategy game.

[PhilipJFry]

Phil, you can build a paragon by the time cybran harms creep gets close enough to your base on setons if that is what you fear.
You guys just think too linear and thats why balancing unit for unit is a terrible approach for a strategy game.

Cybran bs could be nerfted to make up for it.

Are you for real?

[Morax]

Nothing to read here: just Evildrew reminding us why he lost PC election.

[zeroAPM]

Cybran bs could be nerfted to make up for it.

I have no clue what you're talking about. UEF doesn't have sub hunters and nerfing their destroyer is out of question imho.
All Battleships and all tactical missiles are capable of hitting HARMS in the current patch.

Derp, meant the torp boat

[Exotic_Retard]

ahahahhaha

anyway, theres good stuff in eq because its the best balance. clearly. xD

however having said that i wouldnt just go around and copy paste random parts from there. this is because eq is balanced around the big picture and not a hotfix approach. it plays similarly enough for 2k players not to tell the difference, but theres changes under the hood that make it "just work"

harms sinks to the bottom in eq because its part of a working system of torpedoes, torpedo defenses and depth charges. faf has no such system. just putting in the harms from there would make it a pain in the ass to deal with.
the same thing applies to jamming. again, in eq its part of a working and developed system, thats why its fine there.


well whatever, nice to see the mod is appreciated xD