A thought about T4

Moderator: keyser

Re: A thought about T4

Postby CopyyyCattt » 18 Jul 2013, 16:58

So what is their point? what is the role if not line breakers?You tell me.
Don't just tell me they shouldn't be for defense breaking.
Tell me what than their role within the balance should be.
Should they just be the ultimate cost efficiency units? better for cost than any other units?
Should they be glass cannon? Needing support and someone else to tank for them while they do massive damage?
What role would you prescribe to them if you disagree with my proposition?

You say balanced in such a way so that a player owuld need ot use them as part of a larger force..OK..How would that happen?
Make them buff units around them somehow but make their stats lower in general?Give a specific solution to their role in the balance.

And yes i think that aside fomr their oooomph (omgzors huge units) they are pretty boring. They cant be microed to evade shots(almost).They jsut march in.
Playing with groups of units or mixed forces is much more fun than spamming brute force XPs at the enemy...
User avatar
CopyyyCattt
Avatar-of-War
 
Posts: 126
Joined: 15 Jun 2013, 14:18
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time
FAF User Name: CopyyyCattt

Re: A thought about T4

Postby Mycen » 18 Jul 2013, 17:54

CopyyyCattt wrote:What role would you prescribe to them if you disagree with my proposition?


To be honest, aside from what you said about nerfing them so that less players build them, (which doesn't make any sense to me) It's not really clear to me that you're really proposing anything. You want there to be fewer experimentals in games? But the complaint is already that they aren't worth building in engymod, so it seems like you got that wish...?

CopyyyCattt wrote:So what is their point? what is the role if not line breakers?You tell me.
Don't just tell me they shouldn't be for defense breaking.
Tell me what than their role within the balance should be.
Should they just be the ultimate cost efficiency units? better for cost than any other units?
Should they be glass cannon? Needing support and someone else to tank for them while they do massive damage?
...

You say balanced in such a way so that a player owuld need ot use them as part of a larger force..OK..How would that happen?
Make them buff units around them somehow but make their stats lower in general?Give a specific solution to their role in the balance.


I think they're pretty good as they are right now, They're very powerful, but they can't wade through hordes of smaller units without support, and they often fight each other to or near a draw. I'm not saying they shouldn't be used for defense breaking, they are large and powerful units with high HP, after all. I'm just saying that they shouldn't be powerful enough to smash through a base and its defenders by themselves. And they aren't. So I don't really see a problem in their "role in the balance" that requires a "solution."


Prodromos started this thread by saying that he would rather the experimentals be (which they are not right now) able to beat their own worth in T3 units. He also (I think) said they should also be costed such that it would be easier to build your own T3 units to counter enemy T3 armies, and you would only be rolling out experimentals in the late game, once you have secured an economy and some field position.

I'm saying that, while this wouldn't be bad, I think that right now, experimentals function more along the lines of adding power and flexibility to your existing army. They are typically easier to position - they are all amphibious, and they can all be constructed conveniently, without the need for a large factory infrastructure. They also provide more damage and HP per unit than the T3 units, so you don't need to wrangle large numbers of them into the right position/formation or worry so much about choke points. But since they can't beat T3 armies on their own, if your opponent has a large T3 force you have to either build T3 units of your own to go with any T4s you might have, or send your T4s where his army is not.

My "specific solution" would be to think of T4s and T3s the same way one thinks of T3s at the T2 stage. No one argues that T2 and T3 should be distinctly separate "stages" of the game, where you're largely done with T2s when the T3s hit the field. It is quite common for players to suggest things like mixing a few Harbingers or Loyalists in with a T2 army, pushing out some T3 mobile arty to break that firebase for your T2 force, etc. Experimentals should be thought of the same way - not something separate and above the other tech levels, but just the next step up in unit abilities, something you add to your army, not an army in and of itself.

As far as specific balancing ideas, that would depend on the T4 in question. But I wouldn't be the one to ask about that anyway...

CopyyyCattt wrote:And yes i think that aside fomr their oooomph (omgzors huge units) they are pretty boring. They cant be microed to evade shots(almost).They jsut march in.
Playing with groups of units or mixed forces is much more fun than spamming brute force XPs at the enemy...


Well sure, that's definitely true! But large formations and most T3 units can't be microed at that level either (certainly not bricks/percivals) and if experimentals are not made so powerful that they can take on their weight in T3 then players will actually be encouraged to mix them, instead of just spamming them alone. There's no need to make them weaker.
Mycen
Evaluator
 
Posts: 514
Joined: 12 Feb 2013, 03:20
Has liked: 12 times
Been liked: 40 times
FAF User Name: Mycen

Re: A thought about T4

Postby CopyyyCattt » 18 Jul 2013, 19:03

I cant say anything about the new patch...but if XPs got nerfed cause of it im hapy TBH.
ATM even on flat maps without much porc you still see XPs spammed often...Its rediculeous. I think they should be for those long porcy games...where the front line is covered with many untis and defense so you need units that are great porc breakers..meanign units with low reload time and high dmg per shot that have a slow turning and moving ray and a slow turret so they are not good at catching smaller moving units.This would give them a clear place in the balance.
User avatar
CopyyyCattt
Avatar-of-War
 
Posts: 126
Joined: 15 Jun 2013, 14:18
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time
FAF User Name: CopyyyCattt

Re: A thought about T4

Postby ColonelSheppard » 28 Jul 2013, 18:39

I nearly managed not to answer but i simply couldn't, sorry.

1. Reclaim in SC2 is honestly a shitt feature indeed
2. 700 engys on factory? bad idea
3. SupCom2 grafics look like from a comic, yes it might be cleaner though
4. yeah basicly by that 10 units per faction were removed, gj with that
User avatar
ColonelSheppard
Contributor
 
Posts: 2997
Joined: 20 Jul 2012, 12:54
Location: Germany
Has liked: 154 times
Been liked: 165 times
FAF User Name: Sheppy

Re: A thought about T4

Postby CopyyyCattt » 28 Jul 2013, 18:59

Reclaim is a bit overdone in FA because of it's high ratio.
Should be somewhere between 40% and 60%, definitely not more and the reclaim time should be increased a bit.
Current state encourages to only attack when u can completely dominate the opponent, meaning less room to harass and more overplay where you win by eco microing better or by making a better type of units.
On smaller maps or more crowded maps this is compounded by the commander being worth a lot of time and unit amount.
you cant harass a bit cause even if you kill more units than you lose you are still feeding him mass and just having a medium advantage in unit amounts is not enough because of the commander.This does not matter in 1v1s but in team games pushing with com(to counter his com defending, and use your unit advantage to overtake the position and get the reclaim) is extremely dangerous because of how vulnerable it is to t2 Air.
Last edited by CopyyyCattt on 28 Jul 2013, 19:08, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
CopyyyCattt
Avatar-of-War
 
Posts: 126
Joined: 15 Jun 2013, 14:18
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time
FAF User Name: CopyyyCattt

Re: A thought about T4

Postby pip » 28 Jul 2013, 19:06

abcabcabc339 wrote:
prodromos wrote:Giving credit to eternal whiners, destroyed supcom2:
1. oh oh too difficult to reclaim, just remove it
2. oh oh the units, have problems in pathfinding waisting computational power, let's replace it with the unnatural flowfield(yupee battleships and colossi skating on ice like ballerinas!)
3.oh my god too high graphics requirements(lol), let's make it look like a toy from the AOE era.
4. whine! my t1 units can't be used in later stages, let's buff them so that a tiny winy mouse can bring down a t4 behemoth(oh yeah the revenge of little people!)


1. Reclaim is honestly a shitty feature.
2. Take 700 engineers and have them assist a factory, see if they skate. (this does not happen in Supcom2)
3. The graphics look better and cleaner this is A PHILISOPHICAL TRUTH.
4. No one whined about that.

Supcom 2 is a better game because: Units do what they are supposed to do. Units do what you tell them to do, when you tell them to do it.


If you think Supcom 2 is the better game, you are most probably wasting your time on these boards.
pip
Supreme Commander
 
Posts: 1826
Joined: 04 Oct 2011, 15:33
Has liked: 191 times
Been liked: 86 times
FAF User Name: pip

Re: A thought about T4

Postby ColonelSheppard » 28 Jul 2013, 19:38

comparing SupCom2 to FA is like comparing a banana to an apple

apple is just better
User avatar
ColonelSheppard
Contributor
 
Posts: 2997
Joined: 20 Jul 2012, 12:54
Location: Germany
Has liked: 154 times
Been liked: 165 times
FAF User Name: Sheppy

Previous

Return to FAF Suggestions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest