Reworking Fatboy, Megalith, Tempest and Aircraft carriers.

Moderator: keyser

Re: Reworking Fatboy, Megalith, Tempest and Aircraft carrier

Postby Mycen » 31 Jul 2013, 19:58

Although as the only way to make the engymod concept work it is what it is, as Firewall pointed out, it's already bad enough that a unit (factories) can arbitrarily lose/gain abilities because of another unit somewhere else that is unconnected to it (HQs). To exacerbate this problem by forcing players to build another unit in order to get their factories to work properly is just... outrageous.

Really, the real problem with your idea is evident right here:

to force players


We are supposed to be giving players the freedom to do different things. Not forcing them to do one thing in order to do another. You should always be trying to give players more options, not less.
Mycen
Evaluator
 
Posts: 514
Joined: 12 Feb 2013, 03:20
Has liked: 12 times
Been liked: 40 times
FAF User Name: Mycen

Re: Reworking Fatboy, Megalith, Tempest and Aircraft carrier

Postby Apofenas » 01 Aug 2013, 04:36

Really, the real problem with your idea is evident right here:

to force players


We are supposed to be giving players the freedom to do different things. Not forcing them to do one thing in order to do another. You should always be trying to give players more options, not less.


Excuse me for my bad english. I was hurrying to answer.

I wanted to say: to give players choise between continouing T3 spam with normal speed or building experimental and start making spam with increased speed. Then goes choise between keeping this experimental in base or in front, where it is vulnerable.

Well, I don't like an idea of engie mod as well. But if I have to play with it, I want to play without such bugs.
BalanceVictim wrote:I tried it out, and yes, the anti-torpedo is a useful tool now. Sadly, the rest of the unit is still extremely weak compared to any other frig
Apofenas
Contributor
 
Posts: 747
Joined: 21 Jul 2013, 14:39
Has liked: 179 times
Been liked: 180 times
FAF User Name: Apofenas

Re: Reworking Fatboy, Megalith, Tempest and Aircraft carrier

Postby Mycen » 01 Aug 2013, 17:19

Ah, okay, well that's more clear. Still, I don't like the idea. Factories can suddenly build more quickly because there is a fatboy/megalith somewhere on the field? And not even that they can build more quickly, but they can build one particular unit more quickly? How does that make any sense at all?
Mycen
Evaluator
 
Posts: 514
Joined: 12 Feb 2013, 03:20
Has liked: 12 times
Been liked: 40 times
FAF User Name: Mycen

Re: Reworking Fatboy, Megalith, Tempest and Aircraft carrier

Postby Apofenas » 02 Aug 2013, 04:28

Mycen wrote:Ah, okay, well that's more clear. Still, I don't like the idea. Factories can suddenly build more quickly because there is a fatboy/megalith somewhere on the field? And not even that they can build more quickly, but they can build one particular unit more quickly? How does that make any sense at all?


To me, it sounds like: "Why can I suddenly upgrade T1 factories to T2 support or build new ones, because I have T2 HQ?". The mod, first of all, changing dynamics of land factories, doesn't affect best land factory in the game. Combinations of other factions with Huge direct firing units, sniper bots and a little bit worse, but still T3 bots/tanks are capable of much easier finishing game, Because T4 units are much more powerfull and can get huge health boost, by achieving veterancy levels(try to do same with army of Percivals), while UEF forces won't be successfull so much, because Fatboy isn't a tank or mobile firebase or battlestation, it is experimental mobile land factory, so I believe it should be used so. And if it could build while moving, it would be used so, but that is impossible, so the best way of using it as a land factory is to make it HQ land factory, capable of increasing Percival build speed. So it will make UEF even to other factions in experimental fight without adding new direct firing unit.

For Cybrans though, I suggested to do same with Megalyth and Bricks, because Megalyth won't appear in the game so early, because of its cost and Brick spam won't be so dangerous, because Bricks are a little bit worse than Percivals, so it's just a new option for this faction.
BalanceVictim wrote:I tried it out, and yes, the anti-torpedo is a useful tool now. Sadly, the rest of the unit is still extremely weak compared to any other frig
Apofenas
Contributor
 
Posts: 747
Joined: 21 Jul 2013, 14:39
Has liked: 179 times
Been liked: 180 times
FAF User Name: Apofenas

Re: Reworking Fatboy, Megalith, Tempest and Aircraft carrier

Postby Hawkei » 02 Aug 2013, 04:39

Affording the Fatboy a global Build Rate buff would be a fairly ubiquitious change. Which would be invisible to most players. However, Supreme Commander was built on fairly simple and universal build mechanics. Which combine to create some pretty interesting outcomes. As soon as you head down the path of complicated buffs and multipliers, you have abandoned the very thing which makes Sup Com what it is. This is not like any other RTS, so it can't be balanced in the same manner.

A Percy is a Percy. So it should always have the same build time. At some point you need to recognise that you are trying to use balance modifications to steer the gameplay toward the type of gameplay you like. Which is not balance at all. It is an inhibition and limitation, with the explicit intent of engineering gameplay. If the meta-game has steered toward T3 AAB spam, then devote time to learning the counters. Such that you feel comfortable dealing with it.

The purpose of balancing is to ensure that the meta-game does not spiral into a "use this faction or die" sort of scenario. Which is not where we are at. The mechanics are pretty universal, and all the factions viable... If you have trouble going up against Percies, you should first try to work on counters. THEN when you have exhausted your counter options we can talk about balance.
User avatar
Hawkei
Supreme Commander
 
Posts: 1217
Joined: 03 Jun 2013, 18:44
Location: A rather obscure planet in a small cluster of stars on the outer edge of the Milky Way Galaxy
Has liked: 44 times
Been liked: 182 times
FAF User Name: Firewall

Re: Reworking Fatboy, Megalith, Tempest and Aircraft carrier

Postby Apofenas » 02 Aug 2013, 06:10

When I was creating this topic I did realize, that this suggestion will fully work out, if it will work out at all. The reason why I defending such balance is because I saw a lot of topics about making Fatboy stronger or adding new units to UEF since appeared Supreme Commander: Forget alliance (That is because in original SC Fatboy could easily kill GC and of course Spyder).

That's why (i think) appeared Hawk's mod (which became a part of truly unbalanced Black ops) and such mods. I don't like any ideas of adding new units to this game, but even here of FAF I saw some topics about reworking/adding new units to this game. For example: "New Unit Concepts to make Naval Battles Awesome"(viewtopic.php?f=42&t=4636). Black ops had same units: Cybran:T2 Minelayer Submarine and Cybran:Anti-Shipping Mine - In Black ops you could build mines by engineers; Aeon:T3 Mothership - you could build floating units on naval factories (and Tempest as well). Seraphim:T3 Hovering Transport - well, it wasn't black ops, but there was one buggy mod adding such units to each faction.

That's why I prefere reworking old units. This idea may not to be that balanced, as I hope it to be, but if one day there will be decision of adding new experimentals, think of my though again.
BalanceVictim wrote:I tried it out, and yes, the anti-torpedo is a useful tool now. Sadly, the rest of the unit is still extremely weak compared to any other frig
Apofenas
Contributor
 
Posts: 747
Joined: 21 Jul 2013, 14:39
Has liked: 179 times
Been liked: 180 times
FAF User Name: Apofenas

Re: Reworking Fatboy, Megalith, Tempest and Aircraft carrier

Postby Hawkei » 02 Aug 2013, 07:05

Apofenas wrote:..., but even here of FAF I saw some topics about reworking/adding new units to this game. For example: "New Unit Concepts to make Naval Battles Awesome"(viewtopic.php?f=42&t=4636). Black ops had same units: Cybran:T2 Minelayer Submarine and Cybran:Anti-Shipping Mine - In Black ops you could build mines by engineers; Aeon:T3 Mothership - you could build floating units on naval factories (and Tempest as well). Seraphim:T3 Hovering Transport - well, it wasn't black ops, but there was one buggy mod adding such units to each faction.

That's why I prefere reworking old units. This idea may not to be that balanced, as I hope it to be, but if one day there will be decision of adding new experimentals, think of my though again.


I think when we are talking about adding units to the game. These would be done via mods. But when you're talking about engy mod balance, we are then discussing default FAF balance. Which is played in ranked matches. I would not expect to see any additional units in 3626 or any subsequent patch.
User avatar
Hawkei
Supreme Commander
 
Posts: 1217
Joined: 03 Jun 2013, 18:44
Location: A rather obscure planet in a small cluster of stars on the outer edge of the Milky Way Galaxy
Has liked: 44 times
Been liked: 182 times
FAF User Name: Firewall

Re: Reworking Fatboy, Megalith, Tempest and Aircraft carrier

Postby Mycen » 02 Aug 2013, 08:00

Apofenas wrote:To me, it sounds like: "Why can I suddenly upgrade T1 factories to T2 support or build new ones, because I have T2 HQ?".


Exactly. There is no reason to say, "Well why not, we've come this far!" when we have stretched what makes sense quite far enough with engymod. Let's not go any further just because we can.

Apofenas wrote:The mod, first of all, changing dynamics of land factories, doesn't affect best land factory in the game.


Surely you jest. The Fatboy's bizarre and extremely slow rolloff always prevented that from being the case, not to mention that even with 3x the build power, its cost was far greater than 3x, and it has the 'attack or build' tradeoff that means you're almost always wasting half its capabilities/cost. The Fatboy takes so long to build and moves so slowly that you're better off just dropping a bunch of engineers close to the frontline and building normal factories if field production is your goal.

For the player who wants to build a bunch of land units, at no point ever was the Fatboy anything close to the best land factory in the game.

Apofenas wrote:Combinations of other factions with Huge direct firing units, sniper bots and a little bit worse, but still T3 bots/tanks are capable of much easier finishing game, Because T4 units are much more powerfull and can get huge health boost, by achieving veterancy levels(try to do same with army of Percivals), while UEF forces won't be successfull so much, ... So it will make UEF even to other factions in experimental fight without adding new direct firing unit.


You started this thread arguing that Percivals are too powerful now, and this change would act as a break on UEF percival spam. Now you're saying that UEF land isn't strong enough, so this would be a needed buff? Which is it?

Apofenas wrote: because Fatboy isn't a tank or mobile firebase or battlestation, it is experimental mobile land factory, so I believe it should be used so. ... , so the best way of using it as a land factory is to make it HQ land factory, capable of increasing Percival build speed. So it will make UEF even to other factions in experimental fight without adding new direct firing unit.


Oh, I agree that given its description, it is a shame how little it is used for actually building units, but that doesn't mean the best way to push it in that direction is to impose new and arbitrary limits on other units. Aside from increasing its build power to be triple that of T3 Land HQs again and (if possible) decreasing its rolloff time, I'm not really sure what the best way of making the Fatboy attractive as a factory is, or if there even is one. But I know it isn't this.

Apofenas wrote: so it's just a new option for this faction.


But don't you see how this isn't adding options, it's taking them away? Consider this example: If you want to maximize the combat effectiveness of your ACU, you might give it the gun upgrade, or you might give it the T2 engineering suite, right? Those both maximize its effectiveness at the desired task, but in different ways. You have options. If you want to maximize your economy, you aren't going to decline to build ras on your ACU right? Because it's the only option your ACU has for increasing your economy.

It's the same thing with trying to spam land. Right now if you want to build percivals as quickly as possible, you can build more factories, or upgrade your factories to HQs, or assist them with engineers. You have several options that will all produce the desired result (more percies) in different ways. If your change were implemented, every UEF player who wants to spam percivals would, as soon as possible, build a fatboy, because it's the only way to get that increase in production rate.

That is fewer options, not more.
Mycen
Evaluator
 
Posts: 514
Joined: 12 Feb 2013, 03:20
Has liked: 12 times
Been liked: 40 times
FAF User Name: Mycen

Re: Reworking Fatboy, Megalith, Tempest and Aircraft carrier

Postby Apofenas » 02 Aug 2013, 08:25

The problem in our discussion is that I tryed to solve three problems at once;
1) Connecting units with building capability with stationary facilities.
2) Making this building capability to be usefull and balancing it with each other.
3) Solving problem with UEF T3-T4 direct firing unit.

You didn't expected your units to be in next patch, but I know, there were discussions of adding new direct firing T4 unit for UEF. And again engie mod made it complicated, because second and third problems could be solved by:
1) Increasing Fatboy's and Megalith's build rates.
2) Reworking Megalith's building capability (I really don't like those eggs).
3) Reworking Fatboy's building capability (it takes about 4 seconds to move unit from conveyor belt, it's not that scary with Titan, for example, which takes 13 sec, but it's bad with flak, which takes 4 sec to build).

Solving theese problems one by one isn't that hard, but solving them at once, having old issues with engie mod is too complicated. And that is what you don't like.
BalanceVictim wrote:I tried it out, and yes, the anti-torpedo is a useful tool now. Sadly, the rest of the unit is still extremely weak compared to any other frig
Apofenas
Contributor
 
Posts: 747
Joined: 21 Jul 2013, 14:39
Has liked: 179 times
Been liked: 180 times
FAF User Name: Apofenas

Re: Reworking Fatboy, Megalith, Tempest and Aircraft carrier

Postby Hawkei » 02 Aug 2013, 09:23

No, I think the problems were never identified to begin with.

1) Connection between mobile and static factories is not a problem. It is a proposed solution, to a pervieved problem which doesn't actually exist. What says their ought to be any connection at all? What is the problem?
2) The capability of this unit (the Fatboy's manufacturing capability) always has been useful, and would be no more useful following your proposed changes.
3) The UEF has no problem with T4 direct fire unit. Because they have the Percival. They also have the Ravager T3 PD which is unique to this faction. So they are the best equipped to "Recieve" a T4 Direct Fire Experiemental. It is faction diversity which most UEF players accept.

It may be true that Engie mod, has made T3 spam more accesible. But this also means that Aeon, Cybran and Seraphim T3 are also equally accesible. When matching T3 against T3, the other factions are well equipped to deal with Percies.

As for the utility of the Fatboy, I would agree that reduced rolloff time would be beneficial. But I think that this unit is best utilised in the attacking role. The ability to spam out some engineers for reclaim, or a T3 engineer to build SAM's or flak to defend against those gunships adds to the units flexibility.
User avatar
Hawkei
Supreme Commander
 
Posts: 1217
Joined: 03 Jun 2013, 18:44
Location: A rather obscure planet in a small cluster of stars on the outer edge of the Milky Way Galaxy
Has liked: 44 times
Been liked: 182 times
FAF User Name: Firewall

PreviousNext

Return to FAF Suggestions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest