Page 11 of 11

Re: Scathis.

PostPosted: 18 Mar 2013, 20:59
by Golol
yea i thouht about a land transporter since a time. it would make t3 units much more useful and fit uef style.
100 reply :P wheres my cookie :D?

Re: Scathis.

PostPosted: 19 Mar 2013, 05:07
by Mycen
Golol wrote:i would like some reaction on my suggestions



On any map where you would even be building T3 artillery in the first place there should be some struggle to secure a position from which to bombard an enemy base. Giving every faction unlimited range artillery means that no one has to do anything except eco. If you really want to play simcity that badly just build nukes, there's no need to mess up everyone's artillery.

Also, 'rebalance' means adjusting units' costs and effectiveness in order to bring the viability of using them in line with other units. It does NOT mean entirely and dramatically altering the functions of several unit types so that they will work how you think they should on setons or isis. The reason the scathis is having all of these balance issues now is precisely because, more than any other unit I can think of, it has been drastically altered several times (first from its design in SC to its stats in FA, and now back more towards its original plan) so no one is happy with how it's set up now.

While I won't argue about whether or not T3 artillery needs to be rebalanced, it does need to be rebalanced. It does not need a complete redesign, and certainly not one that would obliterate strategic weapons' faction diversity.

Re: Scathis.

PostPosted: 19 Mar 2013, 07:51
by Golol
well right now its always easier to build a load of strats and asfs for a snipe instead of a mavor or salvation.
mavor and salvation are simply so expensive that theres always a cheaper alternative for them.
but with the roles they have right now they have to be expensive so i would male them cheap and changw their roles.
and i think its worse if the salvation or mavor are underused than if the t3 artys are underused (what they are right now anyways)

Re: Scathis.

PostPosted: 24 Mar 2013, 01:28
by ICKEN
i really don't like the idea of increasing the mass costs. the only thing that will happen after the change that scathis will get less frequently build.


once scathis was a game ender but things have changed. it is now a navy counter and turtle breaker on 20km maps, and in the eyes of some players a under priced game ender on 5, 10 km maps. if you change its price, the role still will be the same, you just give your opponent more time to react and make it less viable for building it yourself.

i will now make a suggestion which solves most of the problems ppl see at the scathis at the moment:

mass: the same
range: from 330 to 230 or something near that
speed: from 1 to >1,5<2

so what would change?
due to its new range you cant just let the scathis stay in your base if you want to end the game. you would be forced to go into combat and to drive closer to your opponent. once shooting its doing the same job as before but it can be now countered better by exp´s because its closer to the opponents base. also it isnt that good protected against air, as in your own base.....

ok, now lets look from the other side
your opponent has managed to build a scathis and you weren't able to stop him. but due your eco advantage you have 2 land exp´s more. you now go into combat and force your oponent to stop shooting and drive away. - problem solved- hes now not longer in range of your own base and the scathis could be unshielded cause its moving. thats why you try to strat bomb it.

on bigger maps it could still counter navy and due its mobility it can reach at least the same targets as before.


balanced like that scathis isn't a game ender as it was supposed to be in 3599 which means cybran have no game ending long range weapons as the other factions.
the question is now, what is better? a gameender which you maybe build 3 times in a year or a usefull exp that could apear in almost every game?

from my point of view cybrans never were a faction that should end games like that. they are meant to play aggressivly. they never were good for turtle and they are not good in protecting a very expensive unit (maybe thats why you can fully cloak the cybran acu :) )

cybran are the only faction that can counter game enders easy and cost effective because they are masters of stealth and their bombers have the highest chance to drop their bomb in late game. they would lose a game ender vs game ender battle anyway. the cybran acu is also very strong in late game because you can tele mazor your opponent if he did not pay attention...

please think about this change. and dont look at it one sided. think what it would change if you build a scathis and what would change if your oponent has one...

Re: Scathis.

PostPosted: 24 Mar 2013, 09:19
by Golol
i think its not about changing zhe scathis.
its about changing the mavor salvation and arty.
but your change on the scathis is still not bad and it should maybe get a slight hp increase if its aggressive
again and cloak. i suggest making the mavor and salvation static scathis (for sure mavor more range than scathis and highest dps, salvation smaller range than mavor but still much bigger as scathis and biggest splash. and cost of mavor and salvation MASSIVELY decreased for sure.and the t3 artys become mavors