T2 Bomber Suggestion

[keyser]

Corsair has already a real use.
notha can bomb structure that T1 bomber can't thanks to their speed, and 1-2 bomber are less easily spotable than 10 T1 bomber.
uef one is more disputed. T1 bomber can do their work, and speed isn't that much require since army are already on the front line. only viable reason atm is to survive 1-2 path thanks to their health.

but on t1 stage it is exactly the opposite sera and aeon are times better vs units and uef is better vs buildings. maybe for t2 thats the same?

i don't understand your question. Are you asking me why it's not the same job for different bomber of the same faction ?

[yeager]

notha should be anti unit, uef anti base, and corsair anti major targets (it's best at sniping) corsair is fine as it is, notha sucks a little too much vs units, and uef could be a little better
I'd say buff uef over time damage and give sera a slightly better aoe or a faster muzzle velocity or SLIGHT tracking ability on bomb

[Iszh]

Maybe keyser you re right my question was useless, forget it. Somehow i think you didnt get the quintessence of my big post above so here short version.

No matter how to change those t2 bombers i need a bomber which can bomb an enemy air player serious as a t2 unit and will not be dead after he built 2 t1 aa guns to kill a unit for 420 mass cost. Either remove damage against ground and make them cheaper&less built time or remove aa weapon and make them cheaper&less built time. They are not cost worth to prevent an enemy from t3 rush like in land play it is normal. Because thats the biggest air problem that t2 is simply not good and can be skipped completely withtout any harm. T1 is for front players thats ok that you can skip t1 in a back position but t2 should not be skipped.

I wanted to reach the side effect that those "new" t2 planes also finally can stop early t3 bombers and a few low numbered asf reliable. Because that will be the gameender after your rush failed. To make this possible will decrease the risk for t2 tactics. And finally we have a nice air meta without 100% t3 rush. Exactly alike land playing.

The discussion about bombing units or not thats to much for me there are no armour types in fa it simply does not matter if some splash or damage types like burn over time will favor a special kind of target, this is not warcraft 3! Much more interesting is i know the effect as i described on teamgames, how in this way changed t2 planes will change 1v1 game? I guess it will be alike land after you got t2 sooner or later t1 will disappear which is normal. Somebody with more experience in 1v1 tell me the effects please.

[Turinturambar]

maybe you take the wrong approach.
YES maybe t2 bombers are useless in teamgames with airspot.
thats not because these units are bad (exept unfixed janus maybe) its because the meta on this maps allows the airplayers 2 rush t3 air.
It would be the same with t3 land if there would be a map where one position could just rush t3 land without being punished and then roll over the enemies if their t3 land player was 2 slow.
thats not because t2 fighterbombers dont filll their role its just that the meta skippes that niche.
In 1v1 fighterbombers can be gr8 if used correctly and t1 baombers rly cant have the same impact because they are slower=> easier 2 intercept and get slaughtereed by flak. same for hp stak on t2 bombers.
the question is rather do t2 bombers need a little buff to fulfill their role, wich i would say is not 2 kill strats (that you can do with~20 ok positioned inties) its 2 kill units/structures/priority targets.

[Gorton]

I would like to see an increased use for t2 f/b, and less domination of asf - or at least, slowing down the asf from arriving. It's weird that t2 fighter/bombers are vaguely on-par masswise to inties when asf are clearly superior, and similar situation for the differences between t1/t2/t3 land.
turin's correct, though. In general the maps and playstyle prevent this more than the stats.

[Ithilis_Quo]

maybe you take the wrong approach.
YES maybe t2 bombers are useless in teamgames with airspot.
thats not because these units are bad

you are right !!

So you suggest rework 90% or most played map, for remove air spot, or jast prohib play that map?


Isnt change T2 air to be usable also on map that are played for 9/10 causes easyier option?

[keyser]

what's funny in faf is that 90% of map played = 4-5 map.
imo it's better to remove air spot of 5 map, than change the whole balance so that we can play those 4-5 map perfectly, while fucking the gameplay in 1v1, and on 95% of teamgame map of faf.
if you want to play only 1 map again and again, and have the perfect balance on it, i advice you to play LoL.

[Turinturambar]

maybe you take the wrong approach.
YES maybe t2 bombers are useless in teamgames with airspot.
thats not because these units are bad

you are right !!

So you suggest rework 90% or most played map, for remove air spot, or jast prohib play that map?


Isnt change T2 air to be usable also on map that are played for 9/10 causes easyier option?

I do not think so, because t2 (in the role they fill atm) bombers gain strengh on spread out maps, where they can attack from many angles kill targets of medium priority (t2 mex etc) and armies that also happed 2 NOT be existing in teamgames (on maps like canis, wonder etc. pd spam just prevents (big t2) armies 2 be of any use .
Sadly teamgame maps happen to usually be very clumped
(pls s1 create a really spread out map e.g emarald crater with classic spawns + spawns in the corners maybe in 10x10 size should be fun).
reworking t2 fbs in a way 2 be more airdominant would give them another function and remoove that niche they fill atm thereby lowering the diversity of the game.


2nd if the enemy air is t3 (way) earlier he could just build 3 asf 2 protect his strat vs t2 fbs leaving their reworked version still unable 2 compete with asf. if the strat is well microed and protected with 3-5 asf+allied air it should not die ,exept if its focused down by maaany fbs, what would be a huge inverstment. Would that be worth it?
would it be worth building some t2 2 fight the enemy t3 air, delaying the own t3 air with it?

3rd if you expect an airplayer expects 2 loose the t3 rush fight he can just pick aeon. if he doesnt think it will be a problem he can go what he wants.

maybe a better way 2 deal with strat rush would be that just EVERY player (exept air) in the team with loosing air helps one getting t3 land=> sams everywhere) or they all build one airfac at ~5-7 and spam inties. with some ok scouting and positioning they could then intercept the early strats and even fight 5 asf.
if their airplayer then still doesnt have asf it should be gg by all means anyway.

[Ithilis_Quo]

if the enemy air is t3 (way) earlier he could just build 3 asf 2 protect his strat vs t2 fbs leaving their reworked version still unable 2 compete with asf.

Then you need rework T2 fb for not be that stupid, and for be posible to compte.... You are use bad rework t2 as argument why it should not work. Jast dont rework it bad. Here is 18 pages of suggestion how to do it, some of then was good one. And when its make well then 3asf protekting strat will fall down against T2 air in superior number.

[Turinturambar]

if the enemy air is t3 (way) earlier he could just build 3 asf 2 protect his strat vs t2 fbs leaving their reworked version still unable 2 compete with asf.

Then you need rework T2 fb for not be that stupid, and for be posible to compte.... You are use bad rework t2 as argument why it should not work. Jast dont rework it bad. Here is 18 pages of suggestion how to do it, some of then was good one. And when its make well then 3asf protekting strat will fall down against T2 air in superior number.

but for what cost?
if the difference between t2 and t3 is as big as t2-t3 land it will be way 2 epansive 2 spam meaningful amounts of t2 air. doing it would delay the bombs for maybe 5 min then it would be 50 asf vs 50 fb and 10 asf. by all rights the asf should win.
so where is the point in building meaningfull amounts of t2 air?
the only way 2 make it pay would be making them able 2 punish the enemy t3 air rush with some hard t2 bombing though i fear that the impact of such a strike could be reduced by front players building some air and killing sth with it.
Maybe 2 summ it up: i do not think that changing fbs in a air vs air unit would change the situation since you would try 2 hold vs strats using them. fighting t3 air with reworked t2 air would be an long therm loss. and building reworked fbs would be of no use (i refer 2 iszhs idea : far less dmg vs ground more dmg vs air) because they do no dgm. they would just scale terrible.
if t2 air spam would scale well it would be plain op.
just imagine the same situation on land on some map where this cenario works:
2 players rush t3 land if one is later his team gets disadvantages. He CAN build t2 land 2 defend the first waves but the longer he does it the worse it will get for him.