Cybran torpedo on amphibious units

[Apofenas]

In Ithilis's mod its weapon has 2 goals: harras ACU under water and add damage, but only when there are subs around. It doesnt make any major affect on navy with its 10 dps weapons since: in equilibrium subs can be seen only by other subs, frigates have too much hp and t2 navy has torp def, range, strong torps and armor.

[Zeldafanboy]

Honestly I'd rather have the Wagner's torpedoes removed entirely and just replaced with torp defense

[keyser]

meeeeh it's funny to snipe people underwater with them... why do you remove every way of trolling ??? :c

[yeager]

Destroyer ability to walk on land is not used in 99% of cases. Other hover raids are generally better since they able to shoot back into navy and can be built on t1, have higher speed on land and take flak with raids. Wagner is better tank, yes, but that's another issue as you can build wagners instead of rhinos on land only map and only benefit for it. However it has completely useless weapon. Useless weapons exist in like 1/4 of units of game incluuding wagners and it's another issues that has to be fixed.

Ithilis fixed most of the things that were mentioned in this topic incluuding cybran t1 navy which you think is too strong. Just watch equilibrium mod or ask him.

LOL t1 hover is shit in naval warfare, the aura is eh, (why not build frigates?) and a single frigate can kill an infinite amount of arty, not only this, but thats the reason ser and aeon have poorer frigates, so dont even bring it up. "useless weapons are never totaly useless, just awful, and its fun, also that is a sh*ty excuse to make cybrans, who aready have a god like t2 and t1 even better. destroyer is great, on many maps they take a victory and turn it into a game's end, fighting shore position on setons, fighting ozone, fighting waters of isis, and on other maps (like roanoke) its just a plus and on occasion gives a great advantage, just cause you cant abuse the living hell out of it doesnt mean its bad.

Honestly I'd rather have the Wagner's torpedoes removed entirely and just replaced with torp defense

balanced right, this would be nice, but it would need to be a flare with a REALLY short range, or people will throw it into navy for torp def bonus.

[keyser]

T1 arty is great. if you mix it with T2 tank, that cancel the possibility of attack move from frigate player. because attack move = stacking frigate. you don't need lot of arty. And if opponent can't do move attack, the frigates engagement is bad.

T1 arty is also great for droping. you can drop them onto water and kill a T2 facto in no time. (the destroyer being build if not possible to kill the facto)

aurora is already really good tank beside their ability to hover. This just add to the unit a "+", that shouldn't exist for balance purpose imo, but which is great for faction diversity purpose.

[Apofenas]

I can't imagine somebody building even buffed wagners even for buffed naval usage. Factory and 4 wagners cost like destroyer. Do some math and count what unit is more efficient.

T1 hover cost 54 mass and only needs t1 factory it also appears so much much early in the game and sometimes before naval factory in general.

Spoiler: show

T1 units raid earlier in game and more areas at once due to lower cost which means 4 factories in roanoke abyss with rally points through all expanding areas will leave Yeager with his 20 apm and no mexes while on other suggested maps neither wagners, nor hover units will not take any major affect due to being eco bullshit with no/little expansions

Sera and aeon can switch their t2 land factories for t2 flak and shield spam to help navy. And how many time did you see riptides doing anything in same situations?

Seriously it was already tested and changed and tested again a lot of times(just ask how many hours Ithilis spent on it and how many games eauilibrium got played just to test it in real game), while you just try to guess how it will be and throw your random thoughts in forum without any idea what you are talking about.

Cybran t1 and t2 navies are not a "god like" they are just a bit better.

I do not want wagners being good against navy. I want cybrans having same option as other factions on hover biased maps like paradise, wilderness ect.

Honestly I'd rather have the Wagner's torpedoes removed entirely and just replaced with torp defense

Was tested in IceDreamer's mod. Got removed due to being useless.

[Apofenas]

meeeeh it's funny to snipe people underwater with them... why do you remove every way of trolling ??? :c

You have brick torps for that.

[Flamingo]

Let's use a Seton's example:

Okay, most popular map. Got a huge body of water to work with.

you are playing UEF vs UEF navy, when all of thE sudden 50 Wagner show up and rape all of your shield boats. Make coopers pre-emptively, sure, good way to fall behind vs your opponent. Hover is countered by units that you are building in the first place.

So theoretically we ought to nerf sub hunters and force them to surface in order to be effective? Because if you have no power against torpedoes at all it seems like sub hunters would kill you faster and more efficiently than a slow moving tank with less range and less DPS than a T1 sub.

Not to mention that the Wagner is DAMN good in 1v1.

Dude, it's basically a more fragile Rhino but with higher DPS to sort of even it out. Most prefer the Rhino. The Wagner is an okay tank but I wouldn't call it "damn" good like it's the finest weapon you've seen this side of the quantum gateway.

Cybran T1 and T2 navy is too strong to need buffed wagners. People use the hell out of them in 1v1, considering I've never seen you before I have a feeling you may bot be the most experienced player on these forums. I'm not either, but navy and air are my things, and Cybran Navy absolutely does not need this.

A player who relies on Wagners to bolster his navy instead of Destroyers or other conventional naval units would lose at navy. A multi-role Wagner would be practical for maps other than Setons where there's water but not too much of it - enough that people might not choose to focus heavily on navy. Cybran is always at a disadvantage there. Imagine you're playing a map with some water between you and your opponent builds a Governor. Now, you're doing air drops or something - I don't know, but you're Cybran and you don't have boats in the water. You can always drop everything and chase it with the ACU torpedo upgrade, but that's risky for reasons I've mentioned before. Either way, you're certainly not building a naval factory NOW that it's too late. So a winning fight turns to a losing one because you don't have a lot of options; the only realistic choice is to build torpedo bombers, which lack an edge over cruisers due to the cruiser's AA weaponry.

Anyway, I know terrible players who are "experts" at their favorite things and they're terrible at their "expertise", so don't pull disrespect by accusing me of being too new to understand why exactly I'd want a multi-role amphibious tank and I won't assume you're an "expert". I know exactly why I want the Wagner to have better torpedoes even though I know it can't replace actual naval units. Just nerf its land DPS to make it more mediocre out of the water. It's not a "damn fine" tank, it's an average tank for T2 as it currently is.

LOL t1 hover is shit in naval warfare, the aura is eh, (why not build frigates?)

Because frigates are more expensive than T1 hover and you can threaten enemy land facilities with a unit that can go on land? Are we still talking about Setons? Not every map is Setons.

I do not want wagners being good against navy. I want cybrans having same option as other factions on hover biased maps like paradise, wilderness ect.

In a nutshell this is all I'm advocating. Just a multi-role option for the very specific maps where that kind of function is handy. Some people might feel like the Wagner in its current existence is stronger for those maps since it has the same land potential as your standard T2 tank, but I'd like the ability to use a land factory to modestly push back against navy if it needs to happen. And without setting my ACU up for a torp bomber snipe.

Again, it's not a needed change. It would be nice for the versatility but the game is fine without. I'd just like it. Anyone saying it would be a balance problem is just flat wrong because, as mentioned by someone else, why on earth would you build Wagners instead of destroyers? Or if torpedoes with less power than a T1 sub's would be so powerful against your navy, I imagine I could easily beat you by spamming up a few sub hunters. Or heck, I could build T3 arty or a nuke. What the heck are you doing over there that your pro navy strategies are losing to tanks that cost as much as T1 subs and do less damage, have less range, and move more slowly than T1 subs? I could beat you with anything.

[KD7BCH]

Why ruin it's land use when there is no reason to increase the torp dps?

wow, solid logic, I'm impressed.

[Apofenas]

Why ruin it's land use when there is no reason to increase the torp dps?

wow, solid logic, I'm impressed.

I think it's answer to my suggestion to nerf its direct fire weapons. If wagner gets torp dps buff it has to be done for 2 reasons: 1)it has it because it's useless under water; 2)it is better than rhino in some game situations and equal or not much worse in others, which is kinda retared. I didn't build rhino at least for a year. Cybran is my most played faction.