Patch 3676 Feedback thread

[FtXCommando]

Basic game balance:
All factions must have a weakness.
Cybran was mistakenly designed to be adaptive to almost every situation. This means they have little weaknesses. This is a basic noob mistake in designing a game.

Every faction is designed to have an adaptive response to every problem you can encounter in the game. The point isn't to have a weakness, the point is to have an army with a functioning doctrine. Mobility is flexibility. Mobility is attack. If being slow and sturdy won the game, then turrets would dominate. That's why Cybran does better than UEF. Weak buildings will not achieve balance, but it is annoying.

I intended to walk away from this, but please. This a very stupid argument.

Like I say, you'll find somebody to endorse your changes. It's politically unfortunate to see "death to Cybran" in their tag, but you get their endorsement

Reasoning behind the change is in the changelog.

That reasoning was felt insubstantial to the point they had to follow up with a Youtube video, which also felt fairly insubstantial. Again, bottom line, "We want to generally hurt Cybran, and we want to see more people get badly surprised by tac missiles and bombers". I disagree. It doesn't matter, but I don't think a core balance aim should be to hurt a faction, and I don't really want tac missiles or bombing raids to be more deadly because I have less personal control over preventing snipes, and because snipes end games very abruptly. I don't understand Gorton thinking they're more fun. Maybe he's the type of player that does a lot of sniping so this fits him, but I always enjoyed the back and forth of a land battle.

It's not unreasonable for sniping to be a risk and reward thing rather than something you've always got in your back pocket.

I don't understand. If you take a really broad meaning for "adaptive response" to mean that every action has a prospective counter, then yeah I guess that's true barring game enders. But you are really ignoring what people mean when they say that the Cybran faction is adaptive when you take that approach. No other faction in the game really has as many tools in their tool box as well as abilities to take advantage of an opponent's misplays.

Also agree with Gorton on how it seems you are saying that Cybran are strong now but are not really suggesting viable alternatives. I know you said that cybran units should get a range nerf, but I don't think you realize how disruptive that change would be for the t1 phase.

How do you nerf a faction without hurting a faction btw.

A Cybran advocate upset about not having control over snipes and cheese is pretty funny as well. So much of the Cybran arsenal allows you to "end the game abruptly" and has been a complaint by players of other factions for years yet it is kept because it's part of what makes the faction unique to play.

[biass]

and I don't really want tac missiles or bombing raids to be more deadly because I have less personal control over preventing snipes, and because snipes end games very abruptly. I don't understand Gorton thinking they're more fun. Maybe he's the type of player that does a lot of sniping so this fits him, but I always enjoyed the back and forth of a land battle.

fighting for balance because player cannot stop snipes and rather just shit land back and forth
im not even surprised at this point and im the most useless sniper ever created ayy de la lmao

It's not unreasonable for sniping to be a risk and reward thing rather than something you've always got in your back pocket.

please learn to scout
and please learn to fill your time spent typing words with more "content"

[Ars Nova]

I think all that's happening at this juncture is that people are being willfully obtuse or feigning a misunderstanding of the argument.

• We are not all super computers with perfect awareness, so things are going to get sniped.
• Lower HP on buildings means it requires less risk and investment to perform the snipe.
• Therefore, players get their stuff sniped more often when building HP is low.
• Cybran were nerfed especially hard as far as building HP. The regen is a joke gimmick.
• I don't think it's all that fun to be sniped. Your mileage may vary, but this sucks for players who feel a little empty when they instantly lose on a dime.
• I don't think this will balance any stage of combat. Nobody here seems to be sure it's affecting normal combat either except that bases are overrun faster.
• I think if Cybran building HP were lowered enough to have a noticeable impact on ordinary pushes, it could only be because their buildings are so weak that an enemy can focus down buildings instead of fighting mobile units.
• I think that if you really believe Cybran units are OP, you're going to have to look at individual unit stats and change them.
• I think to preserve faction diversity, you'll want to nerf things other than what the unit is designed to do, which may mean slightly reducing firing range if the unit is supposed to be fast.
• I think you can find sycophants who will support any change you make, no matter how ill-advised, but sycophants are useless people that will inevitably poison your community and drive away thoughtful feedback.

Is this clear enough or some of you still seeing a billion oxymorons and self-contradictions? Because so far, you all just keep saying "we want to nerf Cybran, we want to nerf Cybran. No, we can't change the units, the Cybrans won't let us, we got to make their buildings have low HP". You try to contradict me, but you're not really engaging. You are, ironically, mostly just sniping at me.

[Gorton]

I think all that's happening at this juncture is that people are being willfully obtuse or feigning a misunderstanding of the argument.

• We are not all super computers with perfect awareness, so things are going to get sniped.
• Lower HP on buildings means it requires less risk and investment to perform the snipe.
• Therefore, players get their stuff sniped more often when building HP is low.
• Cybran were nerfed especially hard as far as building HP. The regen is a joke gimmick.
• I don't think it's all that fun to be sniped. Your mileage may vary, but this sucks for players who feel a little empty when they instantly lose on a dime.
• I don't think this will balance any stage of combat. Nobody here seems to be sure it's affecting normal combat either except that bases are overrun faster.
• I think if Cybran building HP were lowered enough to have a noticeable impact on ordinary pushes, it could only be because their buildings are so weak that an enemy can focus down buildings instead of fighting mobile units.
• I think that if you really believe Cybran units are OP, you're going to have to look at individual unit stats and change them.
• I think to preserve faction diversity, you'll want to nerf things other than what the unit is designed to do, which may mean slightly reducing firing range if the unit is supposed to be fast.
• I think you can find sycophants who will support any change you make, no matter how ill-advised, but sycophants are useless people that will inevitably poison your community and drive away thoughtful feedback.

Is this clear enough or some of you still seeing a billion oxymorons and self-contradictions? Because so far, you all just keep saying "we want to nerf Cybran, we want to nerf Cybran. No, we can't change the units, the Cybrans won't let us, we got to make their buildings have low HP". You try to contradict me, but you're not really engaging. You are, ironically, mostly just sniping at me.

Guard more? Sniping will only work if you let them through - and if they're let through then maybe you already lost, and it's not a sniping problem anymore.

Sniping isn't really important to this tbh.

If someone is going to "snipe" you (what are they sniping, power or something? hqs?) then they're going to manage it regardless.
If something can be destroyed in 1 tactical missile or 2, it's going to die if the tacts can get through at all, and same if it will die to 5 tacts.

If the damage is getting through, then the hp isn't that important, the problem is you don't have a defence.

The only real argument you can make is that sustained pushes into the base / raids are more effective, which is the entire point - giving a weakness to cybran.

Because so far, you all just keep saying "we want to nerf Cybran, we want to nerf Cybran. No, we can't change the units, the Cybrans won't let us, we got to make their buildings have low HP".

Again, nerfing cybran is the point. Changing specific units will not help, it's already been theorised and tried and tested. People decided to try building hp, and I don't have much thought one way or the other about this.

What as a whole we do think is that you can't come up with a reason as to why nerfing building hp is bad, as we've debunked everything you said.

I think that if you really believe Cybran units are OP, you're going to have to look at individual unit stats and change them.

I think this is the fundamental problem we have though - you're hung up on this thought, and it's just not true.
It's not that the units are particularly strong or op in certain parts - it's that there are many strong units, with easy usage. If you nerf one, you just end up reducing options, not balancing anything.
If you nerf them all, then the faction becomes weak, because you just nerfed the strong part.

[sasin]

I think all that's happening at this juncture is that people are being willfully obtuse or feigning a misunderstanding of the argument.

• We are not all super computers with perfect awareness, so things are going to get sniped.
• Lower HP on buildings means it requires less risk and investment to perform the snipe.
• Therefore, players get their stuff sniped more often when building HP is low.
• Cybran were nerfed especially hard as far as building HP. The regen is a joke gimmick.
• I don't think it's all that fun to be sniped. Your mileage may vary, but this sucks for players who feel a little empty when they instantly lose on a dime.
• I don't think this will balance any stage of combat. Nobody here seems to be sure it's affecting normal combat either except that bases are overrun faster.
• I think if Cybran building HP were lowered enough to have a noticeable impact on ordinary pushes, it could only be because their buildings are so weak that an enemy can focus down buildings instead of fighting mobile units.
• I think that if you really believe Cybran units are OP, you're going to have to look at individual unit stats and change them.
• I think to preserve faction diversity, you'll want to nerf things other than what the unit is designed to do, which may mean slightly reducing firing range if the unit is supposed to be fast.
• I think you can find sycophants who will support any change you make, no matter how ill-advised, but sycophants are useless people that will inevitably poison your community and drive away thoughtful feedback.

Is this clear enough or some of you still seeing a billion oxymorons and self-contradictions? Because so far, you all just keep saying "we want to nerf Cybran, we want to nerf Cybran. No, we can't change the units, the Cybrans won't let us, we got to make their buildings have low HP". You try to contradict me, but you're not really engaging. You are, ironically, mostly just sniping at me.

Guard more? Sniping will only work if you let them through - and if they're let through then maybe you already lost, and it's not a sniping problem anymore.

Sniping isn't really important to this tbh.

If someone is going to "snipe" you (what are they sniping, power or something? hqs?) then they're going to manage it regardless.
If something can be destroyed in 1 tactical missile or 2, it's going to die if the tacts can get through at all, and same if it will die to 5 tacts.

If the damage is getting through, then the hp isn't that important, the problem is you don't have a defence.

The only real argument you can make is that sustained pushes into the base / raids are more effective, which is the entire point - giving a weakness to cybran.

Because so far, you all just keep saying "we want to nerf Cybran, we want to nerf Cybran. No, we can't change the units, the Cybrans won't let us, we got to make their buildings have low HP".

Again, nerfing cybran is the point. Changing specific units will not help, it's already been theorised and tried and tested. People decided to try building hp, and I don't have much thought one way or the other about this.

What as a whole we do think is that you can't come up with a reason as to why nerfing building hp is bad, as we've debunked everything you said.

I think that if you really believe Cybran units are OP, you're going to have to look at individual unit stats and change them.

I think this is the fundamental problem we have though - you're hung up on this thought, and it's just not true.
It's not that the units are particularly strong or op in certain parts - it's that there are many strong units, with easy usage. If you nerf one, you just end up reducing options, not balancing anything.
If you nerf them all, then the faction becomes weak, because you just nerfed the strong part.

I'm not taking a side in this argument with what this guy said, but I think your point here is a little weak, Gorton. If there units are across the board a little too strong, there is clearly some across the board nerf that would make them more balanced. If you knocked down every cybran unit's HP by 2%, I don't think they'd be too weak. There is some value there that'd get the job done, although that's obviously a pretty uninspired way to balance them (if they are even OP).

[PhilipJFry]

• The video about the 3674 patch was made primarily so we can spread the word about the patch and the changes further.
• (Some) Cybran units will get changed with the upcoming T3 Land rebalance patch. It's not like we intend to balance cybran just by nerfing their building hp values.
• It would be really great if people would actually give feedback on the patch this thread was made for. In case you haven't read the title yet it says "Patch 3676 Feedback thread".

[Blodir]

Again, nerfing cybran is the point. Changing specific units will not help, it's already been theorised and tried and tested. People decided to try building hp, and I don't have much thought one way or the other about this.

Dunno about you but I would play UEF if titan was equal to loya. I would play Seraphim if othuum was equal to brick & ythotha didn't kill my own army. I would play Aeon if their tmd wasn't annoying af to use & ML couldn't rape everything I hold dear before my gc is out.

Do you even play this game? There's pretty sick advantages to each faction, but they have some so frustrating weaknesses that they are totally unenjoyable to play.

Meanwhile this HP crap is an invisible change with 0 impact on player psychology apart from the moment someone kills your HQ with 1 tac missile, or you try to snipe something but miscalculate the number of strats because for some completely arbitrary reason you need 1 more vs uef. I'm not enthralled by having to learn a series of arbitrary values, because some balance team just didn't give a f*** about community opinions while pretending to do so

Nobody's even aware of any advantages that the change may have brought. This is the perfect example of when you should back down on it: 1. There's no visible benefits 2. It's controversial af. If you don't back down now I have little hope you ever will

[nine2]

Post your views without being aggressive = better

[Blodir]

Post your views without being aggressive = better

It doesn't make a difference anyway, I'm just childishly venting my frustration. But make no mistake, every word is true.

[nine2]

Yeah it can be frustrating thats for sure