Aircraft carriers changes.

Re: Aircraft carriers changes.

Postby Plasma_Wolf » 24 Feb 2013, 20:32

I think that this might make the CZAR and Atlantis overpowered (Though I'd be all for it :evil:). Think of keeping the atlantis in the fleet while it is in battle. If you see that you're going to lose, you can let it keep building torpedo bombers while the whole fleet retreats. The ability to turn the balance of the battle around is increased immensely that way.

Somewhat the same goes for the CZAR, only with restorers or ASFs. I the player wants to build such a unit early on, it will lack air support. If you can build that air support on the way towards the enemy, you'll be able to attack with such a powerful unit way faster.
User avatar
Plasma_Wolf
Supreme Commander
 
Posts: 1300
Joined: 20 Oct 2011, 11:28
Has liked: 20 times
Been liked: 84 times
FAF User Name: Plasma_Wolf

Re: Aircraft carriers changes.

Postby ColonelSheppard » 24 Feb 2013, 20:55

the atlantis is not good for ANYTHING
not for torp dmg
not for build capacity
and not for kiting
User avatar
ColonelSheppard
Contributor
 
Posts: 2996
Joined: 20 Jul 2012, 12:54
Location: Germany
Has liked: 154 times
Been liked: 159 times
FAF User Name: Sheppy

Re: Aircraft carriers changes.

Postby Pathogenic » 24 Feb 2013, 22:55

ColonelSheppard wrote:the atlantis is not good for ANYTHING
not for torp dmg
not for build capacity
and not for kiting


Has great vision though, for dealing with nasty stealthed Cybran fleets.
Pathogenic
Avatar-of-War
 
Posts: 144
Joined: 06 Sep 2011, 05:23
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Re: Aircraft carriers changes.

Postby ColonelSheppard » 24 Feb 2013, 22:57

Pathogenic wrote:
ColonelSheppard wrote:the atlantis is not good for ANYTHING
not for torp dmg
not for build capacity
and not for kiting


Has great vision though, for dealing with nasty stealthed Cybran fleets.

ok now i noticed you are trolling
User avatar
ColonelSheppard
Contributor
 
Posts: 2996
Joined: 20 Jul 2012, 12:54
Location: Germany
Has liked: 154 times
Been liked: 159 times
FAF User Name: Sheppy

Re: Aircraft carriers changes.

Postby lapantouflemagic » 25 Feb 2013, 00:21

i absolutely agree with the fact that aircraft carriers being unable to build while moving is annoying, changing that would be great.
lapantouflemagic
Crusader
 
Posts: 27
Joined: 24 Feb 2013, 20:38
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 7 times
FAF User Name: lapantouflemagic

Re: Aircraft carriers changes.

Postby Firestarter » 26 Feb 2013, 18:58

lapantouflemagic wrote:i absolutely agree with the fact that aircraft carriers being unable to build while moving is annoying, changing that would be great.


Agreed. Or at least prevent the build queue being deleted each time they move. A simple production pause on moving would be sufficient if we want to retain the game mechanic; it's pointlessly irritating to have to re-do the buildqueue after any move.



PS: If the cybran carrier's main focus is to become AA (+dps for that but reduced build rate), does that mean that its projectile speed will be increased so it hits things as well? :P
Firestarter
Crusader
 
Posts: 40
Joined: 04 Jul 2012, 19:59
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 2 times
FAF User Name: Firestarter

Re: Aircraft carriers changes.

Postby Ze_PilOt » 26 Feb 2013, 19:12

It's an engine restriction : Only one command can be processed at a time. (moving and having a BO are two orders).

So it will need to save the list, move, restore the list. Possible, but I don't have time to do that.
Nossa wrote:I've never played GPG or even heard of FA until FAF started blowing up.
User avatar
Ze_PilOt
Supreme Commander
 
Posts: 8985
Joined: 24 Aug 2011, 18:41
Location: fafland
Has liked: 18 times
Been liked: 376 times
FAF User Name: Ze_PilOt

Re: Aircraft carriers changes.

Postby Firestarter » 26 Feb 2013, 19:26

lapantouflemagic/Firestarter wrote:i absolutely agree with the fact that aircraft carriers being unable to build while moving is annoying, changing that would be great...or at least prevent the build queue being deleted each time they move. A simple production pause on moving would be sufficient if we want to retain the game mechanic.

Ze_PilOt wrote:It's an engine restriction : Only one command can be processed at a time. (moving and having a BO are two orders).

So it will need to save the list, move, restore the list. Possible, but I don't have time to do that.


Ah right, thanks for that.

Just out of curiousity - is there anyone around who is able to do this? Having the buildqueue pause and reload by itself on carrier movement would remove a counterintuitive obstacle to new players and remove irritation for anyone else. :)
Firestarter
Crusader
 
Posts: 40
Joined: 04 Jul 2012, 19:59
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 2 times
FAF User Name: Firestarter

Re: Aircraft carriers changes.

Postby noobymcnoobcake » 26 Feb 2013, 20:10

I believe there was a topic on this a while ago - And by that i mean 6-12 months ago. It was discussed that it might be posible to just spawn an aircraft in the hangar after X seconds and a resorce could be used up when this feature is turned on. I still dont know if this would fix movement issues though because it might just stop the moment a plane is spawned in and that would be worse than what it is currently.
User avatar
noobymcnoobcake
Evaluator
 
Posts: 671
Joined: 17 Sep 2011, 16:34
Has liked: 16 times
Been liked: 5 times

Re: Aircraft carriers changes.

Postby Firestarter » 09 Mar 2013, 17:02


my suggestion: Is one i already made in the "buff aircraft carriers" thread in december and it goes like this:
lets give those aircraft carriers a role that fits into their faction, give each faction the carrier they need.

Aeon and Sera need a good option to produce air in late game without hitting the unit limit too fast. they do not need a carrier as anti air ship they have hover flaks and shields,
air is not a big issue for their navy forces.

cybrans need a decent aa option on water for lategame. the cybran cruisers really suck in terms of their aa performance and there are no shields or flaks for them to help out on this
point. Cybran do not need a floating airfactory in order to not hit the unit limit to early - they have hives for that.

my suggestion is to buff aeon/sera carriers buildpower + 25% and nerf their aa capacity about the same amount.
Buff the cybran carriers aa for 50% and nerf their buildpower in equal scale as trade off.
(numbers are negotiable)

in my opinion those changes would be good for faction diversity + they would help their factions on points where they perform really bad compared to the other factions. and last but not least the changes would help to give carriers a clear role in the game. Whenever i build a carrier at the moment they perform ok in both thier roles (aa / factory) but they dont do either job really good. im always insecure how i shall use them in game (propably they do a bit better in airproduction than in terms of anti air atm)

As i will be away for a month now i would like to name ICKEN to manage this suggestion in my place when the polls start and if there is any more babysitting needed for this suggestion. He understood the purpose of this idea really well so he can make things clear if there are any more questions about it.


Are we going to be able to test this soon? Pleeeease :P
Firestarter
Crusader
 
Posts: 40
Joined: 04 Jul 2012, 19:59
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 2 times
FAF User Name: Firestarter

PreviousNext

Return to Patch 3622

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest