Forged Alliance Forever

Re: Does something need to be done about T2 Air?

2012-08-07T16:26:38+02:00

It's rather related to the map size and its configuration!

Statistics: Posted by -_V_- — 07 Aug 2012, 16:26

Re: Does something need to be done about T2 Air?

2012-08-05T11:27:59+02:00

pip wrote:
T2 air is really good, especially t2 gunships (they even were nerfed because they were too good). Swiftwinds are good to gain air superiority, torp bombers to torp sae units and hiding ACU. Fighter / Bombers are expensive but they can snipe important targets fairly well even if there are flaks around. I think t2 air is fine, but its uses are dependant on the map played. If it's a big map like Seton's, you can skip t2 air indeed, but on most 10x10 maps, it's a good key to victory more often than not.

agreed, and futhermore:

Let's say a t2 airfighter can beat like 4 t1 Interceptors, so you can kill 4, then return to Base and kill some more

Statistics: Posted by ColonelSheppard — 05 Aug 2012, 11:27

Re: Does something need to be done about T2 Air?

2012-08-05T00:14:22+02:00

rootbeer23 wrote:
dunno about t2 air, but let me say that there is a line.
on the front of this line is that lonely guy, the SCU. he has been waiting for ages and he still does not have any friends, because nobody wants to play with him. Those half a dozen t3 bots behind him demand a larger share of the fun for themselves, but only a few of them could get in line, before the GC came and wasted their factory.
And this trembling on the ground comes from the horde of t1 engis which demand better working conditions. they heard that there is a new optimized method of tank manufacture possible but they have no access to it.

I love it ^^.

T2 air is really good, especially t2 gunships (they even were nerfed because they were too good). Swiftwinds are good to gain air superiority, torp bombers to torp sae units and hiding ACU. Fighter / Bombers are expensive but they can snipe important targets fairly well even if there are flaks around. I think t2 air is fine, but its uses are dependant on the map played. If it's a big map like Seton's, you can skip t2 air indeed, but on most 10x10 maps, it's a good key to victory more often than not.

Statistics: Posted by pip — 05 Aug 2012, 00:14

Re: Does something need to be done about T2 Air?

2012-08-04T21:06:57+02:00

LOL Root.

Besides different t2 air have different stats...

Also when using higher tier units you will have less dps drop off when fighting say t1.

You have to remember that they perform two roles, they can't be optimised for either otherwise they would be very op.

Statistics: Posted by Softly — 04 Aug 2012, 21:06

Re: Does something need to be done about T2 Air?

2012-08-04T19:56:01+02:00

dunno about t2 air, but let me say that there is a line.
on the front of this line is that lonely guy, the SCU. he has been waiting for ages and he still does not have any friends, because nobody wants to play with him. Those half a dozen t3 bots behind him demand a larger share of the fun for themselves, but only a few of them could get in line, before the GC came and wasted their factory.
And this trembling on the ground comes from the horde of t1 engis which demand better working conditions. they heard that there is a new optimized method of tank manufacture possible but they have no access to it.

Statistics: Posted by rootbeer23 — 04 Aug 2012, 19:56

Does something need to be done about T2 Air?

2012-08-04T18:22:57+02:00

It's very rare to see much focus on T2 air, usually you will see T1 interceptors in large numbers on smallish maps, or a straight rush for T3 ASFs on larger maps like Seton's. T2 is skipped over in general for a number of possible reasons. One key reason is probably that ASFs are so desirable that it is rarely a bad idea to have a large fleet of them, and this may not be something that can be overcome. Certainly the ASF balance now is much better than it used to be, and it may not be possible to improve it any further.

The other obvious reason for T2 being effectively skipped is cost-effectiveness. I've put a load of figures into a spreadsheet and come up with the following:

I have ignored the Aeon Swift Wind Combat Fighter and the Aeon Restorer Gunship in the above figures, because they are substantially different from the other factions' equivalent unit.

Please note that the damage figures are DPS for fighters and gunships, and damage per drop for bombers.

What this seems to show is that T1 and T3 interceptors have effectively the same damage and hitpoints per mass. The energy costs are quite different but this just lends weight to the argument that it is mass rather than energy which is the limiting factor, even though air is ostensibly limited by energy.

The T2 fighter-bombers cannot compete with the T1 & T3 fighters at AA; it costs over three times as much mass to get the same anti-air firepower. Their ground damage is more impressive, but it is still lower than the equivalent in T1 bombers. Strat bombers are worse on paper, but in reality their role as front-loaded heavy hitters and their extra durability and speed help make up for their lower damage per mass.

As for hitpoints, the T1 & T2 bombers have roughly the same amount per mass cost, the T2 edges it slightly but it's only a matter of 6% difference. The weakness that both T1 and T2 have is flak: a small amount of flak can decimate any T1/T2 air force extremely quickly. Again the strat bomber makes up for its comparatively lower health by being that much harder to shoot down.

Should anything be considered to bring T2 air more into the game? What could be changed to achieve this?

If anyone wants to see the full list of figures, you can download the spreadsheet here.

Statistics: Posted by Eukanuba — 04 Aug 2012, 18:22