Forged Alliance Forever Forged Alliance Forever Forums 2011-09-11T16:23:35+02:00 /feed.php?f=11&t=62 2011-09-11T16:23:35+02:00 2011-09-11T16:23:35+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=62&p=586#p586 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 Mobile Shield]]> e.g.
- for the energy drain the player has making sheilds you aren't, say, gaining air superiority so that he can't scout (also, you can only see the units for the time you have vision over them)
- that the omni for t3 radar is close the battle that is commencing. (granted for aeon they have an ACU upgrade that is super OP for the intel it gives)

I would like to see:
mass for mass fights of pure units verses shielded units (remember, some of the mass for the shielded units must go into power for making the shields).
Winner decides whether shields are OP (also we might be able to calculate the optimal shield/unit ratio if one exists)

Statistics: Posted by Gowerly — 11 Sep 2011, 16:23


]]>
2011-09-11T14:15:17+02:00 2011-09-11T14:15:17+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=62&p=581#p581 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 Mobile Shield]]>
And comparing stealth to shields is... err... I don't really know what to make of that. You say you can get 8 stealth for the price of one mobile shield... the problem is you can completely negate that stealth gen's effect with a single T1 air scout. Even assuming the Cybran player has loads of flak in it's army that will quickly kill the scout, you still just need to make one every 5-10 seconds and fly it over the same area. Using funk's own calculations he made in chat yesterday, that's (and this is a stretch) -9 mass a second to completely counter stealth.

Perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't see a way to completely disable shields for 9 mass a second?

Especially when you consider that you can completely counter stealth with a T3 radar (remember, we're suggesting using experimentals to counter T3 shields, so using a T3 unit to counter a T2 unit shouldn't be out of the question on our side either)... Good thing we have that Anti-Shield Field Generator that uses -2k e but completely disables all shields. Oh wait...

Statistics: Posted by uberge3k — 11 Sep 2011, 14:15


]]>
2011-09-11T12:59:40+02:00 2011-09-11T12:59:40+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=62&p=576#p576 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 Mobile Shield]]> Statistics: Posted by Isen — 11 Sep 2011, 12:59


]]>
2011-09-10T23:49:22+02:00 2011-09-10T23:49:22+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=62&p=572#p572 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 Mobile Shield]]>
And gowerly Cybran dont have a GC :P

Statistics: Posted by TAG_ROCK — 10 Sep 2011, 23:49


]]>
2011-09-10T20:37:31+02:00 2011-09-10T20:37:31+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=62&p=570#p570 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 Mobile Shield]]> Statistics: Posted by Gowerly — 10 Sep 2011, 20:37


]]>
2011-09-10T15:53:12+02:00 2011-09-10T15:53:12+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=62&p=565#p565 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 Mobile Shield]]> Statistics: Posted by FunkOff — 10 Sep 2011, 15:53


]]>
2011-09-10T11:30:47+02:00 2011-09-10T11:30:47+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=62&p=561#p561 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 Mobile Shield]]>
As a Cybran player all I can do vs a wall of percies, harbs, sera tanks with shields is play defensive, or run away.

Megalith works, but having to depend on the costly experimental breaks the flow kinda.

Aeon disruptor should be given to Cybran and all is fine I think, or make the T3 mobile artillery have a dual function.

Statistics: Posted by TAG_ROCK — 10 Sep 2011, 11:30


]]>
2011-09-10T10:34:28+02:00 2011-09-10T10:34:28+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=62&p=559#p559 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 Mobile Shield]]> Everytime I saw t3 sera shield used they made a huge impact. They will become imba very fast if cost is reduced more than a small amount.

Statistics: Posted by lebensnebel — 10 Sep 2011, 10:34


]]>
2011-09-10T10:26:29+02:00 2011-09-10T10:26:29+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=62&p=558#p558 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 Mobile Shield]]> Statistics: Posted by Isen — 10 Sep 2011, 10:26


]]>
2011-09-09T17:35:46+02:00 2011-09-09T17:35:46+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=62&p=544#p544 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 Mobile Shield]]> Statistics: Posted by TAG_ROCK — 09 Sep 2011, 17:35


]]>
2011-09-09T10:30:53+02:00 2011-09-09T10:30:53+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=62&p=525#p525 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 Mobile Shield]]> Statistics: Posted by Isen — 09 Sep 2011, 10:30


]]>
2011-09-09T00:31:31+02:00 2011-09-09T00:31:31+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=62&p=519#p519 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 Mobile Shield]]>
TAG_ROCK wrote:
I dunno it just frightens me to see 10k hp shields that can be spammed so easily. I mean late game when you have many t3 mexes and can spam t3 pgens in seconds.


Well, that's a valid concern. However, the shields have a very small radius, which is a hugely limiting factor. Even 20 of them bunched together than easily be taken down, due the plash damage, from an experimental. Additionally, they need to be balanced for early tech 3 because the weaknesses of the Othuum are only balanced out by the T3 sniper, of which the garbage health is only balanced out by the availability of mobile shields. Without a usable (ie, lower energy consumption) mobile shield, seraphim T3 is simply gimped. Also, going on the logic that T3 should >> T2, Seraphim T3 shield should cost less mass per HP and less energy consumption per HP than T2 mobile shields, which it does not. I'd be fine keeping the high mass cost if it just got a sensible E consumption reduction.

Statistics: Posted by FunkOff — 09 Sep 2011, 00:31


]]>
2011-09-08T23:00:58+02:00 2011-09-08T23:00:58+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=62&p=515#p515 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 Mobile Shield]]> Statistics: Posted by Treble — 08 Sep 2011, 23:00


]]>
2011-09-08T22:30:27+02:00 2011-09-08T22:30:27+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=62&p=513#p513 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 Mobile Shield]]> Statistics: Posted by TAG_ROCK — 08 Sep 2011, 22:30


]]>
2011-09-08T18:25:05+02:00 2011-09-08T18:25:05+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=62&p=509#p509 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 Mobile Shield]]>
TAG_ROCK wrote:
Its a 10khp shield that's why I think.


For the same mass cost you can build UEF T2 Mobile Shields that sums 18.666 HP, and Aeon T2 Mobile Shields that sums 16.888 HP, and Seraphim T3 should be better than that, it's built in a tech 3 land factory, harder, takes long and many more resources.

Maybe the energy drain per second could be -250, and the cost and build time reduced in 40% and HP lowered to 9000 HP.

Statistics: Posted by Moritz — 08 Sep 2011, 18:25


]]>