Forged Alliance Forever

Re: Costly Tech 2/3 Artillery Installations and Experimental

2012-12-06T10:46:18+02:00

Batmansrueckkehr wrote:
i can not imagine to break a turtler with t3 arties... u get no shield down with it.. Oo
spaming nukes is more useful.

no
im sorry for not posting a replay but my main hard drive is still out of order
i will do so as soon as it is back online

Statistics: Posted by ColonelSheppard — 06 Dec 2012, 10:46

Re: Costly Tech 2/3 Artillery Installations and Experimental

2012-12-04T02:00:41+02:00

ColonelSheppard wrote:
i have several examples of game where t3 arty made the point, t3 arty is not for the exp stage, it's suitable for the stage behind it, you can only build it if you position is fortified and if you got wrecks to reclaim, artys are(and should not be) there for countering agressive play but for breaking turtle stand, not for getting an advantage but for snowballing an earlier advantage and finishing off an enemy so they costs are perfect

Agreed.

Statistics: Posted by noms — 04 Dec 2012, 02:00

Re: Costly Tech 2/3 Artillery Installations and Experimental

2012-12-03T16:17:12+02:00

i can not imagine to break a turtler with t3 arties... u get no shield down with it.. Oo
spaming nukes is more useful.

Statistics: Posted by Batmansrueckkehr — 03 Dec 2012, 16:17

Re: Costly Tech 2/3 Artillery Installations and Experimental

2012-12-03T14:29:11+02:00

noms wrote:
ie. Scathis on 10x10 maps
I think T3 arty cost is fine as it is. Why encourage turtelling?

we are talking about the normal t3 artys, pls stay out with scatis your thread was closed for a reason i gues

i have serveral examples of game where t3 arty made the point, t3 arty is not for the exp stage, it's suitable for the stage behind it, you can only build it if you position is fortified and if you got wrecks to reclaim, artys are(and should not be) there for countering agressive play but for breaking turtle stand, not for getting an advantage but for snowballing an earlier advantage and finishing off an enemy

so they costs are perfect

Statistics: Posted by ColonelSheppard — 03 Dec 2012, 14:29

Re: Costly Tech 2/3 Artillery Installations and Experimental

2012-12-03T14:20:24+02:00

noms wrote:
just build three and get them to shoot at the same time. overlapping shields take damage together.

By the time you even get 1 T3 artillery installation, your commander is probably already dead...

Statistics: Posted by TestPlay — 03 Dec 2012, 14:20

Re: Costly Tech 2/3 Artillery Installations and Experimental

2012-12-03T15:00:44+02:00

TestPlay wrote:
I have not seen a game where T2 artillery installations can actually win a game. If so, how many games are actually won using it?

uberge3k wrote:
You could say the same about the large majority of units in FA. Ideally, *all* units should have a roughly equal impact on the total outcome of the game; otherwise, specific unit types are most likely too strong, causing their alternatives to be overlooked. This is more or less the case as it is, as T2/T3 land/air, exps, etc all see a lot of use and their use can easily be the deciding factor in a game.

Finally, I simply do not believe that the late game of FA has been "solved" - that is, that every unit and tactic has been thoroughly tested in many different situations in extremely close games in order to determine their relative merits. The biggest reason for this is that FA's economy is exponential, and thus a small advantage early on will quickly snowball into a crushing victory later on, at which point it wouldn't matter what you used to end the game. Therefore, "safe" and "traditional" tactics seem to be favored; has anyone even attempted to use the supposedly "useless" T3 arties in a competitive situation when specific, niche need arises for them? What about, for example, SCUs? The list goes on and on. Attempting to change units simply because they "aren't seen that often" is therefore a highly risky endeavor.

Mmm...then don't you think it is a little sad to see so many powerful units in your arsenal...but are not "worthy" to be built for it's power at all?

Statistics: Posted by TestPlay — 03 Dec 2012, 14:17

Re: Costly Tech 2/3 Artillery Installations and Experimental

2012-12-03T12:34:46+02:00

just build three and get them to shoot at the same time. overlapping shields take damage together.

Statistics: Posted by noms — 03 Dec 2012, 12:34

Re: Costly Tech 2/3 Artillery Installations and Experimental

2012-12-03T10:25:52+02:00

btw, with the shields being less effective since the last patch, t3 artillery actually is quite effective.

Statistics: Posted by Kryo — 03 Dec 2012, 10:25

Re: Costly Tech 2/3 Artillery Installations and Experimental

2012-12-03T07:22:45+02:00

I honestly think that over everything, T3 artillery cost should be reduced. its a tad bit expensive to even be used on all but the biggest maps. even nukes can be useful on the smaller maps. but specifically T3 arty cost is so high that its barely even used. is there anyone who seriously used it to snag a win even? I understand that maybe its not supposed to break heavy shielded bases, but even still its hard pressed to keep a navy or an army at bay or even harass.

just a slight reduction imo would make it a more viable unit. say 5-15 percent is enough. but 90,000 mass and almost a million energy (give or take) for an arty is godly expensive. and takes forever to build that by the time u finish, your enemy already has a few exp. and you are left with nothing to counter since all your eco just went into it building something that does good against groups or stationary lightly and Unsheilded targets.

Statistics: Posted by Nossa — 03 Dec 2012, 07:22

Re: Costly Tech 2/3 Artillery Installations and Experimental

2012-12-03T02:52:08+02:00

ColonelSheppard wrote:
reducing costs would make them:

1. more suitable for turteling
2. op on maps where you can use them from your own base to kill the other base

ie. Scathis on 10x10 maps

I think T3 arty cost is fine as it is. Why encourage turtelling?

Statistics: Posted by noms — 03 Dec 2012, 02:52

Re: Costly Tech 2/3 Artillery Installations and Experimental

2012-11-30T23:16:18+02:00

if it worked in your country: ok.. in mine it did not but i guess you got my point

Statistics: Posted by ColonelSheppard — 30 Nov 2012, 23:16

Re: Costly Tech 2/3 Artillery Installations and Experimental

2012-11-30T19:37:31+02:00

ColonelSheppard wrote:
buffing arty and nerfing shields in order to make an airsnipe possible is like lowering taxes in order to get more taxes ('cause there is more bought then): it does not work

You should check your facts, as lowering taxes is indeed the most effective way to stimulate growth and thus overall tax revenue. At least in America, when federal taxes were lowered, total tax revenue actually *increased*. Common sense...

On topic: defense will always be stronger than offense due to many factors, from strategic attenuation to reclaim to the power of PDs and shields. While I personally love to turtle and take advantage of this fact, making it even more attractive will cause games to become even more static. "Whomever moves first loses" does not an interesting game make.

TestPlay wrote:
I have not seen a game where T2 artillery installations can actually win a game. If so, how many games are actually won using it?

You could say the same about the large majority of units in FA. Ideally, *all* units should have a roughly equal impact on the total outcome of the game; otherwise, specific unit types are most likely too strong, causing their alternatives to be overlooked. This is more or less the case as it is, as T2/T3 land/air, exps, etc all see a lot of use and their use can easily be the deciding factor in a game.

Finally, I simply do not believe that the late game of FA has been "solved" - that is, that every unit and tactic has been thoroughly tested in many different situations in extremely close games in order to determine their relative merits. The biggest reason for this is that FA's economy is exponential, and thus a small advantage early on will quickly snowball into a crushing victory later on, at which point it wouldn't matter what you used to end the game. Therefore, "safe" and "traditional" tactics seem to be favored; has anyone even attempted to use the supposedly "useless" T3 arties in a competitive situation when specific, niche need arises for them? What about, for example, SCUs? The list goes on and on. Attempting to change units simply because they "aren't seen that often" is therefore a highly risky endeavor.

Statistics: Posted by uberge3k — 30 Nov 2012, 19:37

Re: Costly Tech 2/3 Artillery Installations and Experimental

2012-11-30T17:56:08+02:00

Half price t3arts...
Not exactly sure why I made this as it is clearly imba its easy to change around the pricing though if you want. Also you can use it as a root to expand for whatever t3 art mods you may wish to try.

http://rapidshare.com/files/4117086530/ ... eT3Art.rar

Statistics: Posted by NotAsian — 30 Nov 2012, 17:56

Re: Costly Tech 2/3 Artillery Installations and Experimental

2012-11-26T16:02:22+02:00

viewtopic.php?f=26&t=2424

Statistics: Posted by ColonelSheppard — 26 Nov 2012, 16:02

Re: Costly Tech 2/3 Artillery Installations and Experimental

2012-11-26T16:01:02+02:00

what u think about let the dps of t2 arty the same but increase fire rate 2x? that would cause half dmg per shot.
this would make it more efficient because of less overkill to smaller units. also the bad accurancy is less important because of more shots.

so efficiency would be increased by changing nothing than the fire rate. and 10 secs a shot is still very long.

Statistics: Posted by Batmansrueckkehr — 26 Nov 2012, 16:01