Forged Alliance Forever

Re: Reason UEF sucks in current patch is obvious

2013-10-21T15:59:19+02:00

ill just say this here: i think uef has a lot of losses vs aeon because aeon t1 + t2 kind of counters uef t1 + t2
auroras are obviously great against strikers.
obsidians totally own pillars.
mongoose do ok against auroras but cant hurt obsidians.

Statistics: Posted by Golol — 21 Oct 2013, 15:59

Re: Reason UEF sucks in current patch is obvious

2013-10-18T00:15:42+02:00

ahem, am i mistaken or is this one of those kind of discussions i only find in the forum grave yard? a BALANCE discussion?

Statistics: Posted by Master_Vallex — 18 Oct 2013, 00:15

Re: Reason UEF sucks in current patch is obvious

2013-10-17T20:58:15+02:00

Again you should consider the full naval to balance, not only one stage.

Statistics: Posted by -_V_- — 17 Oct 2013, 20:58

Re: Reason UEF sucks in current patch is obvious

2013-10-17T20:16:22+02:00

Cantor wrote:
Cybran T1 navy is actually really good...and atlantis loses hard to t3 subs. Yea 1 atlantis can kill 1 t3 sub...but mass for mass t3 subs own.

Dont build atlantis against t3 subs, build torpedo boats, shields and a couple of battleships.

Statistics: Posted by Petricpwnz — 17 Oct 2013, 20:16

Re: Reason UEF sucks in current patch is obvious

2013-10-17T15:29:41+02:00

Cybran T1 navy is actually really good...and atlantis loses hard to t3 subs. Yea 1 atlantis can kill 1 t3 sub...but mass for mass t3 subs own.

Statistics: Posted by Cantor — 17 Oct 2013, 15:29

Re: Reason UEF sucks in current patch is obvious

2013-10-17T13:09:21+02:00

It's a t2 navy fight.

Oh cmon! Only allowing UEF to do t2 naval is like having cybran only use t1 and t3 naval! Their battlecruiser is pretty cheap for what it does and 2 battlecruisers with a few cruisers and shieldboats (And some torp boats if enemy spams subs) will kill pretty much any naval.. Yes their destroyer is the worst but their t3 pwns everything except sera sub hunters (which a atlantis will kill)

Statistics: Posted by D4E_Omit — 17 Oct 2013, 13:09

Re: Reason UEF sucks in current patch is obvious

2013-10-17T10:14:11+02:00

Stefan wrote:
Really?

no sry

Statistics: Posted by ColonelSheppard — 17 Oct 2013, 10:14

Re: Reason UEF sucks in current patch is obvious

2013-10-17T08:03:26+02:00

rockoe10 wrote:
But UEF is pretty strong.

Really?

Statistics: Posted by Stefan — 17 Oct 2013, 08:03

Re: Reason UEF sucks in current patch is obvious

2013-10-16T17:59:20+02:00

BrickedKeyboard wrote:
I don't really see any "context" here. It's a t2 navy fight. The UEF player can choose to make destroyers, cruisers, coopers, or shield boats. His opponent has similar choices.

Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it isn't there. Because, after all, you're quite wrong: Not only can the UEF make destroyers, cruisers, coopers, and shield boats, they can also make frigates, attack subs, interceptors, attack bombers, T1 transports, T2 transports, torpedo bombers, fighter-bombers, combat engineers, hovertanks, mobile shields, mobile flak, heavy tanks, gatling bots, tactical missile launchers, tactical missile defenses, T2 shields, T1 and T2 torpedo launchers, T2 flak turrets, and T2 point defense. (Among other things.)

SupCom is all about establishing an economy that can in turn produce an effective war machine. Players, especially in a 1v1, are supposed to use all means at their disposal to disrupt the enemy economy while developing their own.

You are claiming, essentially, that in order to evaluate how effective a unit is, (balance it, in other words) there need not be context for the battle, and that at a certain tech level in a certain unit category the players' options under evaluation consist solely of the units at that level in that category that you are evaluating.

This claim is so laughable that there is little room for an in-depth discussion of your ideas - they're just too far off the mark.

BRNKoINSANITY wrote:
UEF has more than enough naval options.... you just have to throw enough frigates at the threat till you can reach t3. The sheer HP of shield boats + buttloads of frigates is relatively cheap and usually enough to survive till the transition.

Cantor wrote:
FYI, aeon torpedo dps is 106+75 = 181 not 106.

I would say UEF are not very strong but I don't think the main problem is the navy. With micro, Aeon navy is weaker. On big maps UEF can play passive since when they get to t3 stage they will win vs aeon/cybran. Playing passive is helped more because they have shield boats.

These two know what they are talking about. Cybran, Aeon, and especially Seraphim, use their T2 destroyers as their primary naval combat units. UEF, on the other hand, are required to have a more diverse mix of ships in order to be effective - their faction is designed to work this way.

Statistics: Posted by Mycen — 16 Oct 2013, 17:59

Re: Reason UEF sucks in current patch is obvious

2013-10-16T16:17:39+02:00

TBH shields are not an issue. How many times does shield stacking even come into play? Hardly ever. In team games yes it does, but in team games UEF is not so bad.

Statistics: Posted by Cantor — 16 Oct 2013, 16:17

Re: Reason UEF sucks in current patch is obvious

2013-10-16T15:05:34+02:00

True, although the ability to upgrade there shields is a plus. And the larger size makes layering easier. As for shield consumption, this may need to be looked into. Testing may find that the energy consumption could be reduced.

Statistics: Posted by rockoe10 — 16 Oct 2013, 15:05

Re: Reason UEF sucks in current patch is obvious

2013-10-16T09:47:01+02:00

bwt imo they have worst t2 t3 shields (about t3: cybran ED4-ED5 is worse than uef t3) and mobile shield consume pretty much power, the greater coverage is irrelevant for me if they have least shield HP and consume alot of power

Statistics: Posted by ZLO_RD — 16 Oct 2013, 09:47

Re: Reason UEF sucks in current patch is obvious

2013-10-16T09:05:42+02:00

Much of what you say has some truth ZLO, but that is why the UEF is considered a more "Turtle" style faction and likes to get to the next tech sooner than some of the other factions.

Statistics: Posted by rockoe10 — 16 Oct 2013, 09:05

Re: Reason UEF sucks in current patch is obvious

2013-10-16T06:41:50+02:00

uef sucks because of t1 bomber, becasue many many people go second air and ghettos became less usefull(bomber comest in time when you load labs in transport and can kill them all) and already may have interceptor escorting bomber), because in t1 spam vs t1 spam striker+lobo are weakest, mongoose+shield not enought against t2 tanks, on water maps riptide counters by air and frigates, and sometimes uef have hard time struggle with submarine spammers (can't attack for long time while haveing more navy) cause coopers can die to air or destroers.
However they have percies, battlecruisers, fatboys, battlesgips, spearheads, goveners (t2 cruiser), shield boats, and t2 ghettos

but in early game they only have mechmarine that work well only agains mantis imho

Statistics: Posted by ZLO_RD — 16 Oct 2013, 06:41

Re: Reason UEF sucks in current patch is obvious

2013-10-16T06:18:39+02:00

BrickedKeyboard wrote:
Why don't you set up a test game, 2 equally matched 2000 players. No T3 allowed, fixed income so they have identical mass, and see who wins navy. One player plays UEF, the other another faction.

I don't really see any "context" here. It's a t2 navy fight. The UEF player can choose to make destroyers, cruisers, coopers, or shield boats. His opponent has similar choices. The numbers clearly show the UEF will lose to all 3 races :

...

LOL, while your at it, can you test ONLY they T2 point defenses of the Cybran and the UEF and tell me who wins. Or how about the Shields of the Cybran and any other Faction? The numbers clearly show the Cybran will lose to all 3 races.

P.S.

Im kidding of course, you can't ignore the rest of a factions arsenal. If UEF or Cybran didn't have ways of dealing with, or countering, in some way I would agree. But UEF is pretty strong.

Statistics: Posted by rockoe10 — 16 Oct 2013, 06:18