Forged Alliance Forever Forged Alliance Forever Forums 2014-03-01T22:02:51+02:00 /feed.php?f=2&t=6696 2014-03-01T22:02:51+02:00 2014-03-01T22:02:51+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=6696&p=67546#p67546 <![CDATA[Re: Mavor - Accuracy?!?!]]>
Mycen wrote:
Mavors cannot reliably destroy single targets quickly, but no shield patch can withstand a Mavor bombardment. Since Novax cannot be stopped except by shields, they are a game-winning combination.


Is the bit I take issue with. As Iszh has now found out as others before him, Mavor CANNOT break a late-game shield array over a high-value target. It's 200,000 Mass. If I point this at something, IT SHOULD DIE, end of story. It should actually be OP as hell, and it wouldn't matter because it's so rarely built.

Recent Gyle Epic had a guy build THREE Mavors. After a solid 10 mins of firing, the enemy still have about 60% of their Structures. I'm not going to try to pretend that it didn't wreck their game, but 3 Mavor is 600,000 Mass. 600K Mass, in my book, should be GAME OVER. After 1 minute of that much Mass firing, the enemy should be DEAD, no exceptions.

One day I'll rewrite my Mavor "Lock On" script, but... Effort.

PS: Anyone using the "But Range" argument here should realise that until the Community begin playing on 40K maps, that argument is invalid.

Statistics: Posted by IceDreamer — 01 Mar 2014, 22:02


]]>
2014-03-01T19:12:55+02:00 2014-03-01T19:12:55+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=6696&p=67521#p67521 <![CDATA[Re: Mavor - Accuracy?!?!]]> Statistics: Posted by Mr-Smith — 01 Mar 2014, 19:12


]]>
2014-03-01T17:37:36+02:00 2014-03-01T17:37:36+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=6696&p=67488#p67488 <![CDATA[Re: Mavor - Accuracy?!?!]]>
i think it should be able to one-shot any shield if its not accurate, and keeps the same aoe,

and/or decrease its price as well

http://faforever.com/faf/unitsDB/unit.php?bp=UEB2401,XEA0002,XEB2402,UEB2302
comparison between other uef weapons: doesn't seem to be that bad, but the others are far cheaper, and can do damage much earlier, so it needs to be better in order to be worth building, sat also needs a buff imo (aoe 2-3 will do nicely)


http://faforever.com/faf/unitsDB/unit.php?bp=UEB2401,XSB2401,URL0401,XAB2307
comparison between other game enders: nuke is hard to compare but clearly mavor is awful: scathis has 40% price and same dps, salvation is cheaper and has 65% more dps

Statistics: Posted by Exotic_Retard — 01 Mar 2014, 17:37


]]>
2014-03-01T17:19:18+02:00 2014-03-01T17:19:18+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=6696&p=67484#p67484 <![CDATA[Re: Mavor - Accuracy?!?!]]>
We got the more expensive game ender and lost because of its inefficiency agaisnt a cheaper gameender.

Statistics: Posted by Iszh — 01 Mar 2014, 17:19


]]>
2014-02-19T23:11:44+02:00 2014-02-19T23:11:44+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=6696&p=66090#p66090 <![CDATA[Re: Mavor - Accuracy?!?!]]>
"The Mavor shells are very accurate and powerful, and also have a very large damage radius. Because of this, the Mavor can destroy any building in one to two shells. Any shields protecting the building will be quickly dealt with. Further, thanks to the large damage radius, the Mavor can efficiently break through any shield patch. "

See here: http://supcom.wikia.com/wiki/UEF_Experi ... _Artillery

It was this, but no longer is. Now, even with 5 Mavors, you can barely end the game (see replay UID 1873454 for an e.g.). That didn't used to be the case.

Statistics: Posted by VEGER — 19 Feb 2014, 23:11


]]>
2014-02-19T22:19:09+02:00 2014-02-19T22:19:09+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=6696&p=66084#p66084 <![CDATA[Re: Mavor - Accuracy?!?!]]>
This should be fixed.

Statistics: Posted by VEGER — 19 Feb 2014, 22:19


]]>
2014-02-17T17:09:22+02:00 2014-02-17T17:09:22+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=6696&p=65702#p65702 <![CDATA[Re: Mavor - Accuracy?!?!]]>
Deering wrote:
You should never build it. Build 5 novax centres instead. You get 100% accuracy, more dps and intel.


Nope.

It's not that you build Novax centers instead of Mavors, you build them in conjunction with Mavors. Mavors cannot reliably destroy single targets quickly, but no shield patch can withstand a Mavor bombardment. Since Novax cannot be stopped except by shields, they are a game-winning combination. (I did some testing during the thread jmd3au1 linked to, and I have no idea how they arrived at the "can't break three shields" conclusion, which is demonstrably false.)

Although you are correct that a Mavor's worth of Novaxes has more damage, intel, etc., the thing about the Novax is the satellite is very slow. On a map large enough to make a Mavor worthwhile in the first place, the Novax takes so long to traverse the map that a player can easily build an entire base with enough shields to stave off the Novax attack by the time the satellites arrive. A Mavor, on the other hand, can direct its full DPS anywhere with almost no time delay at all. This is what keeps it superior to simply having lots of Novax.

Also, before considering someone's perspective on the Mavor and its usefulness, look at their replays. If they don't surround their Mavor with T3 pgens, they obviously don't know how to use the unit in the first place. :D


Deering wrote:
Like its said in that topic, it needs to be better for the price. When you compare against YO and salvation it just isn't good.


The Mavor is easily as good as the Yolona Oss, I don't even know how you came to this conclusion. The Yolona Oss is much better for eliminating an opponent's ability to expand, because there's no way they can ever get enough SMD going before you blast them. But it's not hard to defend against a YO in a base that's already set up, because you don't really need that many SMD to stop it. A Mavor, on the other hand, is much better against an established base, because (especially now with the damage transfer) the maximum achievable shield density is still lower than the amount required to withstand a Mavor bombardment. Once the Novax gets there it is impossible to defend and gg.

As for the Salvation, however...

Plasma_Wolf wrote:
Salvation is qualified as at3 unit, despite the obvious fAct that it's an experimental. t3 units get 3 hp/s regen with each veterancy level, experimentals 10.



Exactly! It's not that the Mavor is not good enough in relation to the Salvation. It's that the Salvation is better than it should be.

First, consider the concept of the Salvation: In contrast to the slow-firing, but extremely accurate and powerful Emissary, which is designed to destroy single targets, the Salvation is supposed to be quick-firing, doing relatively inaccurate and dispersed damage. The two artillery pieces complement each other - The Salvation erodes shields and suppresses armies (whether field armies or armies of engineers) while the Emissary quickly destroys specific targets.

Yet somehow, we ended up with a unit that does massive damage in an area that, in the end, is really not that dispersed at all, and is more than capable of punching through shields and wiping out targets all by itself. It can even destroy units that are on the sea floor, does that make sense?! Aeon players don't even build emissaries anymore! Not only that, but the Salvation's range is so great that it can cover pretty much the entirety of any map that isn't an 81x81. Even on Betrayal Ocean, you can bombard all but the island across the map without ever even leaving your home base!

This brings me to my second point - The Salvation shouldn't have the range it does. The only reason people are even comparing the Mavor to the Salvation is because of its game-ender level range. But don't the Aeon already have the Paragon? The reason it makes sense for them to have an infinite resource generator as their strategic T4 is because they don't have any game-enders to put those resources into. They still need to capture territory and fight field engagements to win. Except that, with the Salvation, they don't. They can just build a Salvation or two instead. :roll:



tl;dr: The Mavor is perfectly fine as it is, just surround it with T3 pgens and use a few Novax with it. The real problem is that the Salvation needs to be the T3 artillery piece it's supposed to be, not a hidden T4.

Statistics: Posted by Mycen — 17 Feb 2014, 17:09


]]>
2014-02-17T15:34:59+02:00 2014-02-17T15:34:59+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=6696&p=65676#p65676 <![CDATA[Re: Mavor - Accuracy?!?!]]>
Although I'm not sure how these regen values are going to help you when a monkeylord arrives at the artillery, or a bunch of strat bombers.

Statistics: Posted by Plasma_Wolf — 17 Feb 2014, 15:34


]]>
2014-02-17T15:32:10+02:00 2014-02-17T15:32:10+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=6696&p=65675#p65675 <![CDATA[Re: Mavor - Accuracy?!?!]]> Statistics: Posted by IceDreamer — 17 Feb 2014, 15:32


]]>
2014-02-17T15:27:10+02:00 2014-02-17T15:27:10+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=6696&p=65673#p65673 <![CDATA[Re: Mavor - Accuracy?!?!]]>
You should never build it. Build 5 novax centres instead. You get 100% accuracy, more dps and intel.

Also whats with the salvations regen?
http://www.faforever.com/faf/unitsDB/un ... 01,XAB2307

Statistics: Posted by Deering — 17 Feb 2014, 15:27


]]>
2014-02-17T11:49:35+02:00 2014-02-17T11:49:35+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=6696&p=65644#p65644 <![CDATA[Re: Mavor - Accuracy?!?!]]>
viewtopic.php?f=45&t=1881

Mavor had a pinpoint accuracy in vanilla SupCom, but apparently they thought it was OP, so they changed it :idea:
It is innacurate, but you can always surround it with 4 T3 pgens, which makes it fire 50ish % faster...

Statistics: Posted by jmd3au1 — 17 Feb 2014, 11:49


]]>
2014-02-17T10:52:15+02:00 2014-02-17T10:52:15+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=6696&p=65642#p65642 <![CDATA[Re: Mavor - Accuracy?!?!]]>
Anyway, I think it is not good enough for the larger games, and that is really the only time you see the Mavor. So Improved accuracy is a must.

Statistics: Posted by Plasma_Wolf — 17 Feb 2014, 10:52


]]>
2014-02-17T10:35:01+02:00 2014-02-17T10:35:01+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=6696&p=65640#p65640 <![CDATA[Re: Mavor - Accuracy?!?!]]> Statistics: Posted by D4E_Omit — 17 Feb 2014, 10:35


]]>
2014-02-17T09:46:26+02:00 2014-02-17T09:46:26+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=6696&p=65632#p65632 <![CDATA[Re: Mavor - Accuracy?!?!]]> Statistics: Posted by SC-Account — 17 Feb 2014, 09:46


]]>
2014-02-17T08:27:21+02:00 2014-02-17T08:27:21+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=6696&p=65617#p65617 <![CDATA[Re: Mavor - Accuracy?!?!]]>
May not literally that precise, but guaranteed hit on clicked square should be the case.

Statistics: Posted by errorblankfield — 17 Feb 2014, 08:27


]]>