Forged Alliance Forever

Re: Should shields start depleted when built?

2016-06-05T17:17:10+02:00

Ithilis_Quo wrote:
TheKoopa wrote:Not really, if you don't have air superiority...

I was talking about 8 novax that cant break shields that are nonstop builded by T3 acu with faster speed as 224K mass in novaxes is able wipe out.

you mean ACU build new shield everytime or assisting the shield?

if build, did you try it as Cybran? I dont think you would be able to defend

Statistics: Posted by ZeRenCZ — 05 Jun 2016, 17:17

Re: Should shields start depleted when built?

2016-05-12T22:16:42+02:00

zeroAPM wrote:
NapSpan wrote:Dont know why anybody would build Novax to harass when they primary role (at least for me) is tickling things like Exps.

Fixed

Statistics: Posted by Lieutenant Lich — 12 May 2016, 22:16

Re: Should shields start depleted when built?

2016-05-12T17:32:01+02:00

NapSpan wrote:
Dont know why anybody would build Novax to harass when they primary role (at least for me) is tickling things like Exps.

Fixed

Statistics: Posted by zeroAPM — 12 May 2016, 17:32

Re: Should shields start depleted when built?

2016-05-12T15:39:43+02:00

Dont know why anybody would build Novax to harass when they primary role (at least for me) is hunting things like Exps.

Statistics: Posted by NapSpan — 12 May 2016, 15:39

Re: Should shields start depleted when built?

2016-05-12T02:20:04+02:00

Ithilis_Quo wrote:
TheKoopa wrote:Not really, if you don't have air superiority...

I was talking about 8 novax that cant break shields that are nonstop builded by T3 acu with faster speed as 224K mass in novaxes is able wipe out.

That's a Novax balance issue. And the fact that Novax is a DEFENSE satellite. Put on glasses if you need to read the word "defense". People use it for attacking unprotected bases and yes, a shield can hold off one or two. 8-9 is unlikely. Look at the novax balance discussion - linked in my post above.

Novax should have superior intel, like you, Ithilis, suggested - I agree 100%. To make it useful because as Koopa said, I believe, "Novax in its current state is almost useless".

About T3 com. Solution I see here is making the suite more expensive and so it IS affected by having T2 - using more resources, etc. Supreme Commander is not about turtling. As one can see in campaigns, bases have defenses to SUPPLEMENT firepower to their defensive units, like T2 tanks, T3 bots/tanks, exps, etc. Not to be those units. Page on defenses on supcom wikia is here: http://supcom.wikia.com/wiki/You_shall_ ... e_stratagy

Paragraph from it as a reference:
"Point defenses, like AA guns, should also be supplementary in nature. A T1 point defense is powerful enough to cause real trouble for a T1 army, and it can easily earn back the mass that was spent on it. This fact is common knowledge, and it's why many inexperienced players tend to want to rely on point defenses instead of a mobile ground force. The problem is, the point defense only projects your influence as far as their range, and no further. Even the lowly LABs, meanwhile, can run all across the map, killing engineers and denying mass points.

Consequently, point defenses are most useful for two things: deterring ground harassment and defending hotly contested areas. Though it may seem counter-intuitive, your primary base is not a hotly contested area in most cases. In fact, it's one of the least contested areas of the game because it will spend most of the battle crawling with your own units. If you opponent can build a forward base on top of your own primary base, you have done something terribly, terribly wrong.

Ultimately, you should find yourself building very few point defenses, and if you do so at all, it will often be to assist a forward position that is producing mobile units. Alternatively, you may choose to build point defenses if you see an advancing force you aren't ready for, perhaps spotted during a bomber fly-by or simply by radar. In these cases, the point defenses will be supplementing your army, which is, at that moment, too small to defeat the incoming attackers. The important thing to recognize here is that the point defenses are not going anywhere once they're built, so they absolutely need to be placed only in areas where you know the enemy has to pass through or is going to pass through.

Back to the topic - shields should stay where they are. Also, the T3 com with shields is not protected 100%. Solutions:
1) Get more units up for greater firepower
2) with existing ones, get under the shield and kill it. Just a few shots and it is down.
3) If doing an air raid, just do some land drops - if your enemy is mostly air - he probably has little land defenses. At least on turtle maps.
4) If the com is protecting himself with his buildpower and you cannot break through, retreat and save your units. Drop them in the rear, collapse economy and the defenses will break on their own. MML/MMP/Arty spam will also do it. If you lack map control to do so - that's a different problem.

Statistics: Posted by Lieutenant Lich — 12 May 2016, 02:20

Re: Should shields start depleted when built?

2016-05-07T22:27:40+02:00

TheKoopa wrote:
Not really, if you don't have air superiority...

I was talking about 8 novax that cant break shields that are nonstop builded by T3 acu with faster speed as 224K mass in novaxes is able wipe out.

Statistics: Posted by Ithilis_Quo — 07 May 2016, 22:27

Re: Should shields start depleted when built?

2016-05-07T22:13:16+02:00

Ithilis_Quo wrote:
Of course that is game problem when single acu can handle so much mass agaist then its not problem of people when do it, its problem of game that allow it.

But this is not only about novax, i point also other problems that will be with this change fixed. And sadly some new rise (necesary of rebalance shields) but this is kinda solution, but need some work around

Not really, if you don't have air superiority you will most likely get killed, unless you have 1204982109480213849102834 SAMsin your base (in relation to t3 acu vs strats).

Statistics: Posted by TheKoopa — 07 May 2016, 22:13

Re: Should shields start depleted when built?

2016-05-07T18:35:58+02:00

Of course that is game problem when single acu can handle so much mass agaist then its not problem of people when do it, its problem of game that allow it.

But this is not only about novax, i point also other problems that will be with this change fixed. And sadly some new rise (necesary of rebalance shields) but this is kinda solution, but need some work around

Statistics: Posted by Ithilis_Quo — 07 May 2016, 18:35

Re: Should shields start depleted when built?

2016-05-07T18:14:27+02:00

Ithilis_Quo wrote:
On the other hand ACU with T3 suite can easy handle 7-8 novax that will never penetrate shields. Or sacu that can easy build shields and sams and protect themselves from air snipe. Or nonstop build new and new shields on artillery war, or push with PD creep that OC hard to break.

That is not a game problem, that is a people problem. On small maps, game shouldn't even get to the point of T3-T4.

If you are talking about holding off Novax - you are on the wrong topic, Ithilis. There it is: viewtopic.php?f=42&t=11897
I took your idea of superior intel on Novax and added it in my mod.

Statistics: Posted by Lieutenant Lich — 07 May 2016, 18:14

Re: Should shields start depleted when built?

2016-05-07T17:14:47+02:00

On the other hand acu withT3 suite can easy handle 7-8novax that will never penetrete shields. Or sacu that can easy build shields and sams and protect themself from air snipe. Or nonstop build new and new shields on aetilery war, or push with PD creap that os Hard to break.

I dont see many reasons why it will be bad change, it will neglect shield and make them much harder to be use as agresive toll. As a results will be fair to buff shields sligthli on they defensive place where they should be. But this change will fix lot of problems.

Negative is that will be necesary rebalance all shields, and consider if is not needed some new more reliable adjustancy for shields that will help in aetilery war instead of never ending rebuilding

Statistics: Posted by Ithilis_Quo — 07 May 2016, 17:14

Re: Should shields start depleted when built?

2016-05-07T14:10:10+02:00

Not at all realistic. Will ruin gameplay, and make shields completely underpowered. No way is this a good idea.

Statistics: Posted by Hawkei — 07 May 2016, 14:10

Re: Should shields start depleted when built?

2016-05-07T03:53:20+02:00

ZeRen wrote:
+
more realistic
-
ruin gameplay

It will ruin gameplay indeed. Imagine a situation when you have Jesters or renegades shooting at you and there are either too many or your AA is away as are inties (Not supposed to happen but you would also need a shield if you are getting jumped by T1 mobile arty). What do you do? Build a quick shield, get a few flaks, get another shield so you survive the day. When one has T2/T3 suite, the other side must have something good by that time. I believe the solution is not changing shields but increasing the cost of T2 suite (swapping gun and suite economic values) or the build time/cost of T3 suite so com drops are not so OP. I witnessed enough of them.

Statistics: Posted by Lieutenant Lich — 07 May 2016, 03:53

Re: Should shields start depleted when built?

2016-05-03T08:38:25+02:00

zeroAPM wrote:
Build everything I need at the cost of moving and attacking since the obese tank wannabe forgets it has weapons the second it start building

fixed now

Statistics: Posted by biass — 03 May 2016, 08:38

Re: Should shields start depleted when built?

2016-05-03T08:14:16+02:00

Build everything I need at the cost of moving and attacking since the obese tank wannabe forgets it has weapons the second it start building

Statistics: Posted by zeroAPM — 03 May 2016, 08:14

Re: Should shields start depleted when built?

2016-05-02T23:10:01+02:00

Well, turtle strategy with UEF works, but in different way, its not about covering your base with defenses but cover enemy base with them. Fatboys has this philosophy, its a mobile firebase that can build everything you need.

Statistics: Posted by NapSpan — 02 May 2016, 23:10