Forged Alliance Forever

Re: Two Cents about T3 AA

2014-12-22T11:06:12+02:00

Mhm, I don't really like t3 maa because I am conservative when it comes to new units and balance I guess, but one thing that really bothers me about it is that it isn't in the unit list. Adding new units is one thing, but then making it a huge hassle (to see (and memorize unless i feel like doing same thing over and over everytime i try to include it in my strategy for future games!) stats, costs, dps, hp, factional difference, etc is extremely annoying for both new players, and those who have been away a while (like me ;p)

Statistics: Posted by Ceneraii — 22 Dec 2014, 11:06

Re: Two Cents about T3 AA

2014-12-22T10:50:31+02:00

Not sure if t3 mobile AA is overpowered. For the same price you can get 5 t2 flaks. I think it's well balanced that t3 mobile AA can actually hit strats, but for countering gunships t2 flak is wayyy more effective. T3 mobile AA also die like flies since they have less than 2x the HP of a t2 flak and they are slow.

Statistics: Posted by Vee — 22 Dec 2014, 10:50

Re: Two Cents about T3 AA

2014-12-22T05:27:46+02:00

If I may.

T3maa was introduced to do something about T3 air coming from a dedicated air spot. I have a problem with this.....when did we start balancing based on teamgames? If we are in fact balancing based on teamgames, then go right ahead and nerf overcharge already.

T3maa is a temporary fix for something that needs to be completely redone. I am not against adding new units to correct a balance, but I am against adding new units just to add units when you can better balance the units you already have. In my experience SAMs have been more effective than T3maa against T3 air.

That being said, I couldn't really give a f*** about T3maa until ladder is fixed.............I am wondering how long I will have to wait.

Statistics: Posted by SneakySnake — 22 Dec 2014, 05:27

Re: Two Cents about T3 AA

2014-12-17T11:25:36+02:00

I honestly think that T3 mobil AA is overpowered at, yet not as much as some claim.
I was very skeptical about the introduction of T3 AA and am generally against introducing new units to the bas game, yet, i cannot deny the improvements T3 aa has brought to the game.

I do think that the T3 AA needs a slight DPS nerf, or the reamoval of splash (it's seems for me they have it), but i really want them to stay ingame.

Statistics: Posted by ColonelSheppard — 17 Dec 2014, 11:25

Re: Two Cents about T3 AA

2014-12-16T11:03:10+02:00

Yes, remove it. The great Aulex says so. Although it would be nicer if there were some arguments

Statistics: Posted by Aurion — 16 Dec 2014, 11:03

Re: Two Cents about T3 AA

2014-12-16T05:55:28+02:00

So can we remove t3 maa, it rewards lazy players.

Statistics: Posted by Aulex — 16 Dec 2014, 05:55

Re: Two Cents about T3 AA

2014-09-11T23:19:42+02:00

No offence, but saying that you don't understand the implications of what I posted isn't productive either. Also, I don't really care if nothing comes of the fact that nobody makes better models. After all, if it was up to me, they wouldn't be in FAF. (queue comments about "well that's why it isn't up to you 'cause your stuck in the past of 3599", I don't care, I just want a bug-free, fun Supcom, I am not interested in silly custom models).

Why not just take credit for the poll idea and run with it? I was trying to get people to think of it without them thinking I had suggested it, but I blew that. I totally didn't suggest it if someone else wants credit for suggesting it. :p

Also, I am not going to hold (in)activity against anyone. And I consider reading polls every week a good deal of activity... Maybe I should "work out" more.

EDIT: Oh! What you suggested is reading the whats new page every time I log in... I don't get to do that all the time either...

Statistics: Posted by A_vehicle — 11 Sep 2014, 23:19

Re: Two Cents about T3 AA

2014-09-11T20:22:11+02:00

A_vehicle wrote:
I think you are confused...
...It is you who agree with me, not the other way around. I did, after all, post this topic.

Anyway, I do not work with models (for reasons not relevant to this discussion) so if someone else wants to propose new models go ahead. One day, when I am not so busy with RL and if someone else hasn't done it first, I might make the models myself. However, since I really don't think T3 mobile AA is needed anyway, I probably won't make any new models for them. D

Also, if you were as active as Zep said I should be, you would see that there are only 2 threads (this one included) in this forum in which I post my opinion about the balance of FAF. Normally, I post about modding, not the political/balance state of FAF.

I'm sorry, but this is quite pointless. I haven't seen you propose another poll after the changes have settled in to see if it was a good decision, which is what I meant.

Second point I don't really have to say anything about apart from that nothing will come if it if you don't do it yourself or have a very good laid out concept so people who feel the same way can do it.

Last, you said pretty much the same thing in several posts in the same threads. I'm probably one of the most active forum readers at least and I don't think Zep said you should be active, you should just watch the what's new page in the client every now and then without clicking away instantly.

Statistics: Posted by Aurion — 11 Sep 2014, 20:22

Re: Two Cents about T3 AA

2014-09-11T19:33:57+02:00

I think you are confused...
...It is you who agree with me, not the other way around. I did, after all, post this topic. :D

Anyway, I do not work with models (for reasons not relevant to this discussion) so if someone else wants to propose new models go ahead. One day, when I am not so busy with RL and if someone else hasn't done it first, I might make the models myself. However, since I really don't think T3 mobile AA is needed anyway, I probably won't make any new models for them. :DD

Also, if you were as active as Zep said I should be, you would see that there are only 2 threads (this one included) in this forum in which I post my opinion about the balance of FAF. Normally, I post about modding, not the political/balance state of FAF.

Statistics: Posted by A_vehicle — 11 Sep 2014, 19:33

Re: Two Cents about T3 AA

2014-09-09T23:26:21+02:00

A_vehicle wrote:
Aurion wrote:I'm sorry to say, but everything you say is opinion based (not really backed up by actual balance issues or something). And that means there are about 2k other opinions that might or might not agree with yours. There was a poll in which most people said they did want the change. It might be useful to do a 'do-we-like-it-or-not' poll now, but other than that it's not very useful to keep posting your opinion over and over.

I think that is a great idea bro, why didn't I think of that?[/sarcasm]

Didn't think of what? I don't think stuff in my post is obvious, otherwise you wouldn't have posted your opinion 9782934 times. Apart from your witty response you actually agree with me about the poll, so...

Also, the only way you can get anything done about the models, weaponry etc. is to either make it yourself and propose your change or have someone else make it. Even if people agree with 'model should be changed', nobody will actually go and do it for you (unless they agree, can do it, and also have the time for it, which is an almost impossible combination in projects like these).

Statistics: Posted by Aurion — 09 Sep 2014, 23:26

Re: Two Cents about T3 AA

2014-09-09T22:51:04+02:00

Aurion wrote:
I'm sorry to say, but everything you say is opinion based (not really backed up by actual balance issues or something). And that means there are about 2k other opinions that might or might not agree with yours. There was a poll in which most people said they did want the change. It might be useful to do a 'do-we-like-it-or-not' poll now, but other than that it's not very useful to keep posting your opinion over and over.

I think that is a great idea bro, why didn't I think of that?[/sarcasm]
Also, the fact that what I said is opinion-based validates it. After all, you play this game because it is good in your opinion, do you not?
Seriously, though, why are you guys so hung up on this being "A_vehicle's"/soandso/joeSupcomPlayer's opinion? You know what I think? Based on these kinds of responses, people holding this opinion about my opinion are just like about 1k other people who don't think things through. But based on other people's posts, I think I am pretty reasonable and not in the least bit extreme.

Anyway, I think another poll on this would be a good idea, but what the poll says should probably agreed upon in advance. For example, a poll saying "Should Zep never add anything good to FAF again and remove T3 AA?" would be biased, as would "Should we remove this B#@%$H!7 T3 AA?". LOL

And if we do decide to keep T3 AA, I think their models and weapons should be changed to bring them more in line with normal T3 AA weapons and units by making them use either their faction's SAMs or their faction's T3 ASF weapon. Also, I think none of them should be legged units, probably give most of them treads. That would make more sense, unless you called them "T3 Anti-Air Bots".

Statistics: Posted by A_vehicle — 09 Sep 2014, 22:51

Re: Two Cents about T3 AA

2014-09-09T21:11:33+02:00

A_vehicle wrote:
True. I think people have become kinda burned out by this subject (myself included), but I still haven't changed my mind.

Just because optional mods get zero players doesn't mean they don't deserve 0 players. My point is that the number of players playing a mod does not necessarily correlate with the quality of the mod.

I have to say that 98% of the changes made by FAF, I like. The changes I don't like involve new units, specifically T3 mobile AA, and this kind of change is pretty significant.

In addition, I wouldn't mind Zep addressing the possibility of rolling back any change that might need rolling back, whether it is T3 AA or not.

In addition, the weapons carried by the new T3 aa has nothing to do with the cannon units included with the game. Case in point: the Seraphim T3 mobile AA uses an Unstable Phason Laser. This isn't supposed to be an Anti Air weapon, this is an Experimental Direct Fire weapon (check the Othuy: Unstable Phason Energy Signature file for details)! If these units used weapons that made sense based on the technology of the Supcom universe, I would be a little less resistant to their inclusion.

I'm sorry to say, but everything you say is opinion based (not really backed up by actual balance issues or something). And that means there are about 2k other opinions that might or might not agree with yours. There was a poll in which most people said they did want the change. It might be useful to do a 'do-we-like-it-or-not' poll now, but other than that it's not very useful to keep posting your opinion over and over.

Statistics: Posted by Aurion — 09 Sep 2014, 21:11

Re: Two Cents about T3 AA

2014-09-09T20:51:34+02:00

The Sera AA is the most awesome! I get so much enjoyment every time it zaps an air unit even if it doesn't die. Just the fun of building T3 AA is good. If anything remove labs and keep T3 AA! I hate those pesky things killing my engies.

Statistics: Posted by Ionic — 09 Sep 2014, 20:51

Re: Two Cents about T3 AA

2014-09-09T20:32:28+02:00

True. I think people have become kinda burned out by this subject (myself included), but I still haven't changed my mind.

Just because optional mods get zero players doesn't mean they don't deserve 0 players. My point is that the number of players playing a mod does not necessarily correlate with the quality of the mod.

I have to say that 98% of the changes made by FAF, I like. The changes I don't like involve new units, specifically T3 mobile AA, and this kind of change is pretty significant.

In addition, I wouldn't mind Zep addressing the possibility of rolling back any change that might need rolling back, whether it is T3 AA or not.

In addition, the weapons carried by the new T3 aa has nothing to do with the cannon units included with the game. Case in point: the Seraphim T3 mobile AA uses an Unstable Phason Laser. This isn't supposed to be an Anti Air weapon, this is an Experimental Direct Fire weapon (check the Othuy: Unstable Phason Energy Signature file for details)! If these units used weapons that made sense based on the technology of the Supcom universe, I would be a little less resistant to their inclusion.

Statistics: Posted by A_vehicle — 09 Sep 2014, 20:32

Re: Two Cents about T3 AA

2014-08-30T16:17:49+02:00

Personally I want new stuff. I want FAF to keep improving, no matter what form it takes. I'm happy for changes to be made and then reversed if they prove to be negative. FAF is much more nimble than an official game, and changes can be reversed pretty easily. A few weeks of bad gameplay (T3 Mobile AAs or whatever) is easily tolerated, if the overall process leads to improvement.

Optional mods are not the answer. Throughout the entire history of SupCom, we've seen that optional balance mods get zero players. Even when they're "test mods for the next balance patch", noone bothers. So the only way forward is changing the main state of the game.

I understand how Zep can get snarky. Because honestly, every single time something changes (or doesnt change), there's always a dozen people posting detailed, mature, calm and insightful posts about how ITS ALL WRONG CAN YOU JUST LISTEN TO ME FOR ONCE CAUSE ITS REALLY IMPORTANT, pulling a dozen different ways at once.

Since Zep is keeping the whole thing afloat, in the end he has to make a call. There's been various adjustments to the process to get meaningful community consensus on proposed changes. Ultimately if a decision has been arrived at by following the process, complaining about the outcome is irritating.

Nothing in the OP has any gameplay basis, it's only an expression of principles and desire.
Well, I can express the opposite principles and desire - new stuff is exciting, if they work well in the game, and we should be open to experimentation. I absolutely think we should add new units where appropriate, and even new gameplay mechanics if needed. The game isn't perfect yet, so we should keep improving it.

So yeah, everyone has their own principles, and their own desires for the future of FAF. The only productive way to contribute is to improve the process of making decisions, and be active in participating to improve decisions (eg. provide replays of gameplay tests, etc.)

FAF is now community run. Unlike a private company, where we are customers, we complain, and they do whatever they want (but try not to upset us too much), instead FAF is a bit more like an early democracy. Decisions will be made to favour those who participate the most, speak the most eloquently, gets the most turnout to the vote, is most passionate about the process, is closest to those in power, is best placed to affect things on the ground, etc.

Politics sucks, yes.

Statistics: Posted by AdmiralZeech — 30 Aug 2014, 16:17