Forged Alliance Forever

Re: The T2 mobile shield.

2013-06-12T22:25:31+02:00

Ithilis_Quo wrote:
Nombringer wrote:In English please? I'm not trying to troll you. I actually can't understand a lot of it.

Im realy sorry, i try translate it

I think that the idea of improving Aeon Shield is do Aeons more poise in comparison with other factions. When you look at how many top players on leader of the first 50 plays majority Aeons? It's not very big number, and the reason is that Aeons are terrible fraction against a good player . Aeons have nothing good to T2, Obsidian for cost approximately two Pillars is bad. The shield is extremely expensive (it costs 144 +300 mass / on energy) Blaze is waste of mass on land. Aeons originally had a shield with was many times better like UEF, had 5000 hp, but any path from past has changed it and Aeon have lost their only ability that is bridged through the T2 phase. So that the Aeon shield can not be compared with that shield that has UEF. Becase its diferent army, and position. Now when the shield has lose 1200hp that this energy cost decrease make it similar like it was before -> useful.

What he's saying is basically:

I think that the point of this balance patch is to make aeon more viable for top-level players. Very few of the top 50 players play aeon because it isn't good when you are going up against a top player. Aeon's T2 lacks good options: the obsidian is bad compared to 2 pillars, the shield is expensive (it costs 144 +300 mass / on energy), and the blaze is a waste of mass on land. Aeon originally had a shield which was many times better [than?] UEF, but somewhere along the line of balancing that advantage was removed. That advantage was Aeon's only at T2. So, its shield should not be compared with UEF's shield, because it is a different faction, and the shield plays a more important role in Aeon. Now, becuase the shield has lost so many hitpoints, the energy cost decrease makes it actually useful like it used to be.

It is probably a lot easier for native English speakers to understand Ithilis_Quo so I thought I'd try to help out .

Statistics: Posted by sasin — 12 Jun 2013, 22:25

Re: The T2 mobile shield.

2013-06-12T06:36:30+02:00

salmaafshan wrote:
Ah ok... thanks and sorry

soory for what???

Statistics: Posted by roxanne111 — 12 Jun 2013, 06:36

Re: The T2 mobile shield.

2013-06-10T23:04:50+02:00

Nombringer wrote:
In English please? I'm not trying to troll you. I actually can't understand a lot of it.

Im realy sorry, i try translate it

I think that the idea of improving Aeon Shield is do Aeons more poise in comparison with other factions. When you look at how many top players on leader of the first 50 plays majority Aeons? It's not very big number, and the reason is that Aeons are terrible fraction against a good player . Aeons have nothing good to T2, Obsidian for cost approximately two Pillars is bad. The shield is extremely expensive (it costs 144 +300 mass / on energy) Blaze is waste of mass on land. Aeons originally had a shield with was many times better like UEF, had 5000 hp, but any path from past has changed it and Aeon have lost their only ability that is bridged through the T2 phase. So that the Aeon shield can not be compared with that shield that has UEF. Becase its diferent army, and position. Now when the shield has lose 1200hp that this energy cost decrease make it similar like it was before -> useful.

Statistics: Posted by Ithilis_Quo — 10 Jun 2013, 23:04

Re: The T2 mobile shield.

2013-06-10T11:51:22+02:00

Ithilis_Quo wrote:
I thing that idea of this path is making aeon more balance on hight rating. How many player is playing aeons on 1800+ rating? Not so many, and answer why is beacset they are sux againt good player. Dont has nothing on T2 phase, obsidian by cost of 2 pilars is sux, shild is extremly expensive. Originaly aeon shild was many time better like UEF, so dont comapre it. some path in past was change it and then aeo lose theyr only way how cross T2 phase.

Asmylum before has 5000 shild, so take down energy make it similar like it was before -> usefull

In English please? I'm not trying to troll you. I actually can't understand a lot of it.

Statistics: Posted by Nombringer — 10 Jun 2013, 11:51

Re: The T2 mobile shield.

2013-06-10T11:36:53+02:00

Ah ok... thanks and sorry

Statistics: Posted by salmaafshan — 10 Jun 2013, 11:36

Re: The T2 mobile shield.

2013-06-02T18:40:47+02:00

I thing that idea of this path is making aeon more balance on hight rating. How many player is playing aeons on 1800+ rating? Not so many, and answer why is beacset they are sux againt good player. Dont has nothing on T2 phase, obsidian by cost of 2 pilars is sux, shild is extremly expensive. Originaly aeon shild was many time better like UEF, so dont comapre it. some path in past was change it and then aeo lose theyr only way how cross T2 phase.

Asmylum before has 5000 shild, so take down energy make it similar like it was before -> usefull

Statistics: Posted by Ithilis_Quo — 02 Jun 2013, 18:40

Re: The T2 mobile shield.

2013-06-02T16:15:15+02:00

Aeon need shields on water, so it's intended yes.

Statistics: Posted by Ze_PilOt — 02 Jun 2013, 16:15

Re: The T2 mobile shield.

2013-06-02T16:13:08+02:00

I agree to lu xun. By making shields so cheap to mainrain u influence so many areas.
Is the goal of this patch to make aeon op?

Statistics: Posted by laPPen — 02 Jun 2013, 16:13

Re: The T2 mobile shield.

2013-06-01T12:08:43+02:00

i thouht the aeon shields are an advantage and a reason to go t2. the changes on the shield are supposed to help aeon out on t2. its no prboblem if it is more effective than other shields. that way they have an advantage.
and just because the sera shield is less effective doesnt mean its useless. if the aeo t2 shield is an aeon strength it has to be more effective than other shields

Statistics: Posted by Golol — 01 Jun 2013, 12:08

Re: The T2 mobile shield.

2013-06-01T10:43:33+02:00

The problem is not t3 stage, it's just before t3, when you have your 2nd t2 pgen. Also, if you want energy upkeep to be lower, that's fine, but then it should not have more HP than a shield that requires more energy to run. That's basic logic.

If for 225 energy upkeep (=3 shields), the Aeon player can add 11400 HP to his army and UEF can add only 7000 (=2 shields), there is something wrong.
If the HP of the Aeon mobile shield is reduced to 2800, then it's still a significantly better deal, but the difference is less huge (for three shields = 8400 HP).

Statistics: Posted by pip — 01 Jun 2013, 10:43

Re: The T2 mobile shield.

2013-06-01T10:18:42+02:00

I've seen replay of Blackheart spamming UEF shields the exact same way (one was casted by Gyle this week).

Statistics: Posted by Ze_PilOt — 01 Jun 2013, 10:18

Re: The T2 mobile shield.

2013-06-01T09:56:35+02:00

25 less energy per unit at the T3 stage is going to make no difference whatsoever. Stop deluding yourself; if he can spam them now he could spam them just as easily before too.

Statistics: Posted by IceDreamer — 01 Jun 2013, 09:56

Re: The T2 mobile shield.

2013-06-01T09:11:03+02:00

Here is a replay showing how easy it is for Blackheart to spam Aeon mobile shields at t3 : since the mobile shields don't consume a lot, you can spam them like crazy, without having to micro them much. I suspect we will see many claims : Aeon snipers are now OP, when it's actually the cheap upkeep shields that make them super easy to protect.

So the problem with the 75 energy drain appears after you have your second t2 pgen. Then you can afford a lot of shields on the battlefield, and still have extra energy to produce other units.

I believe 100 energy drain is the minimum, or that if the upkeep is so low as 75, then the HP they have should be significantly reduced, for instance from 3800 to 2800 or 3000 max.
UEF mobile shield provides 3500 HP and consumes 110. The Aeon one should not be so much better in every way, there should be coherence between the two.

Statistics: Posted by pip — 01 Jun 2013, 09:11

Re: The T2 mobile shield.

2013-05-30T21:11:14+02:00

Lu_Xun_17 wrote:
the problem with this shield buff is that you slightly buff T2 aeon land and indirectly buff way more T3 land, T2 navy, even T4 land.
I think this buff is a mistake, it increases the gap between with and without mobile shild factions.

This. Further, at 75 drain, you can get four aeon mod shields for the e drain of just ONE sera mob shield.

Statistics: Posted by FunkOff — 30 May 2013, 21:11

Re: The T2 mobile shield.

2013-05-30T14:41:20+02:00

It's a slight energy cost buff, stop overreacting, it is NOT going to make a real difference on the grand stage. Pil0t could have changed the Aeon T2 to stop the bots, or changed the bots, and sensibly he managed to find an option 3 which I believe is fairly elegant.

Statistics: Posted by IceDreamer — 30 May 2013, 14:41