Forged Alliance Forever

Re: Balance & explanation

2015-06-27T01:46:48+02:00

PsychoBoB wrote:
Again, without somebody from the council your time and effort are in vain. Please don't get in a unnesessary discussion!

Not quite

All useful information from these discussions eventually get parsed and used in some way -- if we see real mods coming out of this then that's real progress that you can play and test right there, meaning it's much more likely to get attention and eventually implementation into the core game, no matter if the council is engaged or not.

Statistics: Posted by Sheeo — 27 Jun 2015, 01:46

Re: Balance & explanation

2015-06-25T19:26:32+02:00

Ithilis_Quo wrote:
coope is jast another think that is suppost be fixed, and im sure that here would not be someone that say.. dont fix this, because we already have enought change...

Another think that need to be fixed is absolut usslesnes of Aeon Frigate...

Aeon frigate is supposed to be awful cause of aurora (same with sera frigate ad arty, but arty isn't as good so sera frigate is better) but it would be nice if it was a little cheaper, or if it had a higher vision radius or something of the sort

Statistics: Posted by yeager — 25 Jun 2015, 19:26

Re: Balance & explanation

2015-06-25T15:46:40+02:00

coope is jast another think that is suppost be fixed, and im sure that here would not be someone that say.. dont fix this, because we already have enought change...

Another think that need to be fixed is absolut usslesnes of Aeon Frigate...

Statistics: Posted by Ithilis_Quo — 25 Jun 2015, 15:46

Re: Balance & explanation

2015-06-25T15:44:02+02:00

Actually, it would be nice if the Cooper could actually be properly aimed at by anti-surface weapons... Yet another bug which has gone unfound and unfixed for much, much too long, but *should* be here very soon.

Statistics: Posted by IceDreamer — 25 Jun 2015, 15:44

Re: Balance & explanation

2015-06-25T02:01:21+02:00

Well yeah, it would be nice if the cooper had more health and weaker anti torps, but cybran navy is the most OP right now by far.
edit: before some one tries to argue they don't. they have:
Best t1 (this is pretty obvious)
Best t2 [destroyer can go on land, sub hunter is cost effective against sera t3 sub, mermaid is a boss (uef cooper and bulwark combo is also cost effective vs the dreaded t3 sub hunter, but that's very hard to pull off and cooper can be killed by surface vessels when there isn't 2000 bulwarks)]
Excelant t3 (everyone has a different opinions on who has best t3 navy after uef)
Additionally they have the best t2 torpedo system and the HARMS

Statistics: Posted by yeager — 25 Jun 2015, 02:01

Re: Balance & explanation

2015-06-25T00:27:46+02:00

Also on your list dont forgot on cooper, for anti-submarine weapon its insine op against everything else..

jast say..

here is manual how to play uef navy: build cooper and bulwark nothing more, maybe bulwark is waste of mass, jast build more coopers

Statistics: Posted by Ithilis_Quo — 25 Jun 2015, 00:27

Re: Balance & explanation

2015-06-24T01:03:49+02:00

theeggroll wrote:
Icedreamer, ive noticed that you always look at other people's balance suggestions and say none/few of them are needed. Trust me, these all look like fantastic changes, and the harb especially is in need of nerfing.

Errrm, I just agreed with all but one of his points... Dunno what you're reading, but it's certainly not what I actually wrote. I suggested alternatives to a handful of his proposed solutions, but his identification of the underlying issue is no less valid.

Statistics: Posted by IceDreamer — 24 Jun 2015, 01:03

Re: Balance & explanation

2015-06-23T23:00:47+02:00

PsychoBoB wrote:
Again, without somebody from the council your time and effort are in vain. Please don't get in a unnesessary discussion!

Nothing wrong with a discussion, perhaps you don't want to discuss this but your post is unnecessary.
Ithilis, while I do enjoy playing equilibrium, your proposed list of changes is too long to likely ever be implomented, whereas keysers list is much shorter and easier to see the reasoning behind and has much higher chances of being added.

Statistics: Posted by theeggroll — 23 Jun 2015, 23:00

Re: Balance & explanation

2015-06-23T17:22:21+02:00

Again, without somebody from the council your time and effort are in vain. Please don't get in a unnesessary discussion!

Statistics: Posted by PsychoBoB — 23 Jun 2015, 17:22

Re: Balance & explanation

2015-06-23T17:08:01+02:00

i don't know what you are talking about ithilis.
theeggroll only talked about 1 unit.
i said there was only 4 must do change.
we can allow us until 10 change max, for fixing most needed unit. This is completely different from your 50 to 100 changes (i gave up looking at how many change you made) that are in your mod. A lot of what you are doing is futile.

Statistics: Posted by keyser — 23 Jun 2015, 17:08

Re: Balance & explanation

2015-06-23T16:45:54+02:00

theeggroll wrote:
Ithilis, while I have played equilibrium with you, this list of changes is much much shorter than yours, make it a balance change rather than a balance REWORK.

And witch change you notice? Because i remember that you after game say me that it is as normal game.

btw you add 2 additional change, so it is 9+2 = 11 change, and here are discuse only few people, and we have already 11 change "that must be", when would discuse more people how many change we would have? Uber was ask question what people think can be better balanced and here is one parth of that discusion viewtopic.php?f=2&t=9044 It was split for more threats because in end it have more as 50side... most of (logical) suggestion from that discusion i implement. People was not suggest it as rework, but as they small piece from complex folder

Statistics: Posted by Ithilis_Quo — 23 Jun 2015, 16:45

Re: Balance & explanation

2015-06-23T16:30:44+02:00

Keyser, this looks fantastic , thanks man. I would have added a change or two about othuums as well to make them able to survive t3 phase.
Icedreamer, ive noticed that you always look at other people's balance suggestions and say none/few of them are needed. Trust me, these all look like fantastic changes, and the harb especially is in need of nerfing.
Ithilis, while I have played equilibrium with you, this list of changes is much much shorter than yours, make it a balance change rather than a balance REWORK.

Statistics: Posted by theeggroll — 23 Jun 2015, 16:30

Re: Balance & explanation

2015-06-23T15:17:51+02:00

yeager wrote:
Beetles/Mercy: i think these are fine, they make for funny cast, face palms of all types, and they separate good and bad players.

you sir gain the award of the best irony. (i hope it is though)

Statistics: Posted by keyser — 23 Jun 2015, 15:17

Re: Balance & explanation

2015-06-22T16:47:49+02:00

PsychoBoB wrote:
Before this becomes just another (endless and without any result) balance discussion i think it's time to make nails with heads (i don't know if this saying exists in english).

I think it's time, that some real balance discussion (maybe moderated by a councilor) has to be done! A lot of work and planning is done now from Ithilis and other guys to get rid of some obvious and some minor faults of the game. But without a responsible person of the Council this will never end.

Is it possible to get a clear statement or roadmap (with numbers and dates) from our FAF goverment in the near future?

It would be nice if this actually went somewhere..

Statistics: Posted by yeager — 22 Jun 2015, 16:47

Re: Balance & explanation

2015-06-22T16:39:59+02:00

Before this becomes just another (endless and without any result) balance discussion i think it's time to make nails with heads (i don't know if this saying exists in english).

I think it's time, that some real balance discussion (maybe moderated by a councilor) has to be done! A lot of work and planning is done now from Ithilis and other guys to get rid of some obvious and some minor faults of the game. But without a responsible person of the Council this will never end.

Is it possible to get a clear statement or roadmap (with numbers and dates) from our FAF goverment in the near future?

Statistics: Posted by PsychoBoB — 22 Jun 2015, 16:39