Forged Alliance Forever Forged Alliance Forever Forums 2016-08-28T00:08:29+02:00 /feed.php?f=67&t=11506 2016-08-28T00:08:29+02:00 2016-08-28T00:08:29+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=11506&p=133678#p133678 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 submarine]]> Statistics: Posted by Lieutenant Lich — 28 Aug 2016, 00:08


]]>
2016-08-27T20:45:25+02:00 2016-08-27T20:45:25+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=11506&p=133662#p133662 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 submarine]]> Statistics: Posted by Mel_Gibson — 27 Aug 2016, 20:45


]]>
2016-08-27T03:27:34+02:00 2016-08-27T03:27:34+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=11506&p=133621#p133621 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 submarine]]> Statistics: Posted by Lieutenant Lich — 27 Aug 2016, 03:27


]]>
2016-08-20T15:16:18+02:00 2016-08-20T15:16:18+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=11506&p=133192#p133192 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 submarine]]>
Um ZiniZini wrote:
* It costs too much, mass to mass ratio's vs atlantis, coopers, barracudas, aeon destroyers etc. etc. it competes badly

You're the guy that started the torrent thread right? I like your work.

Statistics: Posted by Mel_Gibson — 20 Aug 2016, 15:16


]]>
2016-08-20T13:50:33+02:00 2016-08-20T13:50:33+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=11506&p=133186#p133186 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 submarine]]>
* It doesn't look cool
* It costs too much, mass to mass ratio's vs atlantis, coopers, barracudas, aeon destroyers etc. etc. it competes badly

These 2 points is my only problem with them, they look crap and are a bit too expensive for what they're able of

Statistics: Posted by Um ZiniZini — 20 Aug 2016, 13:50


]]>
2016-08-20T08:15:41+02:00 2016-08-20T08:15:41+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=11506&p=133179#p133179 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 submarine]]>
X --- Opening stage spreading engis 1-2min estimating size and distance of reclaim which is deciding how fast you can grow your early base

Then depending on water map or land map
X --- short early bomber and lab time hunting first engis, very critical phase ----> naval getting t1 air spam up and getting ready for drops on important mass spots early air battle tricky targets is to scout and kill enemy transports.
and so on ...
Last land t3 stage is when every not uef player got t2 arti vs fatboy attack and heavy shielded bases.
X --- This leads to nearly no abilities to attack and game jumping to the pure t3 arti and nuke phase which is the second last step in the game. If you go on exp spam that can either end up in mass donation or a lucky go which cant be stopped.

X --- Last step getting up anti air wall with sam templates or simply rows sending your exp to protect the border and building with the whole team super exp units 200k+ mass

All this is depending on the faction of course how they have to play their stages in the game. So that means 4 factions naval and land resulting in 8 rows of different game stages with a few tactics you can move to an earlier game stage. They are called "rush for something" or "cheese".

Maybe we should create something like this all together :)

Statistics: Posted by Iszh — 20 Aug 2016, 08:15


]]>
2016-08-20T00:07:10+02:00 2016-08-20T00:07:10+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=11506&p=133163#p133163 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 submarine]]>
JaggedAppliance wrote:
I'm not sure how weak or strong t3 subs are tbh (maybe a bit on the weak side imo) but there's no reason to make them in the situation nexus found himself in, he should just stay on t2 navy. Making subs vs cybran destros is just a bad idea, the torp defence is epic. He also never got enough subs together so the torp defence was too good and stopped almost all damage.

well having them getting snipe by torpedo bomber help also reducing the critical number of subs, as i said at the very beginning

Statistics: Posted by keyser — 20 Aug 2016, 00:07


]]>
2016-08-19T23:58:03+02:00 2016-08-19T23:58:03+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=11506&p=133162#p133162 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 submarine]]> Statistics: Posted by JaggedAppliance — 19 Aug 2016, 23:58


]]>
2016-08-19T23:53:57+02:00 2016-08-19T23:53:57+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=11506&p=133161#p133161 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 submarine]]> Statistics: Posted by Mel_Gibson — 19 Aug 2016, 23:53


]]>
2016-08-19T23:36:46+02:00 2016-08-19T23:36:46+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=11506&p=133159#p133159 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 submarine]]> Statistics: Posted by keyser — 19 Aug 2016, 23:36


]]>
2016-08-19T21:55:40+02:00 2016-08-19T21:55:40+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=11506&p=133153#p133153 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 submarine]]>
Also people usually don't spam T2 gunships against flak, why should someone spam T3 subs against cybran destroyers then?

Statistics: Posted by Viba — 19 Aug 2016, 21:55


]]>
2016-08-19T21:49:39+02:00 2016-08-19T21:49:39+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=11506&p=133151#p133151 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 submarine]]> As i said there were lot of other mistake been done, but imo the weakness of T3 subs done a lot in his lose.

But if you are so much convinced that T3 subs aren't under-powered then i let you abuse them, will see your pov after some time.

Statistics: Posted by keyser — 19 Aug 2016, 21:49


]]>
2016-08-19T21:33:29+02:00 2016-08-19T21:33:29+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=11506&p=133147#p133147 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 submarine]]>
Some possible reasons Nexus lost the game:
•Having zero intel on cybran stealth navy until very nice sera t1 scout stream which was too late
•Should have had total air control and not locking air prod while bombing all mex and build power or doing other useful things
•Pumping thousands of mass into asf and keeping them consistently in range of the only units on the map to kill them and not using them for other useful things.
•Having zero intel on navy for quite some time
•Looked like poor micro of quite a few torp bombers at one point, maybe not, can't be bothered watching replay again.
•Building a nuke that did absolutely nothing when he could have built a couple of battleships and/or mobile shields, which are very nice for naval engagements, especially if you're going subs.
•Possibly built nuke due to losing all bp on t2 navy hq to just a few frigs at main island
•Not building even some zthuees instead of nuke that did nothing
•Going t3 instead of winning the game with sera destros and air control (1 sera cruiser to shred all inties), at one point had like 6v2 destros and pulled back because of a couple of torp bombers
•Having zero intel on navy for quite some time
•Managing to inflict orders of magnitude less dps with sera destroyer that doesn't miss vs cybran destroyer which misses all the time because keeping it out range with zero intel
•Going subs first instead of battleships when subs don't have the range to back up without completely giving up reclaim field and his very oddly positioned t3 mex

Some possible reasons Nexus didn't lose the game:
•Because T3 subs suck

I'm a total noob but this seems patently obvious to me that t3 subs were not the main problem here. Either lichking (<3) has had too much of an effect on me or this is a bit mad.

Nobody has any problem with frigates being useful at t3 stage of the game. Why should t3 subs be auto win vs t2? Does anybody complain that spearheads suck if you try to spam them after losing your t2 advantage? T3 subs have clearly have their uses in certain situations, min 30 of that game was not one of them.

It really worries me if the game is going to be balanced purely on 1v1s where 1900s don't play well. Nexus obviously knows he made mistakes there, but i'd hope after some thought he doesn't pin it squarely on t3 subs being "trash".

Statistics: Posted by Mel_Gibson — 19 Aug 2016, 21:33


]]>
2016-08-19T20:37:53+02:00 2016-08-19T20:37:53+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=11506&p=133139#p133139 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 submarine]]>

Just watch this mini replay for understanding i think thats self explaining. This effekt made that he could not use the firepower of his t3 subs. You need to watch careful then you can see it even in the cast as well.
(Just a hint Salem and Mermaid have the 2nd best skill in the whole game for this ability. 1st place is cooper but it has far less hp. I know the post sounds arrogant thats just fun ;) )

5062269-Iszh.fafreplay

Statistics: Posted by Iszh — 19 Aug 2016, 20:37


]]>
2016-08-19T20:35:21+02:00 2016-08-19T20:35:21+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=11506&p=133138#p133138 <![CDATA[Re: Seraphim T3 submarine]]>
keyser wrote:
just watch this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kc7UR5qSXw

Giving up the reclaim was a mistake from nexus, and also not using T3 air to do damage. That aside if we focus on the naval micro then there were no obvious fail micro from nexus, that was ages ahead of his opponent.

pls just don't answer by nexus f*** up naval micro horribly. If he is not able to win a won game because he went for T3 subs then 99% of faf player can't either. then you can say that the unit is bad.

I just quickly glanced the replay, to me it looked like he lost the T2 naval fight, tried to save it by doing T3 subs while his opponent had nice amount of destroes left? By my logic that is usually a normal naval loss? Someone could compare mass invested into the subs and mozarts navy.

I mean you need to be able to spam a f*** ton of subs if you want to win after initial naval loss against destroyers. Unless someone shows me mass figures for the naval unit compositions after the initial loss I don't think this replay can be used in analyzing T3 sub effectiveness? To me the game just looks too "irregular" to claim any actual findings about unit x.

Statistics: Posted by Viba — 19 Aug 2016, 20:35


]]>