Making Subs more usefull

[Zock]

What do you think of lowering destroyer torpedo dmg for all factions, and increase torp defence? Sea fights at t2 are Destroyer + Crusier now, it would add subs as third army part. Destroyer would be more a anti-land unit while subs still will take some time killing them. You can even put the Destroyer torp dmg very low and increase torp def by a hughe amount so subs are killing destroyer, but subs and destroyer kill subs.

Since we have a thread inflation anyway one more not including a balancing suggestion but just an idea wont hurt.

[FunkOff]

My opinion is that sub spam is overpowered as it stands because subs can kill everything that can kill them, except torpedo bombers, but Cybran T2 subs cannot be shot by torpedo bombers due to sonar stealth and Seraphim T3 subs have powerful AA, which owns torpedo bombers hard. Also, frigates can counter destroyers, so subs serve the vital role of countering frigates... frigates being absolutely helpless against subs.

Lastly, any buff to subs or nerf to anti-sub weapons could easily turn FA naval balance into what it was in original supcom.... basically T1 sub spam for sea superiority. In supcom, T1 subs absolutely demolished all other navy, so sea superiority was T1 sub spam just like air was T1 int spam (and later T3 asf spam). Simply seeing who can spam the most of the imba unit does't make for fun gameplay imo.

[Gowerly]

cybran t2 subs are incredibly powerful. Aeon ones a little less so. Yes, t1 subs are instakilled, but they are better used for raiding (killing off assisting engineers) than engaging directly in the naval fight.

[TAG_ROCK]

Talking about subs and frigs, how about lowering the speed just a bit so that frigs can run away from them? It makes sense dont you think? ( Thinking TA as usual although in TA subs do much more damage and kills a frig in 2 shots )

[Gunseng]

Aren't destroyers more expensive than T2 subs though? I'd say leave it as it is. Oh and T2 sub spam just use torp bombers or ground fire over them. They're annoying but not too hard to counter if you do it right.

[Zock]

Aren't destroyers more expensive than T2 subs though?

are they? from what i know destroyer can do everything what subs can do. Just better. Why should i make subs when i can have a destroyer? (T2, T1 is fine)

[Gunseng]

Well I haven't tested this to see if it's true or not and I'm pretty tired right now at 2:00am haha, but T2 Aeon destroyers are strong against subs, I'd rather just spam them than their crappy sub killer. However UEF's destroyers aren't that great, Cybran are pretty effective for their cost, and Seraphim are average (but work very well when mixed with certain units). Now what I'm asking though that I haven't tested is, will 2 subs take out a destroyer? Sure it does cost a little more BUT if one spams destroyers while the other spams sub killers, one will have more subs than destroyers for same cost overall and would that be enough to counter?

[Zock]

2 Cybran T2 subs get killed by a sera destroyer (weakest one after uef, who got torp boats) while he has 850 hp left, vs aeon ones 1600 hp left. An Aeon destroyer (strongest) can take out 3 cybran T2 subs but dies himself too. 10 T2 cybran Subs (with focus fire) vs 5 Aeon destroyer (without) means 3 Aeon destroyer with full hp left, all subs dead. They win vs sera ones though, with 5 left. But i dont know what happens if sera destroyer focus fire too.

So the question is if subs should be the best anti water unit instead of destroyers? Not by mutch, just nerf the torpedo dmg of destroyers a bit (sera maybe not) and give them more anti torpedo in compensation, so it needs (a lot) longer to kill them if you go subs only. Destroyer are good vs land and sea, why can a unit wich is only good vs sea not beeing a little better there? Anti torpedo is very powerfull, it should be possible to make destroyer + sub stronger then sub spam, so sub spam only wont be a problem. Subs only are also completly defensless vs air.

Its still just an idea, im myself not sure if it is a good idea. But if not, i want at least some reasons.

[Gunseng]

Thank you for the information, I thought they were more cost effective, guess not. I can agree that something should be done BUT I don't think torp defense should be buffed at all. I think the way torp defenses for all ships are perfect, and provide plenty of diversity among the factions. I would recommend either higher cost for destroyers or T2 subs get damage buff so they are more cost effective anti-naval units BUT testing is a must we don't want to make destroyers "one-purpose only" units. I could see them as bombardment and torp support. The other option though, nerf destroyer torp damage.

[Armmagedon]

subs are good because they are underwater and many air sea and lands units cant shoot them, t2 and t3 sea don't need be changed, the only unbalance that i see is the t1 frigates are more cheap that a t1 sub, and a t1 sub have too few hp,
i think that t1 subs should be more cheaper, or have more hp.
could be good nerf dps and do them more cheaps.
actually t1 subs are useless when players take destroyers