3609 T2 PDs imbalanced

Post here any idea about current FA Balance.
REMINDER : This is NOT a community balance forum. The thread ideas won't be used in a patch.
Forum rules REMINDER : This is NOT a community balance forum. The thread ideas won't be used in a patch.

Re: 3609 T2 PDs imbalanced

Postby Reddev32 » 11 Dec 2011, 15:06

Gunseng wrote:I was exploiting my opponents mistake of paying too much attention to their allies. Pesky allies always getting in the way of winning :roll:


that why they call them allies :P they are mean to be a pain LMAO
Reddev32 ~ Reddev GPGnet ~ Obliterating Wave ~ GPGnet ~ SC-Vanilla ~ FA ~ Supcom 2

GPGnet Vault
User avatar
Reddev32
Priest
 
Posts: 342
Joined: 26 Aug 2011, 17:59
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 3 times
FAF User Name: Reddev32

Re: 3609 T2 PDs imbalanced

Postby uberge3k » 11 Dec 2011, 15:23

Gunseng wrote:Until then could you lessen the cost of Seraphim and Cybran PDs to account for the free intel then? :D

PDs are already a bit too cheap IMO. I really don't want to see "firebase wars" become the de facto standard...

Gunseng wrote:I see PD creep all the time in games, mainly to hold or take ground or just make an opening to get units through. You have to remember this game isn't just about how efficiently you use mass but also exploiting your opponents mistakes. The games I won was because I was exploiting my opponents mistake of paying too much attention to their allies. Pesky allies always getting in the way of winning :roll:

The fact is that static defenses will *always* be less effective than the same mass put into units. This is critical to the balance of the game, as the second that static defenses become more efficient than units (or even close to their effectiveness), we have a very large problem as games will devolve into "he who moves first, loses" turtlefests.

If you exploited their inattention by using a PD creep, you could have exploited it even better by using other units. :)
Ze_PilOt wrote:If you want something to happen, do it yourself.
User avatar
uberge3k
Supreme Commander
 
Posts: 1034
Joined: 04 Sep 2011, 13:46
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 48 times
FAF User Name: TAG_UBER

Re: 3609 T2 PDs imbalanced

Postby Armmagedon » 11 Dec 2011, 20:42

uberge3k wrote:PDs are already a bit too cheap IMO. I really don't want to see "firebase wars" become the de facto standard...


+100000000

pds was buffed on 3603, I hate pds turtlers shits, the beam pds cant be dodged like the others and have a mega dps, thats hateful, i hate tutling festivals zomg
Armmagedon
Avatar-of-War
 
Posts: 135
Joined: 06 Sep 2011, 14:52
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 5 times
FAF User Name: ARMMAGEDON

Re: 3609 T2 PDs imbalanced

Postby Reddev32 » 11 Dec 2011, 20:46

Armmagedon wrote:
uberge3k wrote:PDs are already a bit too cheap IMO. I really don't want to see "firebase wars" become the de facto standard...


+100000000

pds was buffed on 3603, I hate pds turtlers shits, the beam pds cant be dodged like the others and have a mega dps, thats hateful, i hate tutling festivals zomg

berm pd's can be doged easy
Reddev32 ~ Reddev GPGnet ~ Obliterating Wave ~ GPGnet ~ SC-Vanilla ~ FA ~ Supcom 2

GPGnet Vault
User avatar
Reddev32
Priest
 
Posts: 342
Joined: 26 Aug 2011, 17:59
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 3 times
FAF User Name: Reddev32

Re: 3609 T2 PDs imbalanced

Postby Gunseng » 12 Dec 2011, 00:53

Well since Seraphim's T2 PD cost a little over 500 mass they only needs 3 (T2) or 10 (T1) kills to makeup for their cost. With Seraphim that's pretty good since the beams are so accurate.

I see what you mean by it being static but still that isn't too bad, the main problem I see is the players who build PD and just sit there and watch it shoot things....not build units....or even advance with ACU to take more ground....
Gunseng
Avatar-of-War
 
Posts: 69
Joined: 06 Sep 2011, 05:24
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Previous

Return to FA Balance Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest