Good stuff in Equilibrium, why not in main game? + lil rant

[Evildrew]

I read some of the equilibrium balance mod notes yesterday and had a look at 2 things that caught my interest as something that would make FAF a better game (unlike the recent mml, reclaim and many other previous doobious changes to the game.
I am referring to:
1. harms sinking to the bottom of the ocean
2. Units with factory feature being able to be built while microing the unit. Granted the optical look of how it is implemented looks a bit awkward but a problem so many said could not be solved in the past has a solution.
It warms my heart that we have competent techy people in our community who tackle problems with a mindset of finding a solution.
At the same time i look at how divided our community is with some people pushing their agenda of changing the game on an ongoing basis without having or at least not communicating a clear vision of how the end product should look like in concrete terms. Others try to oppose but ultimately are often ignored. There is no clear framework of what balance is and how it is objectively measured. People are only listened to if their points coincide with the opinion of those who pull the trigger. "Balance" is wishy washy concept based on opinions. Data and analysis is never presented to scrutinise.
Some say firebeetles are t2 and should take 2 slots on a transport despite their actual size in game being closer to a t1 unit. Those people might have been humiliated by a beetle snipe and therefore have formed this opinion. Whether size or tech should determine the number of clamps used was never open to debate because some people had made up their mind and their voice had more weight, not based on merit of the argument but on personal relationships between them and the ones with the keys.
The division i talk of is not just among people in power and those outside of it but also the division of knowledge. Someone implemented code for auto OC, which was at the same time the bug of acu being able to fire and build at the same time appeared. There was also no consideration that this would be an autodefence vs beetles when implemented. This lack of knowledge and approach over the last year or so has made FAF more monotone than ever before. At the same time good stuff like the 2 EQ things mentioned above and the fixed janus bomber from the pre august balance mod have not been implemented.
Why???

[PhilipJFry]

Other people not sharing your opinion doesn't mean they do stuff out of spite.

[Evildrew]

I am not saying they do phil, i am just asking why a fatboy or aircraft carrier that cancels a unit at 90% when you tell it to move is not as high on the list of what needs changing as MMLs which had no problem with how they worked? I think i am right to suggest that balance should be properly defined and the goals/priorities to be stated.

[PhilipJFry]

HARMS are actually on the list of things that may get changed but just letting them sink to the sea floor is probably not the best idea.
I'm 99% certain that i've suggested bringing in the mobile factory change from EQ.
As to the MMLs i don't get what your issue is with the non Cybran MML buffs. People didn't even bother making sera/aeon MMls before because they were just that terrible. It's not about making all the same but making all useful.

[zeroAPM]

What about the jamming fix?
Long story short, as of now once you visually scout one of the blips they disappear, forever. The fix makes so they reappear.
And no, you don't even need to toggle jamming off and on again for that.

[PhilipJFry]

The radar jamming change is a major buff for UEF navy and i personally wouldn't want it in unless we nerf them in some other way.
Also the radar jamming reappears in the current patch if you lose radar/sonar coverage of the frigate so saying it never reappears is not entirely correct.

[Evildrew]

I understand why harms on the ocean can be a problem. If is uneven it might shoot into the ground it would have to fire upwards but it would be a cool feature of them being better in deep water and weak in shallow water. I guess that needs to still be considered. What about janus bomber. Its targeting works correctly and as intended in pre august mods?

About that jamming i agree, your opponent pays to scout. So you clicking off/on is a fair trade off to restore the jamming effect. If you dont notice it has been scouted you should stay punished for not paying attention

[PhilipJFry]

HARMS being able to shoot up wouldn't be the issue that is fairly easy to pull off. The HARMS becoming OP is what concerns me more.

Can point out the targeting issue in the current patch with the Janus bomber? And if you have a fix for it make a PR on github since such a thing is not really balance related.

[Evildrew]

Harms always were susceptible to ground fire but that was not intended when the game was made. Cybran used to have weak battleships. That was the trade off from balance perspective and would have gone eith the sneaky ambush mantra associated with cybran. 11k hp might seem to make them op at 3 k mass but actually its not that much. Torpedo bombers are the most effective counter.
I will check out how naval units stack up vs harms on paper, when i have a few mins this afternoon.

[Farmsletje]

People always keep saying this isn't intended that isn't intended. Do you have actual evidence or is it just a wild guess?

But yeah i do agree. Overall i don't like EQ, but there are some pretty nice features i won't mind seeing implemented.

You musn't forget, however, that just like pd on land, harms function best when you combine them with units. And even though they can be damaged by groundfiring they can still be very strong if you rush them on smaller water maps or when you want to stall the enemy navy. Most of the time harms are accompanied by some sams, which, together with the harm HP makes them quite hard to kill, especially if you cant groundfire.

I'm not sure if the uef and sera cruiser can still hit the harm though.