I like to play with boats a lot on Setons, so forgive my ignorance, but I cannot make sense of this change. I've seen vague mutters that it's OP on 1v1 or something. I would hope it is not controversial to say Cybran have by far the worst naval aa capabilities except from at the t1 stage/very early t2. They easily have the worst all round cruiser for aa, not because it is slightly slower at killing stuff but because it can be destroyed almost immediately and effectively by torps and gunships. No other faction is at such a disadvantage. Aeon have infinite health cruisers with properly microd mobile shields. UEF have that giant floating infinite health condom to protect their cruisers, and while sera cruisers are also as vulnerable to torps as cybran until late t3 shields, they are heavily compensated by being immune to gunships and probably mutually killing all torps sent. Whereas with cybran cruisers there will still be plenty of torps to carry on killing the rest of your navy. It's higher HP is irrelevant because it still dies to 4 torps. Not to even mention that Aeon and Sera can have 10+ floaty flak for the cost of a cruiser which are immune to torps, and for all intents and purposes gunships too.
Yes, cybran pwn inties and t1 bombers better than anyone else at the start. But once t2 hits they just don't have the tools to compensate against a heavy air investment. In theory, one could build no navy and easily torp cybran out of the water in a way that you just can't do to any other faction. And given that their frigates are possibly just as important for aa as their cruisers, this changes just makes it even worse. What am I missing here? Where is the OP? How does it even come close to t2 floaty flak and shields?
I know people pretend there is 1v1 (woooo cybran op!!!) and maps other than Setons. I hope i'm wrong but I see cybran being almost completely unplayable in any slot on Setons (perhaps slight exaggeration). This saddens me.
(disclaimer: these opinions are my own and not of the Setons community)