Blaze/Obsidian balance reshuffle

[Elusive]

Goal: Make the Blaze and Obsidian both useful units so that they both can be used instead of relying entirely on Auroras and Harbingers, increasing player choice and effective unit diversity.

Proposed balance changes:
Rework/balance Blaze so that it plays as a comparable equivalent of other factions heavy T2 land unit instead of a hover tank, while still keeping its hover ability. Enabling it to be a little weaker than other factions dedicated T2 heavy land, but a little stronger then other factions T2 hover tank. Aeon are relative experts on hover technology so it would make sense that their hover tank would be better then other factions hover tanks, but as a hover tank it would also make sense for its land ability to be worse then a tank designed entirely on land combat.

Move Obsidian to T3 and buff in magnitude appropriate to for the role of a T3 heavy land. The Harbinger will still play as the main combat unit of T3 still, while the Obsidian will fill the role of an anti exp/base heavy unit (think: Loyalists and Bricks. Both useful, but for slightly different reasons).

[Apofenas]

Goal: Make the Blaze and Obsidian both useful units so that they both can be used instead of relying entirely on Auroras and Harbingers, increasing player choice and effective unit diversity.

They both have their roles. Obsidian is a unit against standard tanks; Blaze is a unit against range bots. Obsidian is strong enough to kill 2 Pillars being 10% cheaper. Nobody just builds this unit because it is 1)Expensive; 2) Has range of t1 unit and bad speed; 3) You have OProras to stay more on t1 and OPHarbs to get T3 earlier.
Blaze is not being built for one very funny reason: range bots aren't being built. These cheap 4.3 speed units with 23 range are very good at catching Range bots. N FAF community mostly ignores them these days because it is easier to get t2 tanks instead than babysit bots. There is no problem with Blaze, there is problem with range bots. Try for once Hoplites against aeon and you will likely see gun-com and blazes countering them.

Proposed balance changes:
Rework/balance Blaze so that it plays as a comparable equivalent of other factions heavy T2 land unit instead of a hover tank, while still keeping its hover ability. Enabling it to be a little weaker than other factions dedicated T2 heavy land, but a little stronger then other factions T2 hover tank. Aeon are relative experts on hover technology so it would make sense that their hover tank would be better then other factions hover tanks, but as a hover tank it would also make sense for its land ability to be worse then a tank designed entirely on land combat.

Aeon t2 hover tank is already better than any other hover in game because of its range and ability to take hover shield with it. You just can't make Blaze as strong as for example Pillar because that makes them stronger than frigates in a direct combat. Pillar has same HP/mass and more DPS/mass than Thunderhead class. How would you conter such t2 hover tanks if your most efficient naval unit (dedicated to counter it) is weaker and can't follow them on land? Add the fact you have hover from t1 and get hover shield on t2. There was a lot of opposite work in past to prevent hover being stronger than frigates and quite francly there are maps like Four corners or Wilderness where hover domintates navy.

It's not very good to have your main land unit also being hover. Sad experience from Nomad faction.

Move Obsidian to T3 and buff in magnitude appropriate to for the role of a T3 heavy land. The Harbinger will still play as the main combat unit of T3 still, while the Obsidian will fill the role of an anti exp/base heavy unit (think: Loyalists and Bricks. Both useful, but for slightly different reasons).

Wut? What did i just read?

Edit: Forgot to mention. Fixed in Equilibrium. Gotta steal that from Exotic_Retart while he reads all the stuff and writes the comment.

[Ithilis_Quo]

If you want more usefull units where can combine more stuff together then you shoudl realy try equilibrium.