Patch 3704 Release Thread

[Mapsilva]

Hey Keyser

I have built many rapid arties and everyone of them was built with out a paragon meaning with full t3 eco i have enough mass and enrgy to build rapid arty without stalling depending on build power used, so no indirect nerf to para , my point is you dont need the paragon to build t4 rapid arty so why is the association made in the first place, is it because they belong to the same race, if so that makes no sense.How is this fair to uef players who would build a mavor which costs more mass and energy to build than a rapid arty but will take 3 times longer to build . This change is a big nerf to the other t4. If 1 aeon player against uef player and both build rapid and mavor with no para (and why would he build para if he can build rapid arty without it and 3 times faster than the mavor) , with the same build power, if the rapid is finished in 5 mins the mavor would take 15 mins while costing more mass and energy, how is this acceptable?

Dro, if you comment is directed at me, my problem is not with T3 arty taking longer to build but with the fact it will take longer than a T4 rapid arty?

[keyser]

the T4 rapid arty is clearly less good than mavor or scathis.
this will balance it a bit more, but tbh you will still mostly stall mass while building a T4, so it won't impact that much. I does only impact when you mass is unlimited (eg paragon) (read back what i wrote there)

[DDDX]

having actually read the patch notes...what's the purpose of giving Scathis 2000 range, from 300?
I mean....that was the challenge, building it relatively cheaply and keeping it stealthed/protected long enough for it to be able to come into range and do its thing.
All the while, that same 300 range means that the enemy actually had a chance of killing it, turning a doomed fight into a victorious one.

If your goal was to make it used more often...then why make it cost DOUBLE? Who's gonna make that thing?
Why is it mobile? It does not need to be mobile at all with 2000 range. With the speed it has, it sure as hell ain't gonna be dodging nukes...

You had a unit that contributed to pushing and front-line warfare...and you turned it into an ultimate turtling unit. No reason for that. What's the logic there?
I see shields not withstand Mavor hits...that's better I guess. Goes along nicely with your new pro-turtle position. Not bad, actually

As for increased build times on game enders...build time is never an issue when making them - resources are. In, dare I say 100% of cases, you stall mass, energy or both, while building them. Now, you remove a few engineers and you won't be stalling any more. So how does changing the build time help? Apart from when you already have a Paragon in place, so resources are actually not an issue...I guess that's the whole point.
Besides...build power is SOOO CHEAP! Just spit out 20 t1 engineers for almost no mass and there you have it - build power. Or just send the ones that were reclaiming trees and rocks - they are long done by now. A good player's last worry on the list is build power - he always has it.

Babysitting noobs with Eye energy storage..losing the ability to snipe a pgen surrounded by energy storages, thus making the enemy blind for a moment if those were his only ones... Why make this game less complex? Why dumb it down?

Effect on the Regen aura's affected unit is a nice touch - will be looking into the coding there

[Fomortiis]

A possible bug regarding the path: In the patch notes, the air staging facility energy consumption is listed as 30; while testing in-game (I let an ASF be damaged and ordered it to go repair) it seems the energy cost in 300 instead. Is this a typo in the patch notes or is it intentional?
Aside from that the unit icon still shows 2 tech markers instead on a single one (since the structure is now T1).

[FemtoZetta]

Sera T3 heavy arty installation shots are still bugged and persist when shooting shields and lag the game. Seen vs UEF shields.

[UnorthodoxBox]

Hey Keyser

I have built many rapid arties and everyone of them was built with out a paragon meaning with full t3 eco i have enough mass and enrgy to build rapid arty without stalling depending on build power used, so no indirect nerf to para , my point is you dont need the paragon to build t4 rapid arty so why is the association made in the first place, is it because they belong to the same race, if so that makes no sense.How is this fair to uef players who would build a mavor which costs more mass and energy to build than a rapid arty but will take 3 times longer to build . This change is a big nerf to the other t4. If 1 aeon player against uef player and both build rapid and mavor with no para (and why would he build para if he can build rapid arty without it and 3 times faster than the mavor) , with the same build power, if the rapid is finished in 5 mins the mavor would take 15 mins while costing more mass and energy, how is this acceptable?

Dro, if you comment is directed at me, my problem is not with T3 arty taking longer to build but with the fact it will take longer than a T4 rapid arty?

The salvation is never really meant to be built before the paragon. Not even 2 salvations is as good as a mavor. This is why they have the lower build time, so they can be made after the paragon is finished and actually compete with a mavor. As it stands, a mavor still consistently beats a paragon all by itself when both are finished around the same time. Salvations should be seen as an upgrade to the paragon, instead of a game ender (which they are not, 2 emissaries are a lot of the time better than a salvation.) Cost is a decent way to understand this. A paragon is less than 50k more mass than a salvation. So you can either save 49k mass and have an arty that is pretty bad by itself, or spend an extra 49k mass and be able to build 10 salvations in 5 minutes. If the build time was increased on the salvation, the paragon would just be pretty much a lot worse, since you can have 10k mass income and the new economy throttle becomes build power.

[LabPunk]

As it stands, a mavor still consistently beats a paragon all by itself when both are finished around the same time.

Have you sandboxed this?
1 Paragon vs 1 Mavor, with or without shields.

[UnorthodoxBox]

As it stands, a mavor still consistently beats a paragon all by itself when both are finished around the same time.

Have you sandboxed this?
1 Paragon vs 1 Mavor, with or without shields.

No I prefer to make stuff up and hope nobody asks me if I am sure about what I said

[Freedomfighter]

lol it's gonna take 5+ minutes to build a paragon with 33 t3 engies.

[FunkOff]

Holy shit, why did Cybran cruisers get a huge buff? They are OP now.

Speaking of OP cybran navy, their frigate hasn't gotten a nerf like it needs. Their frigate is both by far the cheapest whilst also being the best with the strongest anti-air.