Forged Alliance Forever

Re: balance changes I would like to see edited as of 7/11/11

2011-11-11T05:31:35+02:00

Yeah, I've already posted (several times?) that T1 frigs beat T2 torp launchers per cost, but you can be forgiven for not having read/memorized each and every one of my long-winded posts.

I tested T1 frigs and subs vs all of their T2 and T3 naval counters when the 3603 patch was released. What I found was that they perform surprisingly well (even vs Destros). The biggest problems with frigs is that huge masses of them are hard to manage.. I should add that this is yet another place where UEF has a distinct naval advantage. The Thunderhead frigate's secondary ability (the jamming) is incredibly useful at sea because it can nullify long ranged attacks from Yathsous and surface ships. Combined with the solid DPS/cost and HP/cost of frigates, a UEF player has a great advantage available to them by simply spamming T1 frigs even as they tech up to T2 and T3.

noobymcnoobcake wrote:
Torpedo defence is almost useless on all ships. It's because every anti torpedo goes for the same torpedo then self death destucts when the first one gets there. If this was chaned so they intelegently targeted stuff and so only 1 anti torp was fired at a torpedo instead of 50 it would be much better.

I think you're mistaken nooby. This sounds like you're describing the way the Seraphim and Aeon anti-torps work, but from what I've observed it seems that the UEF Cooper/Valiant and the Cybran Salem both use a 'flare' type of torp defense that can actually redirect multiple incoming torpedoes simultaneously. This is part of the reason why Coopers can be so powerful. If you stack enough Coopers tightly together, they can completely nullify the torps coming in from a Megalith. Fortunately for the non UEF players, Coopers tend to spread out enough that they don't cover each other very well with their anti-torp.

noobymcnoobcake wrote:
I never knew they outranged sera and UEF destroyers. I suppose this is because there cruises have missile launchers. So the sera can just get 2 torpedo launchers and a few TMD and hold off the navy until they get T3 subs? or do T2 torpedo
Launchers get cost effectively killed by UEF destoyers?

I haven't tested it recently, but IIRC every faction's destroyers will lose to T2 torp launchers (per cost) so long as they're within range (which means that they do counter Seraphim and UEF, yes).

Also I agree that torpedo launchers are almost always killed by ships and not subs so anti torpedo is almost useless. Buff hp to cybran level and keep anti torp I think. I'll add this to
My list Of changes.

I think maybe the Seraphim should get a small DPS buff too. (The Cybran Nanite launcher has a DPS of 187.5, the rest have a DPS of 150. Maybe the Seraphim should get bumped up to 160-165?)

Statistics: Posted by Mr Pinguin — 11 Nov 2011, 05:31

Re: balance changes I would like to see edited as of 7/11/11

2011-11-10T15:15:46+02:00

TESTED.

9 frigates vs 2 t2 torp launchers. Frigates win.
But 10 frig + 2 t2 torp vs 19 frigs, the group of 19 frigates loses.

And as expected the torp boats are owned by the t2 launchers. It's epic rape

Statistics: Posted by -_V_- — 10 Nov 2011, 15:15

Re: balance changes I would like to see edited as of 7/11/11

2011-11-10T15:01:12+02:00

First are we still talking about t2 torps launchers ?

Second, i don't see why more than 2 lauchers wouldn't be effective enough. As long as the 2:1 ratio is respected (matching equal mass costs) , the uef and sera destros lose to those. 10 destros will still lose to 20 torp launcher if positioned properly. Didn't test it, but that's only logical.

My guess is that t2 torp launchers rape frigates, but I didn't test it yet. I will in a second. I guess from the stats that torp boats aren't effective either against the t2 launchers but i will test it too. But 50 range, 900mass cost, only 1500 hp. That doesn't sound really good against the t2 launchers, even if they have great anti torps defenses.

Statistics: Posted by -_V_- — 10 Nov 2011, 15:01

Re: balance changes I would like to see edited as of 7/11/11

2011-11-10T14:48:29+02:00

Torpedo defence is useful 1v1 or 2v2 but any more than that it don't affect the outcome of the battle much. Also how mass effective are torpedo launchers bs frigates. I imagine these are the best counter to them for UEF and sera. Or it could be torpedo boats as there anti torpedo is the 2nd best in the game and reloads fast enough to stop half the torpedoes from the launcher.

Statistics: Posted by noobymcnoobcake — 10 Nov 2011, 14:48

Re: balance changes I would like to see edited as of 7/11/11

2011-11-10T11:30:04+02:00

noobymcnoobcake wrote:
Torpedo defence is almost useless on all ships.

Hum it's one of the big advantage of the cyb destro, which despite the low HP, is a terrific destroyer compared to the others

I never knew they outranged sera and UEF destroyers.

Hum they don't. Same range. But equal mass, t2 torps launchers win against uef and sera destros.

Statistics: Posted by -_V_- — 10 Nov 2011, 11:30

Re: balance changes I would like to see edited as of 7/11/11

2011-11-10T10:22:13+02:00

Torpedo defence is almost useless on all ships. It's because every anti torpedo goes for the same torpedo then self death destucts when the first one gets there. If this was chaned so they intelegently targeted stuff and so only 1 anti torp was fired at a torpedo instead of 50 it would be much better.

I never knew they outranged sera and UEF destroyers. I suppose this is because there cruises have missile launchers. So the sera can just get 2 torpedo launchers and a few TMD and hold off the navy until they get T3 subs? or do T2 torpedo
Launchers get cost effectively killed by UEF destoyers?

Also I agree that torpedo launchers are almost always killed by ships and not subs so anti torpedo is almost useless. Buff hp to cybran level and keep anti torp I think. I'll add this to
My list Of changes.

Statistics: Posted by noobymcnoobcake — 10 Nov 2011, 10:22

Re: balance changes I would like to see edited as of 7/11/11

2011-11-10T06:15:00+02:00

FunkOff wrote:
I think it's balanced considering the torpedo defense and the higher DPS vs the UEF one. Further, torpedo defenses are very niche weapons... only really strong against T1 ships and T1/T2 subs. All T2 ships out-range them except seraphim/uef destroyers and even T3 sub hunters out-range them. The DPS is most important, I think, because they prevent against bum-rushes against your longer-ranged weaponry, like SMS and battleships.

Hmmm? The Cybran Torp launcher has better DPS, but the Seraphim DPS is (basically) identical to the UEF. (150.75 vs 150)

Anyway, I agree with you that they're a niche tool, but the ability to hold off UEF and Seraphim Destros with a torp defense isn't trivial in the situations where you need it. Plus, even though torp defense is outranged by various other naval units, for the time it's alive it acts as a potent deterrent. This makes its HP critical vs all destroyers and torp bombers and gunships and anything else that might be used to bring it down. Now that frigates have been buffed (and they're even cost-effective vs T2 torp launchers), I think it'd be nice if the Seraphim T2 torp launcher was at least competitive.

The UEF launcher has 33% more HP for the exact same price, and the torp defense on the Sera launcher is (imho) basically useless.

I'd also add: the Seraphim arguably need the ability to stall and turtle at T2 more than any other faction because their naval strength doesn't appear until T3.

Statistics: Posted by Mr Pinguin — 10 Nov 2011, 06:15

Re: balance changes I would like to see edited as of 7/11/11

2011-11-10T05:37:04+02:00

Mr Pinguin wrote:
I know this is a relatively trivial balance issue, but I think the Sera need a buff on their T2 torp launchers.

GPG decided to make the Sera T2 Torp launcher unique by giving it torpedo defense and then 'balancing' this advantage by giving it lower HP. I'm all for faction diversity, but the problem is that T2 torpedo launchers are very rarely attacked by torpedoes and they're very often attacked by air-to-surface or surface-to-surface fire (where HP counts and torp defense is useless).

I think it's balanced considering the torpedo defense and the higher DPS vs the UEF one. Further, torpedo defenses are very niche weapons... only really strong against T1 ships and T1/T2 subs. All T2 ships out-range them except seraphim/uef destroyers and even T3 sub hunters out-range them. The DPS is most important, I think, because they prevent against bum-rushes against your longer-ranged weaponry, like SMS and battleships.

Statistics: Posted by FunkOff — 10 Nov 2011, 05:37

Re: balance changes I would like to see edited as of 7/11/11

2011-11-10T05:29:12+02:00

I know this is a relatively trivial balance issue, but I think the Sera need a buff on their T2 torp launchers.

GPG decided to make the Sera T2 Torp launcher unique by giving it torpedo defense and then 'balancing' this advantage by giving it lower HP. I'm all for faction diversity, but the problem is that T2 torpedo launchers are very rarely attacked by torpedoes and they're very often attacked by air-to-surface or surface-to-surface fire (where HP counts and torp defense is useless).

So the easiest fix would be to buff their HP, but if anyone has any other creative ideas, that might be nice too.

(FYI: Sera T2 torp launcher =1080 Mass, 4800 HP. UEF T2 Torp launcher = 1080 Mass, 6400 HP).
http://www.faforever.com/faf/unitsDB/su ... bp=XSB2205
http://www.faforever.com/faf/unitsDB/su ... bp=UEB2205

The Aeon has 6100 HP (for no apparent reason), and the Cybran only has 5800 HP but it has higher DPS.

Statistics: Posted by Mr Pinguin — 10 Nov 2011, 05:29

Re: balance changes I would like to see edited as of 7/11/11

2011-11-09T10:52:59+02:00

noobymcnoobcake wrote:
-_V_- wrote:Funny you say that cause you want to make mass fabs a good eco solution

Not a good Eco solution but something that is occasionally used. At the moment they might as well not be there as they are used so little. If they were ocasonaly used in team games on larger maps would be better

They are used ...once all mexes have been upgraded to t3 with mass storages, especially in games that are expected to last.

Statistics: Posted by -_V_- — 09 Nov 2011, 10:52

Re: balance changes I would like to see edited as of 7/11/11

2011-11-09T10:34:24+02:00

Fair enough. TBH, I forgot all about what SC2 has.

Statistics: Posted by Plasma_Wolf — 09 Nov 2011, 10:34

Re: balance changes I would like to see edited as of 7/11/11

2011-11-09T10:18:49+02:00

-_V_- wrote:
Funny you say that cause you want to make mass fabs a good eco solution

Not a good Eco solution but something that is occasionally used. At the moment they might as well not be there as they are used so little. If they were ocasonaly used in team games on larger maps would be better

Statistics: Posted by noobymcnoobcake — 09 Nov 2011, 10:18

Re: balance changes I would like to see edited as of 7/11/11

2011-11-09T00:49:32+02:00

Funny you say that cause you want to make mass fabs a good eco solution

Statistics: Posted by -_V_- — 09 Nov 2011, 00:49

Re: balance changes I would like to see edited as of 7/11/11

2011-11-09T00:24:44+02:00

you got hover shileds for the shipyard. We dont want SC2 here.

Statistics: Posted by noobymcnoobcake — 09 Nov 2011, 00:24

Re: balance changes I would like to see edited as of 7/11/11

2011-11-08T23:51:48+02:00

And who cares about shield on shipyard anyway ?

Statistics: Posted by -_V_- — 08 Nov 2011, 23:51