Mr Pinguin wrote:
Normally when people play a game a lot, they find imbalances a lot, and then they want to see those imbas fixed. That's why very active games often come with frequent balance patching early on, so long as the devs can support it. Normally communities support that kind of thing. In the case of SupCom FA, GPG made some early changes, but then they left things at 3599 for a long time, and I think most people got used to the status quo. They got used to some tactics and strategies being overly/easily dominant, and some other units and tactics being left irrelevant and never used by people who really knew the game.
Then we finally got 3603, and I guess some people see it as special because it was released by GPG..
It is "special" because it is effectively the last guidepost saying "here's what the developers intended".
It is also "special" because a large number of the top players got together and figured out what needed changing to create the 3603 patch mod for GPGNet. It went through a *ton* of "QA" with the community over a period of ~2 years and many people seem to forget that.
Mr Pinguin wrote:
But there's nothing sacrosanct about 3603. If it was just another patch that came out a few weeks (or even months) after 3599, then I think the active community would still clamor for updates and further improvements.
While debatable, I don't disagree with the premise. If something needs improving, then by all means we should improve it. The problem is, there is currently no way of determining what, exactly, needs improving as the community can't get consensus on much and there is no balance team created yet to find that consensus through rigorous testing of very specific issues.
Mr Pinguin wrote:
Some of the 3603 changes made by GPG were derived from some thorough discussion by the FA fanbase, and some of the changes seemed to be pretty arbitrary.
A number of the changes in 3603 were clearly for the worse, not for the better. So even though 3603 was an overall improvement (imo), and even though you guys have made some minor tweaks since then, it's still clearly the case that there are woefully underpowered and underused units. Some of that isn't even subjective, some of it is just a matter of math.
Again, it's highly debatable and subjective as everyone has their own personal opinion of what the balance should look like. That's why we have this forum - so parties that are interested may post their opinions instead of clogging up chat and every other thread with it.
Regarding the point about math... I've yet to be convinced by any form of math as there is a massive double standard when it comes to proposing ideas. Look at Arma's thread on T2 gunships. He mathematically proved that they are too strong, yet was ignored. But even flakier math (eg, "sera destroyer is UP! No I don't have any replays to prove it, nor am I taking into account that they have lots of other really good units, but since EVERYONE (read: me) knows that sera is so UP I don't need to prove it - and if you challenge me you need to prove your claims instead! Whee inverse burden of proof!") should be used instead?! If so, I am mathematically proving that Auroras have infinite mass-effectiveness due to their ability to kite, and thus Aeon needs inverse-regen (all their units slowly die). 
(for those paying attention, you'll see that the next step is for that last sentence of mine to be taken out of context and used as a serious balance idea )
People seem to be forgetting Pilot's rules (and, really, that Pilot is the ultimate authority who decides what goes!):
Name of this forum wrote:
FA Balance Ideas
Post here any idea about current FA Balance.
REMINDER : This is NOT a community balance forum. The thread ideas won't be used in a patch.
How the balancing will be done? wrote:
- This forum is NOT a base for balance changes. His only purpose is to drive away balance discussions from chat, and why not give some ideas. It is NOT a representation of what we are planning for FA.
- No balance changes are planned until all the bugs we can fix are fixed. The balance must be done from a fixed versions, in order to not make changes based on bugs (for exemple, the aeon Destroyer missing all the time, bombers missing first drop, the lasers missing targets and being invisible).
- There is currently NO balance team, and it will be none until the bugs are fixed.
- Once the bugs are fixed, a balance team will be formed. A more appropriate name will be "Balance testing team", as their job will be to test changes and not proposing them.
- If you want to apply as a balance tester, be aware that is a serious (as serious it can be for a game) position. You will have to provide a certain amount of replays using the testing balance mod each week.
- The biggest changes will be for currently useless units, like SCU or massfabs, and, later, making the game more easy for newcomers (for example, ease the mass storage process and revamp the adjacency bonuses to be more logic and viable).
- The others changes will fall under the scope of the "5 % rule". No change will goes beyond that range. That rule can be broken if it's really necessary and heavily tested.
Read this post before creating a new thread! wrote:
Here is some simple rules to keep sanity on this forum :
- Posting replays proving your claims help a lot. In fact, it is mandatory.
- Don't create a new thread on a subject already covered by another thread.
- You are NOT part of the balancing team. The balance team have the rights to ignore or check your claims.
- Any flame or troll will not be tolerated. Respect the ideas of others, and let the moderators moderate and the balance team members balance.
The way I see it, people are instead:
- Acting like the balance team is comprised of whomever posts the most
- Acting like said balance team is not only already official, but has free reign to change whatever they feel like
- Refusing to take the time to create any replays to provide proof of any claims (I think there have been exactly two replays used to prove a point in the 100s of threads here... "rules are made to be broken"? 
)
- Making massive changes to random things which aren't covered in any way under those guidelines (5% rule? "oh, that's stupid so I'm ignoring it" 
)
- And, worst of all, trying to railroad untested, arbitrarily-decided-by-a-small-group-of-people-who-are-not-in-the-balance-team changes into a new patch. Thankfully pilot isn't going to let this happen.
Let me be clear: I am not against any change ever occurring. I am against hastily-thrown-together changes by two or three people who are not part of the official balance team that Ze_PilOt will manage, and am strongly against the attitude of "I know better than Ze_PilOt so I'm ignoring his rules" that I so frequently see.
The simple fact of the matter is that there is no consensus on what currently needs to be changed. If there was something on the scale of, say, Restorers, where it was universally agreed that they were broken and needed changing, then by all means, go for it. However, if that was the case, I'm confident that Ze_PilOt would have already taken steps towards it.
Since it's not, are we supposed to take the word of the loudest voices on an idea/theorycrafting forum, and force it on the rest of the community (the majority of which doesn't even read these forums?!). THAT kind of recklessness is what would kill off the community even faster, IMO. Ze_PilOt clearly shares this sentiment, if you reread his many stickies and warnings in this section.
TLDR version:
FAF is Ze_PilOt's work. We should respect his wishes. I frankly don't care if tomorrow he decides that the balance will be decided by a random number generator and that everyone must type all sentences backwards in chat or be banned, as he has every right to do so. It's his project, and he's free to run it however he feels like. He doesn't owe any of us anything, and we should be thanking him for spending his time working on FAF instead of endlessly trying to grab power and "enjoy the ride while it lasts" and, more generally, try to make "My specific version of what I personally think FA should look and play like" the New Official Patch.
If you don't like his decisions, you're free to leave at any time. Fact is, without him, we wouldn't have an FAF balance to bicker about in the first place.Statistics: Posted by uberge3k — 21 Nov 2011, 13:33
]]>
1k - 1,k HP/ 60 DPS / 3- 12)
. (1100 HP/0 DPS/ speed 3-10 (as slow as a bomber)) (give UEF gunship hook 2 transport slots so it could carry a sparky or 2 mecharines or one mecharine and a scout. you get the idea