5129 replies to this topic

[Handepsilon]

Indestructible timed Raven, meaning it runs out.

Also, I wouldn't consider Satellite hack a High Reward tech building. Most of the time, players are capable of clearing the whole map's visibility within mid-late game, rendering it moot.

I'd have to agree a bit on the Gap Generator part though

[GameMaster0000]

Side thought: If someone sabotages your radar while you have a tech satellite hack centre captured, does your radar persist or reset?

It's will reset for 1-2 Second, then all map will reveal again.

[FELITH]

about Gap Generator. maybe give Gap a weapon that can kill the support power.

edit: oh and the Sensor Tower as well. don't know is it doable tho.

 

I think Tech Secret Lab need changes as well. sometimes I got the monster tank from the faction I play. it really is balanced breaking.

Edited by FELITH, 19 July 2018 - 11:12 AM.

[Drezalnor]

about Gap Generator. maybe give Gap a weapon that can kill the support power.
edit: oh and the Sensor Tower as well. don't know is it doable tho.
 
I think Tech Secret Lab need changes as well. sometimes I got the monster tank from the faction I play. it really is balanced breaking.

I have proposed a solution for this-have a look at one of my posts on page 176 of this thread.

[BlackAbsence]

Defences that aren't dependant on power are nice to have, especially at T1.

The defences fitting this category we currently have are as shown:

- Pillbox

- Gun turret

- Sentry gun

- Battle bunker

As you can see, Epsilon and Foehn lack in this department.

Which is why I'd like to suggest some things.

 

First let's talk about Epsilon. Fortunately, they have the ever-so-easy up-grade-able bio reactor to support their early-game gatling cannons, which they are dependant on at the time. They also get the T1.5-ish tank bunker. However, the tank bunker requires a lot of space and its occupant can get jet-struck easily. I suggest taking away the jet vulnerability (despite it being a cool feature, imo). Maybe some other slight buffs, too. That's the only change I think Epsilon really needs here.

 

Foehn, on the other hand, have it the worst: Once they reach low power, it takes them longer to get back on-line due to their method of power generation in bulk. Which is why I recommend walling the windtraps. That's the problem. Now here's my idea to help them out in this department: The castle battlement. The castle battlement properties are as shown:

- This replaces the bastion wall.

- If two castle battlements are placed adjacent to each other, the space between them will become walled... like how regular walls work.

- The cost of a castle battlement is $200.

- Two infantry can garrison the castle battlement.

- The castle battlement itself is fairly sturdy / much stronger than their connecting walls.

- Their walls are twice as strong than the walls of other sides.

Edited by BlackAbsence, 19 July 2018 - 07:00 PM.

[Divine]

The Tank Bunker is a piece of crap, it has always been, and always will be. Takes 2x2 cells and only crap vehicles fit in it unless we count mind control victims and crate goodies. Takes armory tab AND vehicle tab production to make it effective, as the above poster said tanks are easily jet-struck, but for example Desolators and Eradicators can also kill the occupying vehicle, if my memory serves me well. Not that it matters, since the Tank Bunker itself is made of a cutting edge alloy of wet tissue paper, chewing gum, and porcelain, and gets wrecked by pretty much anything that has anti-building firepower above tier 1. The contrast is especially sharp if we compare it to the Soviet Battle Bunker, which is while similarly fragile, at least has devastating firepower against ground units when filled with infantry - filling it requires infantry production, instead of hogging the War Factory.

[StolenTech]

in a faction all about mobility tank bunker simply has no place, unless it gives a range bonus that's actually worth something. 

[Divine]

in a faction all about mobility tank bunker simply has no place, unless it gives a range bonus that's actually worth something. 

Ironic that it is exactly the Scorpion Cell that's got a support power to spawn the said useless structure. PsiCorps is also somewhat about mobility on a tactical level with amphibious units, but HQ is closer to being brute force (literally). IMHO the Tank Bunker needs the range bonus you suggest, but also a change to its armor type so it won't be torn apart in seconds by anti-building units. It lacks the firepower of a filled Battle Bunker, it is weak against jets and some other weapons and it takes vehicles to occupy it, I think it should make up for all these drawbacks with a lot more durability.

[Handepsilon]

Foehn, on the other hand, have it the worst: Once they reach low power, it takes them longer to get back on-line due to their method of power generation in bulk. Which is why I recommend walling the windtraps. That's the problem. Now here's my idea to help them out in this department: The castle battlement. The castle battlement properties are as shown:
- This replaces the bastion wall.
- If two castle battlements are placed adjacent to each other, the space between them will become walled... like how regular walls work.
- The cost of a castle battlement is $200.
- Two infantry can garrison the castle battlement.
- The castle battlement itself is fairly sturdy / much stronger than their connecting walls.
- Their walls are twice as strong than the walls of other sides.

 
...garrisoned infantry in a wall sounds utterly broken to have on Foehn's side.... Haven't you seen what a Sonic Emitter can do? It's the only defense that can destroy an entire infantry regiment in one shot
 
 

in a faction all about mobility tank bunker simply has no place, unless it gives a range bonus that's actually worth something.

...but IT DOES GIVE RANGE BONUS. Haven't you noticed the awesome range of bunkered Stinger in my Dissonance? Though I usually just bunker up Gattling Tanks and Stingers, the former being a cheaper power-free Gattling Cannon, and the latter being a stationary anti-spy

Edited by Handepsilon, 20 July 2018 - 03:15 AM.

[BlackAbsence]

 

Foehn, on the other hand, have it the worst: Once they reach low power, it takes them longer to get back on-line due to their method of power generation in bulk. Which is why I recommend walling the windtraps. That's the problem. Now here's my idea to help them out in this department: The castle battlement. The castle battlement properties are as shown:
- This replaces the bastion wall.
- If two castle battlements are placed adjacent to each other, the space between them will become walled... like how regular walls work.
- The cost of a castle battlement is $200.
- Two infantry can garrison the castle battlement.
- The castle battlement itself is fairly sturdy / much stronger than their connecting walls.
- Their walls are twice as strong than the walls of other sides.

 
...garrisoned infantry in a wall sounds utterly broken to have on Foehn's side.... Haven't you seen what a Sonic Emitter can do? It's the only defense that can destroy an entire infantry regiment in one shot
 

How is that broken? It's less "OP" than battle bunkers behind walls and Foehn infantry is expensive. it's $1000 just to have one with 2 knightframes in one and it probably still wouldn't be as good as a sonic emitter. Meaning you're getting less damage for your money. You calling that broken is just dumb. The main potential with these are their versatility and power-free dependency (something Foehn painfully lacks).

Edited by BlackAbsence, 20 July 2018 - 05:39 AM.

[Drezalnor]

Foehn, on the other hand, have it the worst: Once they reach low power, it takes them longer to get back on-line due to their method of power generation in bulk. Which is why I recommend walling the windtraps. That's the problem. Now here's my idea to help them out in this department: The castle battlement. The castle battlement properties are as shown:
- This replaces the bastion wall.
- If two castle battlements are placed adjacent to each other, the space between them will become walled... like how regular walls work.
- The cost of a castle battlement is $200.
- Two infantry can garrison the castle battlement.
- The castle battlement itself is fairly sturdy / much stronger than their connecting walls.
- Their walls are twice as strong than the walls of other sides.

 
...garrisoned infantry in a wall sounds utterly broken to have on Foehn's side.... Haven't you seen what a Sonic Emitter can do? It's the only defense that can destroy an entire infantry regiment in one shot

How is that broken? It's less "OP" than battle bunkers behind walls and Foehn infantry is expensive. it's $1000 just to have one with 2 knightframes in one and it probably still wouldn't be as good as a sonic emitter. Meaning you're getting less damage for your money. You calling that broken is just dumb. The main potential with these are their versatility and power-free dependency (something Foehn painfully lacks).

Hmmm...the idea of a Garrison Wall for Foehn is a little strange,though not broken as Handepsilon says.Though I do agree that Foehn walls ought to be the tankiest among the four.

Besides,Tank Bunkers are complete BS.I have not seen a more pathetic defensive structure until now.

[Handepsilon]

We're talking about spammable Knightframe and Lancer garrison. KNIGHTFRAME and LANCER. The same T1 that has the most damage inside and outside garrison. Even one of them can easily wreck T1 stuff (also, Knightframe is splash and Lancer is bouncing, go figure). Do I really need to remind you how slow and short-ranged infantry inside a garrison adapts with the faster and longer ones, or how some corners might be unreachable due to the square nature of usual walling?

 

How often do you lose power aside from trying to surround your base with Signal Inhibitor anyways?

 

 

Besides,Tank Bunkers are complete BS.I have not seen a more pathetic defensive structure until now.

 

Explanation? They're weak yes, but they're not a complete BS

[Divine]

Soviets also have a bunker as a tier 1 defense, giving something similar to the Foehn wouldn't be very original.

[Drezalnor]

Soviets also have a bunker as a tier 1 defense, giving something similar to the Foehn wouldn't be very original.

In any case,the idea suggested by BlackAbsence is not good.For one,Knightframes loose their AA capablilty when garrisoned and Lancers-well,the vehicle would have to get a little too close for comfort.

[BlackAbsence]

Soviets also have a bunker as a tier 1 defense, giving something similar to the Foehn wouldn't be very original.

Well it's original because it's a wall.

Pillboxes are too similar to sentry guns yet there they are. 

Edited by BlackAbsence, 20 July 2018 - 01:40 PM.

[BlackAbsence]

 

Soviets also have a bunker as a tier 1 defense, giving something similar to the Foehn wouldn't be very original.

In any case,the idea suggested by BlackAbsence is not good.For one,Knightframes loose their AA capablilty when garrisoned and Lancers-well,the vehicle would have to get a little too close for comfort.

Just deploy them out if you need to shoot air. I do that for my flak troopers in bunkers all the time. Lancers get a range bonus within garrisons.

[FELITH]

Pillboxes are too similar to sentry guns yet there they are.

I just notice that wow. thought sentry needs power.

Edited by FELITH, 20 July 2018 - 02:04 PM.

[StolenTech]

in a faction all about mobility tank bunker simply has no place, unless it gives a range bonus that's actually worth something.

...but IT DOES GIVE RANGE BONUS. Haven't you noticed the awesome range of bunkered Stinger in my Dissonance? Though I usually just bunker up Gattling Tanks and Stingers, the former being a cheaper power-free Gattling Cannon, and the latter being a stationary anti-spy

 

 

 

unless it gives a range bonus that's actually worth something.

[UNSC THE CHILL OF WAR]

About that foehn wall bunker thing, one could just spam the node part of the wall and fill with units, it just becomes a heavily armor death blob
And then you can build nanocoat regulators and signal inhibitors inside it so its indestructible

[Divine]

About that foehn wall bunker thing, one could just spam the node part of the wall and fill with units, it just becomes a heavily armor death blob
And then you can build nanocoat regulators and signal inhibitors inside it so its indestructible

Suddenly, artillery. 

 

Seriously tho, bunkers are primitive (even if useful). Foehn is all about high-tech stuff. It would be the last faction I'd ever consider giving a bunker, or trenches for that matter.

 

If we really need an additional tier 1 defense for them, how about something like the Scrin's Buzzer Hives from TW? A building that would attack by spawning clouds of tiny flying robots or nanites that would assail the enemy, but would be destroyable themselves.