376 replies to this topic

[Solais]

Well, having more naval units is always good for me. Still wishing for that whole naval expansion to all the factions.

[Handepsilon]

Also, Deviatress weapon is an excellent air countermeasure sounds like fun and a fine way to help LB and HH against WoC at sea -ptearodon isn't immune to confusion right?

It would be better to confuse a nearby buzzard/Alanqa. A confused Pteranodon won't fire at air and chances are there won't be any other nearby target it can't shoot.

Unless a confused ptera would suddenly break away from formation and return back to base I guess.

[legionnaire501]

hey so quick question about save games, will it still stop crates from spawning on reloads cause i always hated that in 2.0 and vanilla

Edited by legionnaire501, 13 February 2018 - 10:37 AM.

[Kirov_Fury]

Well, having more naval units is always good for me. Still wishing for that whole naval expansion to all the factions.

Yeah, more units more diversity.Especially faction based T1 Naval could be a thing. Just like the faction based MBT, the "faction primary naval combatant"

[XoGamer]

Well, having more naval units is always good for me. Still wishing for that whole naval expansion to all the factions.

 

I agree, the navy of MO is feeling lacklustre

 

 

++ added: new naval unit for all Foehn subfactions - Whipray, a dedicated anti-aircraft ship, with Golden Rockets and a Confusion Ray

 

A couple things about this:

 

1. is it single-target confusion like a Deviatress

2. Do golden rockets have a lock-on time like a Teratorn?

3. How much will it cost?

 

change: Swordfish AA drone removed, price decreased from $1000 to $850, naval AA functionality moved to Whipray

 

 

I like most of this

Except the Swordfish cost buff, it was already far too good against Naval units, and spammable for $1000, imagine it at $850

 

 

Yes wtf with that price buff? That is way too low, it should be $900 at least

 

 

- nerf: Apocalypse anti-aircraft weapon effectiveness decreased by 15-20%

+ buff: Grumble anti-aircraft weapon effectiveness increased by 25-30%, 
range increased from 25 to 26

 

So now it will 1 shot kill Barracudas, right?

 

 

Well, as sad as I am for Apoc nerfs, maybe it is for the best - as for Grumble buff that was very needed

[Tathmesh]

Will Whipray be affected by Spinblades?

[Speeder]

Yes.

[Damfoos]

hey so quick question about save games, will it still stop crates from spawning on reloads cause i always hated that in 2.0 and vanilla

 

The crates will work properly in missions, not sure about skirmishes.

[StolenTech]

A couple of questions about the changelog : 

* change: strength of Allied, Soviet and Epsilon Tier 2 tech access buildings increased by 200
* change: strength of all Tier 3 tech access buildings increased by 300, but 4 Barracudas can still destroy them

does this mean the 3 tech buildings for foehn will get the 300 HP increase or will it only affect the one that unlocks T3 for each of their subfactions ?

 

* change: firepower of all capturable tech defenses increased by 10-20%

does this one affect the Artillery Bunker in particular ? and how much more firepower will it gain ?

[Battle Bee]

 

 

- nerf: Apocalypse anti-aircraft weapon effectiveness decreased by 15-20%

+ buff: Grumble anti-aircraft weapon effectiveness increased by 25-30%, 
range increased from 25 to 26

 

So now it will 1 shot kill Barracudas, right?

 

 

Well, as sad as I am for Apoc nerfs, maybe it is for the best - as for Grumble buff that was very needed

 

To be fair, a nerf of 15-20% isn't crushingly bad considering just how powerful the Apocalypse AA is. It will still shred through aircraft.

[NorthFireZ]

Is there going to be any stat releases of the new AA ship for Foehn before the Patch come out?

[StolenTech]

can we get an actual nerf for pteranodon PLEASE ? 
I've been playing a lot of vs Coronia matches recently and it's just impossible to defeat these flying things, no matter how hard you try to shoot them down...it is...just... impossible to shoot them down on a realistic situation.

We had a 3v1 scenario today (long story but it was a really bizarre game that turned from 3v3 to a 3v1 and the other 2 dead people having enough power and their Superweapons) and even with the combined AA power for Pacific Front, Last Bastion and Headquarters they were just helpless against these things for the most part of the game while still getting more and more reproccessor funds to get bombarded with 1 harbinger after another. 

They need a Strength nerf and a cost nerf, they are just too easy to spam for the speed/strength/damage/AoE they provide, their RoF is not even remotely the problem since they tend to delete their target in 1 shot anyway (unless it's an epic unit) and even then a RoF increase of 10 will not change a thing.

Edited by StolenTech, 16 February 2018 - 01:32 AM.

[Damfoos]

Maybe what they really need is a range decrease, so more AA units could attack them at the same time? Maybe a strenght/amorset change would work, though the more we nerf them here, the less useful they become individually, while blobs will still remain dangerous. Decreasing the AoE would be another solution, but that AoE is kind of the point of this units, so idk. It certainly should be weaker than other T3 heavy tanks simply because it has a large advantage of being extra mobile AND stackable (so you can concenrate enomous firepower at just a few tiles), and also because it can only be attacked by dedicated units unlike other super tanks. I'd say making the T3 heavy tank a flying unit opened a big can of worms, which is what we see now.

 

Let's break it down. Pteranodon has a lot of potential to be OP because a large blob of those can move in, one shot a blob of units (like 3x3) and get out, then repeat, and you can't do anything if your AA is taken out. That's a bunch of separate factors. The first one can be sort of addressed with a price increase, but in team games there will still be a large blob that will oneshot anything, simply because they stack. So unless AlexB invents some more Ares magic to not let air units stack in the air (which I think is way beyond possible), a mobile source of highly concentrated firepower in form of multiple Pteranodons bunched together will remain a thing. Increase the cost too much, and then first few Pteranodons may not pay off, while still being effective in stacks. The second factor is how many units can this stack kill in one shot. You can decrease the firepower (eventually making lone Pteranodons next to useless), or decrease the AoE (does not sound like a bad idea to me, but considering vehicles are often spread, your chances to kill something decrease quite much), the former means you'll need more Pteranodons in a stack to oneshot things and the latter means you'll oneshot less units no matter how many Pteranodons you have (unless they are split into multiple groups and are told to attack different targets, but that's not easy to do when they are moving). The thid factor is that Pteanodons, unlike other monster tanks, can't be harmed by most of the units, so your success in countering them depends on how long your AA can fire at them and how much damage it can deal. Since Pteranodon is a fast flying unit, it can escape stationary AA before taking enough damage, so you have to either build walls of AA defences or spam AA infantry and vehicles. Once those are taken out, you are defenceless. Here we can either decrease its mobility making hit'n'run attacks more difficult, decrease its armor making direct engagements more risky or decrease its range, so more AA units would be able to get shots on it before dying. RoF nerf won't do much because Pteranodons are already good for hit'n'run, no need to stay in danger when you can fly away to reload, then return and attack again. Now the question is, do we want Pteranodons to stay hit'n'run units or do we want them to be most suited for direct combat?

 

There are other stackable flying units that can kill ground stuff, but do we have problems with them? The biggest problem would probably be Wolfhounds and Thors, but the former can only oneshot one AA vehicle at a time and doesn't fire on the move, so it can be chased, and the latter is slow and doesn't do well against AA vehicles, which are your mobile source of AA. Invaders deal pitiful damage and are lightly amored, same applies to Warhawks except they are a bit better at killing stuff; all these units stack, but most often can be killed with proper units before doing too much damage. Wolfhounds can be killed by both vehicles and infantry, thors can be killed by vehicles which EA can't kill remotely other than with Harriers (they have no AT gunships or AT support powers), warhawks and invaders can be killed by both infantry and vehicles (Invaders are better to be killed by vehicles, but Epsilon doesn't have a way to quickly remove a group of AA vehicles from a distance either). You can say Pteranodons can't kill infantry so it balances them, but let's not foget that Coronia can handle BOTH infantry and vehicles by adding Buzzards to the stack or by dissolving enemy AA infantry with Devourer in the right time. This adds up to Pteranodons' own traits described above, so go figure.

Edited by Damfoos, 16 February 2018 - 08:17 AM.

[Death_Kitty]

Of course none of the things you suggested fix the actual problem with the ptera. It will ALWAYS be able to hit and run by the very nature of it being a FLYING unit. Decreasing its range will only make these attacks slightly more risky, but the ptera will still be stupidly cost effective. Just remove the splash. All those non foehn units that Damfoos mentioned, you know what they have in common? NO SPLASH. Foehn has both splash pteras and buzzards. ITS NOT ROCKET SCIENCE PEOPLE! High damage+ flying + AoE is what makes the unit OP. and seeing how removing the first 2 would be stupid, just get rid of the AoE. (Not that I think anything will actually happen)

 

And if you feel like countering my arguments, I'm just gonna tell you, play LC against Coronia with someone competent. You will get the message eventually. 

[GuardianGI]

I hate to say this, but you do realise that Thors *actually* have splash, right?

[Endless]

Of course none of the things you suggested fix the actual problem with the ptera. It will ALWAYS be able to hit and run by the very nature of it being a FLYING unit. Decreasing its range will only make these attacks slightly more risky, but the ptera will still be stupidly cost effective. Just remove the splash. All those non foehn units that Damfoos mentioned, you know what they have in common? NO SPLASH. Foehn has both splash pteras and buzzards. ITS NOT ROCKET SCIENCE PEOPLE! High damage+ flying + AoE is what makes the unit OP. and seeing how removing the first 2 would be stupid, just get rid of the AoE. (Not that I think anything will actually happen)

 

And if you feel like countering my arguments, I'm just gonna tell you, play LC against Coronia with someone competent. You will get the message eventually. 

[CLAlstar]

Thors have splash. Wolfhounds have splash. Small, but noticeable vs air units.

 

*insert magikarp meme*

[TeslaCruiser]

The whole "big map= foehn advantage" thing is not really a balance problem but the way foehn was designed so they win in big maps and any situation where they have enough time. Or what is the same: use foehn in big maps and team games, enjoy playing foehn and those awkward and sluggish engagements. Alternatively, you can play allies and snipe tech -wosh wosh or try to get stolentech.
Meanwhile not enough early game weaknesses has been added to foehn, I still think all jets should rekt minermites both D-A and Foxtrot need an upgrade to deal with foehn eco memes early, right now all you need to do as foehn to denied damage is to move minermites away from the planes flying trajectory and the damage goes full retard because weird 20 years old game.
So we have the big map=foehn but not enough of small map=no foehn. That is all.

 

edit

and just to be clear, this is not a personal opinion on how mo balance should work but my conclusions based on how the actual game works and how the community has learned to use the factions.

 

Edited by TeslaCruiser, 16 February 2018 - 04:45 PM.

[NorthFireZ]

Speaking of Jets, Foxtrots still need some kind of accuracy buff. It was actually impossible for 3 Foxtrots to snipe Tanya when there were 6 other infantry units casually surrounding her (three GG.I and 3 medics). Only three of the projectiles were actually able to hit Tanya.
This wasn’t just an one odd event either, two players both using one full Airfield of Foxtrots repeatedly failed to snipe one critical unit in multiple bombing runs. It was almost comical how random the Foxtrot projectiles chose its targets.

Perhaps an accuracy buff will also help in sniping miners, light vehicles, and such.

[Death_Kitty]

I hate to say this, but you do realise that Thors *actually* have splash, right?

 

Thors have splash. Wolfhounds have splash. Small, but noticeable vs air units.

 

*insert magikarp meme*

 

-_- ok. I am utterly confused as to why anyone opposes removing AoE for the ptera, but...

 

"Thors have splash. Wolfhounds have splash. Small, but noticeable vs air units." - What does this have to do with anything I'm saying? Am I complaining about air vs air splash? Perhaps ill put some fine print next post that reads: "Thor and Wolfhound don't have splash ​that's noticeable vs ground units."  Happy?

 

Tell me about how wolfhounds and thors kill tier 3 AA vehicles, their counters... o wait, they don't, do they? At critical mass of both units AA usually wins, as it does not stack up, and does splash a fair amount of time, or else has high dps/ RoF. Ptera critical mass needed to kill a much larger amount of units is sooooo much smaller. Honestly, I don't know why I bother. 

 

List of good arguments I've heard for keeping ptera AoE:

 

That's it. the whole list. there are none.