FAF Beta - Feedback
-
Fun fact: Aeon and Cybran ints deal less than 50 damage per volley, while UEF and Sera inties deal 50 or over. Coupled with HP differences, this means Cybraa/Aeon ints need 7 volleys to kill a UEF/Sera ints, all other combinations need 6. Aeon and Cybran ints also need 11 volleys to kill a T1 transport rather than 10. Aeon/Cybran ints used to cost 2 less mass to compensate, but it was equalized at some point. I wonder how it compares to Cybran versus Sera frigates.
-
@mazornoob That kinda sucks. I don't like that.
-
@espiranto said in FAF Beta - Feedback:
What the fuck Sparky, a commander with a T2 and a cannon is not enough for you
Interesting idea. If Sparky was a Cybran unit it could complement the ACU's lack of T2+gun a little.
@espiranto said in FAF Beta - Feedback:
Do something with cybran acu, its having choose gun or t2
I have advocated that stealth give a small speed boost, but apparently that fucks up too much balance.
I still don't think the Cybran ACU is weak though. It has high regen. Also, Mantis can assist a gun upgrade.
-
@unknow I dont recall that period ever stopping
-
@black_wriggler said in FAF Beta - Feedback:
the added blueprints are great, with the exception of the t1 factories - not sure if this has been tested yet but i feel having a mix of riptides and sparkies vs navy, is going to be too strong when you can easily spam navy facs as you push forwarded for added frigs and taking all the reclkaim
Good thing Aeon doesn't have T2 mobile hover shields and hover flak which can't be torp'd, or bombed/gunship'd easily. That'd be too strong within a navy mix.
Alright, jokes aside... The job to build factories is usually given to T1 engineers behind the push but that role was now assigned to the Sparky as it is part of a push.
There is basically no difference or if any, very little difference in gameplay terms.
~ Stryker
-
After getting mercy sniped twice today while being surrounded by (cybran) maa and having inties close by, I have to ask:
Can we finally balance mercies, instead of the current reliance on the honor-bound approach of looking down on the low lifers that use this disgusting tool?
-
@xayo i agree
-
@xayo What would you recommend?
-
@comradestryker said in FAF Beta - Feedback:
@black_wriggler said in FAF Beta - Feedback:
Alright, jokes aside... The job to build factories is usually given to T1 engineers behind the push but that role was now assigned to the Sparky as it is part of a push.
There is basically no difference or if any, very little difference in gameplay terms.
~ Stryker
Actually there is a large difference when the T1 engie equivalents have 1k hp and 30 dps
-
It’s potentially even higher than 30dps as well, as they can reclaim while firing (it means that if sparkies are attacking a stationery group of pillars they can beat a mass equivalent force, although it usually requires too much microing with reclaim orders to be worth the effort)
-
@black_wriggler said in FAF Beta - Feedback:
Actually there is a large difference when the T1 engie equivalents have 1k hp and 30 dps
Isn't that the whole point of a Sparky though?
If not, then what is the point of it?
Because, at the moment, it doesn't really have much of a point, in my opinion.
With this, at least, it'll have more of a, engineering aspect to the "Field Engineer" part of the unit.@maudlin27 said in FAF Beta - Feedback:
It’s potentially even higher than 30dps as well, as they can reclaim while firing (it means that if sparkies are attacking a stationery group of pillars they can beat a mass equivalent force, although it usually requires too much microing with reclaim orders to be worth the effort)
Harbs can do that, too - though less effectively, as they can't shoot and reclaim, but they can reclaim after the fact, preventing the need for engies to follow.
~ Stryker
-
@xayo said in FAF Beta - Feedback:
After getting mercy sniped twice today while being surrounded by (cybran) maa and having inties close by, I have to ask:
Can we finally balance mercies, instead of the current reliance on the honor-bound approach of looking down on the low lifers that use this disgusting tool?
The most OP part might be the way it turns into unkillable missiles before hitting the target. So delay this transition or even remove it altogether?
-
Hello,
this is possibly only a purely subjective opinion. However, I noticed that the new snipe icon for the Sera Sniper bots doesn't quite match the other icons.
The others tend to appear grayed out when the ability is disabled and the icon itself glows green when enabled. The background remains grey. With the new snip icon, the background itself begins to glow green. Wouldn't it make more sense to just let the crosshair light up green to bring it more in line with the other icons?
-
The icons for sniper mode are just confusing in general IMHO - Back in my days when I started playing FAF I never knew if the unit was in sniper mode or not, especially when you have disabled the mouse-over text via options (which I would highly not suggest, it disables too much information, because it is related to lobby like Ping/CPU, etc. as well)
Best case scenario, if you hit the sniper button, it should print out some text on the screen like "Sniper mode on" or "Sniper mode off". Easy to understand, and you do not have to relate to some confusing icon which any beginner will be confused by that toggle, but maybe I was just a slow learner and people figured it out sooner. Have not played Seraphim or Aeon in the last time, maybe the icon/text stuff was changed recently to make it more clear, dunno.
-
My goal with changing the icon was to make the difference from sniper mode to normal a bit more obvious, im all for making it more consistent with the other icons. Ill try to update the PR this week.
-
@magge said in FAF Beta - Feedback:
Best case scenario, if you hit the sniper button, it should print out some text on the screen like "Sniper mode on" or "Sniper mode off".
This should be a given for all units and structures that have a togglable ability, honestly.
And let the player decide if they want the text on or off via an option in settings.But that might be too much for something that can be conveyed with the icon color.
~ Stryker
-
Either way, this is an improvement over the icons before and definitely makes it clearer. Happy to see that in the upcoming patch.
-
tbh I'm a bit surprised there's no minor nerf to cybran frigs. Like a 2.5-5% increase in cost so you don't have to really revolutionise anything before taking a deeper look at navy, but at least not making them dominate so brutally in small ponds. They're currently 7% cheaper than the next cheapest frig (sera) while having 17% more surface dps, a minor cost increase won't change it being the best but would somewhat mitigate its lead.
-
Idk about the [UEF T2 Destroyer] Valiant change - it definitely needs a buff, but I'm not sure HP is the way to go. It's biggest drawback is the poor range of its main gun IMHO. Yes, it has bad torpedoes, but you can easily mend that slightly by say increasing the range by 5 and maybe making it's sonar as large as it's torpedo range (so if you are roaming with them, they actually start firing on subs as soon as they are in range, rather than half-way in, effectively making their superior torp range meaningless).
As it currently is, torpedo-wise, 1 Valiant dies to 5 T1 subs with 1 sub almost full HP left alive. A Salem kills all of them with over 25% HP left (and it already starts off with 1k less HP). It has 40% DPS with torpedoes of the 2nd worst Destroyer, and Salem has over 3x the DPS. I think there's space to make it's torps the same-ish strength as other destroyers have (say 50-60 DPS). Or maybe bolster it's torp defense (indirect HP increase).
But yeah, back to it's main problem. It's the range on those main guns. Yes, it has highest DPS, but only by a little (274 compared to Uashavoh's 250 - 2nd highest). The difference in DPS gun+torpedo is still on the negative for Valiant. So Salems can outrange it, and you can effectively kite with them, and on a say 5v5 matchup (no. of destroyers, not players), you can whittle down at least 1 or 2 Valiants before actual engagement, and as soon as Valiants get into range, Salems can move in and use their total higher DPS (330 vs 304) to end the fight. Exodus can employ similar strategy, theirs being weaker if you micro, but stronger if you don't/the enemy does (since high alpha really rewards shoot-and-scoot tactics, even with minimal micro by the enemy makes it even stronger). Uashavoh's have the advantage of not missing their shots like the rest of the 3, and it has marginally less HP than the Valiant (<5%), which is countered by evading 1 salvo (not to mention going underwater and just torpedo-duking it out).
So if you look at every Destroyer's main weapon:
Valiant:
+bit higher DPS
-range
-somewhat easy to dodge
Salem:
+range
+no overkill
-less HP
Exodus:
+range
+high alpha + AOE
-somewhat easy to dodge
Uashavoh:
+can't dodge his cannons
+can dive
+no overkill
-rangeAll of the destroyers except the Valiant have 2 '+' and 1 '-'. And on top of that Valiant has piss-poor torpedoes.
Some argue "Well, that's why the Battlecruiser exists". But that's a no-argument for me. Battlecruisers are indeed amazing. But they are only slightly less expensive than Battleships. And while they do have very nice damage and you can't dodge it, they are still out-performed by Battleships IMO. And after a fight, you can actually use a Battleship to threaten coastal bombardment, while the Battlecruiser has the same reach as Salem or Exodus, assuming no one built a sandcastle on the beach that day to block the laser - so in the end, it's only effective in water, vs naval units. But even then. If you have time to build a cruiser, the enemy will soon have a battleship of their own - they are only slightly cheaper (1 destroyer difference in mass, even less compared to cybran). And while a battlecruiser might be much better at clearing out the real fodder, the frigates - don't make the destroyers take the role of cannon-fodder, when there's much more efficient solution already. Battlecruisers won't save you if you are losing (slow to build and expensive vs a destroyer spam), and they are kinda sitting pretty doing nothing if you are ahead. But if you are even, you could've just built a battleship - they do lose out in skirmishes with other units mixed in, but battleships actually do something both before battle (long-range bombardment of enemy navy, which battlecruiser can't do efficiently vs equally-ranged destroyers) and after (killing in-land operations).
So what's my final take? Instead of increasing it's HP (that's what frigates and shields are for), I'd either increase it's range so the gun actually fills its role (note that the only '+' Valiant has is quite not that big of a plus, the DPS advantage is 10% over the 2nd best, which is not a lot) and makes use of it weapon (you maybe don't have to match the 80 range Salem and Exodus, but give it middle ground of 70, between them and Uashavoh). Another solution would be to make it more self-reliant, and have it's sonar, radar and vision ranges increased. Maybe in addition to that, make it's torpedoes slightly have larger range (but keep the poor dmg).
Another solution that's more on the silly side is, give it air-staging capability. Not that it's gonna increase it's solo potential, but it increases it's value and it'll actually give UEF a non-experimental naval-based air-staging facility. Cybran has both the cruiser and the carrier, while Sera and Aeon have the carriers. UEF has Atlantis (which is 3x more expensive than the T3 carriers).
-
A range increase of 5 has zero real game impact. You also can't kite with salems.
