The worst experimental in the game: the bug
-
@arma473 it dosent make sense how figthers would ignore a litterall mountain walking on the ground or a gingantic ship or an unmoving building. because faf is just a game with game logic, when we would involve logic the asf becomes the undeniable best unit in the game because of its mix of cost, hp, and dps and no real reson why it wouldnt fire its guns on pretty much any target.
maybe then the better idea is to make the bug a ground unit that can fly to appease this laughable talking point.
-
imo asf and other aa air units could be made able to shoot at ground units if all aa damage in the game from any plane or ground/naval unit/building was reduced by a huge amount, ex. 100 times, and all air unit hp reduced by same amount (100x), to keep the air vs air and aa vs air game the same, how it already was in original supcom in first place anyways, while allowing air units to shoot at ground without deleting everything in seconds like they do in air, but at least deal some sensible damage
alternatively all air units could be made unable to attack any landed air unit but that's just even worse imo
-
Just give it a jamming field that creates a decoy unit or two. Give it build power to make the entities, it takes like 8-10 seconds to build the decoy and the decoys are "T5" for the purposes of AA targeting (they take priority over the bug.) Give it an upper limit of like 10ish entities with just enough health to eat a single sam firing cycle and boom bug is good. It makes the first pass of ASF and initial barrage of sams ineffective, EZ.
EDIT: Like the jamming crystals in the campaign and a czar, that would work. (this would also use assets that already exist rather than making new ones)
-
@vinyl117 said in The worst experimental in the game: the bug:
Just give it a jamming field that creates a decoy unit or two.
Why would you want Jamming over Stealth?
~ Stryker
-
@vinyl117 said in The worst experimental in the game: the bug:
the decoys are "T5" for the purposes of AA targeting (they take priority over the bug.)
making units act stupid to balance them is wrong, also players can control target priority through advanced target priorities mod anyways
-
Could make into a mobile anti-air unit. It lands and its back bristles with flak guns or SAMS (High DPS but less DPS per mass then a SAM to prevent them from being spammed and stuck in a base). ASF can't attack it on the ground but it has a long landing animation where it is vulnerable to prevent abusing this. Drastically reduce its anti-ground DPS as well for balance (would probably need to make it token) this would solve the ASF problem as it wouldn't be much of a threat when airborne. This would essentially make it into a land experimental that can reposition quickly but IMO it would be more unique than just a generic "gunship but big" and would give the Cybrans an interesting area denial tool for the air game.
-
Problem with making the bug walk on the ground is creating the animation for the legs. Is it even possible to create new animations?
I guess making it unmovable in this mode would fix that. -
there are many walkers in mods such as blackops so I guess it is possible
-
My first thought is lower the cost and total HP, and make it the Monkeylord of the sky. But I also understand that T3 air is being looked at, so maybe that domino needs to fall first.
-
@mach if its set to experimental it will still target the decoy. So target priority does nothing and that's what torp defense already does so its not like this is unprecedented. Certainly a better option than "funny bug walk" which is just imbalanced.
-
@comradestryker Uh i didn't say to get rid of the stealth, stealth is radar based. The jammer would be visual and omni based (it creates physical entities like the drones from a kennel)
-
@vinyl117 you all keep saying its imba but that really only holds up in a vacuum, the same way fatboy should be imba because "it got so much range and dps", turns out its quite hard to get adequate value for it because it so easy to counter using air or t2 arti. also you heared of manual targeting ?
-
@lorem_ipsum My main complaint is it feels out of place and would be a lot of work. Okay manual targeting is more time spent on trying to get the bug which if the "drones" (for lack of a better term) are a part of the unit they still eat the initial fire either way if the targeting makes them priority anyway.
-
@vinyl117 doesnt rly feel out of place for a faction using walking boats imo, also seems way easyer and direct to implement then whatever your idea is, espically considering that for a playtest you dont even need a walking animation. that can be added at a later date similar to the stomp feater or the gc claws that had been disabled for quite some time.
-
I think a nice first step would be to make a new unit variable called "Grounded" or something and adding it to some air units that so that they cant be targeted by air when landed. See if that changes up the meta a bit if you can somehow force those air units to land to keep them safe. I mean ground units can attack landed air units. Cant we make it the other way around for some of them?
-
add 6 t3 transport slots to the bottom and now it's the best
-
Alternatively give it a battleship gun because it would be funny. (This is mostly a joke for legal purposes) Give it the ability to transport units like its a t3 transport.
Edit: Make it land and become stationary give it a battleship battery, land battleship.
-
not sure why you would want to give a unique ability of UEF to a another faction.
-
@azraeel You mean a unique ability that belong to the cybran gunship in the base game anyway?
-
I will also still say that strapping a battleship turret to its ass if you make it land is more cybran than just making it a shittier monkey. Just give it jamming and call it a day or do something cool like make it a deployable artillery base. (It'd be cool af)
