Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Balance, faction analysis and ramblings

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    so i posted a reply about a week ago but it got flagged as spam when i tried to correct a typo... i was hoping that it would be put back up. ahwell guess ill type it again.

    i did not advocate for earlier acces to bombers. only a cost decrease and a production time increase.

    test the 6 strike fighter vs 3 ints yourself. the ints lose. its all because of damage falloff due to focus fire. first volley 1 sf and 1 int die, 1/6 and 1/3 of the total damage potential gone. it does not matter the sf dies first as 5 sf still instakill an int. again on paper the damage potential of ints is higher but in practice it is not.

    i think you miss pirrot's point, he clearly states SOME changes need to be reversed. the changes were needed but they were too much.

    railguns underperform for reasons i clearly explained. equal resources give similar dpm but a large hp disparity, and bad fight progression due to damage falloff.

    on aa, yes a pc can move, but moving a pc is economic damag. An aa turret has more than twice the range of a pc with 100% accuracy. so flying around it is far harder on all accounts.

    on lavs, i think in keeping with faction philosophy equal resource mirror matchups should always be won by the gaalsien. 1 damage reduction will not stop the boost kiting causing skimmer bleed. Its the range, rate of fire and boost cooldown that make lavs as op as they are. yes they miss half their shots at range but that doesnt really matter if they fire ~40% faster than skimmers.

    why does the mortar suck? i think i provided ample arguments why it is really good.

    AAVs do need a nerf as they beat their counter(rails) in the earlygame. second is that all top players i know build AAVs. If you are talking about garmilator you there is a very strong argument that he is not the top player as last GLCL tournament yours truly beat him 2-1 with, you guessed it, AAVs. Also even if so your argumant would be invalid due to being an authoritative fallacy. Lastly the reason he does not build aavs is not because they are bad but because lavs are better.

    Comment


    • #17
      The bomber stuff must have been in the discord chat, might not have even been you, I wrote that reply on an airplane a week before I posted it. My mistake. That said, what I wrote is true.

      There is really no way for me to continue the argument about interceptors and strike fighters without being a **** and saying git gud. Same thing about the airburst, and getting AAV rushed (not you in particular).

      You just made that stuff about faction philosophy up on the spot right there. No one ever said anything about coal being supposed to rely on combined arms; its baloney. And as per the game it really plays the other way around. Coalition, because of their current unit design and not some made up philosophy, can get by just fine by ramming their AAV and railgun **** down the opponent. Their units are cheap and expendable. With gaalcien and khaaneph its really really hard to just build one or two types of units, and more often then not the expansive nature of their units means you play a long positional game of chess with your opponent, using all the tools you have.

      The LAV vs AAV and LAV vs skimmers are two not entirely separate entities. One illustrates why a range nerf is not an option for the other. But a damage nerf on LAV by 1, as well as an AAV armour increase by 1 would return the LAV/AAV relation to how it was in 1.2. This damage nerf also goes a long way to rebalancing the LAV skimmer fight, allowing skimmers to make greater use of their healing abilities.

      Heavy railguns do not under-perform. I understand your example, but that one circumstance is just an example of the coalition playing well and the gaal playing poorly. The more realistic scenario is the coal using his better LAV vision to spot the skimmers, and then their railguns fire upon the skimmers, to which the heavy rails now turn and fire upon the highlighted coal railguns. If anything, the research unlocking heavy railguns just costs to much blue.

      For the AAV, see garm i.e. the reason everyone thinks turret/LAV is OP. Cause he is the best player, and never ever makes AAV. The last tournament I can recall ended with him winning due to forfeiture by his opponent. There has not been another one since.

      Comment


      • #18
        on making things up on the spot, from the literal first post in this thread:

        Originally posted by Catharsis View Post
        There is also some mismatch with research cost , in short gaalsien are usually behind on armour upgrades because they are so specialized. This is also not reflected in the cost. all armour upgrades for coal/soban cost 1200CU/825RU in 95s and 1600CU/1425RU in 160s for gaal/khaan. Being specialized does not mean EVERYTHING needs to be more expensive. I believe that if you try and counter the gaalsien with mirror matchups you should be punished incredibly hard, which is currently not the case.
        check the tournament results yourself, this is the last DoK tournament played.
        https://battlefy.com/giant-land-carr...nfoTab=details
        you misunderstand why garm does not make AAVs. Again since LAVs are so good(even against AAVs) there is no need for him to build AAVs since they add nothing to his unit composition. While being a good player he is far too one dimensional in relying on an overpowered mechanic making him too predictable to be called the best. which is exactly the reason why i beat him.

        I find your statement to not continue an argument in which you have provided 0 arguments for your case laughable. Either provide an argument why, or refute my arguments. Repeating the same statements without any explanation is no way to make a point. as in this line of reasoning i could also simply say that you need to git gud. It carries neither weight nor relevance. your railgun point is a solid but it relies on max range and clear line of fire. even in that case the coal would win since higher numbers and the skimmers being unable to hold a line against the LAVs. forcing the heavy rails to retreat. Your scenario at heart is a strike craft fight not a railgun fiight. Strike craft superiority wins railgun battles. I was purposefully keeping other units out of the comparison i presented. I wanted to prove a point that equal resource heavy rails vs rails do not win while i, per faction philosophy as i stated then, think gaalsien should always win mirror matchups. And they win neither the pure rail war nor the rail/strikecraft war.

        Comment


        • #19
          I believe that if you try and counter the gaalsien with mirror match-ups you should be punished incredibly hard, which is currently not the case.
          I do not.

          As for the other thing, I have provided plenty of counter arguments. You just ignore them and keep saying the same thing. But I suppose that you have the same perspective. From over here, its like I am trying to tell you that 2+2=4 and you keep insisting that it equals 3.

          Comment


          • #20
            ''i am of this opinion'' is not an argument it is a conclusion.

            give me the reasons why you think so, something you simply dont do.

            in other words, if i can borrow your analogy, you dont tell me 2+2=4. You only say 4

            explain yourself, provide reasons, arguments and examples

            Comment


            • #21
              The difference, as I see it, is that since you are the one urging for change, the burden of proof falls onto you.

              Comment

              Working...
              X