ARROGANCE, NERDRAGE, TL;DR POSTS, ETC & occasional helpfulness!

Well the game is rather.. messed up now.
This whole people accidently telling the enemy your plans because /a doesn't stick.
The lack of colors, you can't tell if someone said something to everyone or just you. While what you say will go "To allies: yada yada" everyone else just gets your name and text, so you have no idea if they accidently told that to the enemy or not, you have to ask if they ally chatted that.
Then there is the bad imbalance between races now from the new black market. The only time people play Vasari now is because they purposefully want to gimp themselves and know they'll win anyways, or because they haven't seen how much worse they are(which then the game starts and 20-30 minutes into it they say "my god vasari is horrible now..")

Are we going to have to wait until 1.04 to get these things fixed?.. 1.04 is supposed to have lots of new features and extras as I understand it, and thus it's not coming out next week or anything. Probly late next month, right? But can we wait and undure the game being so messed up until then in online play?..

I'm going to keep this simple without to many explainations so that it's not tl;dr:

Firstly.. Please bring back random amounts of extractors per planet like in the "Random Resources" setting in 1.02!

Black Market

  • How the Black Market works now is much better, but the prices are not. This whole tec and vasari imbalance is coming from cheap buy prices and even worse sell prices. The solution to this is simple.. adjust the Black Maret so buy pries tend to go higher and stay high, and sell prices be much higher too.
  • The 3:2 ratio was better than the one now
  • sellPrice 1.6(up from 0.8) buyPrice 2.4 would be good, IMO, and have booms happen twice as easy and the price go down slower after booms.

LRMS

TEC Jav LRM
  • 1.03 cost. 275/45/25
  • Supply increased to 6.(up from 4)
  • Reduce range (it's at.. 11000.. now.. With Akkan it's 13000 or so. It should be getting 11000 WITH akkan, so start at 9250 or so)so that it doesn't outrange Gaurdian's Repel skill and so many other abilities without having Akkan(that'd be buffing akkan if using it made javs outrange some abilities. Tactics, and such).

Advent Illum

  • 1.02 cost. 360/50/40 I believe it was
  • Supply increased to 7.(up from 6)
Vasari Assailant.
  • 1.02 cost. 360/55/35
  • Supply increased to 8.(up from 6)
All LRMS
  • Medium Damage Vs. Very Heavy increased to 100%(up from 75%, this is what heavy cruisers and buildings have now.
  • Building armor changed to a new "Building" armor type. Medium damage vs. buildings 50%(down from 75% it had on Very Heavy) All other damage types vs. this building would be the same as Very Heavy's.
  • Medium Damage Vs. Cap armor to 50%.(down from 75%) At starting at 11/13 DPS, half that is still good dps against a cap ship. Illums have anti-cap damage, so they'd do the same, but each beam of theirs is only 5.2DPS against caps versus the current 9.75 of assailants. 50% would bring assailants down to 6.5 for caps, much better.
  • In short, LRMS damage increased vs HC's, lowered against buildings and caps.
Light Frigates
Vasari Skirmisher
  • Hull Regen increased to 1.5(up from 1.0)
  • Damage increased to 13 DPS(up from 10.5)
  • Range increased to 4250(up from 3500)
  • Increase hull to 800(up from 700). Reduce shields to 340(Down from 440). [More effect from hull upgrades, more effect from healing abilities when hull is gotten to sooner. It's self repair would happen sooner with hull getting attacked sooner.)
  • OR reduce its supply to 6, increase DPS to 11, reduce cost to 360/60/0(down from 400/70/0).

Siege Frigates

  • 1.02 Cost or 30% increased DPS. (currently a siege cap costs LESS than 4 siege frigs, and the siege cap is as good as 6-8 siege frigs at bombarding planets, while obviously the siege cap is obviously much better at fighting too.)
  • 1.03 Survivability

Carriers.

Currently well.. http://dstuff.l2wh.com/images/soase.png This shows well what I mean. Fighters are ONLY better against LRM's and bombers. Besides killing LRM's, you use bombers. This is rather.. or very odd to me. It would also make sense to me that if you had enough bombers you could overwhelm flaks (heavy armor) but this isn't the case. You need something like 7 carriers with bombers for every flak to overwhelm them. So as long as someone has just one flak which costs 1/2 as much for every 5 carriers, your heavy cruisers are safe.
This wouldn't be too much of an issue, but HC+Flak is a very strong combination. Bombers are their only really counter, but you only need 1 flak per 5 bomber squads to stop them. You can't use light frigs to kill their flaks because their HC's eat them.

Increase bomber HP 50% higher.

Fighters do 1/4th the damage as bombers against everything but LRM's and scouts, basically. But with how low hp/shields/armor scouts are you might as well use bombers for those too as 8.22 vs 19.50 is good enough against them. This shows rather well how you should only use fighters vs. bombers and lrms. On the other dozen of the units, in any situation, use bombers.
NAME........DPS.....vs v-light...vs light...vs med...vs heavy...vs v-heavy...vs cap...vs bomber
FIGHTER.....9.75..........9.75......19.50.....2.44.......2.44.........2.44.....2.44........14.63
BOMBER......16.44.........8.22.......8.22.....8.22.......8.22........16.44....12.33.........1.64
  • I'd give fighters a new damage type to make them just as good against medium armor and heavy without buffing scouts.(even if fighters did 9dps vs. heavy armor, flaks kill them twice as fast, so it's effectively half. This new damage type should do 100% to medium, 100% heavy, over the 25% it does now, but the rest the same as AntiLight)
  • 100% chance (up from 75%) to hit Bombers with this new damage type, this balances out the HP increase for Bombers with fighters attacking them. (effectively 33% increased damage against them vs. their 50% hp increase should work fine)
Numbers if Fighters got a new damage type that was same as AntiLight but 100% vs medium and heavy.
NAME........DPS.....vs v-light...vs light...vs med...vs heavy...vs v-heavy...vs cap...vs bomber
FIGHTER.....9.75..........9.75......19.50.....9.75.......9.75.........2.44.....2.44........14.63
BOMBER......16.44.........8.22.......8.22.....8.22.......8.22........16.44....12.33.........1.64
HOWEVER you must take into acount while they'd do SLIGHTLY more than the 8.22dps bombers do vs these, that the flaks will kill fighters about twice as fast as bombers especially with bombers getting a bigger HP increase to better survive flak, so bombers are better in situations against flak always, vs heavy and medium it depends on whether there is flak or not.
Also since abilities do damage vs. fighter typically(cap abilities) fighters are more suceptable to these, more to take into account with their balance.

Support Cruisers
Vasari Subverter
  • Increase supply cost to 9-11(up from 5)
  • Increase cost to 450/130/110(up from 400/80/80)
  • Increase cooldown on it's aoe disable to 70(up from 60)
  • Decrease duration on it's aoe disable to 25(down from 30)
  • If that isn't enough maybe it needs AOE range reduced aswell..
Vasari Overseer
  • Have it's health buff no longer require facing the target or greatly increase turn rate.

Buildings
Refineries

  • Increase their effectiveness, I'm not exactly sure how much.
  • Reduce cost to 1500/75/100(down from 1500/125/175) for vasari/tec's of course.. advent shares it with trade port.

Capital Ships

  • Remove the XP sharing so that two caps doesn't make you get half xp.  Both caps should get the maximum xp.   There is nothing overpowerd at ALL about rushing a 2nd cap, or using more than 2 caps, so why penalize they're xp rate?  2 caps might become viable with this change and the lrm nerf.

Mostly just simple entity editing except the black market and text thing. :3

Edited to include something about AntiMedium damage type, and Vasari skirmisher as no one uses them, they are highly regarded as far to expensive/not good enough.

Edited in suggestion to buff Refineries


Comments (Page 3)
8 Pages1 2 3 4 5  Last
on Mar 15, 2008
Innociv, the problem with raising subverter fleet supply to 9-11 is that Vasari already have higher "supply cost" units than any other race. Thus for any given fleet, vasari have significantly less units... Such a radical supply increase on subverters (from 5 to 9-11) would likely force vasari to have to be a "fleet upgrade" above an enemy to have any chance in a battle...This of course would give the already-weak vasari economy another big wack .

An increase from 5 to 7 I could understand, perhaps with some resource/credit increase as well (This is assuming the vasari economy gets fixed with a black market fix, otherwise forget it!)... If more is needed later, they can always nerf again. Given how this is a nerf to a unit that nobody has yet really called for "omg nerf subverters" (Yes yes, your points about its description are valid...but we are still fixing a problem before it becomes a "crisis") Its a good unit, somewhat OP...but not significantly so IMO, given that its a vasari unit.

All in all, I think that IC/SD have so many bigger fish to fry for the sake of "balance" before they significantly mess with subverters...hehe.
on Mar 15, 2008
Well in 1.02 the races where well balanced and subverters prooved very overpowered then. Now, like I said, they're the only thing that keeps the race barely playable.

The nerf to subverters i've suggested goes along with improving prices in the black market to 1.02 levels (As I said, new market system is good, the prices for stuff is not though) which will bring Vasari economy back up.

Hopefully extractors will be buffed too, bringing Vasari up more. But buffed extractors with current subverters would be badddddd.
on Mar 15, 2008
Stop with the subverters already! Without them the Vasari support is lackluster.
on Mar 15, 2008
Skirmishers cost 7! supply...


Major off-topic, but I read that as 'seven factorial' supply and was like 'DAMN!' Back to my corner.

on Mar 15, 2008
Maybe Subverters are overpowered? I have used them a few times, but they die pretty fast, so I tend to favor enforcers. I will say, it is Vasari's counter to clustered ships. I find that if the game goes on too long and I'm playing Vasari, I tend to need RA to counter the TEC economy (this was the 1.02 economy, 1.03 is even more TEC favorable, but this is a market issue, not a TEC issue. I find the strength of the Vasari to be how fast they are out of the gate....once that early game burst of aggressiveness winds down, the Vasari better have secured some kind of advantage. Then comes dependence on technology (Subverters), or RA. So maybe Subverters are OP, but the Advent fleet synergies are downright evil in their own right.
on Mar 15, 2008
Stop with the subverters already! Without them the Vasari support is lackluster.


Subverters still have the -10% mitigation +25% phase missile penetration.. which is good, but it's aoe disable is better so no ones gunna spend AM on that
And note i've suggested the buff to overseerers.

I'd be fine with a less drastic nerf than I suggested though.
on Mar 15, 2008
Innociv, the problem with raising subverter fleet supply to 9-11 is that Vasari already have higher "supply cost" units than any other race. Thus for any given fleet, vasari have significantly less units... Such a radical supply increase on subverters (from 5 to 9-11) would likely force vasari to have to be a "fleet upgrade" above an enemy to have any chance in a battle...This of course would give the already-weak vasari economy another big wack .An increase from 5 to 7 I could understand, perhaps with some resource/credit increase as well (This is assuming the vasari economy gets fixed with a black market fix, otherwise forget it!)... If more is needed later, they can always nerf again. Given how this is a nerf to a unit that nobody has yet really called for "omg nerf subverters" (Yes yes, your points about its description are valid...but we are still fixing a problem before it becomes a "crisis") Its a good unit, somewhat OP...but not significantly so IMO, given that its a vasari unit. All in all, I think that IC/SD have so many bigger fish to fry for the sake of "balance" before they significantly mess with subverters...hehe.


what u are basicly saying is that we should wait for the disaster to happen.
We know that subverters are overpowered and the only reason that it isnt a change concern yet is the fact that its a ship which doesnt get used a lot and that vasari are nerfed due to the market changes (so the overpowered subverters currently cover up other vasari issues).
Though like inno said this will defiantly change and ppl will beginn to use subverters.
Now if we wait for patch 1.04 without fixing this subverter issue while fixing all the other stuff suggested here we will be having again a huge problem which then can only get fixed with patch 1.05.
So this would mean we would waste for sure at least 3 months on something that is already now obvious.
If we/IC keep doing it like this then it will require a long long time to get a decent balancing.
You simply cant do changes one by one, u have to address as many issues as possible while always taking a look at the bigger picture.
This bigger picture tells me that as soon as vasari is economicly on equall footing again subverters will tip the balance in favor of vasari's.
Its also not fun if the game has such uber/must have units. They are simply too strong compared to the other races support ships.
So if noone wants subverters nerfed then u would have to seriously buff the other support ships but that wouldnt be a good idea.
I already saw the first fleets which consisted of 50% subverters and thats not something i rly like to see.

Btw its also an option to simply reduce the range of the AOE ability instead of giving em a lot higher support. This way they would be more like other support ships and u could still built a decent number of ships as vasari.
Still i want to point out again how much more powerfull they are compared to other support ships so a nerf is A MUST.
Something i would suggest is to nerf subverters a bit and buff some of the other support ships, should also make support for other races more important and thus make a mixed fleet worthwhile.
on Mar 15, 2008
I agree with OP on the Black Market. The rest was for the most part smaller issues that don't reeeeaally need to be changed anytime soon, and some are even acceptable as they are because it adds variety to game style. I mean the argument about fighters is great, but keep in mind that your counterargument applies to a certain gameplay approach. Whereas the market argument is a global issue that affects everyone. All in all though I agree with most what you said there. It was also nicely organized, easy to read, and very respectful. I hope the devs take some of your stuff to heart.
on Mar 15, 2008
Stop with the subverters already! Without them the Vasari support is lackluster.


the subverters are not there to fix all the other vasari issues.
U cant have one uberunit just cause some other units are badly balanced.
Instead IC should make Overseers more usefull and also some of the other vasari ships so that subverters are gonna be what they are supposed to be, support ships and not the main part of ur fleet.
on Mar 16, 2008
Another option would be to keep the AOE size the same and other things the same but make it effect a max of 5 or 6 units. But I'd personally prefer them be costly/in small numbers/be good.

Cielo's could probably use a buffing, and overseers might need more than simply faster turn rate or not needing to face, but these are minor and I could see waiting.

I wanted to keep this to sort of "bare essentials" and not bother the devs to much now
on Mar 16, 2008
I agree with the majority of the ideas but think fighters shouldn't be buffed that greatly, you also have to take into account that fighter squadrons tend to be larger than bomber squadrons, even though I see your point that against flak bombers would still be better I think bombers should always be a better choice against heavier armour types.
on Mar 16, 2008
LinkesAuge, regarding the subverters I just happen to agree with Cykur that lategame, Vasari (even in 1.02) need such "great support" to have any chance. Or they could go RA. TEC have their insane economy, advent have their great synergies, what do vasari have for lategame?

Thats why I agreed a minor nerf to them was ok (assuming vasari econ is fixed). I played Vasari mainly in 1.02 (Although I liked TEC too), and I can tell ya (once again, like Cykur), I mainly went enforcers (HC) as a vasari. Subverters were a good addition but their fragile and dps is bad. The fact is, at this late point in the game, Vasari is weaker than advent's synergies and out-numbered by TEC. They *need* a way to even the score and in some ways subverters fill this void.

Thats why i'm wary of over-nerfing them, specially since right now as I said, its not a "crisis" yet. Maybe it never will be. Things sometimes look great on paper and don't work out as well in practice...
on Mar 16, 2008
LinkesAuge, regarding the subverters I just happen to agree with Cykur that lategame, Vasari (even in 1.02) need such "great support" to have any chance. Or they could go RA. TEC have their insane economy, advent have their great synergies, what do vasari have for lategame?Thats why I agreed a minor nerf to them was ok (assuming vasari econ is fixed). I played Vasari mainly in 1.02 (Although I liked TEC too), and I can tell ya (once again, like Cykur), I mainly went enforcers (HC) as a vasari. Subverters were a good addition but their fragile and dps is bad. The fact is, at this late point in the game, Vasari is weaker than advent's synergies and out-numbered by TEC. They *need* a way to even the score and in some ways subverters fill this void.Thats why i'm wary of over-nerfing them, specially since right now as I said, its not a "crisis" yet. Maybe it never will be. Things sometimes look great on paper and don't work out as well in practice...


Vasari do have RA late game , which is their answer to TEC's insane eco. Similarly, with RA you can out-manouver an advent's fleet (but it is unlikely you will defeat it head on). The problem with subverters is that they can disable entire fleets - I have seen fleets which were 50% subverters and its not pretty (if the other half is dps, like assailants). Yes they die fairly quickly to malice etc, but in the time his whole fleet is disabled you can really screw over one of his high level caps and if advent lose a few of those its gg. I think if this issue isn't addresed in the next patch, we will see subverter spam, since imo the cat is out of the bag on this one now . (of course, the Black Market and javelis LRM changes are more important imo).
on Mar 16, 2008
Working on a mod that encompasses most of these changes.
on Mar 16, 2008
Ehtom, RA isn't a strategy you usually decide to "go" because it is late-game... It takes so long to get all the civ labs, research, get the gates up, etc. RA is a strategy that you begin the game with... So unless you want us to always be going RA as Vasari, thats not really a answer to the late game.

I've yet to see a vasari successfully convert from going non-RA in the early/mid game, then see its not going to end soon and switch over to RA in time. Not with decent players anyhow. Have you?

I agree with you that lategame, a fleet with 50% subverters is effective. Whether this "effective fleet" can overcome advent synergies or TEC economy lategame...That case has not been made IMO. I think in such a situation, TEC or advent still have the advantage personally. Because it *is* an effective combination, I was ok with a small nerf to subverters... But please, lets not nerf the combination into the ground and stomp on it. If, after a small nerf, we see vasari being too strong in a non-RA lategame (which I HIGHLY HIGHLY doubt), they can nerf subverters more.

Actually, this is my last post on subverters. I'm playing TEC Sim-City-Econ now anyway, why am I defending Vasari? Nerf it nerf it! .
8 Pages1 2 3 4 5  Last