| 1 |
> - hunters (torpedo ships) sux. They may teoretically make cost vs scallops but in real situations they are useless. They don't stack as well as scallops because they are so damn huge. They also die very easily to anything that can hit above ground units, for example enforcer or any hovers.
|
1 |
> - hunters (torpedo ships) sux. They may teoretically make cost vs scallops but in real situations they are useless. They don't stack as well as scallops because they are so damn huge. They also die very easily to anything that can hit above ground units, for example enforcer or any hovers.
|
| 2 |
\n
|
2 |
\n
|
| 3 |
Or scallops that [i]walk up onto the shore[/i].
|
3 |
Or scallops that [i]walk up onto the shore[/i].
|
| 4 |
\n
|
4 |
\n
|
| 5 |
The
problem
is
that
sea
has
*three*
different
types
of
targets
to
consider
instead
of
the
regular
two.
Normally,
on
surface,
there's
land
units
and
air
units.
In
sea,
there's
surface/land
units
(
that
can't
be
harmed
by
torpedoes)
,
underwater
units
(
that
can't
be
harmed
by
surface
weaponry)
and
the
usual
air
units.
|
5 |
The
problem
is
that
sea
has
*three*
different
types
of
targets
to
consider
instead
of
the
regular
two.
Normally,
on
surface,
there's
land
units
and
air
units.
In
sea,
there's
hover/shore
units
(
that
can't
be
harmed
by
torpedoes)
,
underwater
units
(
that
can't
be
harmed
by
surface
weaponry)
and
the
usual
air
units.
|
| 6 |
\n
|
6 |
\n
|
| 7 |
And the naval player? Defenses? They're vulnerable to *both* surface units *and* UW units. So by default, they're operating at a massive disadvantage.
|
7 |
And the naval player? Defenses? They're vulnerable to *both* surface units *and* UW units. So by default, they're operating at a massive disadvantage.
|
| 8 |
\n
|
8 |
\n
|
| 9 |
Then combine the fact that naval units are bulky and clumsy - hard to pack together, snakes have their stupid "fire forward only" behavior, etc. Naval range advantages are counteracted by this clumsiness, making it hard to kite with them.
|
9 |
Then combine the fact that naval units are bulky and clumsy - hard to pack together, snakes have their stupid "fire forward only" behavior, etc. Naval range advantages are counteracted by this clumsiness, making it hard to kite with them.
|
| 10 |
\n
|
10 |
\n
|
| 11 |
I think we need a coherent idea of how underwater gameplay is supposed to work - is it just another layer of weapon countering like air? Is it about stealth, like Starcraft's cloak that requires special equipment to spot? About bypassing the combat?
|
11 |
I think we need a coherent idea of how underwater gameplay is supposed to work - is it just another layer of weapon countering like air? Is it about stealth, like Starcraft's cloak that requires special equipment to spot? About bypassing the combat?
|
| 12 |
\n
|
12 |
\n
|
| 13 |
A part of me wants to remove or nerf 90% of the underwater weaponry and crank up the prices on detectors to make underwater units focus on being a stealth layer rather than an offensive one.
|
13 |
A part of me wants to remove or nerf 90% of the underwater weaponry and crank up the prices on detectors to make underwater units focus on being a stealth layer rather than an offensive one.
|
oldschool sea battles