Expansion is incredibly overpower/overused

Post by **Raveen** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 11:09 am

Bacon wrote:QUOTE (Bacon @ Jan 7 2008, 05:05 AM) I'm positive that I'm not alone in saying this, but Exp is getting old. If you want to win, you go exp. Simple as that. Tac and Sup can win, sure, but if you want a sure fire way to give your team a definite shot at winning, you go expansion. If your team is a bit more skilled or you're feeling daring, you can go Sup or Tac. But if the enemy is Exp, they can counter your SF's w/ PP's and they can counter your bombers w/ hvy ints. Nothing, however, can really counter heavy ints. Shouldn't there be some way to counter hvy ints? Like, say, maybe a Sup/Tac gun that happens to shred ints? I don't see how that's any more cheesy than ints carrying a probe that can see SFs or ints having guns that rip figs to shreds.

I do like my anti-int gun idea, though. It could potentially make for some more variety to your average pickup game.

It's called a Galv. Check the stats, nothing is more effective vs medium hull. Of course, actually getting one costs a huge amount of money but there you go.

Adept · Post by **Adept** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 1:18 pm

Snack wrote:QUOTE (Snack @ Jan 7 2008, 12:24 PM) Absolutely Bacon. However, as you can see there are many people who think "it's fine", so there's really nothing else to do but keep wtfpwning them with expansion. :-/ They will get it eventually, but then we will have new people again, thinking "it's fine" and so on and so on...
Oh and not to mention those who actually agree with you Bacon but will cry bloody murder if...I don't know...ints get more signature, or something as logical as that anyway.

That's one of the strangest things. Why on earth are interceptors stealthy like tigers in the jungle anyway? This is the In-your-face-come-get-me-if-you-think-you're-hard-enough-#"Â¤#"Â¤"!! Ship. What need does it have to sneak around??

Admittedly one can do great things with the stealth, but I just don't see the justification for it.

takingarms1 · Post by **takingarms1** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 2:23 pm

Please don't nerf interceptors!

You want to make a single change that will completely change the dynamic of allegiance? Move PPs from EXP to SUP, and don't let ints mount them. Then, my friends, you will have a paper-rock-scissors thing going where tac > exp > sup > tac.

I always thought it was rediculous that Ints carried PPs.

Adept · Post by **Adept** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 2:27 pm

takingarms1 wrote:QUOTE (takingarms1 @ Jan 7 2008, 04:23 PM) I always thought it was rediculous that Ints carried PPs.

That's a pretty good point. That would make the big-bad-ints rely on station sensors or have a scout along.

Still leaves the problem of them hunting miners far away, and having enough fuel to overwhelm enemy sectors.

Adaven · Post by **Adaven** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 3:35 pm

Vlymoxyd wrote:QUOTE (Vlymoxyd @ Jan 7 2008, 01:19 AM) As for bios, I think that GS are overrated and that people should just learn to int bomb against bios. GS and bios basic figs can't do much vs ints.

Actually vly, a number of these bios comeback games spidey is talking about aren't using gs at all.

spideycw · Post by **spideycw** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 3:53 pm

Adaven wrote:QUOTE (Adaven @ Jan 7 2008, 10:35 AM) Actually vly, a number of these bios comeback games spidey is talking about aren't using gs at all.

Not only that but since I've started complaining so vocally I think we've seen much less Bios GS+Home Sup+Tp2+XRM. Now if we can do the same thing with Exp!

Vlymoxyd · Post by **Vlymoxyd** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 5:58 pm

I didn't get GS the last 3 times I commanded bios /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" /> I won 2 of them. The loss was me being stupid cause I built an assault exp with no probes.

SaiSoma · Post by **SaiSoma** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 6:02 pm

Adept wrote:QUOTE (Adept @ Jan 7 2008, 08:27 AM) That's a pretty good point. That would make the big-bad-ints rely on station sensors or have a scout along.

Still leaves the problem of them hunting miners far away, and having enough fuel to overwhelm enemy sectors.

ints are defensive ships. i know that the best D is a good O, but c'mon!

aqhorus · Post by **aqhorus** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 6:02 pm

http://www.freeallegiance.org/forums/index...showtopic=31759
http://www.freeallegiance.org/forums/index...showtopic=38315

I think these two threads are also related to this one.

Typhoone · Post by **Typhoone** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 6:53 pm

I still like the fact that ints can carry PPs. They are a great upgrade and the idea behind the upgrade is solid. If anything I guess I'd recommend making PP require EWS2 or something? But if one was to do that you might as well just move PPs to Sup... which through all the rough ideas tossed around so far is my favorite.

Ints are a great all-around ship. They are easy to use. That's the strangest thing for me. I thought the most generic easy-to-use ship should be the fighter. Yet it is so versatile and has so many more features (missiles, MPs, 3 primary armaments as opposed to 2, rip ability) that it makes it more difficult to use effectively. Let me correct that by saying that fighter's aren't any more 'difficult' - their biggest perks come from their ability to be versatile - while ints just dump all that versatility into owning other ships. Which, in the end, is tactically most important to contributing to winning the game through killing miners and blowing bases.

Ty.