OK first off I do need to clarify what I have said. When I said no one cares, well we have, maybe 15 people in this thread. Of those 15:
Papsmear said it'e overpowered. OK.
Deathreander said Hunt3 is faceroll. Ok.
Phoenix said Hunt3 is faceroll, takes, no skill etc. OK.
I missed Culmination. OK.
I see Doc Izzo here also. OK.
Now Vogue. Uh, not sure if serious.
Due to Vortrog's earlier comment I would exactly not say he is calling for tac nerf either:
Vortrog wrote:QUOTE (Vortrog @ Nov 17 2014, 06:59 PM) Please don't do to Adv tac what we did to XRM2 heavy bombers.
But yes, make it more energy managed so if you do that right, you deserve to own any other tech.
Everyone else has offered helpful if different solutions, but I don't see most of them explicitly saying tac needs nerfs. Finally there is the rest of the 150 people on leaderboard, who don't appear to care. Maybe they don't care at all, buffs or nerfs.
Anyway if there were more than 6 people here calling for a tac nerf out of the blue, I might take it more seriously.
I stand by what I said about Hunt2 and Sniper1, it is not that easy to defend with.
As for what I said about making tac more of a primary techpath, forget it. I don't think major changes should happen to the techpath without the support of the community. Now, what I don't care to see happen is for tac to become more of a secondary techpath, and nerfs to tac will indeed move in that direction.
phoenix1 wrote:QUOTE (phoenix1 @ Nov 25 2014, 10:00 AM) Win, I know reading isn't your strong suit. But here's a list of the people who have suggested various nerfs to tac who aren't me.
That's not 3 people.
I mean it MIGHT be 3 people but somehow I suspect that it isn't since rather than being the kind of moron who goes "that's how it's always been" and then just assumes that's a reasonable answer I've actually put some thought into it.
Oh and you know what's changed? Missile damage GA was moved to tac. *that* wasn't always the case and giving a 21% damage buff to hunter 3 was probably way over the top. If missile damage GA moved back to sup that would probably also resolve the issue... but frankly I don't think that's necessary. I think all that's necessary is dropping the damage from 144 to 130 on hunt3 or, maaaaaaaaybe, dropping DM04 from 1.0 vs light to .9.
You see, the funny part about all of this is Win STILL doesn't get what the problem is. He's still worried about bombing vs adv tac (which shouldn't work) and claiming that all you need to do is push cons against tac (which absolutely shouldn't work).
Here's the problem with tac in a nutshell:
The primary accepted tactics against Tac are as follows: bomb and push cons. Bombing would be nice except unless you have a base right next to their tac they get to watch you walk for days and pick off your scouts. The solution is to push a con, right? Except that there's a fun little fact about tac: it's the best techpath at killing constructors. So maybe if you get into position you can attack miners. Once again: tac is simply better at attacking miners than you are. Well maybe we can just defend miners? Maybe except that nanning doesn't work because util2 out damages nan2 so 2 SFs are going to spike down a miner almost before the defense can react. And if it's 3 sfs vs 3 defenders? Forget about it.
Again, all this would be fine except that Tac has the best end game (and always has had the best end game). There's a reason everyone goes for SBs and not Figbees or HTTs when they're multiteching. There needs to be a reliable way to deal with Tac.
Also hvy/adv scouts aren't a good answer. Hvy scouts might be a good answer if they had turrets again, but as it stands you're asking people to put off their own adv tech so they can deal with someone else's adv tech?
Make xnaning a viable option against hunters again. Nerf DM04 by 10% against light hull. Then make some subtle changes to the regen rate of adv sfs so they can't cruise at invisible.
EDIT: also Win, culmination's opinion is worth a lot more than yours with regards to game balance because he is better than you by a wide margin.
OK, yes I do know the Missile Damage GA, with Ship Speed, got moved to TAC. Sup got Missile Tracking and Scan Range. Exp got: pulse probe moved to tier2, with its 5k scan range. That's right, pulse probe was moved to tier2 for exp, giving exp a direct counter to TAC. I know it was move to treasures and it's range was reduced to 3k recently. Still, most of this was like well over a year ago. Now 6 people have a problem. Well........I guess now is as good a time as any, but I don't see a big community concern for it, I see 6 people.......
I think Weedman did move Missile Damage to Tac specifically to help Tac defend. But it adds, 10% extra damage at tier2?
As for con pushes, the con needs an escort, the stealth fighters need to use util to kill the con and that will get them eyed by the con, so the defenders can pick them off. Also the scouts have to die. If this is done with a bomb run, it can be effective. Maybe not in every situation, but it does work, especially with counter3 heavy bombers and avd scouts.
I can see people having issues with the way tac works. It can be frustrating to deal with. But there is a reason most pub commanders don't go full tac first. Because it will be bombed, and the bomb run often will work. I did not see many people going full tac during the recent squad tournament either. I think there is a reason for that as well.
Eh, whatever. I don't think there is more I can say. I have the opinion that it is fine. Maybe a half dozen have the opinion that it needs to be nerfed, like each in a different way. I suppose it could use some tweaks. The question whether it is overpowered or not, well, that answer is mostly just an opinion, and nothing more. I would kind of prefer a general poll.
Well, it's not like tac will be nerfed out of the game. If need be changes can be reverted anyway. I will support whatever P32 decides to do. (Oh, can you buff Vangs please. Might as well ask while we are talking about balance changes. Lol.)
