Belters need a cost nerf

spideycw · Post by **spideycw** » Fri Oct 24, 2008 6:24 pm

Well if we are adressing the issue of a cost nerf/econ nerf for Belters should we not be saying the same for Giga or even TF's fairly cheesy econ?

As for your other issues I'm not sure if you are suggesting Belters figs should not be able to nan or they shouldnt keep their enh tech or what? Can you expand upon that?

HSharp · Post by **HSharp** » Fri Oct 24, 2008 8:08 pm

CronoDroid wrote:QUOTE (CronoDroid @ Oct 24 2008, 12:39 PM) On that note could SOMEONE please tie Hvy Scouts to Starbase?!! It is SO annoying to have to continue to fight Hvy Scouts if the enemy is turtled into a few sectors with just their techbase after you've killed the garr.

If this is done could we do it so you don't require a techbase to get heavy scouts then?

Kltplzyxm · Post by **Kltplzyxm** » Fri Oct 24, 2008 9:10 pm

spideycw wrote:QUOTE (spideycw @ Oct 24 2008, 11:24 AM) Well if we are adressing the issue of a cost nerf/econ nerf for Belters should we not be saying the same for Giga or even TF's fairly cheesy econ?

As for your other issues I'm not sure if you are suggesting Belters figs should not be able to nan or they shouldnt keep their enh tech or what? Can you expand upon that?

My point is that you should get one benefit or the other. Giga sup is forced to pay for all the tech and cannot just pick up and use anything that acquire regardless of techbase or no techbase all together.

Put it this way, we have one faction that has many many perks with little drawback. You can't even say speed is a drawback with belts due to the speed of ints and scouts. Belter figs SHOULD be able to nan , belters SHOULD use all the tech they pick up. That is the character of that fashion. These two points alone are very strong incentives and advantages for belters... but at what cost? Right now I see relatively none compared to the other factions. The only real drawback I can see right now is a high sig and maybe low accel. But in all, that is relatively trivial compared to it's other advantages.

Personally, I think that the cheap cost of cons for Belter is thematically unneccessary. Increasing the cost of tech cons so that they are in line with the other factions is probably enough of a change that won't affect the characteristics of Belters and still have enough of an impact.

takingarms1 · Post by **takingarms1** » Sat Oct 25, 2008 1:59 am

Belters has several drawbacks, some of which were recent topics in this forum. One, they are flying garbage cans and maneuver accordingly. Two, no small shields. Three, 4 minute research time. Up until fairly recently, they were one of the worst factions in allegiance with one of the worst win/loss ratios.

Drizzo · Post by **Drizzo** » Sat Oct 25, 2008 2:11 am

Remove the fighter size reduction and belters will suck again like everyone wants it to.

Evincar · Post by **Evincar** » Sat Oct 25, 2008 3:35 am

belters econ is quite balanced if you take the tech cost/time into account. I always like to compare them as 'opposite' to GT: those have high cost bases but lower cost tech, achieving a different kind of balance (neglecting expansion -this is not completely accurate with the pali- to get more tech), where the early game ends with the construction of a palisade and techbase, opposite to belts who only get advanced tech and proceed to endgame when they have more territory. the problem is inherent to the way belters work towards endgame, with very powerful bomb runs, from early to the beginning of endgame, making the ability to spam their bases of maximum importance to attain map control, trading off combat power, to attack miners in essence, because fignans are quite proficient at defending and bombing. So, if belters suddenly were subject to a raise in base costs, their bombing power would be considerably reduced -> their expanding power and ability to put pressure in miners reduced + less space for their miners to run free-> unbalance

edit: an example.

limdiamond, belts vs ic. belters secures low with tele, their middle with op, buys bombers and menaces to capture their middle, disrupting their mining operations, while it bombs the forward op using the powerful fignans (unstoppable with lt ints on squadgames, ie.). next belters mines the lower part of the map, pushes a techbase to their middle, maybe low, and in the case they managed to clear their forward base, to high. ic plants a techbase on the meantime, between their forward op and their home, or at their middle.

in this case belters use the ability they have to spam constructors and mine on semi secure sectors (due to cheapness of miners in case they are threatened, and early carriers/fignans) to induce a slow paced early game where positioning takes more importance than whoring power. when belters builds a secure (non forward) techbase, they are ready to advance to endgame, probably a sup (or an exp in case of a competent team). Even though belters will probably obtain more territory at first, ic is well placed with three (or two if they failed to defend high) connected sectors, and has the money to get adv tech, at it's very basic expression (aka heavy ints). after this, the focus of the game shifts to conquer the sectors that are possible to mine and were not previously disputed, where belters loses it's edge on the con run, since all you need is a single one, so a good heavy int escort will be quite unstoppable.

limdiamond, GT vs ic. Gt starts with op low, teleport to their middle, mines low and moves miners forward low while ic plants tp and op high. next GT quickly buys a techbase and plants it middle, and caltrops the aleph to high, while pushing a pali/tele to midhigh, depending on which techpath was chosen, if it is a tele, it will rip a palisade soon and rush advanced tech to enjoy the benefits of early tech supremacy. after this, the focus of the game shifts from expanding to killing their respective techbases, since both factions don't need any more money other than for (adv tech, but it is not much, and) buying more ops/teles.

Dark_Sponge · Post by **Dark_Sponge** » Sat Oct 25, 2008 4:29 am

TakingArms wrote:QUOTE (TakingArms @ Oct 24 2008, 06:59 PM) Belters has several drawbacks,...no small shields...

IMO Having no small shields is a huge advantage for Belters, or rather the extra hull to make up for a lack of shields is a huge advantage.

Even when you don't take faction modifiers into account (which makes belters hull even more impressive) they still have waaay more hp than other factions.

----------Hull---SS1---Total HP
Rix Fig: 300 + 150 = 450
Belt Fig:600 + 000 = 600

----------Hull---SS3---Total HP
Rix Fig: 300 + 225 = 525
Belt Fig:600 + 000 = 600

So Belter Figs have more total hitpoints than other figs with ss3. Even without faction modifiers.

And yes, hull doesn't regenerate like shields, and shields have different damage modifiers than light hull. But that's offset by their total hp being completely nannable. If you knocked Belter Figs down to 300 hull and gave them ss it would make Belters much weaker (please don't do that, just making a point).

CronoDroid · Post by **CronoDroid** » Sat Oct 25, 2008 4:47 am

I actually agree with Drizzo here, Belter Figs should be made fat again. So they're mincemeat for Rix Figs or Lt Ints.

Anyway since I feel nobody from the CC staff pays attention to any of us (it would be nice if someone with authority actually posted with a detailed discussion/rebuttal for once) I will make my own topic about Hvy Scouts.

On the Belters thing, they're particularly strong during longer games because of high yield (meaning more money when rocks aren't as full), tech retention and cheap techbases. I would nerf the yield slightly while increasing capacity so that they still get the same amount of cash from a minerload on a given setting but so that when the game drags on, their rocks aren't all much more full than the enemies because they don't drain as much due to lower capacity. This gives a fair amount of breathing room to their economy if they're pushed back or run out of sectors to mine. And yeah, the higher yield means they can get more out of a given unit of He3 than other factions can.

So if you want to nerf Belters, that's my suggestion. Either that or my previous one about losing the garrison resets the tech retention for Belters. So if they're played well, Belters will still be just as strong. This will just cut down their amazing survival ability somewhat which I think a lot of people dislike. Yeah, Belters is pretty much as powerful on the comeback as BIOS is.

Post by **pkk** » Sat Oct 25, 2008 9:26 am

Dark_Sponge wrote:QUOTE (Dark_Sponge @ Oct 25 2008, 06:29 AM) ----------Hull---SS1---Total HP
Rix Fig: 300 + 150 = 450
Belt Fig:600 + 000 = 600

----------Hull---SS3---Total HP
Rix Fig: 300 + 225 = 525
Belt Fig:600 + 000 = 600

Your caluclation is wrong, you forgit the faction wide modifier:

----------Hull---SS1---Total HP
Rix Fig: 300*0.9 + 150 = 420
Belt Fig: 600*1.05 = 630

----------Hull---SS3---Total HP
Rix Fig: 300*0.9 + 225 = 525
Belt Fig:600*1.05 + 000 = 630

Remember: Gat and Mini do only half damage to shields, unlike mls:

----------Hull---SS1---Total HP
Rix Fig: 300*0.9 + 150*0.5 = 570
Belt Fig: 600*1.05 = 630

----------Hull---SS3---Total HP
Rix Fig: 300*0.9 + 225*0.5 = 720
Belt Fig:600*1.05 + 000 = 630

badpazzword · Post by **badpazzword** » Sat Oct 25, 2008 11:12 am

1. Get the size of the ICE window, let it be X and Y
2. Roll a dX
3. Roll a dY
4. Move mouse over rolled position relative to topleft corner
5. Roll a d10
6. Take 1 off
7. Hit the corresponding number on the keyboard
8. Click
9. Repeat till you save the core.
10. ...
11. Tell us how it went

</comic-relief><endless-balancing-discussions>