Free Allegiance Forums

Dorjan wrote:QUOTE (Dorjan @ Apr 28 2009, 01:00 PM) I really am against this idea for one reason: You are taking away something from the game that is unique and already balanced with IC. Gigas bases are vuln to small arms fire and IC are against galvs, two big features that make the factions.

Either get rid of their ripping miners maybe as that was added to them (I could be wrong but hasn't IC ALWAYS had ungalvable bases?) if my assumptions are correct, the ripping miners are the more obvious "nerf" to IC.

Sup has fig/bs that aren't all that much more expensive than galvs to get (ofc galvs doesn't cost per ship..)

IC also has large doors making them weak to HTT runs. On Large maps going IC is suicide.

This will really throw IC out of balance and their costs / build times etc will all have to be adjusted.

Fighter/bombers are SY+sup.. at least you have to have SY enabled to get them. All things being equal, no faction going pure sup has a prayer of a chance against IC exp, which is funny since as I understand it, the techpathts are supposed be rock-paper-scissors (IE: tac is strong vs sup, sup is strong vs exp and exp is strong vs tac). As for taking away ripping miners, now THAT would be a nerf to make IC nigh unplayable. As it is now, an alert commander can do practially without miner d in early game, since there is no way a miner is going to die to a random assault before it rips.

I would be very happy if IC ops and teles take 2x the time to get galved in respect to other factions.. they would still die fast in large games though (but this is another story/problem)

Dorj your missing the point, going sup vs IC is silly unless you hold out for figbombers, galvs are an important part of supremacy for taking out enemy minor bases, but IC are immune to that, to get effective figbombers you need tp2 as well so that's a lot of money just to kill IC ops and teles.

I actually think the numbers although extreme are good for IC because they can be galved but still very hard to galv which means they can be defended.

apochboi wrote:QUOTE (apochboi @ Apr 28 2009, 05:33 AM) If you feel there is a larger issue with expansion well, post that rather than just one factions expansion.

A significant number of people *do* have an issue with expansion - there was a poll in the CC forum with a fairly large amount of responses, where a majority of people wanted to raise ints' basic sig to 100%, and a smaller, but still very significant number wanted to reduce the amount of fuel ints carry. If we're going to be balancing a faction because it has strong exp, exp itself should be balanced first, to see if the faction even needs anything at all afterwards.

QUOTE (Dorjan)I really am against this idea for one reason: You are taking away something from the game that is unique and already balanced with IC. Gigas bases are vuln to small arms fire and IC are against galvs, two big features that make the factions.[/quote]This. Ungalvable bases are something very unique about IC, and I really think they should stay, because they are awesome. At least keep the teleports ungalvable (someone suggested this earlier to encourage IC sup, so it doesn't get quite as ignored). And taking out ripping miners? O_o That... would completely change everything, woudln't it? And again, they're just cool. Anyway, isn't it true that neither of these two things are actually the advantages that make IC strong?

If the reason IC are played too often that they have lt ints, and you want to nerf them a bit, then... why not nerf lt ints instead of ungalvable bases? Reduce lt ints' hit points or make them harder to steer or something, just a bit, until it balances out. Making the bases galvable will not weaken IC where they need weakening, and it will weaken them where they're already weak - expanding across the map, which is already hard enough due to expensive and slow-building constructors. Making galving possible against them won't lead to people going Sup vs. IC Exp... I mean, really? Will it? You can galv the few ops and TPs they've managed to build, and you'll go sup because of that if you otherwise would not have? Against IC hvy ints?..

Anywho, I think, apply the small nerfs to Exp generally that were already disucssed at length and voted in favour of on the CC forum, and then see if IC is still overpowered, and if they are, nerf lt ints slightly so they aren't an overwhelming early game advantage (only a moderate one).

girlyboy wrote:QUOTE (girlyboy @ Apr 28 2009, 01:35 PM) expanding across the map, which is already hard enough due to expensive and slow-building constructors.

Erm what?

IC Op Cons take 2mins to launch, Rix Op Cons take 1min 30 seconds to launch. OH noes 30seconds they have map now!!!
IC Op costs 5k, Rix Op costs 5k.

What is your point? That because it takes 30 seconds longer to get out a con IC can't expand?

Add in the fact that an IC Op is heavy making it almost as strong as other factions techbases and you can easily spam the map with IC. And with ripping miners you can plop Teles everywhere.

You must be stupid to think you can't expand with IC. And yes galving is very important, if you can galv ops and teles you can take out ICs mining sectors instead of the alternative which is to try and catch a miner which can ripcord to safety at the first sign of trouble.

Stop being retarded and just accept the fact that IC needs a nerf because it's not just about expansion because IC Ops and Tele's are still ungalvable if they choose to get Tac or Sup as well.

Hmm, it appears I have no idea what I'm talking about. For some reason I was convinced they were more expensive when that obviously isn't true.

Still, a lot can happen in 30 seconds!

>_>



Or... or something.

Don't change them, they are awesome. Nerf the ints instead.

girlyboy wrote:QUOTE (girlyboy @ Apr 28 2009, 02:35 PM) This. Ungalvable bases are something very unique about IC, and I really think they should stay, because they are awesome. At least keep the teleports ungalvable (someone suggested this earlier to encourage IC sup, so it doesn't get quite as ignored). And taking out ripping miners? O_o That... would completely change everything, woudln't it? And again, they're just cool. Anyway, isn't it true that neither of these two things are actually the advantages that make IC strong?
ed weakening, and it will weaken them where they're already weak - expanding across the map, which is already hard enough due to expensive and slow-building constructors. Making galving possible against them won't lead to people going Sup vs. IC Exp... I mean, really? Will it? You can galv the few ops and TPs they've managed to build, and you'll go sup because of that if you otherwise would not have? Against IC hvy ints?..

I really think you should play some competive games before posting stuff like this.

Basically being able to galv IC means you can take the map from them as sup, making it harder for them to attack your miners, push cons, mine... you pick it. There are some reasons why figbees do not fit well into that role, such as being far slower and easier to kill than adv figs and costing money for each ship, which means for every run you have to pay cash, and isn't even sure it will work.


I think the IC bases should have 1/3 or 1/4 more hull and be galvable.

HSharp wrote:QUOTE (HSharp @ Apr 28 2009, 02:12 PM) Erm what?

IC Op Cons take 2mins to launch, Rix Op Cons take 1min 30 seconds to launch. OH noes 30seconds they have map now!!!
IC Op costs 5k, Rix Op costs 5k.

What is your point? That because it takes 30 seconds longer to get out a con IC can't expand?

Add in the fact that an IC Op is heavy making it almost as strong as other factions techbases and you can easily spam the map with IC. And with ripping miners you can plop Teles everywhere.

You must be stupid to think you can't expand with IC. And yes galving is very important, if you can galv ops and teles you can take out ICs mining sectors instead of the alternative which is to try and catch a miner which can ripcord to safety at the first sign of trouble.

And what, the 0.75 Capacity and 0.85 speed of IC miners compared to the 1.00 Capacity and 1.00 speed miners of rix doesn't make a difference either? The fact that it takes miners longer to dock at a Op / Tech base than a ref. The fact that a ref is cheep, an Op isn't?

Come on Hsharp you're smarter than that. There are more reasons than a 30 second extra build time on opening op/tele makes that difference. It helps of course but you missed the point.

IC's HTTs are loud and only slightly stronger than "normal". I don't think the un-galvable bases is whats wrong with IC Queen.

Dorjan wrote:QUOTE (Dorjan @ Apr 28 2009, 03:06 PM) And what, the 0.75 Capacity and 0.85 speed of IC miners compared to the 1.00 Capacity and 1.00 speed miners of rix doesn't make a difference either? The fact that it takes miners longer to dock at a Op / Tech base than a ref. The fact that a ref is cheep, an Op isn't?

So IC miners mine on a rock for longer, then they can rip back to base and offload then having to walk, you don't need refs with IC miners, so yes it takes longer for a miner to dock then it does for another factions miner to dock at a ref, but guess what that other miner can't rip to offload, you don't need refs because you have teleports instead which are pretty damn cheap and more useful then refs, and for some strange reason you are arguing that this makes IC worse on large maps? The fact that the miners can rip to one side of the map to the other to mine full He3 rocks while other factions have to walk thier miners everywhere?

Cmon Dorj your smarter then that, and this isn't some huge mega-ultra nerf because although it makes IC bases galvable it still will take a long time to galv them down.

HSharp wrote:QUOTE (HSharp @ Apr 28 2009, 04:00 PM) So IC miners mine on a rock for longer, then they can rip back to base and offload then having to walk, you don't need refs with IC miners, so yes it takes longer for a miner to dock then it does for another factions miner to dock at a ref, but guess what that other miner can't rip to offload, you don't need refs because you have teleports instead which are pretty damn cheap and more useful then refs, and for some strange reason you are arguing that this makes IC worse on large maps? The fact that the miners can rip to one side of the map to the other to mine full He3 rocks while other factions have to walk thier miners everywhere?

Cmon Dorj your smarter then that, and this isn't some huge mega-ultra nerf because although it makes IC bases galvable it still will take a long time to galv them down.

You forgeting capacity? And their rip time being 20 seconds? Come-on...

I agree that making them tougher to galvs is better than just normal bases, but i'd rather see their price go up than that.

Would it be possible to allow IC to buy an upgrade from Normal to Heavy Bases?