Nice video, thx. Cybran HARMS is also pretty devastating for defending POI, though I'm not sure how cost effective/practical you feel it is. Also, maybe an ACU upgrade path comparison chart would be cool?
I think the cybran destroyer's weakness is being highly understated. The inability to shoot backwards severely limits ability to dodge in circles without losing firepower (gun unable to shoot and has to turn all the way around from one side to another rather than 360ing, if you're turning at max speed, this is a huge impediment) and hurts the strength of being able to stealth kite as they can't shoot backwards. I think it puts it on par with aeon or sera destroyers and evens the field a bit. The trash cruiser and lack of floaty flak also hurt their ability to stave off air attacks. If it weren't for how good their frigate was I think they'd be low tier but as it stands they are #1 or two but I don't think they're starworthy. I think the megalith might be viable if it can lay Wagner eggs underwater to suck up wrecks. I've never tried it but it might be worth a shot.
There are some things which the Aeon navy has going for it - which wasn't mentioned in this video. Aeon has the T3 hover-tank, the Absolver, which can bring down Bulwark/Asylum/Sera shield units. Thus evening the playing field against the late-game UEF fleet. They also have a T3 Torpedo Bomber which is especially potent against Cybran Cruisers and Seraphim Sub-hunters. Aeon therefore has tools which make it capable of asymmetric counters against other late-game navies. They also have a unique bombardment unit, the missile ship, which means the Aeon with naval supremacy is capable of much deeper power projection.
I agree to some extent, but I would actually put the Sera navy as the real assym-counter. Even their Carr doesn't feel like too much of a tack-on. Aeon can hit once they claim the water - but between the T3 hunters and the Uashas with their micro and the Itha with its absolutely insane AA, I see the Sera pushing Aeon out of the water every time if played even remotely competently.
Pretty much exact;y my opinion too. some ppl say aeon frig is great but I think t1 aeon is poop. the aeon bs is pretty okay though, like a shotgunner. lethal close in
They have poor late game potential, and if you don't manage to win early in their strengths other factions (like UEF and Aeon) Will win. They are The rush/snipe faction so they want to win early/quickly. Which is why their air is strong and their early navy and land are strong too. They only late game strength is really their air tbh
Cybran is the C&Cs NOD Faction. Cybran goes for early Spam and Rush. It also offers good possibilities to raid and disturb the enemy, if you are not massed eneough to push your main combat forces. They have T1 Gunship, that should tell you everything bout this faction.
@@mannyperez1880 I disagree. Personally I don't believe there is a time in the game on 90% of maps where Cybran doesn't have some of the strongest options for winning the game. You mentioned their strengths early game, but t2 stage they have corsair, best mml, cruise missle launcher, solid rhino, best amphibious wagner, and best range bot, best destroyer, and mermaids are great. T3 stage they rush the impressive loyalist, have and arguably better persival in the brick, the best t3 arty, the best strat arguably, a cloaked com, a cloaked mazor com, a teleporting mazor com, and the monkeylord. Cybran is the best all round faction no contest
@@redmen2822 Cybran is strong in T1, and climax in T2. Their late-game potential falters after this. Their biggest strength, stealth and cloaking, are nullified with omni-sensors. Many of their avenues for sniping can be mitigated through proper preparation and fortification of one's ACU. Their T4 units get outclassed which other factions T4 come online. Their combination of wide AOE and poor accuracy of Artillery, along with the worst shield options, and lower HP, make them ill-suited to strategic bombardment. The Cybran advantage does expire.
I've seen T3 Sera Sub-hunters just wreck Fleets. Every once in a while I see someone stop it, but can't figure out how. What is the sub-hunter counter?
If you haven't also lost air, then T2 torps + hover tanks to keep the subs from surfacing can work, but only if the enemy has neglected their unit composition and gone T3 subs with no surface weaponry.
Even more. Sub-hunter only costs 3k mass and in even situations can be built much faster and outmass enemy fleet in total. It's great unit overall with easy micro, and I usually try to semi-rush T3 on navy as seraphim. Cool swarming frigates will be just melted by 1-2 sub-hunters with like move only kiting, no matter how much there are at all!
UEF bulwark, torp flares, and lots of torpedo power. But sera should be running something like a 2-2-1 mix of sub hunters, destroyers and cruisers already, and there is torp defense in there, as well as basically air immunity and the ability to avoid deck guns entirely. So basically, mass for mass Sera can push anyone out of the water with only a little work.
When the game gets late enough, nothing beats tempest chain production + cybran SACU harms & sam creep. Tempests can also one shot T3 subs with ground fire if their density justifies the micro management. Tempests can do the same to atlantis, which means atlantis is a complete waste of mass against them. The only thing capable of beating tempest + cubran sacu spam is Yolona OSS.
In theory yes, but in practice it doesn't happen like that because of the range advantage. You can kite with the tempest to eventually outvalue them or you can block the battleships with hover spam or t1/t2 navy spam. You also have high damage AoE shot which one shots every destroyer. I'm not saying its a good unit, just that imo it's better than aeon battleship cause that one is pure trash
Farmsletje I do think Aeon Battleship is BS, but isn't the tempest shot super easy to dodge as well? Plus being such a big target I'm not sure about it being a micro ship tbh.
The big AoE makes it harder to dodge. Also you can do other micro stuff that does not invole dodging incoming projectiles, and if you keep your tempest at range you never have to dodge unless you're facing uef battleships which have close to the same range i think.
Is it just me or you didn't say anything about Cybran cruiser using it's AA against navy/land tagets? Also it's probably the best ship for destroying shields from all t2 navy units.
sankyu for asking this! i didn't mention it because i don't think it needs any special attention since the implementation of auto-toggle. i feel like i sufficiently covered the cybran cruiser's direct fire capabilities when i said it's useful against hover. not because i believe it has too little DPS to kill anything bigger than hover, but rather because the cruiser's HP-to-mass-ratio is too low for using it carelessly. i dislike the idea of people sending their cruisers ahead of their destroyers for some extra DPS against shields. an expensive glass cannon that carries most of the fleet's anti-air capabilities shouldn't be at the front of the formation.
I think the Sera cruiser's air AOE damage is underrated since it can annihilate grouped up intys. Contrast that with the Aeon cruiser - although it does not miss, I do not think it is as effective to counter your enemy's overall air force in the early t2 stage. But I also think the Aeon cruiser is worthless anyway...
@@MrGlutamate Not with Sera. You supplement with their hover flak, but the cruisers themselves are intensely valuable, not just for the fact that they are THE BEST AA unit in the damn game but also for their TMs and TMDs and HP, so you should still build them, even if not as many as your destros or sub hunters. Also, Sera only has T3 mobile shields, which don't speed match well with the rest of their units and are better stuck on to bubble their BSs.
@@makarov718 The +0.5 units are typically units that cost more than comparative peers, but are stronger. There are many examples A first common example, is jester gunship. Jester gunship is essentially tier 1.5, it has near tier 2 gunship DPS. And considerable HP for T1 air. Lets look at where it becomes major, with T2, tanks like Riptide, Obsidian, and llshavoh bot are T 2.5 attacking units. They have considerable more HP than normal T2 attacking units like Rhino, pillar, blaze. But they cost more. In T3, there are considerable differences in comparing attackers. The first group (T3) are loyalist and Titan. The 2nd group, I would even say T 3.25 are Harbringer and Seraphim amphibious tank. And then there are T3.5, percival and Brick. l would probably ____? consider UEF and cybran bombers T3.5, because they have rear anti air guns that will oddly threaten T1 interceptor and T2 fighter / bomber, while seraphim and aeon do not. l don't think its just Aeon and UEF with T4 navy. Though monkeylord isn't great with water, Megalith is a danger. About the video, weird no talk about Aeon T3 Solace torpedo bomber, Cybran Harm turret, and Cybran / Seraphim amphibious land forces. Special mention to Aeon shield disrupter, which is hover and can be very annoying to shield boats and T2/3 hover shield.
I have a question that bugs me to no end. I don't have FAF just to point it out. My Torpedo bombers seem to encounter a bug, when I order them to repair or sometimes just land to conserve fuel, they just fly in circles and NEVER land. Is this bug fixed in FAF or is it something I can fix in Regular Supcom FA? It makes me never want to use them because its so inconvenient to not be able to land them.
RunethePony Loads of bug fixes, loads of improvements, loads of balance improvements, loads of new maps, plenty of mods, co-op campaign and of course a multiplayer community. All for free. Go to faforever.com to check it out.
RunethePony yeah it's non-destructive so you keep the basic version as well :) The torpedo bomber problem is the sort of thing FAF has fixes for, I've never had the problem you describe
I think they own the seas. With the combination of their insane sonar, and the ability to combo sub hunters and micro destroyers into something that can effectively push out all other factions from the naval space. Once they do and have cruisers operating as backline guards, the best you'll be able to do is defend shoreline emplacements with TMD and direct artillery for a short while, since between the ungodly AA and the ability of the Uashas to juke other ships, as well as go submerged... If you play with anything like a solid unit mix, you can own the water, since you have so much firepower switch-up and concentration ability, and you're basically always safe from air. Then all you need is to build a carrier and 2 BS, and now you've suddenly got yourself something like an endgame option... The UEF are the only ones who can force Sera out of the water, with Bulwarks and TDs. And they aren't going to be mass-efficient at doing it. Meaning, in my estimation, that on any water map Sera should be switching to navy fast if the T2 ground game is tapering off. From which they can then dominate with bombardment until you can start throwing chickens or Wassaps at the enemy to break any static defenses, or overwhelm them with strat launches. It's the hidden Sera T4 option.
@@Sakhmeov on top of the fact that the sera hover options are amazing, fobo spam t3 shields, cheap flak to supplement cruisers production, high alpha hover tank etc
@@makarov718 Hovers and T3 shields are notable. Certainly you should always have tons of Sera flak something like minutes in from even getting to T2, because the fixed installations are just pointless. I don't agree on the tanks though; maybe it's a fault of my own for working more on unit mix and econ, but I just find them kind of a waste of mass and incapable of holding their own, since they always waste so much fire and don't have either the range or the speed to work their poor DPS against the other factions' options. Better go the dedicated route, imo.
90% frigates? My experience is that it's more like 90% submarines especially in the early game. Frigates typically can't do anything against submarines.
Subs take too long to kill a frig. By the time your frig is low HP, it has already killed a bunch of engineers or coastal mexes, you’ve built a torpedo launcher or a sub of your own to kill theirs. You can even ground attack t1 bombers to damage subs. Disclaimer: I haven’t played FAF in years, so if jaggedappliance has ruined the balance more in the meantime, I wouldn’t know about it.
@@Penemue well it can also be because I don't play many different maps and those that I play don't have mexes that can be targeted by t1 frigates (not sure if even T2 destroyers have the range). "You've build a sub of your own" is not an argument, because it's between the choice of building mainly frigates or a subs. Torpedo launchers > subs > frigates > torpedo launchers (talking about cost efficiency at T1). Only 1 of the 3 is stationary and has for that reason imo less value. With the T1 subs you shouldn't wait till you have a wolf pack, but go at it right away and avoid torp defences. The early enemy frigate will be heavily damaged, if not destroyed, by the point it'd reach your base. Well aimed t1 bombers could work, but it's difficult to ground attack units that don't move in a straight line. Probably bettter to use those against mexes.
Most people say the same. Same what Pene is saying about starting with T2 destroyer, not supports like sub or cruiser. Frigate, destroyer, BS are combatants, not support. What they do is contest, and do their best to secure surface, while also able to influence land (coast) more and even stall with HP. This leads to more map control, less needed micro. Subs, except for the T3 seraphim sub are poor choices for dominance, and are instead counters. Problem with counters, its generally a losing game because it throws versatility out the window. lf you are playing a counter game, lol you are already behind.
@@demetrioshristovski4518 Depending on the map you can kill a naval base, that rushes T2, with subs. T2 destroyers are great, but you can be vulnerable before you get them. In tier 1 it's basically building either frigates or subs. One counters the other so for me that's an easy choice. The UEF have radar jamming on their T1 frigate, so it's great to have a 1 or 2 of them.
imo cybran destroyer is the worst, can be easily dodgeable (can dodge 80% of the shoot easily) and there is no need of timing like with the aeon one (harder to dodge imo), and the biggest issue is that it can't shoot backward. So retreat is not a good option, and if you try to dodge you lose all your dps (since it doesn't shoot anymore). hopefully mermaid is there to make up for its weakness. otherwise i agree to pretty much everything.
Drkeyser35 all you said was "imo is harder to dodge" then listed its let downs in. I think cybran is better because of rate of fire and versatility. Aeons shots are too slow moving and they fire too slow. And the splash isnt that great but makes it nice for barraging land or hitting t1 navy. But cybran does that too.
Nice video, thx. Cybran HARMS is also pretty devastating for defending POI, though I'm not sure how cost effective/practical you feel it is. Also, maybe an ACU upgrade path comparison chart would be cool?
I think the cybran destroyer's weakness is being highly understated. The inability to shoot backwards severely limits ability to dodge in circles without losing firepower (gun unable to shoot and has to turn all the way around from one side to another rather than 360ing, if you're turning at max speed, this is a huge impediment) and hurts the strength of being able to stealth kite as they can't shoot backwards.
I think it puts it on par with aeon or sera destroyers and evens the field a bit. The trash cruiser and lack of floaty flak also hurt their ability to stave off air attacks. If it weren't for how good their frigate was I think they'd be low tier but as it stands they are #1 or two but I don't think they're starworthy.
I think the megalith might be viable if it can lay Wagner eggs underwater to suck up wrecks. I've never tried it but it might be worth a shot.
Woo! Been waiting for this for a while. :)
I love your image!
experimental battle ship tempest has its place in the aeon navi because of its high alpha damage and especially its range
Yeah no T4 or T3.5 Granted only 2 factions have T4 navy.
There are some things which the Aeon navy has going for it - which wasn't mentioned in this video. Aeon has the T3 hover-tank, the Absolver, which can bring down Bulwark/Asylum/Sera shield units. Thus evening the playing field against the late-game UEF fleet. They also have a T3 Torpedo Bomber which is especially potent against Cybran Cruisers and Seraphim Sub-hunters. Aeon therefore has tools which make it capable of asymmetric counters against other late-game navies. They also have a unique bombardment unit, the missile ship, which means the Aeon with naval supremacy is capable of much deeper power projection.
I agree to some extent, but I would actually put the Sera navy as the real assym-counter. Even their Carr doesn't feel like too much of a tack-on. Aeon can hit once they claim the water - but between the T3 hunters and the Uashas with their micro and the Itha with its absolutely insane AA, I see the Sera pushing Aeon out of the water every time if played even remotely competently.
its really late game but i dont remember hearing about harms creep as cybran, it can be used to give a lot of sub defense t3 especilly vs seriph
Pretty much exact;y my opinion too. some ppl say aeon frig is great but I think t1 aeon is poop. the aeon bs is pretty okay though, like a shotgunner. lethal close in
is it me, or is Cybran good all across the board? Landwise they're pretty good, they have the best air and apparently navy too?
They have poor late game potential, and if you don't manage to win early in their strengths other factions (like UEF and Aeon) Will win. They are The rush/snipe faction so they want to win early/quickly. Which is why their air is strong and their early navy and land are strong too. They only late game strength is really their air tbh
Cybran is the C&Cs NOD Faction. Cybran goes for early Spam and Rush. It also offers good possibilities to raid and disturb the enemy, if you are not massed eneough to push your main combat forces. They have T1 Gunship, that should tell you everything bout this faction.
@@mannyperez1880 I disagree. Personally I don't believe there is a time in the game on 90% of maps where Cybran doesn't have some of the strongest options for winning the game.
You mentioned their strengths early game, but t2 stage they have corsair, best mml, cruise missle launcher, solid rhino, best amphibious wagner, and best range bot, best destroyer, and mermaids are great. T3 stage they rush the impressive loyalist, have and arguably better persival in the brick, the best t3 arty, the best strat arguably, a cloaked com, a cloaked mazor com, a teleporting mazor com, and the monkeylord.
Cybran is the best all round faction no contest
@@redmen2822 Cybran is strong in T1, and climax in T2. Their late-game potential falters after this. Their biggest strength, stealth and cloaking, are nullified with omni-sensors. Many of their avenues for sniping can be mitigated through proper preparation and fortification of one's ACU. Their T4 units get outclassed which other factions T4 come online. Their combination of wide AOE and poor accuracy of Artillery, along with the worst shield options, and lower HP, make them ill-suited to strategic bombardment. The Cybran advantage does expire.
@@BenjaminPitkin my comment is over 2 years old, much has changed balance wise.
I've seen T3 Sera Sub-hunters just wreck Fleets. Every once in a while I see someone stop it, but can't figure out how. What is the sub-hunter counter?
If you haven't also lost air, then T2 torps + hover tanks to keep the subs from surfacing can work, but only if the enemy has neglected their unit composition and gone T3 subs with no surface weaponry.
Even more. Sub-hunter only costs 3k mass and in even situations can be built much faster and outmass enemy fleet in total. It's great unit overall with easy micro, and I usually try to semi-rush T3 on navy as seraphim. Cool swarming frigates will be just melted by 1-2 sub-hunters with like move only kiting, no matter how much there are at all!
UEF bulwark, torp flares, and lots of torpedo power. But sera should be running something like a 2-2-1 mix of sub hunters, destroyers and cruisers already, and there is torp defense in there, as well as basically air immunity and the ability to avoid deck guns entirely. So basically, mass for mass Sera can push anyone out of the water with only a little work.
When the game gets late enough, nothing beats tempest chain production + cybran SACU harms & sam creep. Tempests can also one shot T3 subs with ground fire if their density justifies the micro management. Tempests can do the same to atlantis, which means atlantis is a complete waste of mass against them.
The only thing capable of beating tempest + cubran sacu spam is Yolona OSS.
How cost inefficient is the Tempest? I'm not sure how bad should I feel after spamming it at times...
two regular cybran battleships (16k mass total) will kill a tempest (24k mass total)
In theory yes, but in practice it doesn't happen like that because of the range advantage. You can kite with the tempest to eventually outvalue them or you can block the battleships with hover spam or t1/t2 navy spam. You also have high damage AoE shot which one shots every destroyer. I'm not saying its a good unit, just that imo it's better than aeon battleship cause that one is pure trash
Farmsletje I do think Aeon Battleship is BS, but isn't the tempest shot super easy to dodge as well? Plus being such a big target I'm not sure about it being a micro ship tbh.
The big AoE makes it harder to dodge. Also you can do other micro stuff that does not invole dodging incoming projectiles, and if you keep your tempest at range you never have to dodge unless you're facing uef battleships which have close to the same range i think.
That makes sense I guess. Anything to make the Aeon navy look better is appreciated after seeing the table in the video.
Is it just me or you didn't say anything about Cybran cruiser using it's AA against navy/land tagets? Also it's probably the best ship for destroying shields from all t2 navy units.
and litteraly an alternative to building any destroyers at all at certain times. yeah that ship is super interesting!
sankyu for asking this!
i didn't mention it because i don't think it needs any special attention since the implementation of auto-toggle. i feel like i sufficiently covered the cybran cruiser's direct fire capabilities when i said it's useful against hover. not because i believe it has too little DPS to kill anything bigger than hover, but rather because the cruiser's HP-to-mass-ratio is too low for using it carelessly.
i dislike the idea of people sending their cruisers ahead of their destroyers for some extra DPS against shields. an expensive glass cannon that carries most of the fleet's anti-air capabilities shouldn't be at the front of the formation.
_and litteraly an alternative to building any destroyers at all at certain times._
this is exactly the misconception i am trying to avoid :D
oh whoops
Roasted
Atlantis t4 UEF unit has vereeeeeey huge vision. Put 1-2 on the front on your fleet and then shot enemy with 150 ranged summits
I mean I failed to hear about it. I'm sleepy and might have missed it though. If I did - my bad.
I think the Sera cruiser's air AOE damage is underrated since it can annihilate grouped up intys. Contrast that with the Aeon cruiser - although it does not miss, I do not think it is as effective to counter your enemy's overall air force in the early t2 stage. But I also think the Aeon cruiser is worthless anyway...
You're supposed to use T2 mobile flak/shields with aeon fleets rather than cruisers IMO
@@MrGlutamate Not with Sera. You supplement with their hover flak, but the cruisers themselves are intensely valuable, not just for the fact that they are THE BEST AA unit in the damn game but also for their TMs and TMDs and HP, so you should still build them, even if not as many as your destros or sub hunters. Also, Sera only has T3 mobile shields, which don't speed match well with the rest of their units and are better stuck on to bubble their BSs.
Torrents suck so much, might as well save up for tempest. It's not cost effective, but does have good range.
Cybran CI boat?
counter intel
Should have had T3.5 and T4 with T1 Frigates. Granted only Aeon and UEF has T4 but Seraphim and Cybran has a unit that would be considered T3.5
im very inexperienced in naval gameplay so I have to ask, what are the 3.5?
@@makarov718 The +0.5 units are typically units that cost more than comparative peers, but are stronger. There are many examples
A first common example, is jester gunship. Jester gunship is essentially tier 1.5, it has near tier 2 gunship DPS. And considerable HP for T1 air.
Lets look at where it becomes major, with T2, tanks like Riptide, Obsidian, and llshavoh bot are T 2.5 attacking units. They have considerable more HP than normal T2 attacking units like Rhino, pillar, blaze. But they cost more.
In T3, there are considerable differences in comparing attackers. The first group (T3) are loyalist and Titan. The 2nd group, I would even say T 3.25 are Harbringer and Seraphim amphibious tank. And then there are T3.5, percival and Brick. l would probably ____? consider UEF and cybran bombers T3.5, because they have rear anti air guns that will oddly threaten T1 interceptor and T2 fighter / bomber, while seraphim and aeon do not.
l don't think its just Aeon and UEF with T4 navy. Though monkeylord isn't great with water, Megalith is a danger.
About the video, weird no talk about Aeon T3 Solace torpedo bomber, Cybran Harm turret, and Cybran / Seraphim amphibious land forces. Special mention to Aeon shield disrupter, which is hover and can be very annoying to shield boats and T2/3 hover shield.
I have a question that bugs me to no end. I don't have FAF just to point it out. My Torpedo bombers seem to encounter a bug, when I order them to repair or sometimes just land to conserve fuel, they just fly in circles and NEVER land. Is this bug fixed in FAF or is it something I can fix in Regular Supcom FA? It makes me never want to use them because its so inconvenient to not be able to land them.
While am asking question what does FAF offer? do you have a video on it?
RunethePony Loads of bug fixes, loads of improvements, loads of balance improvements, loads of new maps, plenty of mods, co-op campaign and of course a multiplayer community. All for free. Go to faforever.com to check it out.
Does it work with steam and if I want can I revert back to the vanilla version?
Cuz you said Co-Op Campaign and that sounds like a fun time with for me and my buddy
RunethePony yeah it's non-destructive so you keep the basic version as well :)
The torpedo bomber problem is the sort of thing FAF has fixes for, I've never had the problem you describe
I honestly think Sera is at least equal to Cybran in navy
I think they own the seas. With the combination of their insane sonar, and the ability to combo sub hunters and micro destroyers into something that can effectively push out all other factions from the naval space. Once they do and have cruisers operating as backline guards, the best you'll be able to do is defend shoreline emplacements with TMD and direct artillery for a short while, since between the ungodly AA and the ability of the Uashas to juke other ships, as well as go submerged... If you play with anything like a solid unit mix, you can own the water, since you have so much firepower switch-up and concentration ability, and you're basically always safe from air. Then all you need is to build a carrier and 2 BS, and now you've suddenly got yourself something like an endgame option...
The UEF are the only ones who can force Sera out of the water, with Bulwarks and TDs. And they aren't going to be mass-efficient at doing it. Meaning, in my estimation, that on any water map Sera should be switching to navy fast if the T2 ground game is tapering off. From which they can then dominate with bombardment until you can start throwing chickens or Wassaps at the enemy to break any static defenses, or overwhelm them with strat launches. It's the hidden Sera T4 option.
@@Sakhmeov on top of the fact that the sera hover options are amazing, fobo spam t3 shields, cheap flak to supplement cruisers production, high alpha hover tank etc
@@makarov718 Hovers and T3 shields are notable. Certainly you should always have tons of Sera flak something like minutes in from even getting to T2, because the fixed installations are just pointless. I don't agree on the tanks though; maybe it's a fault of my own for working more on unit mix and econ, but I just find them kind of a waste of mass and incapable of holding their own, since they always waste so much fire and don't have either the range or the speed to work their poor DPS against the other factions' options. Better go the dedicated route, imo.
@@Sakhmeov you would know better than me, im a terrible navy player in general, i was just pointing out the options
u can skip t1 navy on large map and kide enemys
90% frigates? My experience is that it's more like 90% submarines especially in the early game. Frigates typically can't do anything against submarines.
Subs take too long to kill a frig. By the time your frig is low HP, it has already killed a bunch of engineers or coastal mexes, you’ve built a torpedo launcher or a sub of your own to kill theirs. You can even ground attack t1 bombers to damage subs.
Disclaimer: I haven’t played FAF in years, so if jaggedappliance has ruined the balance more in the meantime, I wouldn’t know about it.
@@Penemue well it can also be because I don't play many different maps and those that I play don't have mexes that can be targeted by t1 frigates (not sure if even T2 destroyers have the range). "You've build a sub of your own" is not an argument, because it's between the choice of building mainly frigates or a subs. Torpedo launchers > subs > frigates > torpedo launchers (talking about cost efficiency at T1). Only 1 of the 3 is stationary and has for that reason imo less value.
With the T1 subs you shouldn't wait till you have a wolf pack, but go at it right away and avoid torp defences. The early enemy frigate will be heavily damaged, if not destroyed, by the point it'd reach your base. Well aimed t1 bombers could work, but it's difficult to ground attack units that don't move in a straight line. Probably bettter to use those against mexes.
I’m glad I quit this game lol
Most people say the same. Same what Pene is saying about starting with T2 destroyer, not supports like sub or cruiser. Frigate, destroyer, BS are combatants, not support. What they do is contest, and do their best to secure surface, while also able to influence land (coast) more and even stall with HP. This leads to more map control, less needed micro. Subs, except for the T3 seraphim sub are poor choices for dominance, and are instead counters. Problem with counters, its generally a losing game because it throws versatility out the window. lf you are playing a counter game, lol you are already behind.
@@demetrioshristovski4518 Depending on the map you can kill a naval base, that rushes T2, with subs. T2 destroyers are great, but you can be vulnerable before you get them. In tier 1 it's basically building either frigates or subs. One counters the other so for me that's an easy choice. The UEF have radar jamming on their T1 frigate, so it's great to have a 1 or 2 of them.
imo cybran destroyer is the worst, can be easily dodgeable (can dodge 80% of the shoot easily) and there is no need of timing like with the aeon one (harder to dodge imo), and the biggest issue is that it can't shoot backward. So retreat is not a good option, and if you try to dodge you lose all your dps (since it doesn't shoot anymore). hopefully mermaid is there to make up for its weakness.
otherwise i agree to pretty much everything.
zig zag retreat (=
Drkeyser35 how is aeon harder to dodge? sure it has aoe but is also slower moving and firing. Cybran is probably the best destroyer.
already said why
Drkeyser35 all you said was "imo is harder to dodge" then listed its let downs in. I think cybran is better because of rate of fire and versatility. Aeons shots are too slow moving and they fire too slow. And the splash isnt that great but makes it nice for barraging land or hitting t1 navy. But cybran does that too.
i said you had to have the right timing to be able to dodge aeon, while against cybran you can just do circle micro and dodge nearly everything.