Nerf Returning Armada

I don't think it's all that powerful because it doesn't really allow you to transcend your ship points cap, at least not by more than a couple points (say, seven).

From what I can tell, if you ship cap is at 2300 (maxxed out plus 15% bonus from research) you're not going to have more than 2300 support points worth of ships.

Wow, there are so many posts saying how bad returning armada is, and some that say it is too good. It makes you wonder...

Anyway, I have never played as vasari, but I thought the point of the lvl 9 techs or whatever was to be fairly powerful. I mean, if the ability gave you one ship every 5 minutes, theres almost no point to research it. Also, as others have said, you can't really control what fleets you get. If someone just jumps in with 20+ bombers and blows the phase gate up, guess what - no more ships, plus resources to build a new gate.

If I am wrong, correct me, as i have not played as vasari...

It seems to me that RA should give you one capital ship that is nearly destroyed (as a capital ship is the only thing to ever have survived an encounter with the unknown enemy, even though the crew was insane) and it should only work once every so often regardless of how many phase gates you have. It should randomly appear at one of your phase gate locations and maybe some times it will be totally useless. It should allow you to go above your max capital ship number and over time give you an advantage over your enemy. (much like the other super weapons don't instantly win you the game but over time they can turn the tide) Just a thought, feel free to disagree

What is your point? I remember when i played vasari in a 3v3 i reached max fleet supply capacity when the enemy didn't even reach half(seen it in end game summary). I was taking in the end all the opposing team by myself :-/ ... and i wasn't even breaking a sweat, i was just spamming ships to the front carelessly. By the time you research lvl 2 RA and a few phase gates you can just announce the game is over if the enemy is not vasari.

If you own 5 planets that's 5x3=15 RA gates... you already get more ships than losing in battle. All you need to do is max fleet supply tech and fleet supply bonus. Economy doesn't matter no more even if you have no military upgrades.



And don't start that raiding because the raiding fleet will be in fact all your fleet while the vasari fleet will have like 50 carriers and 100 cruisers vs your puny 20 transporters and maybe 20 cruisers. Not only will you lose your fleet only raiding one planet but even if you did raid all the vasari fleet will be now big enough to raid all you planets dry and still kill any remaining fleet you manage to raise up again.

When somebody has returning Armada up, the thing to do is build your bomb shelters to max on all your planets. Alt Tab out and watch tv or something, because you've already lost and you may as well make him bomb your planets for the next two hours.

Thank you for clarifying. So, basically, RA allows the Vasari player to not have to worry about the economy? He can max out the fleet supply before he's built a large, productive economy and he can then use RA to build a large fleet with RA (without having to worry about how to pay for it) and can also scuttle some of those ships for income? I think I get it now.

It's not about being able to have more ships than your 2300 fleet supply points will allow for, it's about being able to actually acquire 2300 fleet supply points worth of ships without having the money, metal, or crystal to acutally buy them, especially early on in a game before either the TEC or Advent could afford to build 2000 ship supply points worth of ships.

If the first maxed out fleet doesn't do it, then the second, third, fourth, and 20th ones will!

What's so crazy, in my opinion about Returning Armada, is that if you're up against it, you lose every battle you fight. Not because you literally lose the fight, and if you have a strong well balanced fleet, you can often absorb an entire Returning Armada attack and survive.

But the bottom line is that all of the losses you inflict upon your enemy will be replaced at no cost (often as soon as they're destroyed since most Vasari go right up to the cap with the gates on Autocast). While each and every one of your losses has to be replaced at cost to you. You can break even if you can manage to take no losses, but unless you exterminate the fleet and follow up to destroy at least one world, the battle itself meant nothing (odds are half the fleet will be replaced though while you're attacking, so it gets very, very messy).

Losing ships is bad to everyone, except a player using Returning Armada. Unless they lose their entire fleet very fast, it's all recoverable. It seems to take away from the game, since there really can be no decisive battle against such a player, the only way to beat a Returning Armada is to not fight it, try to raid the Labs and Gates, and hope that they crippled their own economy with the fleet cap. Not very appealing solutions.

To the OP, comparing Returning Armada to the super weapons is apples to oranges. The Vasari have their own super weapon also, the Kostura Cannon.

Returning Armada is more like Advent's Mass Trancendency or TEC's Insurgency.

I've played the game some more now and I think I do see the value of Returning Armada; it's really helped me now that I've maxed out my fleet and burned through credits, crystal, and metal while fighting a two front war.

Like I posted in another post, 1 guy with returning armada was able to hold off 3 other players. It made the game go on and on because even if his ships were destoryed he'd just get them right back. Eventually I had to get returning armada myself and even then things just sort of went into a stalemate. I eventually quit because the game wasn't any fun anymore. All I was actually doing was selecting units, putting them into a giant blob, and sending them toward an enemy planet or two.

I'll also note that it was only a technical 1v3, after the other guys team mates quit the AI took over so his team mates still did a thing or two every hour or two.

I've played a couple of games where the Vasari player rushes directly to RA and researches no military techs. I've seen players have RA up and running by 30 minutes into the game. If you scout him and see him doing it, and you're TEC, you can bull rush and stand a good chance of pounding him early, but if you make even a small mistake and don't stop him cold, game is over.

RA is somewhat equivalent to TEC insurgents and Advent Mass Transcendency. However, it's insanely powerful compared to the other two. Needs a nerf.

Also, Vasari support cruisers could use a minor nerf. Seriously, the Subverter has area effect stun that lasts 30 seconds or so? That's crazy.

The way it's balanced now, if your opponent is Vasari, your *only* option is to rush him if he knows what he's doing. And if you're Advent, and therefore incapable of rushing, you are screwed 8 ways from Sunday.

Tec and Advent both have a much more reliable economy, or am i wrong? If you're in a map big enough to have allowed Vasari to get returning armada, you should have enough trade ports and upgrades that you will be able to replace your fleet just as quickly

Maybe not as fast, if you're Advent, which has the bonus of best units in the game,
or, even faster, with Tec, if they rushed pervasive economy, or even if they didn't.

Rush the worlds with bombers take out the phase stabilizers, and keep beating full cap vasari. The trick is to remember that you don't need 2000 fleet points to beat a vasari fleet, save the money and keep rebuilding. Build a smarter more balanced fleet, and you can win.

do you have a replay of this? I'd like to see how stupid you and your teammates were. and if they have subverters and RA, you guys really must be playing simcity. lol

Nerf RA? yeah, or not, its not the most usefull ability ever as is, and yes, I'd know, seeing as Im almost always Vasari, and the occasional TEC player. Free ships? yeah right, you only get like 2-5 per every 5-10 min and they generally arnt that good.

If you fighting two or more people, this is quite easily countered.

Plus then if your lazy and don't use tactics, one player can crush you.

I didn't bother to save a replay no, and if I had I wouldn't be able to put it up anywhere for it to be viewed. I didn't say we were the greatest team ever, right off the bat one of my team mates stole my astroid, leaving me with my home planet(we were playing on Forign invasion) untill I was able to colonize an ice world. The three of them tried attacking one of my allies early on and we were able to defeat their lrm/assliant spam but took some heavy losses ourselves. After their lrms+cap ships died two of the enemies quit. While attempting to rebuild my fleet one ally decided to go for heavy cruisers and the other ally(the astroid stealer) kept complaining about the 5 ships the AI would send to attack him ...

Cruiser-Ally sees that the remaining guy on the other team is going for RA(or already has it) so I rally up what I've got, he rallys up what he has, Astroid-Theif says he's not ready(he's just been spamming lrms, he's up to about 50 at this point) leaving just me and Cruiser-Ally. We go in and I go from planmet to planet blowing up phase stabalizers, I take out 5 or 6 of them. Then I retreat my cap ship and the rest of my fleet is bascially dead, but yippy, we got 5 phase stabalizers and a few imperial tech buildings. Too bad once RA is researched you don't need research stations to keep using it, its there to stay.

So RA-Guy rebuild his stabalizers while the fleet he already has finishs off Cruiser-Ally(who hadn't yet gotten to heavy cruisers). RA guy then launches all of his free ships at my 2 planets(Astroid-Theif had taken all the others, he stole the terrain world I was going for to). My fleet died taking out phase stabalizers, so Astroid-Theif has to fight off RA-Guy while the AI sends in a fleet to attack his astroid(which is apparently more important than my home world).

Eventually we get them beaten back for a while, I skuttle all my buildings, Cruiser-Ally funds me the resources, and withen... I don't know, 15-25 minutes I have RA up and max stabalizers on my 2 planets(I think it was 3 each, so 6 gates). Cruiser-Ally is getting heavy cruisers out now that he doesn't have to fund me, my income rate is now -1.2 or something, so I'm losing credits every second, but Cruiser-Ally keeps me funded so I can get my fleet cap to max. Withen a fairly short period of time(lets say, 15-20 minutes), I've gone from no military to number 2 even with my negative income.

This is where the stalemate comes, I'd just send in a blob of ships while more phased in every once in a while, I'd hold off RA-Guy and my two allys would fight off the AI fleets and proceed to bombard their planets. The game had already been going on 2 hours longer than it should have and it was just a matter of time untill we'd bombed all the planets, there didn't seem any reason to keep going.

As far as I can tell RA can be brought into play in under 30 minutes, assuming you arn't on a tiny 9 planet 1v1 map and you've got an ally or two, your going to be able to get it no sweat. Once you do have it if the other team doesn't, they either get it or you win. I can only imagine what would have happened if the guys team mates hadn't quit on him in the begining(The Ai isin't really good for much). The point isin't that my team had trouble fighting the 1 RA guy, the point is that I was able to go from no fleet to number 2(and eventually number 1) fleet(according to the diplomacy menu) with a negative(or very close to negative, I think at one point is was 2 or 3 per second) income.

You don't have to go straight for RA. It's not like if you want insurgency you have to start working for it right off the bat.

Yeah it's pretty stupid, in small games, to go directly to RA. However, most of the time I've lost against it, or won with it, it's because it was gotten mid-game. It's like "crap I'm losing, I better enter the cheat that lets me build ships instantly".



I've encountered this too, on both ends. You don't have to be stupid to lose to RA. One time it ended up being a 2v1 and the one killed both of us in the end. Another time it was 3v1 and I was the one, with RA. I ended up winning because I could fight a 3 front war with infinite ships, if they tried to destroy my labs or gates, or planets even. I could replace them, or jump around and defend because I had phase gates everywhere. The cost of a lab was about 1/10 the cost of the ships they sacrificed trying to destroy my stuff, where as any ships I lost cost me nothing, they're free. I won because I destroyed one of the enemies and the other 2 quit after that.

No you're not wrong when it comes to the economic disadvantage that the Vasari has. But, as I just wrote in the other, much larger, thread about RA (and I'm lazy so I'm going to quote myself):



It's important to remember that the implicit economic bonus that RA is, grows in the relation to the size of the fleets. Even the strongest 1.03 TEC economy won't be able to spit out ships at the same rate as a decent RA player when taking a 75% upkeep penalty. So, you really hit the nail on the head by suggesting that the best way to take on RA is by restricting your upkeep to a level at which you can replenish your forces at the same rate as you lose them. Trying to match the Vasari player's fleet size will often only end up winning you a few Pyrrhic victories.

For me, the question to ask is this: Could I in a 1vs1 beat a player of equal skill once he's got RA up and running? Could I essentially beat myself with RA? For me, the answer to that question is a resounding no. You might argue that I, especially as TEC, should be almost as certain to finish him (myself - in this Twilight Zone-like example) off before he even gets RA up and running, but for me, that only points towards the existance of two grave imbalances, even though it to some might resemble balance.

I do my best work against Vasari with the Advent.

RA is defeatable.

I'm sure plenty of people on these forums have done so. There's no need to whine about RA any longer.

RA =/= Game Over.

From my point of view there are only two (one?) issues with RA that need resolving.

1) They need to not allow RA to take you into negative supply. This is the most glaring, and the only truly major change RA needs. If you time it right, you can go negative 65 easily, and take it to even more extreme measures with practice. This is not however, a problem with RA. It's a problem with people abusing an exploit.

Perhaps if you added a short duration (even just 3 seconds would probably do it) universal cooldown to all Phase Stabilizers in existence every time one of them uses RA. This would give the computer more time to check your available fleet supply to see whether or not it needs to refuse you further ships, or scale down an incoming fleet to fit within your limits.

2) While I'm not certain it needs it, you could limit the number of Phase Stabilizers per world to one. It would introduce a higher need for management to the Vasari player, as consolidating one's forces from abroad can be a P.I.T.A.... It would also serve to provide the other races more time to adjust accordingly. Fair enough, I guess. This is probably the only non-ridiculous nerf idea I have actually seen floated around where RA is concerned; and the only one that makes sense.

sounds like you got shafted with your teammates. it happens.

It does seem slightly silly that more phase stabilizers makes a difference. I mean, a phase stabilizer stablizes phase space...either phase space is stabilized or it isn't, right? Can it be made "more stabilized"? If so, why does this not make any difference to anything other than RA?

In another thread concerning RA, I mentioned attacking in waves.

What Vanechka has refined from CommanderAdama's post, much more clearly illustrates the concepts behind what I was trying to say by 'attacking in waves'. I'm not saying it's an exact translation; but that what was posted was one of the core points I was trying to make.

Sustained assault. Longevity. I wasn't referring to out numbering the Vasari so much with a single fleet, as I was referring to outnumbering them over the long haul; grinding them down, so to speak.

PS: Thank you, Vanechka, for capitalizing Pyrrhic .

Quoting myself from another thread on the exact same issue

Here's the problems with RA. An ability is overpowered if the only way to "counter" it is to prevent it from getting out. That's admitting that once it's out, it's unstoppable. To all you saying "just rush him", clearly have no idea what you're talking about or even what game balance is.

With the risk of being too brash, I've yet to read someone make an argument against RA's unbalance that doesn't quintessentially boils down to this. Simply because something is defeatable doesn't mean it isn't overpowered. I refer to you the previous points I've made in this and other threads (yeah, I'm still lazy). Maybe it's a difference of definitions, but even if I was to abide by yours I'd still want RA altered in one way or another. For me, RA detracts from the game experience since it de-emphasizes or simplifies several facets of the game for the Vasari as soon as it is introduced. Not to mention how the game is often prolonged greatly simply because the opponent has researched RA, no other technology holds (or should) that kind of frustrating power.

With regards to your two points. I think the first is a minor issue, an additional 65 supply doesn't affect things too much when it's such a relatively low amount. But, it's an issue nevertheless. With regards to the second point, I agree with you that's the best suggestion out there (I even made one myself). It's simple and practically solves all the grievances I have with RA. It's got my vote.

And off-topic:



I'm Danish and couldn't remember how the term is spelled in English (I'm a bit rusty). So, at the risk of seeming less smart if it was a genuine compliment (the smily leaves a bit of ambiguity), I must admit I that I looked it up on Wikipedia and Dictionary.com, where it's capitalized. Though I must admit that I couldn't figure out if it was for emphasis only. Is it normally capitalized? I'm curious.

And finally, have you checked the other thread in which you ranted? I ranted back

Expanding on an idea already presented here, maybe the phase stabilizers should use more slots? If a fully upgraded planet could only support one, it would greatly decrease it's power, a player couldn't build one on every single planet they own