I feel like orgovs pop. expecially to fighters and scouts, and to a good degree flack and lrms.

I demand replays before you go calling orgrovs severly overpowered.

That said...  a speed reduction would not be to big of a thing to ask for.   It will also help ogrovs from not coasting into starbase weapon range.  could/should also be applied to advent anti-structure as well, which, as far as the role you are watching ogrovs playing... the advent anti-structure in theory would do even better.

It's counterable with a good scout mob.  Chase them down with 20-30 secouts (that's equivalent to roughly 3-6 Ogrovs command-wise) and they'll die pretty easily.  Still, I fully see where you're coming from.  This unit hits hard and can knock out economic infrastructure extraordinarily quickly, and if you get blindsided by it there's really not a lot of time to react to this fast-working unit.  In that sense, the Ogrov is similar to the Vulkoras; if you're caught offguard the planet is gone, nothing you can really do about it.

To be honest, I see the current state of the Krosov (and by extension all siege frigates) versus the current state of the Ogrov as a bit of a contradiction.  The Krosov was nerfed into the ground ages ago because it was too good of a harasser and now is utterly incompetent in any in-battle situation.  On the other hand, we now have the Ogrov which is basically at the same strength level as the old Krosov, except versus structures. 

Part of the problem is that players really don't bother to defend their flanks.  They just lean on the fact that planets and structures have loads of hit points as a deterrent to smaller raids, and are willing to accept the loss if a larger forces ploughs through.  Ogrovs allow a player to expend a medium-sized force that can very quickly desolate these flanks.  So I'm not willing to jump to the conclusion just yet that they're uncounterable and overpowered when the victim left himself open to this sort of tactic.

Definitely a discussion that needs to be had, though.

i actually did the math on that, and while the vasari scout is lacking in hp, its dps is actually between that of the tec and advent scouts.

(someone do please tell my why advent scouts have 2 base armor, vasari 1.5, and tec 1... thats just wrong backwards stupid.)

still demanding replays, btw.

hmmm... I was looking at 20.5/8 = 2.5625 for tec,  17/7 = 2.42857 for advent, 18.5/5 = 3.7 for vasari... 3.7/3*2 = 2.466 for 2/3rds a vasari scout.

I'm fine with the strength and damage as long as their speed gets cut in half.

I am not of the opinion that ogrovs are overpowered.  I do believe however that adjudicators/starfish are underpowered though.  Ogrovs serve the function they are made for well.  Starfish do not.  I could do without starfish being able to target 5 structures and have fewer targets with more damage.  It does piddly damage to a starbase and if you are going for lightly defended econ territory it is not every time that trade ports and such are grouped together to take maximum advantage of five targets.

[_]-Greyfox

seriously sanchez your dumbass turtle everygame no matter what strategy has a severe weakness and you come crying on here when someone takes advantage of it. 

maybe if you someday realize that starbases dont solve everything,,,,maybe the same day as kok realizes HCs arnt the be all end all

I'd actually agree with this.

Ogrovs are real life's counterpart to "mobile artillery" and while they aren't as slow as tanks, they are very vulnerable to scouting units.  Mobile artillery is often taken down in the field by armored recon--2-3 personnel carriers with a light guns and a platoon of infantry on board.  Also very susceptible to airstrikes.

All this aside, lighter units should certainly be able to chase down and punish unescorted Ogrovs severely.

About the Starfish damage and even regarding siege frigates and the Ogrov--what would be more in sync with actual artillery/bombardment is to account for volume.  The more units firing, the greater the effect.

I think there should be a buff on same-type "artillery" units that adds an incremental increase to damage for each unit firing.  Adjust damage so that a single unit doesn't produce much but that massed ones do.

The Starfish could be a good place to try that.

Maybe an ability that allows them to decrease their cooldown. Say 20%, researched maybe? Then set it to a stack level of three so that one can be dangerous but three will wreck havoc but they aren't overpowered because the ability can have a large cooldown itself so someone needs to use it carefully.

It's called a "hanger" specced with "fighters".  It just sucks currently and needs a buff.

A defense bomber with a composite attack versus the very heavy attack done by the current bombers. Fighters are good overall. Hangars need to hold more strike craft (maybe 4 for TEC and Vasair and 5/6 for Advent?) and yes have a bigger Anti-Matter hold. Especially with more strike craft added.

Because every balance problem has to be solved by creating new unit types right.

Nevermind, the numbers I referenced were wrong

What's with me and pulling up bad numbers recently...

Hangers are quite expensive; if you invest heavily in these kinds of static defense, a direct attack should be costly. Currently, we have great defensive options on the cheap (repair platforms) and on the expensive (starbase), but nothing to bring up the middle.  That's what hangers should be for.

Just buff the hanger, no need to completely revamp it.