Javs cost 4 supply while the other two lrms cost 6 each

4 X 30 = 6 X 20

Doing single unit vs unit test is a controlled way of testing and repeatable.  If you want to factor the rest of the game which involves player skill, surrounding planet, etc then good luck. 

btw lrms fight lrms all the time. So do scouts vs scout and lf vs lf

Crappers... I knew that, but completely had a brain fart playing the numbers around. I know why I had 5 down because I was thinking they should cost 5 at one time. I apologize for the incorrect reference.

Yes, you do only have my word, because last time I posted proof like replays, like bugged lums, many like you, still questioned it.  

My goal is to educate and correct people's assumptions like people stating that upgraded assailants will kill a capital ship the fastest

Not posting replays does not help your case.  If you attempt to test in a quasi-scientific way then be prepared to be questioned.  Any attempt at scientific method requires questioning as par for the course.  Not posting replays whether you are questioned or not casts doubt on your assertions.  Generally I am not prepared to take the word of someone who regularly attempts to deceive others by smurfing.  Since I have not seen you or heard anyone that has seen you online in quite a while, it is easy to deduce this is what you have been doing(and very likely the reason you do not post the replay since it would uncover a smurf).  The test in the OP was not about caps but LRF.  There is no question of your skill in game but skill does not necessarily make me take you at face value.

Highly debateable and certainly situational.  HC strength means shit in a world of vasari bomber spam.  The only reason anyone still says LF and scouts for advent is because its one of the few things that works against vasari assailant and skirantra spam.  Carrier cruisers are extremely debateable since vas SC are the strongest, most durable ones and repaired by one of the very things vasari spam(skirantra).  You leave out many many vasari advantages which is not just SB thats for damn sure.  This should include at the very least carrier cap, phasic traps(which negate any amount of your supposed OP advent carriers), SB, kostura, subverters amongst others.  This list shows you to be minimizing the advantages of a race widely believed to be overpowered at present and leads one to believe there is a great amount of bias towards preventing a vasari nerf.  I am biased towards advent certainly and do not deny that since its the only race I play as most here know.  I am at least upfront about it.

[_]-Greyfox

I dont need to help my case as ALL people in the fourms who want a balance do not post any type of replays nor have you yourself provided any replays to support anything you have stated.  Many comments you have stated are peppered with biasness that have 0 support from replays ever.  

As you have stated you yourself only play 1 race, advent. Therefore your perspective is very narrow.  Your comments reflect your game style, ie lack of mine use and over use of repulse and lums.

I do play all races with high degree of skills utilizing most if not all aspects of each race.  Thats why I started my own thread and called for change of two things that needed to be fix which are the root of most problems.

1) Maps uneven balance distribution of resource among the teams: Neutrals, Quantity and Quality.

2) Carrier caps as a whole promoting a unique fix ie ability to destroy/weaken 1 host entire sc compliment 

Sorry JJ but you seem biased.Your posts seem centered around proving why vas is fine as is.I do not remember you ever saying vas is op in any area.I think the most opinions are centered around the fact that vas have pm+sb+lrf+easiest tec switch of the game thanks to pm on all commonly used ships and sc+easiest ways to disable entire fleets of sc+easiest way to destroy large groups of frigs+best sw+most tactical base for defense and offense.Im sure I missed something but they are a bit behind in eco which CAN easily be made up for with neutrals.You fail to acknowledge any of these combos.If the jav was not overall similiar with the kanrack by spamming the crap out of it then noone would compete with vas in mp.Yes I know about tier0-1 spam for advent.I have never heard anyone say it was fun to do that.Why would anyone want to play a race in a strategy game where the main combat unit is the scout.

Anyway I do believe your tests.The main problems with vas are its combos and how great they work for them mainly vs advent.The reason why people complain about the kanrack imo is because their power is decieveing with the current level of pm.Thier power is not always related to numbers that are shown like a jav or ilum is.So people want some of the combos nerfed in some way without changing vas to much.I just want a nerf to skirantra.I would also be ok with a revert of all carrier caps and then a minor buff so they are not crap again.I completely agree with your map suggestions.I could say a minor nerf to sub(if no changes to fighters happen).Maybe disable reduced to 18-16 sec instead of 20(I would lean to 18).Phasic trap needs nerfed as well.

I have proved to quar that a vas on equal grounds (no neutrals and similar planets and eco)can hold and potentially beat an advent who spams scout+lf+flak.

All the people on the forums do not perform "tests" of 1 unit against their equivalents in other races.  I certainly haven't done so myself.  I know reading is fundamental and all so it should be noted that I said myself that I was biased even in the post you quoted.  You basically just repeated what I said myself.  I have played vasari myself on occasion and found it to be easy mode.  Your test was not based on either of those 2 fixes you suggest.  It was solely to "demonstrate" that vasari was not as OP as people would lead you to believe.  I have never said that I recall that things were completely bleak for the other races.  TEC better than advent has been mentioned several times(myself included) to be more of a competitor with vasari.  That does not make vasari any less overpowered in general especially against advent.  There is even a stretch of time in games if you last that long where an advent can turn things around but its still an uphill battle unless its decided during that short stretch.  My comments reflect what I have found to work and not work.  Tier 0 spam can work early on.  Carriers with bombers can work if kept in reserve and surprise the enemy cap.  Repulse and illuminators can work once you get to repulse and provided there is no SB involved.  It is easier on the vasari than the advent.

[_]-Greyfox

But do players complain about Assailants, anyway? 

What is far more often complained about is the use of phase missiles on Vasari flak and fighters.  I'd like to see the results of a test of the various factions fighters against LRF, though.  LRF vs flak might also be useful.  Its not as if these are uncommon matchups.

The general principle used in the game is that the strongest ship of a class is the least cost-effective.  Also, it makes a difference when ships are supported by a repair bay, for instance.  With Illuminators supported by Guardians, ships do not start to be lost until later in a combat, which affects the ratio of losses.

If we get rid of trash like Scramble Bombers v1.19, a new balance should emerge during a beta.  What would help would be if the very top players agree to play each other in a series of 1v1s and provide replays, like every decent RTS games there is has.  Otherwise any attempt by the developers to inject life into the game seems doomed to failure.

Being next to each other in team games, and fighting a somewhat isolated battle, simply does not count.  Name an RTS in which the top players take team games seriously?

I have suggest to nerf all carriers so that other capital ships can be utilize in game and offered a way counter mass carrier caps.  When I play 1v1 I dont play vas, but tec due to their econ.  

Map imbalances plague the game greatly. Random maps symmetrically among teams would yield more fair game play.

I dont suggest mass tweaks like others. I like to see how game play changes.  I'm not against tweaking such things as Phase trap or decreasing phase missiles.  But map balance and carrier caps should take priority

I have never suggested massive tweaks either but there are inappropriately powerful things.  Few will play on pre-made maps so random has been the way it goes.  Random is just that....random.  I agree that carrier caps are not balanced.  They were actually fine before they were buffed.  I am not completely trying to bust your chops, JJ.  I am just not willing to take someone's word for it especially when someone is prone to smurfing(deceitful as I see it).  Things aren't terribly off or I would never win a game without outside intervention.  Vasari does have more going for it at present however than the rest.  I maintain my stance that this test is not indicative of real play however and while nice to know is not necessarily beneficial to balance issues this patch. 

[_]-Greyfox

Woow  democracy in action.

Grey needs backup lets bash JJ.

Who cares he is using numbers, his arguments r proven by tets, whith can be easly reapeted and confirmed by anyone.

Comunity vote vasa need massive nerf everywhere so, it is the fact.

Classic.

And te part from  minds post :I have proved to quar that a vas on equal grounds (no neutrals and similar planets and eco)can hold and potentially beat an advent who spams scout+lf+flak.

 Minds u r my hero  , master in PR.

Cause as i remeber, i proved to u, u , as vasari,  cant beat me as advent . I even posted a replay, i topic when u cry vasa is so op and advent is so week for 3 pages and u and Grey  try ed to convince everyone u cant even hold as advent agains skilled vas.

As i remeber, u got your ass kiced

suure, your iron proff took all my arguments.

Few more posts and u will write. I  skilled vasa, holded agains quar and rat whos got 100k feed.

DesConnor

Sins isnt about 1 on 1 sins is team game, most fun is 5v5 or 4v4. Thats its main strength.

U cant balance by 1 on 1. and if u will try it will be screwed.

The only way u can balance sins, is injecting 1 changem, and let people try it for a month.

I suggest start with carrier caps. Tune them and see haw it work, not in 1 on 1, cause 1 on 1 is special. Usualz u dont use full race potential in 1 on 1

You must be speaking of a different game.The game I am talking about I went mil and held off your scout lf spam as vas with no neutrals and no feed compared to you.I eventually had to switch to skirms but it was stalemate.How you think it would have turned out if I started with skirms then went mil?I lost alot by goin that route and still held you off.I was even on the offense for awhile.By the time you got repulse i could have had subs.I had 4k in the bank ,like 6 or 7 labs already ,and 70 skirms.How did you kick my butt?Who was the first one to lose a cap?I killed a sb WHILE fighting you.It also took you like 10 min longer to get your first cap kill then me.Your teamate killed guy behind me and killed my desert not you.You couldnt even kill my roid lol.If you look at your posts in the forums and what we were talking about you never backed up one thing you said about vas vs advent.You didnt use 1 ilum or 1 meteor.NOTHING you said happened in that game.

You didnt prove jack because I already knew a long time about advent scout and lf spam.It was never part of any of our discussions.Most people knew about it and you acted like it was some sort of secret or you was gonna suprise me with it lol.

I agree with your suggestions too.I dont want any massive changes.Devs always seem to make big changes with balance patch when they need small tweaks.Problem is back when they were patching it was like 6 months inbetween and now its been what a yr?I play all 3 races and want to have fun in mp games as all 3.That means they all need to be somewhat competative between themselves.

I was just pointing out the glaring issues.Do you reall think phasic trap is a fair ability and promotes balance for all 3 races in its current state?Also subs+ mines to kill a fleet?If fighters were useful I could see this not being much of a problem.I have never seen anyone use repulse into advent minefield(not sayin its not possible) but subs and mines are way easy.

Quar I think you have lost it.I have heard noone ask for massive nerfs.Just one thing needs to budge for vas and I say is skirantra or what jj is saying.I wish they would rework all caps.Just some nice tweaks here and there could really create some diversity for caps and openers.I still wish for scout nerf across the board in build time and supply cost.

I wouldnt particularly vote for a nerf against assailants. But ilums need a solid buff.

Javs are good as is. 

If anything, TEC and ESPECIALLY advent need more use of underused string "chance to block phase missiles"... There at least few underused units/abilities we can buff by just adding this perk.

The TEC have hoshiko healing that kicks in a little earlier since they start taking hull damage right away, which is actually a pretty nifty PM counter-measure.  It's Advent more than anything that needs attention here, since this counters several of their best defensive combos and leaves them without any option but to lean on their secondary abilities and hope to prevail by sheer firepower.

Minds, i think u lost your connection with reality , or at least u reed only my posts.

People r screaming for massive nerf, they want to nerf  not only scramble bombers,  but phase missiles, phase traps, subs , kosturas, everything thats ql in vasa.

Some idiot even sad lums need buff, gl with that.

And as i sad, few more posts and u will say u have kicked my ass  in that game. The same game we r talking about, same game when u sad gg and quit , so u couldnt see i used lums. same game u bravely  holded your roid, too much affrait, to atack, playing oped vasari agains sucking advent.

PS, i dodnt promised anything exept ill kicked your ass. i did. my arguments, is stronger.

now u cant convert reality, call your a vote and  in proper democratic way vote for a reality where u won, and proven vasa r overpowered.

Oh man, you are rly not letting reality let itself get in the way of your good time if you think Illuminators don't need a buff. These ships are meant to fill the LRF role of the advent, yet their damage is split among 3 banks (only one frontal) and they are tier 3 for f%#ks sake! This ship almost by itself gimps the advent faction in the early game as it costs way too much to tech 'em and then they perform pathetically compared to the assailant which is tier 1.

Wanna use 'em kill a SB? Haha have fun with that. Maybe if there were three orky's all on each side and you had like 700 hundred illums then maybe they might do better than equal assailants. 

Hunting a cap early game? Oooh yea, all the Kortuls are terrified of the illum dread fleet.
"Oh noes! they haz only 1 beem on us! Flee bak to our basez!"

Nope, I mostly ignore these and go straight to bombers and HCs if I have time or spam LF and scouts if not. There is rly no other choice with advent atm.

If this was a principled RTS community and not one gimped by 4s, 5s and random maps, an invitation to have one's rear bruised would be followed by a 1v1 bo5 or bo7..  sadly Quar probably means in the next team game, with all his friends there.  1v1 doesn't have to be on a random map, there are many maps that have closer starts.

Though Ironclad could please indicate which maps they comsider best for balance, at the moment we have nothing like a  'map pool.'

Illuminators used to have capital class weapons.  That would make them worse against LF and other LRF, but better against capitals and structures.  I assume this was to compensate for only putting one beam on a large single target.  It might be enlightening to know whether the Illuminator bug crept in when they were changed to LRF, so that no-one realised that the change had worked against Illuminators. 

Illuminators having capital class weapons made sense to me, again I suggest a revert.  If not, I wouldn't want a buff to Illuminators, they are already stronger than Assailants- unless you want to challenge JJ's tests?

What we need most of all for a good beta is players being prepared to play each other and release replays, and they have to be the best players or it won't work.

I think this one is best left to the player-base.  Give us an in-lobby map preview and map transfer system, and we're golden...

Biggest issue I see here about this test is the ramp up time for shield mitigation.

The assailents upgrades make much less of a difference when shield mitigation is low.

when your doing 30 javs vs 20 assail... thats 30 targets all starting at very low shield mitigation...

and the jav (IIRC) is around 1/2 health before its maxxed out its mitigation.

ALso, one may want to consider wasted missiles.

(what about charged missles and cluster warheads?)

The 20 assailants and the 30 javs vs a capital ship was a much better test.  But i PROMISE you that if that cap ship was a higher level... say a lovely, very important 6.... the assailants would kill faster due to the higher mitigation of that cap ship.  This is why assailants are scarey... they get better as the enemy cap ship levels up.  (will still kill slower... but the time added will be less than the javs.)  It would be intresting to see at what capital ship level the assailants become beter at cap ship keeeling than the javs.

Besides... who the FRACK would have lv 1 cap ships around when the enemy has MAX UPGRADED ASSAILANTS! ROFLS!.... ya... min cap ship lv of 3 sounds about right. lolz.

And if were are going start throwing in capital ships anyway... a skirantra... vs ANY tec cap ship with 30 javs and 20 assail... well, 3 perks there... 1. many fighters to keel javs, 2. repair cloud. 3. scramble bombers (its over 9000!!111) to cause any enemy fighters to default to not attacking the lrms.  Who wins then?

Admittedly these are unlikely to be in play with a mere 120 command in frigates on the field.  If I had that few frigates as TEC and was moving upwards to 4 labs and fighting primarily assailants, I'd probably be more inclined to skip right to Kodiaks rather than spending money upgrading my relatively small Javelis force.

I think a bigger issue is spending priorities.  Vasari tend to emphasize phase missile upgrades while TEC tends to favour their really cheap and cost-effective armour upgrades, though not with the same zeal as the Vasari and their PM's.  So we're more likely to see a numerically advantaged (in command-point terms) TEC with fewer upgrades against a technologically advantaged Vasari.  Given TEC has stronger economic openers and therefor generally a cash-flow advantage... this is just WAY too hard to model to make a good representative test.  In that respect, I stand behind JJ's simplistic model as a good representative.

If we're talking about capital ships that high of a level, then hoshikos and overseers should also be present.  For fleets of 120 command, you'd be stupid to focus fire on a capital ship even with PM-upgraded assailants in this scenario.  They'll easily tank you with healing and wipe out your frigate force.  Larger forces are another matter, but for smaller forces with healing on the field, they will ALWAYS ignore capital ships and try to blast your more fragile firepower instead.  The TEC hoshiko is so advantaged in this scenario that it's not even an interesting test.

1) Mix in some gardas and you're fine.   Gardas are good against assailants, too.

2) Not enough AM to use this and scramble.

3) Most people are already agreed on this one anyways.  Qu4r seems to be the only dissenter on this issue.

IMO:

-LF do 75% damage vs caps (from 50%) - problem with no early game counter to caps fixed

-LRF do 25% damage vs caps (from 75%) - problems with caps being slaughtered by LRF past midgame fixed

-Caps do 100% damage vs LRF (from 75%) - small buff vs LRF

It will give us following counters triangle:

LF>CAP>LRF>>>LF

If we want any counters system implemented, this may be a good beginning.

[further - let Flak do same 100% damage against both fighters and bombers, instead of OP 150% against fighters and laughable 75% against bombers...]