Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Halo Wars Series

Air is OP - Dedicated Thread

OP Viper Skills

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. ...
  9. 10
Ado Ulamee wrote:
to tell someone who paid just like you did that the mode you prefer is more important than the mode they prefer is rude and insulting.
Actually, no, it's just realistic. 1v1 is more important than any other gamemode or playlist. To call that fact rude and insulting isn't really as "fair" as you could possibly be. Look into why RTS is balanced around 1v1 rather than writing off that line of argument as an insult.
It's still your fault for letting them build their air units, does not sound like a devoloper issue to me when you dont harrass to beat air spam..
Since scouting usually goes hand-in-hand with the air topic, wondering if perhaps making scouts a bit more durable or cheaper would allow more people to try scouting.
Yes please, my Ghosts seem a bit too fragile.
Ado Ulamee wrote:
to tell someone who paid just like you did that the mode you prefer is more important than the mode they prefer is rude and insulting.
Actually, no, it's just realistic. 1v1 is more important than any other gamemode or playlist. To call that fact rude and insulting isn't really as "fair" as you could possibly be. Look into why RTS is balanced around 1v1 rather than writing off that line of argument as an insult.
It's still your fault for letting them build their air units, does not sound like a devoloper issue to me when you dont harrass to beat air spam..
Since scouting usually goes hand-in-hand with the air topic, wondering if perhaps making scouts a bit more durable or cheaper would allow more people to try scouting.
If someone is building enough units to kill your scouts, odds are they are not going air.
Ado Ulamee wrote:
to tell someone who paid just like you did that the mode you prefer is more important than the mode they prefer is rude and insulting.
Actually, no, it's just realistic. 1v1 is more important than any other gamemode or playlist. To call that fact rude and insulting isn't really as "fair" as you could possibly be. Look into why RTS is balanced around 1v1 rather than writing off that line of argument as an insult.
It's still your fault for letting them build their air units, does not sound like a devoloper issue to me when you dont harrass to beat air spam..
Since scouting usually goes hand-in-hand with the air topic, wondering if perhaps making scouts a bit more durable or cheaper would allow more people to try scouting.
Yes please, my Ghosts seem a bit too fragile.
ghosts are the best scouts in game.
Air Units, yep.
Ado Ulamee wrote:
to tell someone who paid just like you did that the mode you prefer is more important than the mode they prefer is rude and insulting.
Actually, no, it's just realistic. 1v1 is more important than any other gamemode or playlist. To call that fact rude and insulting isn't really as "fair" as you could possibly be. Look into why RTS is balanced around 1v1 rather than writing off that line of argument as an insult.
It's still your fault for letting them build their air units, does not sound like a devoloper issue to me when you dont harrass to beat air spam..
Since scouting usually goes hand-in-hand with the air topic, wondering if perhaps making scouts a bit more durable or cheaper would allow more people to try scouting.
Yes please, my Ghosts seem a bit too fragile.
ghosts are the best scouts in game.
Well, if scouts are gonna get buffed, Ghosts should be buffed alongside the rest.
Ado Ulamee wrote:
to tell someone who paid just like you did that the mode you prefer is more important than the mode they prefer is rude and insulting.
Actually, no, it's just realistic. 1v1 is more important than any other gamemode or playlist. To call that fact rude and insulting isn't really as "fair" as you could possibly be. Look into why RTS is balanced around 1v1 rather than writing off that line of argument as an insult.
It's still your fault for letting them build their air units, does not sound like a devoloper issue to me when you dont harrass to beat air spam..
Since scouting usually goes hand-in-hand with the air topic, wondering if perhaps making scouts a bit more durable or cheaper would allow more people to try scouting.
Yes please, my Ghosts seem a bit too fragile.
ghosts are the best scouts in game.
Well, if scouts are gonna get buffed, Ghosts should be buffed alongside the rest.
What? Ghosts are by far the best scouts in game. If they were to cost less or anything, they would be op.
Ado Ulamee wrote:
to tell someone who paid just like you did that the mode you prefer is more important than the mode they prefer is rude and insulting.
Actually, no, it's just realistic. 1v1 is more important than any other gamemode or playlist. To call that fact rude and insulting isn't really as "fair" as you could possibly be. Look into why RTS is balanced around 1v1 rather than writing off that line of argument as an insult.
It's still your fault for letting them build their air units, does not sound like a devoloper issue to me when you dont harrass to beat air spam..
Since scouting usually goes hand-in-hand with the air topic, wondering if perhaps making scouts a bit more durable or cheaper would allow more people to try scouting.
Yes please, my Ghosts seem a bit too fragile.
ghosts are the best scouts in game.
Well, if scouts are gonna get buffed, Ghosts should be buffed alongside the rest.
What? Ghosts are by far the best scouts in game. If they were to cost less or anything, they would be op.
Not anymore, if it's ignored in this hypothetical buff. It might become the worst, when that spot probably should belong to the Jackrabbit.
Ado Ulamee wrote:
to tell someone who paid just like you did that the mode you prefer is more important than the mode they prefer is rude and insulting.
Actually, no, it's just realistic. 1v1 is more important than any other gamemode or playlist. To call that fact rude and insulting isn't really as "fair" as you could possibly be. Look into why RTS is balanced around 1v1 rather than writing off that line of argument as an insult.
It's still your fault for letting them build their air units, does not sound like a devoloper issue to me when you dont harrass to beat air spam..
Since scouting usually goes hand-in-hand with the air topic, wondering if perhaps making scouts a bit more durable or cheaper would allow more people to try scouting.
Scouting is important no doubt and cost aren't bad for that purpose. I have issues with effectiveness vs rush units marines and grunts seem to smoke scout units like AT with their first ability and seem pointless to build when 1 squad could destroy it in 1 throw nearly but thats another topic.
Ado Ulamee wrote:
to tell someone who paid just like you did that the mode you prefer is more important than the mode they prefer is rude and insulting.
So its the fault of the player if they dont rush or make there adversary change from air to ground? Or is it the fault of developers for not nerfing the glass canon so that players will not be inclined to use them every game? Not to sound hostile or anything but is it not broken when your opponent builds only two unit types and destroys just about everything vs a more diverse force? Also why does it matter if I let my opponent build an army? I like a battle because rushing is boring in my opinion and I know why people rush but still. Also why should full aa be necessary when its a paper weight for everything else? When someone builds tanks do I respond with a full A-T? No and never had to, I could have like 10 with a mix of armor and do good note sometimes more if they are a forge or Johnson or r really heavy tank units amassed. But no full A-T pop. Speaking for 2v2s and occasionally 3v3s.
I have not found the need for a full AA population to deal with air fleets. Personally have found a nice mix of wraiths, reavers, and grunts helps keep the AA alive longer. The wraiths and grunts easily soak up the damage and allow the AA to make piecemeal of the air. Some huragok mixed in for healing also helps.
I have tried that strategy of mixed units with more aa emphasis but i'll admit that I don't build marines because they r a soft counter and when attacking they built seige turrets or artillery that destroys infantry so i focus vehicles and healing units but that strategy fails at times because of leader powers killing my aa or healers then the inevitable loss of all my units. Some games I feel confident the units i built would be enough to kill air but sometimes they still get killed and i wish i would of recorded it to learn what happened. One match i played 2v2 with a friend i was forge he was colony i think the opponents both anders chesse strats all the way and I knew it was coming air hornets and condors using distance to their advantage killing off our units and mixing in a couple of Kodiaks with sentenal drops. Basically a frustrating game to the end and as unsc i was happy i was furthest away on sentry cause they would fly over and harass finally when we killed most of their units flew over with pelican drop and slowly took out their bases and I mean slow 10 mins at least cause of leader powers and heals once they lost both main structures they resigned/detonated bases my thoughts were why was it a struggle when most their units were air as i remember and ever little fight between our forces felt long and drawn out much more than needed even with the counter. Like each battle it felt like I may have broken his leg while he fractured mine.
to tell someone who paid just like you did that the mode you prefer is more important than the mode they prefer is rude and insulting.
Actually, no, it's just realistic. 1v1 is more important than any other gamemode or playlist. To call that fact rude and insulting isn't really as "fair" as you could possibly be. Look into why RTS is balanced around 1v1 rather than writing off that line of argument as an insult.
If 343 tried to balence the game on team play, they would have a large list of problems they liked fixed that are never fixed. In many cases, 1v1 is the same as 3s except there is more cordination with other players. Because a whole team is not prepared for a fast moving agile unit does not make it OP, thats your fault they massed expensive glass canon. I played a 3v3 a while back and fought a whole team of Mass air spammers with a single ally building full pop AA while we built Core vehicles with building killers, we mixed very little AA in our own armies as well but full pop was good enough. At the end of the day, air is no more "broken" in 3s than it is 2s and 1s.
So its the fault of the player if they dont rush or make there adversary change from air to ground? Or is it the fault of developers for not nerfing the glass canon so that players will not be inclined to use them every game? Not to sound hostile or anything but is it not broken when your opponent builds only two unit types and destroys just about everything vs a more diverse force? Also why does it matter if I let my opponent build an army? I like a battle because rushing is boring in my opinion and I know why people rush but still. Also why should full aa be necessary when its a paper weight for everything else? When someone builds tanks do I respond with a full A-T? No and never had to, I could have like 10 with a mix of armor and do good note sometimes more if they are a forge or Johnson or r really heavy tank units amassed. But no full A-T pop. Speaking for 2v2s and occasionally 3v3s.
It's still your fault for letting them build their air units, does not sound like a devoloper issue to me when you dont harrass to beat air spam..
Granted letting my opponent build is bad but again why should two unit types be so dominate on the field that is what I want to understand. To counter I need to anticipate his moves have LPs do some work then follow up with counter units but then counter attacking can be difficult having to build most my army to counter his air. So I dont have strong offensive units so my attacks may fail. Note the situation I find myself in like this is mostly 2v2s and 3s. And generally its the hornet as the problem I have yet to see banshees this season.
to tell someone who paid just like you did that the mode you prefer is more important than the mode they prefer is rude and insulting.
Actually, no, it's just realistic. 1v1 is more important than any other gamemode or playlist. To call that fact rude and insulting isn't really as "fair" as you could possibly be. Look into why RTS is balanced around 1v1 rather than writing off that line of argument as an insult.
If 343 tried to balence the game on team play, they would have a large list of problems they liked fixed that are never fixed. In many cases, 1v1 is the same as 3s except there is more cordination with other players. Because a whole team is not prepared for a fast moving agile unit does not make it OP, thats your fault they massed expensive glass canon. I played a 3v3 a while back and fought a whole team of Mass air spammers with a single ally building full pop AA while we built Core vehicles with building killers, we mixed very little AA in our own armies as well but full pop was good enough. At the end of the day, air is no more "broken" in 3s than it is 2s and 1s.
So its the fault of the player if they dont rush or make there adversary change from air to ground? Or is it the fault of developers for not nerfing the glass canon so that players will not be inclined to use them every game? Not to sound hostile or anything but is it not broken when your opponent builds only two unit types and destroys just about everything vs a more diverse force? Also why does it matter if I let my opponent build an army? I like a battle because rushing is boring in my opinion and I know why people rush but still. Also why should full aa be necessary when its a paper weight for everything else? When someone builds tanks do I respond with a full A-T? No and never had to, I could have like 10 with a mix of armor and do good note sometimes more if they are a forge or Johnson or r really heavy tank units amassed. But no full A-T pop. Speaking for 2v2s and occasionally 3v3s.
It's still your fault for letting them build their air units, does not sound like a devoloper issue to me when you dont harrass to beat air spam..
Granted letting my opponent build is bad but again why should two unit types be so dominate on the field that is what I want to understand. To counter I need to anticipate his moves have LPs do some work then follow up with counter units but then counter attacking can be difficult having to build most my army to counter his air. So I dont have strong offensive units so my attacks may fail. Note the situation I find myself in like this is mostly 2v2s and 3s. And generally its the hornet as the problem I have yet to see banshees this season.
Yeah the number 1 rule in any RTS is to not let your opponent build buildings. Usually I just pause the game and go to the controller select screen and switch my spare controller to their player so they can't do ah thing. Works everytime
Why are hornets faster than wolverines?
EiTeNeR wrote:
Why are hornets faster than wolverines?
No one knows. Perhaps it will be anwsered one day.
It's insulting because barring a sale or something, we all payed 59.99 or more whether we prefer 1v1 or 3v3. Until they start issuing a discount for people who prefer the unbalanced mode, then all modes should be balanced. What isn't "fair" about that?
Your reasoning for desiring a balanced game mode is fair and rational, sadly unless they break down unit and LP values depending on game mode it's just not practical.

It's a noble pursuit and desire, but I don't think it's achievable at this point.
I hear you Breezy. My biggest issue is that it is still too hard to stop Air. You can stop it now and I am grateful, but you still have to do to much, and that would be in any mode. The reason it isn't a problem in 1v1 is because there are few situations where it would even get to that point. So it's not that air is balanced in 1v1, it's that people don't generally get to the point of maxing air out in 1v1. It would be a problem there too.

As far as the price goes, my point is being missed by some. My point is if you (not literally you) want to bring up valid points about why Air is ok in 3v3, then great, but don't tell someone who might not play ones "Oh well. The game is balanced in ones so screw the mode you like to play." That's all I was saying. i have seen that alot on this forum. We still need to get some games in.
to tell someone who paid just like you did that the mode you prefer is more important than the mode they prefer is rude and insulting.
Actually, no, it's just realistic. 1v1 is more important than any other gamemode or playlist. To call that fact rude and insulting isn't really as "fair" as you could possibly be. Look into why RTS is balanced around 1v1 rather than writing off that line of argument as an insult.
If 343 tried to balence the game on team play, they would have a large list of problems they liked fixed that are never fixed. In many cases, 1v1 is the same as 3s except there is more cordination with other players. Because a whole team is not prepared for a fast moving agile unit does not make it OP, thats your fault they massed expensive glass canon. I played a 3v3 a while back and fought a whole team of Mass air spammers with a single ally building full pop AA while we built Core vehicles with building killers, we mixed very little AA in our own armies as well but full pop was good enough. At the end of the day, air is no more "broken" in 3s than it is 2s and 1s.
So its the fault of the player if they dont rush or make there adversary change from air to ground? Or is it the fault of developers for not nerfing the glass canon so that players will not be inclined to use them every game? Not to sound hostile or anything but is it not broken when your opponent builds only two unit types and destroys just about everything vs a more diverse force? Also why does it matter if I let my opponent build an army? I like a battle because rushing is boring in my opinion and I know why people rush but still. Also why should full aa be necessary when its a paper weight for everything else? When someone builds tanks do I respond with a full A-T? No and never had to, I could have like 10 with a mix of armor and do good note sometimes more if they are a forge or Johnson or r really heavy tank units amassed. But no full A-T pop. Speaking for 2v2s and occasionally 3v3s.
This proves the point I try to make about Air being OP. You are exactly right. If someone makes all scarabs or all tanks, I can make hunters, banshees, blisterbacks, and use powers to stop them without having to go full pop hunters.

If someone goes full pop air with healing support, (especially hornets) you have to go almost all AA. Infantry gets killed very quickly by nearly any Tech 3 unit. The difference is not all leader powers are even effective against air. And if you defeat vehicles, you still have formidable troops left. If you defeat Air, and have a ton of AA left, then you have a terrible army against anything else.
Actually, no, it's just realistic. 1v1 is more important than any other gamemode or playlist. To call that fact rude and insulting isn't really as "fair" as you could possibly be. Look into why RTS is balanced around 1v1 rather than writing off that line of argument as an insult.
What you call "realistic" is still rude and insulting. I'm not talking about the developers balancing the game around 1v1, I am talking about the people who use that fact in a condescending way to respond to someone who wants the mode they play to be balanced as well.

When someone comes here and says that Air is OP and then people make smart remarks that end with "1v1 is the only real mode", that is insulting and rude. It's rude because its dismissive, and it seems that many of the people who reply don't play 2v2 or 3v3 anyway. So why are they even responding?
It's insulting because barring a sale or something, we all payed 59.99 or more whether we prefer 1v1 or 3v3. Until they start issuing a discount for people who prefer the unbalanced mode, then all modes should be balanced. What isn't "fair" about that?
2v2 and 3v3 isn't going to be balanced. Like Darkmaximus said, 1v1 and teams share balance even though they all require different tweaks. If you made a balance decision in regards to 3s, that would end up negatively impacting 1s and 2s since the thing you're buffing or nerfing was already fine. If you're okay with the game being balanced around 1s though, you should be fine with people using that as an argument not to nerf air.

People who play teams and people who play 1s all bought the game for the same price, and they all should have known what they were getting into. If anyone played HW 1 they know that while the game was overall unbalanced, the 2v2 and 3v3 balance was worse than 1v1. The same can be said for a majority of RTS games I would imagine. If you bought Halo Wars 2 without any suspicion that maybe the game wasn't going to be perfectly balanced to your preferences, then I would say your expectations were way too high. A glance at the beta would reveal to you jump pack brutes nuking bases with seemingly no counter play. Of course something like that is going to be worse when there are more than just 2 players in the game. Then maybe you would've either passed up on buying the game or bought it with a more realistic mindset and expectations.

And I hope you're not serious about the discount thing.
Ok. This is the last thing I will say about this to you because I am not sure if you don't understand or if you just want to go back and forth.
I am not saying the modes should be perfectly balanced because that is likely impossible. I am saying that Air is still OP (not unstoppable) because of what you have to do to stop tech 3 air. The process for stopping air is not as simple as stopping other units because the wheel is still broken. If they fix the wheel and make AA better at stopping air, then Air will be fixed in all modes.

As another poster and I discussed in this thread, you have to do too much to stop air. Air is the only unit that you have to do nearly full pop AA to stop Tech 3 Air with healers (especially hornets). You never have to make full pop anything to stop vehicles. You have the choice of making banshees, blisterbacks, hunters, or some of the other vehicles. For air, you must have AA, and a lot of them.

And it is rude to dismiss someones concern with "well it's not a problem in 1v1" when they voice the issue. You admitted in this thread that Air is unbalanced, so I know you know it.
Actually, no, it's just realistic. 1v1 is more important than any other gamemode or playlist. To call that fact rude and insulting isn't really as "fair" as you could possibly be. Look into why RTS is balanced around 1v1 rather than writing off that line of argument as an insult.
Ok. This is the last thing I will say about this to you because I am not sure if you don't understand or if you just want to go back and forth.
I am not saying the modes should be perfectly balanced because that is likely impossible. I am saying that Air is still OP (not unstoppable) because of what you have to do to stop tech 3 air. The process for stopping air is not as simple as stopping other units because the wheel is still broken. If they fix the wheel and make AA better at stopping air, then Air will be fixed in all modes.

As another poster and I discussed in this thread, you have to do too much to stop air. Air is the only unit that you have to do nearly full pop AA to stop Tech 3 Air with healers (especially hornets). You never have to make full pop anything to stop vehicles. You have the choice of making banshees, blisterbacks, hunters, or some of the other vehicles. For air, you must have AA, and a lot of them.

And it is rude to dismiss someones concern with "well it's not a problem in 1v1" when they voice the issue. You admitted in this thread that Air is unbalanced, so I know you know it.
I actually don't care about the "air OP" argument. It's a meme; a joke. I don't take the argument seriously and I don't see why I should. I might attempt to persuade someone who seems salvageable, but those are few and far between. The vast majority of players who believe air is overpowered are far too opposed to the idea of responsibility and improvement to make any progress with in a discussion.

What I've said this whole time is that 1v1 is the only mode in the game that matters balance wise. You said that fact is "rude and insulting." The only thing you backed that position up with was the fact that everyone paid money for the game, which doesn't actually back your argument as I pointed out. People should've known what they were getting into. I can't think of any word other than entitled to describe someone who would demand a refund because their favorite niche gamemode isn't balanced the way they want it to be. Don't think I'm targeting the air is OP bros when I point out that air isn't a problem in 1s. I've heard complaints of other things being overpowered in teams that are fine in 1s, and I'm just as against changing those things as I am nerfing air units.

I don't know why so many people seem to think I'm arguing against something I actually agree with. You stating that "I know" air is OP is the exact same thing a redditor told me a few nights ago: "A good Colony will beat a good Jerome every time and we both know it." Do I give off a disingenuous vibe or something? If you can give me a quote that convicts me of believing that air is OP, give it to me. It won't change my mind, but rather let me know that I have both a bad recollection and bad eyesight and should probably get new glasses. That's about it.
Actually, no, it's just realistic. 1v1 is more important than any other gamemode or playlist. To call that fact rude and insulting isn't really as "fair" as you could possibly be. Look into why RTS is balanced around 1v1 rather than writing off that line of argument as an insult.
Ok. This is the last thing I will say about this to you because I am not sure if you don't understand or if you just want to go back and forth.
I am not saying the modes should be perfectly balanced because that is likely impossible. I am saying that Air is still OP (not unstoppable) because of what you have to do to stop tech 3 air. The process for stopping air is not as simple as stopping other units because the wheel is still broken. If they fix the wheel and make AA better at stopping air, then Air will be fixed in all modes.

As another poster and I discussed in this thread, you have to do too much to stop air. Air is the only unit that you have to do nearly full pop AA to stop Tech 3 Air with healers (especially hornets). You never have to make full pop anything to stop vehicles. You have the choice of making banshees, blisterbacks, hunters, or some of the other vehicles. For air, you must have AA, and a lot of them.

And it is rude to dismiss someones concern with "well it's not a problem in 1v1" when they voice the issue. You admitted in this thread that Air is unbalanced, so I know you know it.
I actually don't care about the "air OP" argument. It's a meme; a joke. I don't take the argument seriously and I don't see why I should. I might attempt to persuade someone who seems salvageable, but those are few and far between. The vast majority of players who believe air is overpowered are far too opposed to the idea of responsibility and improvement to make any progress with in a discussion.

What I've said this whole time is that 1v1 is the only mode in the game that matters balance wise. You said that fact is "rude and insulting." The only thing you backed that position up with was the fact that everyone paid money for the game, which doesn't actually back your argument as I pointed out. People should've known what they were getting into. I can't think of any word other than entitled to describe someone who would demand a refund because their favorite niche gamemode isn't balanced the way they want it to be. Don't think I'm targeting the air is OP bros when I point out that air isn't a problem in 1s. I've heard complaints of other things being overpowered in teams that are fine in 1s, and I'm just as against changing those things as I am nerfing air units.

I don't know why so many people seem to think I'm arguing against something I actually agree with. You stating that "I know" air is OP is the exact same thing a redditor told me a few nights ago: "A good Colony will beat a good Jerome every time and we both know it." Do I give off a disingenuous vibe or something? If you can give me a quote that convicts me of believing that air is OP, give it to me. It won't change my mind, but rather let me know that I have both a bad recollection and bad eyesight and should probably get new glasses. That's about it.
My apologies on saying you admitted it was overpowered. I misread your response. You were talking about HW1 being unbalanced an dI thought you were talking about Air. I definitely didn't mean to misquote you. I don't like when people put words into my mouth, so I definitely wouldn't do it to someone else purposely.
Look bottom line is AA cost energy core air doesn't Energy is 3 times harder to come by than supplies. What do you need too keep up in a tech war. Energy what happens if you spend all your time for AA or core mix units you fall behind. Falling behind means you wasted your time in a useless area building a unit that does not perform well and will only punish you for doing so. Therefore something has to change. I recommend the energy income off generators, give core air energy cost or the energy cost to all AA units reduce by a third
Look bottom line is AA cost energy core air doesn't Energy is 3 times harder to come by than supplies. What do you need too keep up in a tech war. Energy what happens if you spend all your time for AA or core mix units you fall behind. Falling behind means you wasted your time in a useless area building a unit that does not perform well and will only punish you for doing so. Therefore something has to change. I recommend the energy income off generators, give core air energy cost or the energy cost to all AA units reduce by a third
I was talking to my brother about this earlier, and he said the exact same thing, and I agree. You both raise very valid points. I definitely think the Energy required for AA is way too much and sets you back. It doesn't make sense. It's not like they are great units outside of being AA. And for core Air to be the best unit type yet require no Energy makes no sense.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. ...
  9. 10