As the title says, I believe that razorbacks have too high of a damage modifier against air units. It makes it an exception among ground units with laser weapons, which all usually have piss poor damage to air, but the Razorback with it's 75% modifier to air along with its 1000+ DpS means that it performs relatively well against air, and the way its guns fire in bursts of multiple shots means that it doesn't care if the air units it's fighting are large in number with little HP or few in number with a lot of HP. The damage modifier Razorbacks have against air should be brought down to be more in line with other ground units that have laser weapons.
#Reduce Razorback damage modifier against air
1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)
i agree with this. If people want razorback to be "ok" versus air, then give them an air weapon like the Platy bot or whatever, an actual future-missile, thats a balancing question (i dont agree it should get such a weapon btw)
The laser should be versus non-air. I dont think there is any laser in the game that is not down-scaled big time in terms of its dmg% so it makes no sense for the Razorback to be the sole exception.
i think the reasoning was that it should be OK against air like the karganeth
but considering how much better it is against ground than the karganeth, i don't think it needs to be similarly good against air as the karganeth
Make kargsneth better imo
i agree, but should probably make a different suggestion for that
If your argument is nerf razorback because karg is weaker I reply with boost karg a little. It’s good to have T3 with some decent aa capability
my argument is nerf razorback damage against air because it doesn't make sense and is unintuitive
also titans are decent against air, their face laser can hit air targets
The Titan Laser has a too long reload. Razorback and kargs should shredd fighters
karganeth isn't even that good against air
it's just better than other t3
and it's worse than the razorback against multiple targets
Also nice to have something agains stunners
t3 are meant to be supported, you should have AA with your razorback if you're worried about air
but rn razorback is the most massable t3 unit in the game
by a large margin
it's very self sufficient
Razorback is anti spam
It's lasers don't really do well vs air.
They do kill few fighters sometimes
It has 750+ dps against air that doesn't miss and a high fire rate
But also lasers and their damage falloff
It's better against air than the t3 units with actual AA weapons
plz dont forget karganath is all terrain
its price is also 1/3 of a razorback
seems like its a hard comparison to make no/
it has more range
Karganeth and razorback are very different that's true
i would dfinitely not say with much confidense that the razor is better for cost
Oh it is
Speed + damage output are amazing
Also karg is about half the cost i believe
Still think razorback would win
thinking and definitely are too different things
Karg is just a more expensive shiva with some gimmicks
All terrain is a gimmick
And pound for pound shiva and karg perform similarly
Karg is slightly better single target while shiva is slightly better AoE, speed, and range
There's a reason you don't see many karganeths unless people are using their all terrain
But again, this thread is about razorback's damage against air, not whether it can cost effectively trade against karganeths
One fighter worth
And you do maybe 2/3 that as its far by default, even when passing overhead
t2 fighters don't have 13k HP
also being good against air is their job
being good against air is not the razorback's job
And it really isnt
it can deal with gunships just fine
Dragons are a meme.
They die to anything not flak.
And I never seen this matchup
i've seen razorbacks countering dragons more than once
but the argument is that it mostly doesn't make sense that it performs as well as it does against air
why is the razorback the only ground unit that has a laser weapon that does so much damage to air
literally no other unit, not even commanders, has as high a modifier against air with lasers as the razorback
and it's not a close comparison, the next highest modifier is sub 50% (i think)
Should we go around, finding unit with best modifier to nerf it until everything is at same level tho?
Kinda silly
changing this modifier makes as much sense as changing the damage modifiers to com in the com update thread
razorback's modifiers are a large exception to the rule of lasers dealing little damage to air units
if razorback had 40% modifiers while other units had 30% i wouldn't be suggesting this change
Yes, would make sense for all laser weapons to have same modifier vs air
All plasma to have same modifier vs everything.
All explosions.
Why even have modifiers then
plasma already has the same modifiers against everything i think
Plasma is the same as laser, they do their basic damage to all land units
Then a random different value vs air
this is such a minor change balancewise and it would make things make more sense, i don't get why there's so much pushback
and it's not like razorbacks are considered bad
Making that into a universal modifier, like all ground units do 10% or 20% or whatever, of their usual damage, to air, would make a lot of sense
What modifiers are you even talking about
really. have you looked at the Marauder recently LOL
no but find the one unit that has a different modifers for a specific weapon versus a specific unit type compared to all other weapons of this type versus this specific unit type LOL
This is something that has already been nerfed already
Last year
Razorback is only good vs a single targets and does not replace the need for flak
no it hasnt been touched at all
i understand that, it's more about fixing the inconsistency with the damage lasers do to air units
also seeing a razorback being able to deal with dragons is funny
Razor only damages one unit at a time and it prioritizes all ground first
The fact it can apply damage to air is fine
I don’t see razor needing a nerf/buff
its not about razorback being too good/bad, but about whether laser damage to air should be all over the place or not
Okay i throught a pr was made and merged from when we had #⚖|balance-discussion era
start by reading the OP and then you can reply and offer your insight
There is a thread in balance discussion people can post things that are incorrect
I had assumed that a damage modifier to 33% was made and merged becuase of a thread here #⚖|balance-discussion
From about a year ago
Disagree whole heartedly with the topic post. Razorback vs air is a great element and makes them a great all around option
Considering they're shit for their cost as general assault
They perform as all around reaction defense
They barely trade vs dragons
1v1 razorback left with 28% HP not sure about barely trades
is this a trolling attempt LOL
please stop preventing ground units to fire at air or air units to fire at the ground, it makes no sense 😦
My slightly cynical answer to that question would be because it's a very popular unit, and people love to solo dive Razorbacks into the backline, watching them delete any drones or gunships sent at them.
I can also second that side note about Dragons. Razorbacks are one of the few units that will force massed Dragons to retreat. Very effective against them. Generally better than actual anti-air units for that particular task since they can't be focus fired down.
they not better than AA trucks not even close dedicated AA has so much DPS per metal
It's a fairly specific unit interaction.
Against Dragons specifically, that high AA DPS disappears at a rapid rate by queuing a focus fire order on the fragile AA units. Dragons are often durable enough to safely survive this trade, just cycling out the damaged ones when needed until there's no AA left, having suffered no losses.
Against Razorbacks though, they survive long enough (and are more commonly manually micro'd) that the Dragons can't really pull the same stunt. Might kill one or two if in a bigger group vs group, but will usually lose Dragons in the attempt whilst failing to actually stop the Razorback force.
Also stems from how when someones leading an army of Bulls and AA guns, only a smaller portion of the force can be AA.
When fielding a group of Razorbacks, the entire force is AA. Works out as effectively providing more firepower without any resources needing to be diverted away from their intended mission.
Obviously proper AA handles any other aircraft better, where there's no need or benefit from massing in the same manner.
3 AA trucks enough to kill 1 dragon 50/50 on 1 truck dying
with more units its gets even worse for dragons they have very pathetic DPS for the cost
idk where we going with this
i'm not saying the razorback is very good at AA, just that it's better than it needs to be
it's damage modifiers against air are also inconsistent with literally any other unit you can compare it to
I'll trust that's probably correct on paper or in a clinical test environment.
In practice, and ratios of spending on mainforce to AA, people tend to considerably underestimate the amount of AA they need. You don't usually see 3 flak to 3 bull ratios.
I'm just saying I've had a good few games where I went for a backline Dragon rush strat, where I've consistently and very deliberately bullied armies by targeting the AA, wiping it out and repeatedly doing so without losses.
Armies overly packed with the level of AA needed to actually stop me doing that, weren't a threat to my front line allies due to being so anaemic on regular ground forces.
Meanwhile Razorback packs due to their versatility, stood out as a distinct threat to both of us. Am talking from experience as apparently one of the rarer weird players who likes Dragons.
This is all getting rather besides the point though. I don't want to derail Themitri's thread with a relatively fringe detail.
it costs 3800m and 68k energy, it having some decent AA is completely justified since its a heavy skirmishing unit and taking AA with it is difficult with its speed. Something like 12 drones is enough to stunlock one in spite of its AA capability (less than 1/4 the cost)
besides dragons and drones its AA is very negligible and does very little to fighters and bombers because of their speed and flight altitude
I mean reducing its modifiers against air won't make a difference when fighting shurikens that die to a strong gust of wind
It will make a very big difference, it already takes multiple shots to take out a drone, if you halved the modifier vs air you would need half as many drones to emp one
Just tested, takes 2 shots (of the burst of 6) for an armraz to kill a drone.
And with the recent fast retargeting update, armraz can take out 3 drones per laser burst
ohh I haven't played with them since the engine update
Before the update, armraz would kill a drone in 2 shots, and waste the other 4.
Now, it immediately gets a new target after killing a drone, so it does not waste shots
and it's not like razorbacks dominate the battlefield
any T3 unit at some point is supposed to dominate, in a particular situation. That's kind of the point. All of them are supposed to be very useful and make you go like "damn, that's OP"
although so far I've never heard anyone say "damn, Turtles are OP"
New targeting was an overall buff to Razorback whether against drones or not, has yet to be rebalanced, but this is the first big related complaint.
Per shot damage should probably be so lightly reduced to compensate for better aiming
Turtle is a T2 thats in T3 factory for some reason
The unit is working great as budget Thor in cleaning light units, but dies quickly when separated or if enemy can focus it down. Does it really need a nerf?
Well it performs better than it used to, and it was considered balanced.. now this thread complains it needs a nerf. I am just offering a reasonable idea. Does it really need? Not sure, but IMO arm T3 currently outclasses cor T3 pretty easily.
Exception being behemoth but it’s so slow by the time it gets somewhere games already over.
I understand that, but the razorback is one of the most solid units throughout the game once you can get it, no other t3 performs remotely as well as a jack of all trades, and in its weight category it still has really good dps, fire rate, and speed
And it's not like asking for its AA damage to be reduced is a big nerf for it, especially since at that point you can easily afford to provide it a t2 fighter escort
Whether it's banalced or not misses the point really. Should razorbacks be 5-10 times better vs air than other laser units, does that make sense or not?
are they that much better? It feels like the only reason why they're any more effective is purely based off the unit design and it's Gatling lasers. High dps lasers with high ROF will naturally translate to it having more effective AA than laser units with slow ROF and plasma that isn't hitscan and misses a lot more often.
Also, when talking about unit balance and whether it needs to be changed, I think throwing out balance...
Whether it's banalced or not misses the point really.
...is a bit counterproductive.
If people feel like it's unbalanced and too good against air because of the interaction between a high ROF, high DPS, laser weapon, then fine, nerf the modifier. But I don't think ive really ever felt like it was particularly effective against anything other than maybe t1 gunships and shurikens. I've never used them against air and noticed "omg this unit is so op, it actually fights air off super well". It always felt bad to barely mediocre aa to me, which is fine cos it's not an aa unit.
Should razorbacks be 5-10 times better vs air than other laser units, does that make sense or not?
Its only 5-10 times better vs air because it's 8-12 times better vs ground as an anti ground unit. The weapon just translates 75% of that antiground damage to aa instead. I would say it makes sense. It already suffers a 25% damage penalty for shooting at air instead of ground.
no its literally has 75% base damage vs air while other laser stuff has like 8%
really? huh. sure nerf it to 8% as well
at 8%, itll still kill shurikens, so I'm still quite happy
i think the mammoth has like 23% damage against air
and that's the closest thing cor gets to the razorback in terms of similar weaponry
T2
yeah, I dont know if you want to compare razorbacks to a T2 unit that costs 60% of its own price. Arguably now, the razorback should have >23% air damage so that it's still more effective per shot than a t2 unit.
How about 50%? Still a substantial nerf from 75%, but better than the most comparable T2 unit for cor that costs substantially less
i was thinking something like 45-50% damage
i'm fine with the razorback having the highest modifier, but 75% is way too much compared to everything else
I like having that ONE unit that can do something against air, that one exception that you can use in that situation
you don't have to uniformize everything
If you just wanted a t3 unit with AA then marauders have that
lol
While razorback does enough damage to easily take down enemy fighters
Individual fighters
seems like a lost cause, people dont want the game to be somewhat reasonable and balanced, most dont even know what that even means
Razorbacks are fine
start by showing replays where Razorbacks are dominating the battlefield and preventing people from using air at all
for example, it was obvious grunts were way overused in 1v1, which often made the duels boring, so a fix has been provided
but I haven't seen 4v4 6v6 or 8v8 with Razorbacks deciding everything, people overproducing them etc...
You are funny
you cant overproduce Razorbacks
your whole argument falls flat on its face because there is a difference between t1 and t3, who would have thought
I guess theoretically i could find a replay that lasts 4 hours where everybody is producing Razorbacks because they are the best in a way
w<hy don't you start by being polite and not a complete asshat
i was responding to your weird request there
i would like to reiterate: this post isn't about nerfing razorbacks because they are very good against air, it's about bringing their modifier more in line with other laser weapons because they are way better than they should be when compared to other units with laser weapons
and actually answer what I just said
razorbacks aren't very good against air, but it's weird that they are as good as they are
i dont even know what "asshat" even means tbh. i suppose its a slur
I'd rather see a proof of abuse of that difference of air damage modifier first
maybe the dev who did that had a reason, who was it ?
its not about abuse. have you even considered reading the comment you replied to.
its not about OP either. its about streamlining.
the change i'm proposing isn't for balance reasons, it's for simplicity and intuitiveness reasons
less focus on slurs, more focus on reading, friend.
it doesn't make much sense and isn't very intuitive for 1 specific unit that uses lasers to have a modifier against air several times larger than any other unit that uses lasers
stop trying to have things that "make sense" we're talking about sci fi RTS
there's a million things in that game that don't make sense but are implemented
fighters not able to fire at the ground
nettles either
gaslighting...the case that is being made is the damage modifier
units drawing energy without any electrical grid
all of these things don't make sense but we don't spend hours debating it
not about nettles, not about fighting the ground. its about the DAMAGE MODIFIER that is almost unique to the Razorback
who gives a rat's ass
i dont know why you are repeatedly evading the subject
there's probably other unique modifiers or similar things like that in the game
and i'm not talking about "making sense" as you put it from a physics and realism standpoint, i'm talking about it from a video game design standpoint
then find the dev who entered that 75% number and ask him why he did that
and there has been a push to move away from those, such as the removal of special damages against commanders
don't do it on a case by case basis then
gather all the infos and ask if it should be done throughout all units
the change i am suggesting will make it a lot more uniform across all relevant units and buildings
currently, all units and buildings that use laser weapons have very low damage modifiers against air with the exception of razorbacks
@river wharf @icy island do you know why Razorback has 75% damage against air while other units have lower modifiers ?
its been like that since the dawn of time, dont think anyone remembers the actual reasoning, but as far as I can imagine its because it was designed as a standalone raiding unit due to its speed within T3 roster
so devs wanted it to be able to defend from some more emp drones and such than your usual landunit
give it actual AA guns and put main gun in line with other lasers :]
meh I think its interesting that it shoots down air with its main lasers
I dont find them particularly op too due to the short range tbh
it can basically only protect itself from drones and gunships which makes sense
with a dedicated aa weapon (unless unnaturally low range) it would be a diffrent unit
and Marauder already exists
thanks, my thoughts exactly
karganath used to shoot at air with their main missiles too. The Giant Scav version still does that.
Marauder seems to have taken that place though and coincidentally has a dedicated AA weapon.
Marauder is likely getting a nerf soon
it received a buff from script fix which wasn't followed by a rebalance
from my experience marauders feel like raiding units while razorbacks feel like brawlers
kind of like fiends and welders
only since the buff
Interesting. What sort of nerf ? 
Also as a side note I find it very unlikely that nerfing the Marauder would turn the razorback back into a raiding unit. Even assuming it ever was, it's too sturdy, too much DPS, too big for a raiding unit regardless of how much nerf the Marauder. Unit role doesn't change like that IMO
Either a DPS nerf, so T2 trades better into marauders.
Or LOS nerf, so they need at least some kind of support when raiding.
Or an HP nerf, so they can be killed a bit faster before raiding in too deep.
i don't think an HP nerf would be good, they're already squishier than a lot of t2 units
https://discord.com/channels/549281623154229250/1096847232520687626
Before things derail too much
checking BA changelog, it was nerfed from 100% damage vs air to 75% vs air around 2009
which it did from back in AA
i dont think it makes sense to have these values all over the place based on what somebody feels might be cool
just give all lasers a set % of damage they do to air
No.
Look at reactions, just stop complaining, most ppl dislike the idea.
Everything doesn't need to be the same