• We are looking for you!
    Always wanted to join our Supporting or Forum Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
    Take a look at our recruitement page for more information and how you can apply:
    Apply

Space Age Asteroid Belt Feedback

DeletedUser25274

SAAB units defend well but they are not good on attack. This means there is a huge premium on having sky high attack boost, to the point a player must have it or is pretty much wasting their time. I mean way beyond what 4 level 75 fight boost buildings will do. The players who have the big advantage here are those with rows of boost producing event buildings. The kind of rows that can only be had by dumping huge amounts of diamonds into the events. So a very great incentive to buy ever more diamonds has been achieved by making the SAAB units weak attackers. I think this is what Longshanks means by Inno striving to maintain balance in the game. lmfao.
 
The SAAB units look terrible except for maybe the nail storm and B.E.L.T. You gave them only melee range without a high movement, significantly higher stats and/or a passive ability to compensate. They did a much better job at balancing the Egyptian troops than these ones. They seriously need a buff if you don't want another AF incident with the units being obsolete out of the gate.
 

dpghost

Active Member
What bothers me the most is the nerf-ing of Chateau.
Back there in CE I had almost 30 goods coming out 3 times of 10 recurrent quests, and that was the full output of a goods manufacturer for a day.
Those were the good times.
In SAAB I get 35 goods 3 times out of 10 recurrent quests, but the goods manufacturer gives 40 goods every 8 hours. Also to change a recurrent goods i have to click 13 times.
I have to say Inno developers nerfed the Chateau quite good
Also the FP's are in an inflation - the special buildings are giving 10 - 11 - 12 - 20 fp's per day
Previous those numbers were of Cape Canaveral...
Old players, we have a target on our back ...
And on top of that we have players in Colonial explaining why it's good
Damn you Inno
 

DeletedUser25274

What bothers me the most is the nerf-ing of Chateau.
Back there in CE I had almost 30 goods coming out 3 times of 10 recurrent quests, and that was the full output of a goods manufacturer for a day.
Those were the good times.
In SAAB I get 35 goods 3 times out of 10 recurrent quests, but the goods manufacturer gives 40 goods every 8 hours. Also to change a recurrent goods i have to click 13 times.
I have to say Inno developers nerfed the Chateau quite good
Also the FP's are in an inflation - the special buildings are giving 10 - 11 - 12 - 20 fp's per day
Previous those numbers were of Cape Canaveral...
Old players, we have a target on our back ...
And on top of that we have players in Colonial explaining why it's good
Damn you Inno
Collectively a lot of time, effort and money was devoted to aspects of the game which have seen a decline in utility. Nerfed I guess is right. Event buildings bought now for a swipe are faster and easier than GBs pushed all the way up by way of sustained collective effort. From Inno's viewpoint past investment by players is under the bridge and fading into the past. Inno seems more intent on nerfing them so as to relieve some of the hopelessness newer players face trying to compete. Newer players who are now deciding whether whether to invest the time, effort and money. If you were 20 and started playing when FOE was new, you are now a relic at age 28. Go play board games with the boomers and make way for the young stuff. Fresh meat.
 

DreadfulCadillac

Well-Known Member
Collectively a lot of time, effort and money was devoted to aspects of the game which have seen a decline in utility. Nerfed I guess is right. Event buildings bought now for a swipe are faster and easier than GBs pushed all the way up by way of sustained collective effort. From Inno's viewpoint past investment by players is under the bridge and fading into the past. Inno seems more intent on nerfing them so as to relieve some of the hopelessness newer players face trying to compete. Newer players who are now deciding whether whether to invest the time, effort and money. If you were 20 and started playing when FOE was new, you are now a relic at age 28. Go play board games with the boomers and make way for the young stuff. Fresh meat.
one thing inno wont...*ahem* Cant nerf is the ARC.not froma goods standpoint, but from a percent boost standpoint
 

Graviton

Well-Known Member
Collectively a lot of time, effort and money was devoted to aspects of the game which have seen a decline in utility. Nerfed I guess is right. Event buildings bought now for a swipe are faster and easier than GBs pushed all the way up by way of sustained collective effort. From Inno's viewpoint past investment by players is under the bridge and fading into the past. Inno seems more intent on nerfing them so as to relieve some of the hopelessness newer players face trying to compete. Newer players who are now deciding whether whether to invest the time, effort and money. If you were 20 and started playing when FOE was new, you are now a relic at age 28. Go play board games with the boomers and make way for the young stuff. Fresh meat.
I think what this perspective is lacking is...well, perspective. There are so many differences between early ages and the Space Ages that they're practically two different games. The things that could be viewed as declining in utility for late-game players are still quite vital and important to new players. That's the balancing act Inno has to perform. To expect the performance, value, and utility of all buildings to be the same in vastly different eras is unrealistic and frankly short-sighted. Space Age: Asteroid Belt shouldn't just be a brighter, shinier version of the Iron Age. It should be different. Conversely, this same logic tends to support the opinion that the new troop units should be mostly if not all ranged, not melee.
 

ITown

Well-Known Member
Just revisiting this thread, a week later...

Having now played around with all of the units, I can now say unequivocally that the SAAB units are a complete disaster.

1. The heavy unit (shredder) is so terrible that you can kill 8 of them on level 4 GE using 8 ranged units (nail storms) without taking any damage whatsoever, despite the shredder supposedly being a "counter" to the nail storm.

In reality, using the shredder is pure suicide, and there is no advantage whatsoever to using them in any circumstance, compared to using SAM steel wardens.

2. If the heavy unit is terrible, the light unit (Drill Ranger) is an unmitigated disaster of a unit. I seriously cannot fathom why the developers think it makes any sense at all to give Contact to melee units with 1 range. They are so terrible that one of the units they're supposed to counter (Shredder) deals a tremendous amount of damage to them because drill rangers have no way to inflict damage without taking retaliatory damage, whereas Shredders do.

3. The fast unit (hover hammer) is terrible, but at least has the mitigating factor of being immune to artillery.

4. The artillery unit seems balanced.

5. The ranged unit (nail storm) is disgustingly overpowered, easily beating every unit from its age due to its high range and high damage. With the combination of Keen Eye + AO, it is not uncommon to see them 1-shotting the units that are supposed to counter them (Shredder/Hammer). On top of that, they also are extremely strong against the light unit and plenty strong against the artillery as well.



How to balance:
1. Give Drill Rangers +1 range so that their contact skill works against Shredders.
2. Increase the movement of Shredders by 9 so that they can hit Nail Storms immediately after the Nail Storms hit them.
3. Decrease the range of Nail Storms by 1 so that they can't outrange Shredders so easily.
4. Increase the movement of Hover Hammers so that they can hit the nail storms/artillery before they've had a chance to move.
 

dpghost

Active Member
I think what this perspective is lacking is...well, perspective. There are so many differences between early ages and the Space Ages that they're practically two different games. The things that could be viewed as declining in utility for late-game players are still quite vital and important to new players. That's the balancing act Inno has to perform. To expect the performance, value, and utility of all buildings to be the same in vastly different eras is unrealistic and frankly short-sighted. Space Age: Asteroid Belt shouldn't just be a brighter, shinier version of the Iron Age. It should be different. Conversely, this same logic tends to support the opinion that the new troop units should be mostly if not all ranged, not melee.
There is a very equalizer feature: Battleground - it doesn't matter which age you are, if you fight (or negociate) you do the same result whatever age you are in.
And that is good, because the camper strategy should allow campers to do something good for their guild.
If you're in Colonial and get your goods for negociate with an Arc - Chateau combo, me in SAAB, can not compete with that.
I have 13 clicks to do to renew the QR, no unbirthday quest, no coins or supplies separated quest and 50,000 goods needed for research.
What have I done so wrong that I am being punished like that?
 

Graviton

Well-Known Member
There is a very equalizer feature: Battleground
I said nothing about equalizing anything, I said Inno has to keep the game interesting and challenging for all Ages, not just make each new age a higher-level copy of all the others. Battleground is not the game, it's a side game.
 
Last edited:

qaccy

Well-Known Member
There is a very equalizer feature: Battleground - it doesn't matter which age you are, if you fight (or negociate) you do the same result whatever age you are in.
And that is good, because the camper strategy should allow campers to do something good for their guild.
If you're in Colonial and get your goods for negociate with an Arc - Chateau combo, me in SAAB, can not compete with that.
I have 13 clicks to do to renew the QR, no unbirthday quest, no coins or supplies separated quest and 50,000 goods needed for research.
What have I done so wrong that I am being punished like that?
Don't forget that a player in SAAB also has a far larger city than a player in Colonial. How many extra expansions is that to place buildings in?
 

planetofthehumans2

Active Member
There is no meme, ardak does not approve.

On topic, it's kinda hilarious how we're currently stuck in our homes, and INNO released an age where we're expanding to the final frontier. Kinda ironic, don't ya think?
Hells bells your still in the asteroid belt. The next age is VENUS! I really hope we're not going planet to planet before getting out of our galaxy.... Sounds like Inno lost out on ideas for ages.
 

DeletedUser34239

These SAAB units suck. For example, with attr of 30 (gbg, obviously), I fight using 1 SAM heavy (steel warden) with rogues and I lose 1 troop. OK, that makes sense since the AO did not kick in (different era troops). The DA is 8 nail storm, by the way. Then, same DA, same attr, I use 1 SAAB heavy (shredder) and I lose 6 troops (and since they are same era troops, my AO DID kick in). How do you have the highest era heavy with the same weaknesses as the CA heavy (a range of 2 - seriously, TWO)? The only troop that does any good in SAAB is the ranged (nail storm) and when I go in with that (same DA and same attr), I lose 4 units (and again, the AO kicked in). This is crap. In SAM gbg, I could auto up to 70 with some losses, but not bad. For SAAB, no matter what I use, I take heavy losses most of the time once I get to 40. This is KILLING this game.
SAAB units:
Heavy - range of 2 (SAM has a range of 10) - By the time they can do any damage, they are dead.
Fast - range of 1 (SAM has a range of 8) - How do you have a flyer with no real special that is SO MUCH weaker than the previous era???? These are also dead before they can hit.
Light - range of 1 with a supposed special of contact (SAM has the dragon breath special) - With a range of 1, that's not contact (which hits back every time it's hit), it's retaliation (which hits back only when the hit is from an adjacent tile and most units have that and it's not their special)
Artillery - the ignores stealth is a decent idea, but this is so much weaker than the VF artillery (as was the SAM artillery - How did you go from blast, which hits up to 2 spaces away, to none for this? Rockets are still the best artillery for anything in the highest 3 eras).
Ranged - the fact that these can hide in rubble is helpful, too bad there is not much rubble on the asteroids (so the battlefield has very few hiding spots for these).

I heard these troops were even worse in beta. Do the devs actually play this game? These troops need some serious revamping.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

qaccy

Well-Known Member
@KimVM While Inno's changed units in the past, don't expect anything significant. If anything gets changed at all, it's usually only a single update and that's already happened on beta when they increased the attack and defense values. Think the best we can hope for now is that the next age's units are an improvement. But with stats increasing as they have been, I think that's going to happen even if the new units are more or less the same as SAAB.
 

WinnerGR

Well-Known Member
There is not going to be a second GB :(
They confirmed it on FB.
That means that the SC is the only one .
 

Lothar123

New Member
Well, for the first time I was able to fight through all 64 encounters of GE: no negotiation. I suppose it's possible that my improved fighting ability was caused by some kind of strategic epiphany, or possibly by the single level of my TA that I just gained. But I think it's much more likely that it was because the SAM units I was using are significantly better than the SAAB units I was fighting.