Spy satellite nerf?

Is their stealth detection range seriously nerfed in the new update?

Geschrieben von Guest14502, 24.03.2011 at 18:20

Is their stealth detection range seriously nerfed in the new update?

I haven't touched Spy Satellite since its creation. Maybe Amok changed it, not sure.

I nerfed it, but it was about a month ago. No changes since then.

Oh I guess I didn't notice at the time...I wish it had the old stealth detection range, its a lot less useful now

Well it was a unit that totialy f***** stealth players as it was lol.

Now its just like a free spy plane. Pretty useless if you ask me... To be honest, I would rather have the 400 gold lol. I liked it much better when it wasn't nerfed.

Yes I agree 100%. Its basically just a spy plane, and you might as well remove the unit.

I don't really buy that disadvantaging stealth players is a real concern, stealth players can use their own spy planes to detect and kill the spy satellite, which is a very weak unit. Even a simple notification that "so and so player has acquired a spy satellite" would be a better solution than the current nerf.

Geschrieben von Guest14502, 30.03.2011 at 11:36

Yes I agree 100%. Its basically just a spy plane, and you might as well remove the unit.

I don't really buy that disadvantaging stealth players is a real concern, stealth players can use their own spy planes to detect and kill the spy satellite, which is a very weak unit. Even a simple notification that "so and so player has acquired a spy satellite" would be a better solution than the current nerf.

Still, it is invisible, has range 3 times bigger than the sentry plane, and comes for free. Isn't this good enough?
We were actually planning to do notifications like you suggested for nukes, just never got to actually implement them.

Well there is no other unit that has such a great impact on a strategy. There's no EMP-Bomb that maybe would cripple the range of bombers and so on.
If you guys really feel like it's needed to be buffed again, may I suggest to dramaticly decrease it's range? To find that satellite is one thing, when it can always be moved away from your sentries, before they even detect it.
The other thing is to intercept it with anything. There's nothing that has a comparable range. Detecting and killing that thing would be by far easier if it couldn't be moved that far.

Did you mean 3 times stealth detection range, or movement range? 3x movement range is not that helpful, when stealth detection range is the same as a sentry plane. And it doesnt seem realistic for stealth detection range to be the same. Anyway I will quit it now, its not that important.

Has the regular sentry plane has its stealth detection range reduced by the way?

Geschrieben von Guest14502, 31.03.2011 at 18:14

Did you mean 3 times stealth detection range, or movement range? 3x movement range is not that helpful, when stealth detection range is the same as a sentry plane. And it doesnt seem realistic for stealth detection range to be the same. Anyway I will quit it now, its not that important.

Sentry plane view range: 60
Spy satellite view range: 180 (3 times bigger)

The movement range is 20 and 40 - 2 times bigger. All in all seems like a very useful unit to me.

I think its really usefull in big map games... its a gift to know what the enemy is doing and where his troops actually are... to watch europe it dosn't even have to be in it. Just put it on a big inland sea (like the aral sea) with no port and no one will even notice it is there...

What i don't understand how infantry can destroy it X) ....

Im still feeling that the detection capability of units is a little small. 1 Merine on my enemys side of the map always scores me 10 citys. the spy plane and city range should be a little higher but not alot maybe about the distance of a 8th inch on full screen full zoom. i mean i can practicly park in a city now with out detection. Though i do like the way it is and if its not broke then dont fix it. Now im contradicting myself lol.

I think you should add aircraft carriers, not as a rare unit but as a normal unit, and aircraft should have a fuel limitation...

Since we believe that Infantry, Marines, and Militia do not actually walk all the way between cities on land, I think we can believe that the air units had mid air refueling during the trans Pacific flight. Aircraft carriers are not suppose to be put in a cross fire in the middle of battle either.

Adding any sort of supply line system to Afterwind can add unnecessary complications. We know that the troops do not have infinite ammunition or food. I do not want to fuss over how many oil tankers have successfully delivered that filthy black muck to my ports and cities. I do not want to worry if my army will receive enough ammunition in time from the cities. Nor do I want to make any more units that I can only eliminate by sending them on suicide missions.

Since our supply lines are assumed to be there on land, we can also assume that they are there at sea. I do not think it is necessary to add aircraft carriers, they do next to nothing in battles. It is the aircraft they are carrying that counts. I do not think an aircraft carrier can successfully land and launch a Boeing B-52 Stratofortress, given its size. I do not think it is even reasonable to have a super carrier carry any more than one large Bomber either. What will an aircraft carrier do to a Submarine or Destroyer? Why not just assume that the aircraft carrier is with the Destroyer already?

I prefer it simple. We players are Generals boosting our troops' morale and planning tactical battles. We are not the officers who worry over logistics and supplies.

I agree with what the man above me said. However, when they implement cargo ships that can boost city income, that could very well be an awesome addition to the game.