Fix that (balancing)

Fix that (balancing)

Hearken back to the days of yore and enjoy the first major Spring module!

Moderators: Moderators, Content Developer

User avatar
Jools
XTA Developer
Posts: 2816
Joined: 23 Feb 2009, 16:29

Fix that (balancing)

Post by Jools »

Just thought I'd open this thread as well. Because I know the most current issues, I thought I'd start with those that aren't discussed so much, and I believe the common ones will find their way here anyway.

* Nuke area of damage too large, on small maps you can nuke without scouting. Do we want it that way?

* Line of sight generally too large. Yes, I know that this change was made probably when xta was a mod of ota. The problem with ota was the overuse of hawks/vamps, but now I think they are underused. People scout with peepers or radar planes, but why not instead lower the scoutability of those so that you have to build hawks?
User avatar
Gota
Posts: 7151
Joined: 11 Jan 2008, 16:55

Re: Fix that (balancing)

Post by Gota »

You cant use hawks for jack shit in XTA.
SPring fighters and OTA fighters handle very differently.
User avatar
Tribulex
A.N.T.S. Developer
Posts: 1894
Joined: 26 Sep 2009, 21:26

Re: Fix that (balancing)

Post by Tribulex »

hawks are great for comkilling.
User avatar
FaerieWithBoots
Posts: 149
Joined: 17 Jun 2009, 13:21

Re: Fix that (balancing)

Post by FaerieWithBoots »

I have no problems with XTA-nukes. If you get to nukes on a small map, then something is wrong. (and if you dont want them in the first place, disable them).

Line of sight: maybe the LLTs los is a bit too big now (call it line of lol XD ). Slasher, crashers etc all need los from a commander, zipper or other scout to be 100% effective. This is one of the reasons why ppl like to compush with misile units. If you want to make misile units less effective you could reduce their los even more (would need enormous ammounts of testing since it would effect the game play a lot)
Fafik Hawks were never intended for scouting in the first place. They are anti air fighters, wit some other 'talents' as well. You use peepers and radar planes for that.

On a side note: It is imposible to make a well balanced mod for every map. Choice of map is something that is just as important to balance as the stats of the units itself, this is something i have missed in the discussions on balance in general.
User avatar
knorke
Posts: 7971
Joined: 22 Feb 2006, 01:02

Re: Fix that (balancing)

Post by knorke »

Choice of map is something that is just as important to balance as the stats of the units itself, this is something i have missed in the discussions on balance in general.
+1
for example "sea balance", they are many different type of sea maps in spring.

and yes, imo too lasertower los is too big, if you make one in the middle of lava highground (this x- shaped brown map with lava) you can see the entrance to the base areas...
pintle
Posts: 1763
Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 16:01

Re: Fix that (balancing)

Post by pintle »

Insane los buff on Dfenz was insane. Nobody requested it, I have no idea why it was added?

Hawk is also super effective at killing (non-fort/solar walled) antinoox

edit: I just really have to contend basic's noob bullshit :P Hawks are one of the most useful generalised units in the game. I nearly always get a t2 air lab on repeat fighters as soon as I have the eco to support it. Unparalleled AA, massive threat to commaders, great flea/zipper spam counter, single target burst dps monsters basically.

If u keep massing them over your own terittory, you are defending yourself efficiently, while also massing for a game ending strike.

They are one of the most useful units in the game.
User avatar
TheMightyOne
Posts: 492
Joined: 26 Feb 2007, 14:32

Re: Fix that (balancing)

Post by TheMightyOne »

i think nerfing defence's LOS would nerf the defence too much.. i mean we had ppl complaining about defences beeing too weak. i really dont see a problem here. i mean how many pws does it take to take down a single LLT ? 5 ? iirc 8 PWs take down a lonely HLT. our defence doesnt need nerfing.
babbles
Posts: 564
Joined: 22 Jul 2008, 02:30

Re: Fix that (balancing)

Post by babbles »

llts on a hill = I can see your base

needs fixing imo
mongus
Posts: 1463
Joined: 15 Apr 2005, 18:52

Re: Fix that (balancing)

Post by mongus »

You know why did they nerf nuke on xta?(purposedly) (as vulcan bertha and ..)

I liked when a nuke left some structures alive, (flack... viper... some labs?), and you had to stockpile at least 2 to be devastating.

and irrc, 4 aks take down llt. lose one.

Oh and llt los has been 896 since forever.
pintle
Posts: 1763
Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 16:01

Re: Fix that (balancing)

Post by pintle »

TheMightyOne wrote:i think nerfing defence's LOS would nerf the defence too much.. i mean we had ppl complaining about defences beeing too weak. i really dont see a problem here. i mean how many pws does it take to take down a single LLT ? 5 ? iirc 8 PWs take down a lonely HLT. our defence doesnt need nerfing.
LoS buff on static weapons that can see their max range... They would not be nerfed in any funtional way (relative to their role at least).

It would just make porc creep in FFA etc way less viable.

Go look at HLT los range atm, or make an llt on cooper hill.

It is retarded
mongus
Posts: 1463
Joined: 15 Apr 2005, 18:52

Re: Fix that (balancing)

Post by mongus »

Im ok with llts hlts los.

its big, but its cool, and gives the defense an added benefit.
(this is the accuracy los gives to shots, own and from other units)
(that is the added benefit, los for nearby units)

Leco watcher anyone? very usefull why? the los.

wont mind testing/toying with it anyhow.
User avatar
TheMightyOne
Posts: 492
Joined: 26 Feb 2007, 14:32

Re: Fix that (balancing)

Post by TheMightyOne »

mongus wrote: its big, but its cool, and gives the defense an added benefit.
(this is the accuracy los gives to shots, own and from other units)
(that is the added benefit, los for nearby units)

Leco watcher anyone? very usefull why? the los.

wont mind testing/toying with it anyhow.
maybe i've just had a long day but i dont understand this post. sorry. :?
mongus
Posts: 1463
Joined: 15 Apr 2005, 18:52

Re: Fix that (balancing)

Post by mongus »

The los the llt and hlt provide, benefits all nearby units (with weapons).

The benefit is, accuracy. We are used to this added benefit.
This is something pintle is forgetting when he says it wont affect the game if we truncate los to be the same as weapon range.

As a defensive turret, having good los (sensors?) makes sense.

Btw, radar tower does have a good los range too (not as big though).



Leco watcher.... was a defensive structure in TA, that had huge los (maybe 1.5 what a llt does have?).
It made your defenses MUCH more effective (it was noticeable), when you build them.
It was the passive benefit of the los leco watcher gave.
Its a null reference to a null TA mod.
pintle
Posts: 1763
Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 16:01

Re: Fix that (balancing)

Post by pintle »

What i was saying is that the los buff was totally unecessary, and nothing to do with its role, provided it can see to its max range, it can do its job fine.

If you want your strong point to have more LOS, build a fucking radar tower and park 2 peewee in front of your porc. You should not get free LOS on half the map in a 1v1 just because you are a porc whore.

It is a TERRIBLE idea to have given the los buff to dfenz imo. All it does is simplify things and make defensive play more rewarding, both bad imho.

In other mods than XTA, I sometimes use dragon's eyes to enhance my porc, kinda like that ota unit mongus mentioned I guess... ofc in XTA you have to micro you own mobile units to do the same thing (shock horror!)
User avatar
TheMightyOne
Posts: 492
Joined: 26 Feb 2007, 14:32

Re: Fix that (balancing)

Post by TheMightyOne »

one more thing came to my mind recently. its not really a fix but an improvement. its about crawling bombs. for those of you who dont know in the past crawling bombs always exploded with full power no matter what. this resultet in a couple of "phail"-situations. i remember this game on desert tried where i had a t2 lab in the middle of the map and i was building a roach just as it was done some a popup shot at my lab... com that was assisting the lab got hit my the explosion => base gone. so we introduced the full explosion on self d. it works pretty well but sometimes its so frustrating when the enemy is half a second faster then you especially if youre ping is not perfect and his is. so what i would like to see is an on/off button for crawling bombs. "off" beeing the default mod and what we have now, as long as their in your base you keep them on off and if you have to you self d them. "on" beeing full charge no matter what. you turn it on at your own risk and probably once crawlings are outside your base and are not likely to harm your own units. i bet this kind of thing would save a lot of nerves for many players.
User avatar
knorke
Posts: 7971
Joined: 22 Feb 2006, 01:02

Re: Fix that (balancing)

Post by knorke »

i agree that one should have to use radartowers to support lasertowers with los.
Imo 4 aks do not kill a llt.
if the turret is on a hill or something they get slowed down alot climbing up. If there was a nearby radar that you can kill to weaken the defense before attacking, that would be good i guess.

commander los is very big too btw, but yeah xta is very com-heavy so it might be ok. But it makes commander + handfull of missles units very strong. If the com had to plop down a radar from time to time it might nerf this a bit.
But it might get annoying to rebuild radars all the time because they die so fast.

crawling bombs: if the on/off thing gets introduced, add a flashing light on top if they are on. So you do not have to select just to check status.
babbles
Posts: 564
Joined: 22 Jul 2008, 02:30

Re: Fix that (balancing)

Post by babbles »

same for kamizs then?

and possibly mine clearers?
User avatar
manolo_
Posts: 1370
Joined: 01 Jul 2008, 00:08

Re: Fix that (balancing)

Post by manolo_ »

babbles wrote:same for kamizs then?

and possibly mine clearers?
kamiz in generall (or sub-sea-lvl1) has to change somehow to feel better
mongus
Posts: 1463
Joined: 15 Apr 2005, 18:52

Re: Fix that (balancing)

Post by mongus »

Was thinking about llts and los.
And while there are some other considerations.


What about countering? what are llts los the counter for?

commander.

there cant be unchallenged los by commander.

in this case llts provide that capacity, of spotting a commander.

wdyt?

how is the testing going?
pintle
Posts: 1763
Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 16:01

Re: Fix that (balancing)

Post by pintle »

mongus wrote:Was thinking about llts and los.
And while there are some other considerations.


What about countering? what are llts los the counter for?

commander.

there cant be unchallenged los by commander.

in this case llts provide that capacity, of spotting a commander.

wdyt?

how is the testing going?
maek radar tower
Post Reply

Return to “XTA”