View topic - Balanced Annihilation V7.18



All times are UTC + 1 hour


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 116 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 04 Sep 2010, 15:18 
Balanced Annihilation Maintainer
User avatar

Joined: 10 Dec 2006, 18:46
Updated to fix a crash bug and 2 other little things.

Apologies for all the updates but I could not leave a game crashing feature live in BA :(


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Sep 2010, 17:49 

Joined: 13 Jan 2009, 11:20
nvm i just tested it, nanos chaining works again.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Sep 2010, 18:14 
Modeler
User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2008, 15:53
Location: at front, llt pushing
TheFatController wrote:
Apologies for all the updates


im newb, but, what if u could update mutators, not whole game all the time ?

anyway, gj


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Sep 2010, 18:21 
Balanced Annihilation Maintainer
User avatar

Joined: 10 Dec 2006, 18:46
Yeah that would save bandwidth but on the other hand would add an extra file requirement for new players :regret:


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Sep 2010, 18:29 
Modeler
User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2008, 15:53
Location: at front, llt pushing
as far as i know, mutator is tiny file, anyway, just a suggestion, i think it would be good idea 'in the times of spring engine update' ;)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Sep 2010, 22:05 

Joined: 30 Aug 2009, 23:26
I was wondering why the air trans can carry such a big weight like a commander? The all the com drops would stop.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Sep 2010, 22:59 

Joined: 30 Nov 2006, 03:21
Fark really needs to be able to build nanos. Even if it could, it would still be a lot crappier than Freaker, but at least I wouldn't need to tech down back to L1 conbot whenever I need more nanos and I only have L2 kbots.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Sep 2010, 00:37 
Modeler
User avatar

Joined: 02 Jan 2008, 21:55
Tronic wrote:
Fark really needs to be able to build nanos. Even if it could, it would still be a lot crappier than Freaker, but at least I wouldn't need to tech down back to L1 conbot whenever I need more nanos and I only have L2 kbots.


Stop DSD teching?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Sep 2010, 08:22 
Spring Developer
User avatar

Joined: 22 Sep 2007, 08:51
using the rapid system would solve the problem of bandwidth without creating a new one or any inconveniences. this only makes sense if you put it there when you release the version, and not 1 month later though. as much as i know, you have to log in to a page, upload your mod file, give it a tag and description, and thats it for you, as a maintainer.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Sep 2010, 11:44 
User avatar

Joined: 05 Oct 2006, 03:32
Location: New Zealand
Btw TFC why is it when I compress 7.18 it's 700 odd kb smaller :? Any reason you use less compression?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Sep 2010, 11:48 
Supreme Annihilation Maintainer
User avatar

Joined: 11 Jan 2008, 16:55
Nixa wrote:
Btw TFC why is it when I compress 7.18 it's 700 odd kb smaller :? Any reason you use less compression?


Different compression ratio or different software version.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Sep 2010, 23:03 
Balanced Annihilation Maintainer
User avatar

Joined: 10 Dec 2006, 18:46
I put 7zip on Fast cause I like to think it helps load times (but it probably doesn't)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Sep 2010, 00:22 

Joined: 29 Oct 2008, 15:55
It should, Fast packs/unpacks faster than "maximum" or whatever the highest compression is.

Spring uses the same algo for unpacking, so it would take longer to unpack a full compression vs fast compression.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Sep 2010, 16:37 
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: 26 Oct 2007, 15:21
Small visual bug: the bubble trails emitted by ships when moving and by hovers when static or moving is way to fast. It looks very odd.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Sep 2010, 01:40 
User avatar

Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 00:43
Tronic wrote:
Fark really needs to be able to build nanos. Even if it could, it would still be a lot crappier than Freaker, but at least I wouldn't need to tech down back to L1 conbot whenever I need more nanos and I only have L2 kbots.


Build Consuls, which are the Arm combat eng. Yes, they're in the Veh lab. Guess what Core doesn't have in their vehicle lab?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Sep 2010, 02:22 

Joined: 30 Nov 2006, 03:21
Why not remove Farks altogether then? Not a very useful unit as it is now. Costs twice as much as L1 conbot and the only remotely useful thing it builds is L1 mex. Fark's worker time is barely better than L1 con's.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Sep 2010, 05:47 
Modeler
User avatar

Joined: 02 Jan 2008, 21:55
Tronic wrote:
Why not remove Farks altogether then? Not a very useful unit as it is now. Costs twice as much as L1 conbot and the only remotely useful thing it builds is L1 mex. Fark's worker time is barely better than L1 con's.


cheap mobile builder good for assisting and building t1 eco, especially for expansion


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Sep 2010, 08:43 

Joined: 27 May 2010, 22:05
Farks need to have some more build power. In this way it will be more balanced if compared with the freaker. Freaker is slower, tougher and have a better build list, Fark is faster, weaker, but would have better build power to balance its awful build list.

And let me say it again: Core really needs T2 veh engineer imo.

Pxtl agrees with me, lets make a lobby :D and put some pressure in order to have core t2 veh engineer :d

And commandos are op as they are now.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Sep 2010, 08:52 
Tournaments Moderator
User avatar

Joined: 08 Dec 2007, 17:39
Location: UK - England
H2O wrote:
And let me say it again: Core really needs T2 veh engineer imo.


Why? T2 Core Veh Cons have got uber build power, buildlists, toughness and stuffs compared to a Consul. They just cost a lil more that's all :P


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Sep 2010, 08:52 
Modeler
User avatar

Joined: 02 Jan 2008, 21:55
H2O wrote:
Farks need to have some more build power. In this way it will be more balanced if compared with the freaker. Freaker is slower, tougher and have a better build list, Fark is faster, weaker, but would have better build power to balance its awful build list.

And let me say it again: Core really needs T2 veh engineer imo.

Pxtl agrees with me, lets make a lobby :D and put some pressure in order to have core t2 veh engineer :d

And commandos are op as they are now.


Fark is not supposed to be parallel to the freaker, fark is just a little assist kbot. Consul is freaker parallel and it has similar build power and build options. Core has t2 combat kbot con, and arm has t2 combot vehicle con.


It would be ridiculous to give core one for veh as well as kbot.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 116 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC + 1 hour


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group

Site layout created by Roflcopter et al.