PeowPeow
Moderator: Content Developer
Re: BA II v1.0
Whoops, I think I was getting it mixed up with Maximum Annihilation or Tired Annihilation. One of those had a "lab nano is more efficient than assist nano" feature.
- SirArtturi
- Posts: 1164
- Joined: 23 Jan 2008, 18:29
Re: BA II v1.0
What the hell was the point of that video? God Sakes...
And no. We need not match making system nor ladders until we will get the player base bigger. And that we can get it bigger by proper advertisement, which is homepage with screens, videos, tutorials and all other stuff realting. Then we need better accessibility, which means noob-easy-installer, singleplayer missions, map pack, start menu and ingame lobby etc. Oh and ofc before advertising anything we would need better graphics and appearance for the mod, which means new models, gui, new effects, new sounds and so on.
After this we need to improve the gameplay, fix the commander problem, revive useless units etc.
And finally we can launch ladder and do match making system.
Now do this and stop talking nonsense and linking senseless videos. Leave the barking and trolling to me.
Re: BA II v1.0
Your pretty good aren't you..SirArtturi wrote:Leave the barking and trolling to me.
Have you been training in some other community's forums?
- SirArtturi
- Posts: 1164
- Joined: 23 Jan 2008, 18:29
Re: BA II v1.0
It comes from within, from genes, from pure frustration and rage...Gota wrote:Your pretty good aren't you..SirArtturi wrote:Leave the barking and trolling to me.
Have you been training in some other community's forums?
And its fueled by the flu im having. I'm actually barking and coughing irl atm.
Re: BA II v1.0
Would be a nice thing to have a good matchmaking system before big advertisements. It would be big part of that whole accessibility thing.
Re: BA II v1.0
A noob-friendly installer is more important imo, and it probably be a lot faster and easier to make than a good matchmaking system.
Plus, matchmaking systems inevitably break down when there's not many players.
Plus, matchmaking systems inevitably break down when there's not many players.
Re: BA II v1.0
I was thinking I hear some of the BA people say they want an installer but i never see it appear. Why can't you guys just take the portable version of the engine, throw in BA, and some maps, then zip it up and distribute it. While it is not an installer exactly. It would probably do what you want it to do. (at least i think so anyway)
Re: BA II v1.0
I don't know how to make an installer, but if it's as simple as you say it is I might look into it a little, I'd really love to make it easier for people to get.oksnoop2 wrote:I was thinking I hear some of the BA people say they want an installer but i never see it appear. Why can't you guys just take the portable version of the engine, throw in BA, and some maps, then zip it up and distribute it. While it is not an installer exactly. It would probably do what you want it to do. (at least i think so anyway)
It's so hard to walk people through the process the first time.
Re: BA II v1.0
Making an installer shouldnt be hard, but distributing stolen IP in such a way is a bit of a slippery ground.
Re: BA II v1.0
This is more reasonable, although then it'd become more limited AA unit, which is it's intended role in the vech scheme. Adding two weapons to do this would make it the only t1 unit with two weapons. I think either either way would solve the multipurpose role it has now. The arguments will remain the same I would believe, it would become unused/only AA in most situations (which is good, unit variety is a big plus).Pxtl wrote:Personally, I'd cut the range on the slasher/samson to be equal to an LLT, but increase the missile-fuel and projectile velocity so it won't miss aircraft, and let it keep the surface/air targetting. The problem with the old samson/slasher is it wore too many hats, making it impossible to balance. Removing the "artillery" hat would help a lot. Then it would still be useful and familiar to BA players (it's a great spotter), but it wouldn't double as artillery. You could even up its firepower then.
Re: BA II v1.0
==Troy== wrote:Making an installer shouldnt be hard, but distributing stolen IP in such a way is a bit of a slippery ground.
I don't care about that. I'll distribute it myself if need be, I just don't want to have to get people excited about Spring only to have it lead directly to frustration when the install is as confusing as it is.