BA Feature Requests (post features & units here) - Page 2

BA Feature Requests (post features & units here)

Classic game design, maintained to please you...

Moderator: Content Developer

AreaFire
Posts: 41
Joined: 27 Aug 2009, 18:08

Re: BA Feature Requests (post features & units here)

Post by AreaFire »

YokoZar wrote:
DarkDreams wrote:underwater nano turrets - it just needs to happen
The basic con ship is already vastly superior to a land nano turret. What more could you want?

(It's about 50 metal more in cost, and for that cost you get +50 build power, +30 energy, and +0.3 metal production)
Except when you hit SUPER ECO stage and have 30 of them following around your Tech Sub they all bump into each other and clog everything up and slow down your con sub. I recently had my most successful sea battle to date (won a FFA in Throne by going sea) and you know what? The worst part of it was microing the stupid Naval Engineers that kept screwing up my build orders. My con sub got trapped in between them all for 20 seconds at a time.

OOOORRRRRRR.... you have 20 stationary nanos that stay out of the way, transition from task-to-task much more quickly, at the cost of being immobile and not producing energy and metal.

Leave the decisions up to the player, not the mod creator. Do I want better con ships or do I want nano turrets? Probably a good balance of both.

Lastly, they should definitely be floating, and have the same footprint as the current nanos.
User avatar
Wombat
Posts: 3379
Joined: 15 Dec 2008, 15:53

Re: BA Feature Requests (post features & units here)

Post by Wombat »

in last ffa i noticed that 5 naval engs got 666 build power and 25 t1 aircons got smth likr 565 - u dont need water nanos fools, naval engs and sea cons are good enuff
User avatar
Blue_Falcon
Posts: 155
Joined: 16 Oct 2008, 18:54

Re: BA Feature Requests (post features & units here)

Post by Blue_Falcon »

AreaFire wrote:
YokoZar wrote:
DarkDreams wrote:underwater nano turrets - it just needs to happen
The basic con ship is already vastly superior to a land nano turret. What more could you want?

(It's about 50 metal more in cost, and for that cost you get +50 build power, +30 energy, and +0.3 metal production)
Except when you hit SUPER ECO stage and have 30 of them following around your Tech Sub they all bump into each other and clog everything up and slow down your con sub. I recently had my most successful sea battle to date (won a FFA in Throne by going sea) and you know what? The worst part of it was microing the stupid Naval Engineers that kept screwing up my build orders. My con sub got trapped in between them all for 20 seconds at a time.

OOOORRRRRRR.... you have 20 stationary nanos that stay out of the way, transition from task-to-task much more quickly, at the cost of being immobile and not producing energy and metal.

Leave the decisions up to the player, not the mod creator. Do I want better con ships or do I want nano turrets? Probably a good balance of both.

Lastly, they should definitely be floating, and have the same footprint as the current nanos.
Use con-airs if you're over-ecoing. :P
Regret
Posts: 2086
Joined: 18 Aug 2007, 19:04

Re: BA Feature Requests (post features & units here)

Post by Regret »

There wont be underwater nanos, there wont be floating nanos, there wont be flying nanos and there wont be underground nanos.

Thanks for your valuable input on this matter. Next.
User avatar
Blue_Falcon
Posts: 155
Joined: 16 Oct 2008, 18:54

Re: BA Feature Requests (post features & units here)

Post by Blue_Falcon »

Regret wrote:There wont be underwater nanos, there wont be floating nanos, there wont be flying nanos and there wont be underground nanos.

Thanks for your valuable input on this matter. Next.
There are flying nanos, they just suck, they're called conairs. :P
Regret
Posts: 2086
Joined: 18 Aug 2007, 19:04

Re: BA Feature Requests (post features & units here)

Post by Regret »

Blue_Falcon wrote:There are flying nanos, they just suck, they're called conairs. :P
Let me rephrase that: no retarded ideas.
AreaFire
Posts: 41
Joined: 27 Aug 2009, 18:08

Re: BA Feature Requests (post features & units here)

Post by AreaFire »

Regret wrote:
Blue_Falcon wrote:There are flying nanos, they just suck, they're called conairs. :P
Let me rephrase that: no retarded ideas.
How is it retarded? Why not get rid of land nanos, right? We can just build kbot cons and if it gets too crowded, T2 air cons.
User avatar
Blue_Falcon
Posts: 155
Joined: 16 Oct 2008, 18:54

Re: BA Feature Requests (post features & units here)

Post by Blue_Falcon »

Meheheheheheh... I love randomly annoying people with retarded ideas :P

Add the stereo 3D from CA. That's *one* (and probably the only) thing worth adopting from CA. I've done a Q&D adaptation of it (I need to edit the script to change modes).

EDIT: LOL areafire
Regret
Posts: 2086
Joined: 18 Aug 2007, 19:04

Re: BA Feature Requests (post features & units here)

Post by Regret »

AreaFire wrote:How is it retarded?
Because changing that around which an entire tier was balanced is retarded. Imagine pulling the bottom cards from a card house and then rearranging them without the house falling.

Also you're clueless and want the change for the sake of something changing and having new shit to screw around with. Go play CA.
AreaFire wrote:Why not get rid of land nanos, right?
Again, retarded idea, see above.
User avatar
hoijui
Former Engine Dev
Posts: 4344
Joined: 22 Sep 2007, 09:51

Re: BA Feature Requests (post features & units here)

Post by hoijui »

what about under-water walls, that are built on the ground, to protect structures built on hte gorund of the sea. or half way floating walls, that remain in the middle between gournd and surface, to protect subs/from subs. or walls with adjustable height between ground/middle/surface.
User avatar
JohannesH
Posts: 1793
Joined: 07 Apr 2009, 12:43

Re: BA Feature Requests (post features & units here)

Post by JohannesH »

How about terraform
==Troy==
Posts: 376
Joined: 29 Oct 2008, 15:55

Re: BA Feature Requests (post features & units here)

Post by ==Troy== »

Regret is not the one to decide what will be or what will not.

As of conship clogging, get consubs, they do not collide with eachother, and you could easily have 50 of them building you an underwater fusion in less than 10 seconds.
Gedanken
Posts: 121
Joined: 13 Oct 2008, 02:57

Re: BA Feature Requests (post features & units here)

Post by Gedanken »

Charming naivety, Troy

Anyway, this thrad gets my vote for best thrad of year

Give comm quadruple HP, indestructible trans and 360 dgun plox see you in the future

/me puts on hot pink underpants, grinds down half pipe on rollerblades, ollies out of thread , has sex with hot supermodel while eating pizza and snorting powdered cheese
User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Re: BA Feature Requests (post features & units here)

Post by Pxtl »

Realistically, there will be no real gameplay changes to BA. It's safe to expect that any substantial gameplay changes (ie: new roles for existing units, new units, etc.) in this thread will be ignored.

At best, you can expect minor tweaks to units (Krogoth-like crushing for Juggernauts is probably the upper limit).

Any major gameplay changes to BA will be in the form of optional mutators or widgets that change the gameplay without actually changing the game logic (Defense Range Widget, for example).

But yes, the conship, while being easily the best con-unit in the game, does have trouble in super-late-game because of their large footprint-to-range ratio and open/close time. That's part of BA gameplay - accept it and learn to work with it as a feature, don't bemoan the absence of units to alleviate it.
User avatar
JohannesH
Posts: 1793
Joined: 07 Apr 2009, 12:43

Re: BA Feature Requests (post features & units here)

Post by JohannesH »

Pxtl wrote:Realistically, there will be no real gameplay changes to BA. It's safe to expect that any substantial gameplay changes (ie: new roles for existing units, new units, etc.) in this thread will be ignored.
Some recent changelogs prove you wrong.

So this thread is highly relevant.
Regret
Posts: 2086
Joined: 18 Aug 2007, 19:04

Re: BA Feature Requests (post features & units here)

Post by Regret »

==Troy== wrote:Regret is not the one to decide what will be or what will not.

As of conship clogging, get consubs, they do not collide with eachother, and you could easily have 50 of them building you an underwater fusion in less than 10 seconds.
hahahahah
User avatar
Gota
Posts: 7151
Joined: 11 Jan 2008, 16:55

Re: BA Feature Requests (post features & units here)

Post by Gota »

Is this another "BA is finished but woops new changes in the next release" thread?
User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Re: BA Feature Requests (post features & units here)

Post by Pxtl »

JohannesH wrote:
Pxtl wrote:Realistically, there will be no real gameplay changes to BA. It's safe to expect that any substantial gameplay changes (ie: new roles for existing units, new units, etc.) in this thread will be ignored.
Some recent changelogs prove you wrong.

So this thread is highly relevant.
Really, what earthshattering gameplay changes have happened recently? There are various optional gadgets and widgets, but I can't think of anything but nudging some numbers around and fixing gameplay things that can only be described as bugs.... and the drastic ones get reverted anyways if they hurt the gameplay.
YokoZar
Posts: 883
Joined: 15 Jul 2007, 22:02

Re: BA Feature Requests (post features & units here)

Post by YokoZar »

hoijui wrote:what about under-water walls, that are built on the ground, to protect structures built on hte gorund of the sea. or half way floating walls, that remain in the middle between gournd and surface, to protect subs/from subs. or walls with adjustable height between ground/middle/surface.
This is actually reasonable. Right now if you want to protect something from torpedos your best bet is underwater metal storage, since the sharks teeth won't do a thing to stop it.
YokoZar
Posts: 883
Joined: 15 Jul 2007, 22:02

Re: BA Feature Requests (post features & units here)

Post by YokoZar »

AreaFire wrote:
YokoZar wrote:
DarkDreams wrote:underwater nano turrets - it just needs to happen
The basic con ship is already vastly superior to a land nano turret. What more could you want?

(It's about 50 metal more in cost, and for that cost you get +50 build power, +30 energy, and +0.3 metal production)
Except when you hit SUPER ECO stage and have 30 of them following around your Tech Sub they all bump into each other and clog everything up and slow down your con sub. I recently had my most successful sea battle to date (won a FFA in Throne by going sea) and you know what? The worst part of it was microing the stupid Naval Engineers that kept screwing up my build orders. My con sub got trapped in between them all for 20 seconds at a time.
Some suggestions:
1) Put the con ships on top of already built underwater buildings, and have the con sub drag a line of things to build
2) Split them into multiple groups
3) Use construction subs -- they can all stack on top of eachother.
Post Reply

Return to “Balanced Annihilation”