Balanced Annihilation V7.18 - Page 3

Balanced Annihilation V7.18

Classic game design, maintained to please you...

Moderator: Content Developer

User avatar
Nixa
Posts: 350
Joined: 05 Oct 2006, 04:32

Re: Balanced Annihilation V7.17

Post by Nixa » 04 Sep 2010, 00:03

It's not a valid tactic to build ground AA, it doesnt stop bombers quick enough and it can't be built fast enough given where you build it you never have nano buildpower - meanwhile they'll spamming bombers at 1/10th the time.

But it seems everyone completely missed a huge problem with 7.16 which was the non-chaining nanos/AOE problems... unless he fixed that too, in which case sweet
0 x

Tronic
Posts: 75
Joined: 30 Nov 2006, 03:21

Re: Balanced Annihilation V7.17

Post by Tronic » 04 Sep 2010, 01:26

Most ground AA is severely underpowered and this was one of the issues I tried to address in this http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=22081

First of all, static AA only covers one location while fighters can work as a group where-ever AA is required. Therefore they should not be directly compared in cost/dps or other such measurements.

Another issue often overlooked is that the dps values displayed on modinfo are just wrong because AA has special damages for pretty much everything that flies. The flakkers, for example, do 1000 hp default damage, but only 100-200 hp against transports, fighters, bombers, gunships and radar planes.
0 x

Tronic
Posts: 75
Joined: 30 Nov 2006, 03:21

Re: Balanced Annihilation V7.17

Post by Tronic » 04 Sep 2010, 01:33

As for the bombers, disabling the wait function is certainly not the right solution. Increasing reload time is also at most a workaround, not really a fix.

The only proper fix that I can think of is removing the VTOL functionality (and thus the ability to hover) at higher altitudes if not entirely. It would certainly look better if bombers took off horizontally rather than vertically off the airport, but VTOL at low altitudes would still allow vertical takeoff.
0 x

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

Re: Balanced Annihilation V7.17

Post by ==Troy== » 04 Sep 2010, 02:00

I would rather suggest to decrease their accel. and the VTOL speed. So that, after you press wait/stop, the bomber would fly for another mile before landing.

As far as I know this should not affect turning radius, or other aspects of the bomber, it will just be a bit more hassle landing them where you want (cant land immediately), while fixing the wait problem to most extent.


Alternatively, is there a way to check the bomber speed from lua? (iirc there was). Could also add a flag that would allow the bomber to drop the payload only after it gained maximum speed.
0 x

User avatar
JohannesH
Posts: 1793
Joined: 07 Apr 2009, 12:43

Re: Balanced Annihilation V7.17

Post by JohannesH » 04 Sep 2010, 02:04

You can wait fighters too, and they will slow while continuing shooting, but its harder than with bombers since the right timing is much harder to find, and you'd have to have it going in the same direction of the bomber. But definitely doable if you can spare your attention.
Good point about fighters though, though fighters are really good vs bombers to start with. Well, it'd need more play to see properly how it'd play out.

And turrets are fine... Static flak used to be utter crap but it got good buff now. Sure you should be building defenders more often than the other turrets, but that doesn't mean that they don't have their place too. And yes fighters are often better AA but if statics could handle the job better why would anyone make fighters?
0 x

User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Re: Balanced Annihilation V7.17

Post by Pxtl » 04 Sep 2010, 02:34

Considering that fighters can defend your whole base, while statics are location-limited, I would think the question is still the reverse- if you can get an L2 airlab, there's no reason to build land-based AA.
0 x

User avatar
Hobo Joe
Posts: 1001
Joined: 02 Jan 2008, 21:55

Re: Balanced Annihilation V7.17

Post by Hobo Joe » 04 Sep 2010, 04:32

Not to mention, in order to defend your front line against air, you basically have to have fighters, because no static AA short of chainsaw/mercury will give you a chance of killing bombers before their bombs are out.

T2 bomb drop distance is still the biggest air issue, imo. Fighters are basically the only real counter.
0 x

User avatar
Nixa
Posts: 350
Joined: 05 Oct 2006, 04:32

Re: Balanced Annihilation V7.17

Post by Nixa » 04 Sep 2010, 05:13

Ok, well consider this

Ground - vechs can counter bots, bots can counter vechs
Sea - sea can counter hovers (albeit not well), hovers can counter sea
Air - What can counter air, appart from air?

The problem is theres no opposite to air to give u a chance to defend really, just building an air lab is not the answer as usually it's too late by then.

There just needs to be a stop gap to give u a chance to build an air lab, and at the moment if you get the upper hand with air it's 90% GG. Where as if you get t2 bots/vech watever, the opposing team can still counter long enough to give them a chance to launch a counter.
0 x

User avatar
Hobo Joe
Posts: 1001
Joined: 02 Jan 2008, 21:55

Re: Balanced Annihilation V7.17

Post by Hobo Joe » 04 Sep 2010, 05:35

Yeah, I agree. Unless you happen to be lucky enough to have a lot of a ground/aa unit like a samson, you're basically fucked if the enemy builds air. No time to counter, because there's only 1 t1 unit that hits both ground and air, and it's not a very effective ground unit in most situations so it's really not built in large numbers.

In order to counter a bomber rush you either have to build static aa everywhere (very expensive), or build a lab and fighters (also very expensive), and of course the biggest problem with this is that it's just a gamble. Either you spend 1k+ m and maybe stop a few bombers, or you don't and get absolutely fucked with no time to respond with a counter.

It's not like ground where there's landmarks or small cubbyholes of defense to hold your units behind to make the enemy afraid of going around it, cause air can just go anywhere, and move too fast to respond to with anything but more air (which you would already have to have built)


grumble ramble
0 x

[RRU]RockmoddeR
Posts: 18
Joined: 06 May 2010, 22:08

Re: Balanced Annihilation V7.16

Post by [RRU]RockmoddeR » 04 Sep 2010, 06:34

Hobo Joe wrote:Serious bug: Coms don't die in trans, they just fall and bounce.

I don't see it as a bug, rather, I see it as anti-commbomb :D

Maybe keep it for the comm, but remove it from all of the other units...somehow?
0 x

User avatar
Hobo Joe
Posts: 1001
Joined: 02 Jan 2008, 21:55

Re: Balanced Annihilation V7.16

Post by Hobo Joe » 04 Sep 2010, 06:45

[RRU]RockmoddeR wrote:
Hobo Joe wrote:Serious bug: Coms don't die in trans, they just fall and bounce.

I don't see it as a bug, rather, I see it as anti-commbomb :D

Maybe keep it for the comm, but remove it from all of the other units...somehow?

Because com falling out of trans and dgunning everything before dying (or not dying?) is less effective than him dying in the air?


Ummm.... ok.
0 x

[RRU]RockmoddeR
Posts: 18
Joined: 06 May 2010, 22:08

Re: Balanced Annihilation V7.17

Post by [RRU]RockmoddeR » 04 Sep 2010, 06:55

I did some experimenting in single player with this:

Instead of him being a flying bomb that will explode in AA impact, you have a bit longer to get your comm/units back a bit and possibly save them. It takes about 3 seconds to get a comm out of walking dgun range from a stationary position. If the trans can be spotted, and then shot down within the AA radius, you still have time to get your big, explosive units out of the way, thus increasing your chances of survival. Call me naive and dumb, but I tend to be an optimistic person. :D
0 x

User avatar
Wombat
Posts: 3379
Joined: 15 Dec 2008, 15:53

Re: Balanced Annihilation V7.17

Post by Wombat » 04 Sep 2010, 08:16

btw, gj at fixing buttons, minor change, but effect is awesome :) fgts were annoying :D
0 x

H2O
Posts: 32
Joined: 27 May 2010, 23:05

Re: Balanced Annihilation V7.17

Post by H2O » 04 Sep 2010, 12:23

thanks for the drop fix, it was a major issue imo.

Commando is a nice unit, but i think Core needs more a t2 veh engineer like the arm Consul. Imo this is an important unbalance, because if i have only the t2 core veh fab, i can only reclaim metal on battlefields with the lazy, slow and clumsy t2 constructor, while arm can suck easily metal with fast consuls.
Having two fabs, one t1 and the other t2, is not a viable solution when you just have upgraded to t2.

What do you think?
0 x

User avatar
JohannesH
Posts: 1793
Joined: 07 Apr 2009, 12:43

Re: Balanced Annihilation V7.17

Post by JohannesH » 04 Sep 2010, 13:20

H2O wrote:Having two fabs, one t1 and the other t2, is not a viable solution when you just have upgraded to t2.
Usually it is very much necessary unless you're playing 8v8

And to people crying about air/aa, really, if you don't like the way air works on some map then play another. Your team is just playing badly in that 8v8, there's no balance issue before you change that.
0 x

HectorMeyer
Posts: 181
Joined: 13 Jan 2009, 11:20

Re: Balanced Annihilation V7.17

Post by HectorMeyer » 04 Sep 2010, 13:36

Either the explosions were changed or they are broken with the new version somehow.

Nanos don't chain, and fusion, mmaker etc explosions do ways less damage. Also a lot of explosion animations are missing.

Whats up with that?
0 x

User avatar
TheFatController
Balanced Annihilation Developer
Posts: 1177
Joined: 10 Dec 2006, 18:46

Re: Balanced Annihilation V7.17

Post by TheFatController » 04 Sep 2010, 13:54

HectorMeyer wrote:Either the explosions were changed or they are broken with the new version somehow.

Nanos don't chain, and fusion, mmaker etc explosions do ways less damage. Also a lot of explosion animations are missing.

Whats up with that?
I didn't touch anything with explosions, can you post some steps of how to recreate this?

Bear in mind that the bug in 7.16 was that units wouldn't take damage from a non existant attacker which was why aircraft were releasing units and this would likely have also had other effects such as chaining and debris etc. should be fixed in 7.17?
0 x

User avatar
bartvbl
Posts: 346
Joined: 21 Mar 2009, 15:55

Re: Balanced Annihilation V7.17

Post by bartvbl » 04 Sep 2010, 14:06

just something odd: the ghost versions of some models which are shown when you are placing a building are not always removed.
So you see sometimes the ghost model "inside" another model that has been built.

I hope the screen clarifies it a bit: you see the small ghost flames, and the "thing that spins around" has an additional friend.
I also noticed this with the ARM t1 AA, ARM t1 sentinel, ARM t1 radar, CORE t1 LLT and the CORE t1 HLT.
It is rather strange that it doesn't occur on every building of these types; some show the ghost model, others don't.
Attachments
screen.PNG
(810.22 KiB) Downloaded 2 times
0 x

User avatar
Niobium
Posts: 456
Joined: 07 Dec 2008, 02:35

Re: Balanced Annihilation V7.17

Post by Niobium » 04 Sep 2010, 14:32

TheFatController wrote:Bear in mind that the bug in 7.16 was that units wouldn't take damage from a non existant attacker which was why aircraft were releasing units and this would likely have also had other effects such as chaining and debris etc. should be fixed in 7.17?
Checked it out. Behavior seems to be back to normal now; nanos chain, crawling bombs deal damage, etc.
0 x

User avatar
hoijui
Former Engine Dev
Posts: 4342
Joined: 22 Sep 2007, 09:51

Re: Balanced Annihilation V7.17

Post by hoijui » 04 Sep 2010, 15:25

please put it on rapid!
0 x

Post Reply

Return to “Balanced Annihilation”