PeowPeow

[albator]

I dont support all your changes, but what I suggest you to do about samson/slasher wrt BA:
+ 50 % dps against air
- 50 % dps against ground

[Jazcash]

I dont support all your changes, but what I suggest you to do about samson/slasher wrt BA:
+ 50 % dps against air
- 50 % dps against ground

-50% vs ground? No way. Just make their projectiles a bit less accurate or only home onto target for first x yards of the projectile's journey.

[Hobo Joe]

I dont support all your changes, but what I suggest you to do about samson/slasher wrt BA:
+ 50 % dps against air
- 50 % dps against ground

-50% vs ground? No way. Just make their projectiles a bit less accurate or only home onto target for first x yards of the projectile's journey.

That still leaves the problem of slashers causing HLT porc as soon as they're spotted.

[Jazcash]

That still leaves the problem of slashers causing HLT porc as soon as they're spotted.

Nothing wrong with that imo.

[Pxtl]

I dont support all your changes, but what I suggest you to do about samson/slasher wrt BA:
+ 50 % dps against air
- 50 % dps against ground

Honestly, if you're going to do that, you should be giving the unit 2 weapons. When you've got a weapon that sucks vs. target X but is awesome vs. target Y, players are going to be enraged every time it shoots at X. Make it shoot both.

[Jazcash]

I dont support all your changes, but what I suggest you to do about samson/slasher wrt BA:
+ 50 % dps against air
- 50 % dps against ground

Honestly, if you're going to do that, you should be giving the unit 2 weapons. When you've got a weapon that sucks vs. target X but is awesome vs. target Y, players are going to be enraged every time it shoots at X. Make it shoot both.

I thought the same. Is it not possible to alter a projectile depending on what unit it's targeting though?

[Hobo Joe]

I dont support all your changes, but what I suggest you to do about samson/slasher wrt BA:
+ 50 % dps against air
- 50 % dps against ground

Honestly, if you're going to do that, you should be giving the unit 2 weapons. When you've got a weapon that sucks vs. target X but is awesome vs. target Y, players are going to be enraged every time it shoots at X. Make it shoot both.

I thought the same. Is it not possible to alter a projectile depending on what unit it's targeting though?

Give it two weapons a la panther


I do think HLT porc is a problem though, causes big long stalemates in games and encourages early tech and generally makes the game more annoying and boring. HLT's: fine. Early HLT porc line cause of slasher: terrible and boring.

[Jazcash]

Early HLT porc line cause of slasher: terrible and boring.

Again that depends on the player. I'm always a man for stumpy/raider spam whenever I see samson/slasher spam from the enemy. If people want to make HLT instead, that's fine, it's just the way newbs play.

I really do think trying to balance samsons/slashers really is just an unnecessary surface scratcher. I've never really noticed an issue with them myself. They seem balanced just fine. My only gripe about them would be their range is just a tad too large. (A tiny winy bit too large).

[Pxtl]

My problem with the samsons/slashers is that they make the L1 artillery utterly useless by comparison and their crazy sight range means it's too hard to do anything sneaky.

[Nixa]

Ok - last time I say this, obviously it's either not clear or trolls are on the loose... this will not be designed just to make BADSD iphone 2.0 better, but rather BA as a whole.

As a whole, most of your arguments are flawed in the fact that there is currently a T1 long range unit that is invalid because an anti-air unit replaces it's role. The idea behind the slasher change is to a) return use to the T1 unit that is designed for the long range role b) encourage more mobile battles (for better or worse - the hlt is still in the game) c) make samson more useful as AA d) encourage unit mixing (fundamental problem with BA atm). e) you can still use it for los if you want.

Idea's like reduce ground DPS rawr rawr rawr won't fix the problem. Adding a second weapon to it will either leave the problem or be a pointless change if the range was reduced. I can see the problem here, people like to make one unit and only one unit - it's the lazy way out. If you like that style of gameplay I will make you a mod with just one t1 unit per side and you can have fun microing all day

[REVENGE]

They already made it, it's called flashspaem.

[Nixa]

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fusea ... d=21083769

Besides the only way to make this mod really balanced (by definition) would be to move to one faction. Everyone would have the same units to achieve the same goal.

[REVENGE]

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fusea ... d=21083769

Besides the only way to make this mod really balanced (by definition) would be to move to one faction. Everyone would have the same units to achieve the same goal.

For a moment I thought you were linking me to that one SmuG video.

[Nixa]

Couldn't find so this was the next best thing XD

[JohannesH]

I never saw a problem with samsons. Or if there is 1 it's they're too good vs bots. But that would be better fixed by reducing their hp for example.

Samson spam in vehicle battles isn't that great, it's only useful in certain circumstances - you've got a narrow area to cover, and are starved for metal (its energy intensive unit). Or some situational use like countering levs. I don't think making samsons with vs ground use in mind is good but on very few maps, dsd (w big teams) and geyser plains for example.
It's about trends too, people see samson spam so they copy. It's still very beatable by things other than more samsons. HLTs and stumpies work well for example, or just driving around them in many cases.

I don't think ending up with just stumpy spam instead is such great unit diversity XD

Oh and I don't think it overlaps with arty that much to make arty bad becayse of it. Arty has 2x the dps of samson remember for the same cost, and aoe, and shoots nicely from cliffs... They're more fragile but cand hide behind other things better. It definitely has uses that samsons can't do, or things that it just does 2x better than samson.


And why people think this is done with dsd in mind? Because the changes are to things that aren't really that "problematic" outside dsd... Take Nuclear Winter for example, play it 8v8, sudenly nukes aren't as good, bombers aren't as good, samsons aren't as good, when you have more metal and wider space to maneuver. Well people might still try those since that might be all they know
Sure it can work ok on other maps too, but still BA works better imo.

[==Troy==]

if you change the very mechanics of BA, why call it BAII?

there is already XTA, SA, CA etc, all of which are different takes on making BA different.

Either the changes have to be invisible (i.e. small anti-eco/anti-t2air changes in numbers, not mechanics), or the mod has to stop attempting to pretend being BA.

[HectorMeyer]

My 2 cents on Slashers. tldr slashers are ok.

I haven't played the new mod yet, but even if is true that as reported HLTs and static play becomes less relevant if Slashers are nerfed, one has to acknowledge that the current Slashers also help in breaking up fortified positions and encourage mobile play in many ways.

(The following paragraphs are basically a stereotypical DSD basin game description:)

The reason many players make Slashers as their first units is because they are so effective at pushing back comms and breaking early LLT/Comm/Dgun anti-tank fortifications. Another aspect in which they encourage mobile play is when combined with tanks, they force the enemy units to retreat or make an unprepared assault - Samsons/Levelers can be a deadly combination.

Generally, Slashers are always able to shoot something from their relative safe distance, so they can stay in battle almost constantly and thus encourage aggression and dynamics.

People also don't build HLTs to counter Slashers - which die very easily when engaged in close combat by almost any kind of unit - but tanks and other assault/raid units. But once HLT fronts are up, people tend to add Slashers, because they can attack the other side from the safety of the own territory - they can be easily repaired when attacking HLTS, and are protected from counter assaults by own HLTs. So, making Slashers makes more sense then sending some tanks to their death like noobs do all the time. It's actually the other way round: HLTs encourage Slashers. Of course, real progamerz don't ever come into such a situation and always pwn noobs with their devastating weasel raids and comdrops. In this respect, the Slashers=noobs sentiment is understandeable.
Edit: people actually do build HLTs to counter Slashers, but only once the other side already has HLTs. There is definitely some "more HLTs/more Slashers" dynamic going on, which isn't necessarily a bad thing though and an interesting alternative to mass Stumpies.

Once the game progresses further and the fronts start to inevitably break up (usually happens pretty soon, often the north-basin front doesn't even establish when the south players send their units north after the south HLTs are built, often leading to a long, drawn out mobile battle in the north basin), Slashers become less relevant and Stumpies become more important again. When T2 arrives, Slashers are downright useless while Stumpies are still relevant. Unit mixing/changing is very important.

So I think current Slashers are a nice, balanced unit and add lot of dynamics to the game. I think the three different concepts of skirmisher (Slasher), assault/push (Stumpy) and rush/raid (Flash) are all very well balanced against each other and all being used a lot. Nerfing the skirmisher aspect would only make the game less interesting.

I see the point of Slashers having the tendency to replace artillery though, but artillery still has range, aoe, and unblockable shots advantage, and is still very useful when HLT frontlines are really strong. The problem is that the other players usually send t2 to shake up the front by then (early Goliath/Fatboy becomes pretty standard now, like I already mentioned the BA teching is way too fast) which is a big factor in reducing the T1 artillery relevance. I'd actually rather buff artillery (make it also more costly in the process) than nerf Slashers.

It's kinda funny that we have people complaining about Flashspam, Stumpyspam and Slasherspam now, so it seems like we have a balanced situation :D

[Nixa]

if you change the very mechanics of BA, why call it BAII?

there is already XTA, SA, CA etc, all of which are different takes on making BA different.

Either the changes have to be invisible (i.e. small anti-eco/anti-t2air changes in numbers, not mechanics), or the mod has to stop attempting to pretend being BA.

Because it's still 'balanced' in the terms of what BA is trying to represent... though as stated I said this is a BA fork currently... hence the name which would change if it went out on its own... again sorry if I did not make this clear. Or maybe BA II would be appropriate due to the fact I am still keeping everything 'balanced' - I guess it's how you perceive the name 'Balanced Annihilation'. Or maybe you're just trying to troll this mod in whatever way you can, I dunno, don't like, don't play, simple really

Oh and hector current BA has really made little attempt to balance in DSD or any large games. The 'current' BA and probably all future versions will never attempt to balance for the entire gamebase (afterall it's designed in theory for 1v1 - or at lease that's what WarC balanced it for and TFC has little power to change that). It's not the teching that's too easy, it's the imbalance between large and small gameplay.

Oh and btw, most people that hated the idea of the slasher changes before trying them now agree that it does make it a better game (except axio who raged straight away because he didn't read the changelog). Simple fact is it's hard to take the opinions of those who haven't tried the mod because of the changes, the people that have tried it and either like or dislike the changes I will tend to favor in terms of who I listen to.

BTW as a side note, I just finished adding in an entire new soundset and part way through some animations to those of you that actually care (which will be noone here I admit - you guys only moan )

[Pxtl]

if you change the very mechanics of BA, why call it BAII?

there is already XTA, SA, CA etc, all of which are different takes on making BA different.

Either the changes have to be invisible (i.e. small anti-eco/anti-t2air changes in numbers, not mechanics), or the mod has to stop attempting to pretend being BA.

Well, to be fair, XTA, SA, and CA all make far more massive sweeping changes from BA balance. SA has factory spam. CA is practically a completely new game. XTA is comm-obsessed. BA 2 is meant to be BA rebalanced, nothing more - just like BA was meant to be AA rebalanced.

The Samson/Slasher change is the only one that is a big change.

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.

[Gota]

Just so none is misled, SA has no Lab spam..Labs work in the same way they do in BA/XTA.