Balanced Annihilation 7.31 - Page 3

Balanced Annihilation 7.31

Classic game design, maintained to please you...

Moderator: Content Developer

User avatar
Aether_0001
Posts: 228
Joined: 25 Feb 2008, 03:41

Re: Balanced Annihilation 7.31

Post by Aether_0001 » 29 Mar 2011, 02:21

Stop the rage, TFC was being very rational and smart, and put in a ton of forethought before making changes like putting commando back in (after it was removed for being a completely overtly useless and shitty unit) and making it what it now is. It's also completely balanced, and actually fills a viable, albeit situational niche rather than be completely useless, overall there's not much to complain about the balance of BA.

Also, balancing towards 1v1 and balancing towards team games are not different things. They're the same units, each opposing team has to fill a set of roles the map provides, like water bombardment, main assault, artillery, etc with his own units - just that in 1v1 each player takes more of the roles, and on small maps the game finishes before larger ones come into fruition.

I agree with having balance changes called for by a vote, but it has to be really organized and well-executed (like you can't just put it on some obscure channel, forcing someone to click a link etc, no one would do it). A bug tracker would also be nice but keep in mind that there's always noobs who'd spam your tracker/conference rooms/threads with crap like "DGUN DOESNT WORK" and "WHY HIS PEEWEE KILL MY GOLIATH"
0 x

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

Re: Balanced Annihilation 7.31

Post by Wombat » 29 Mar 2011, 02:36

@solar blocking llt

http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.ph ... 82&start=0

--

remove commando !

fix pelicans movement finally !

--

balancing for both, team games ans 1v1's is just stupid. cant have both cookies. secondly, dont balance game for something that is simply not desired.
0 x

User avatar
knorke
Posts: 7971
Joined: 22 Feb 2006, 01:02

Re: Balanced Annihilation 7.31

Post by knorke » 29 Mar 2011, 02:40

that poll was stupid.
instead of Should Arm Solar block LLT fire? yes/no it should have been

Which solars should block LLT fire?
[]only Arm
[]only Core
[]Both
[]None
0 x

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

Re: Balanced Annihilation 7.31

Post by Wombat » 29 Mar 2011, 02:41

but only arm solar is problem, not core.

also 43 pplz wouldnt agree with u ;)
0 x

User avatar
Aether_0001
Posts: 228
Joined: 25 Feb 2008, 03:41

Re: Balanced Annihilation 7.31

Post by Aether_0001 » 29 Mar 2011, 03:11

Commando is a fine unit, it deserves to stay. Pelican movement DOES need to be fixed, I've told TFC about it earlier but he didn't get around to it. (In fact, pelican laser should be stronger)

Again, I say that balancing for team games and balancing for 1v1 are not different things. Team games and 1v1 both have the same essence and style (depending on how good the players are).
0 x

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

Re: Balanced Annihilation 7.31

Post by Wombat » 29 Mar 2011, 03:18

my base | impassable hill | inc commando drop.

normally i would need just decent aa. now i need decent aa and decent ground defence around my base to kill commandos. dont forget arm doesnt have cheap emp. no, it doesnt deserve to stay at all (definitely not in the current shape). lets not forget that 1 commando can prepare full drop...
Team games and 1v1 both have the same essence and style
yaaa >_>
0 x

User avatar
Aether_0001
Posts: 228
Joined: 25 Feb 2008, 03:41

Re: Balanced Annihilation 7.31

Post by Aether_0001 » 29 Mar 2011, 03:53

Not at all. Any fighter wall around the limits of your base takes down a wave of commandos before they get past the limits of your base, or 1 pitbull on your base > infinity commandos.

Having normal ground AA anyway drops enough commandos before they drop onto your base to the point that they get reclaimed by nanos. And if you get swarmed by a commando cloud, you're fucked anyway - they're 900 metal each. That's a lot for a unit that can't kill 2 LLT's.

Have your 10 commandos be countered by one pit bull, or use 9k metal to make 3 annihilators (3k each) to kill enemy porc? Or make 2 berthas (4k each)? Use 9k metal instead to make a nuke launcher (7k metal)? Use 9k metal to make 30 hurricanes (300 each)?

Also, arm "cheap emp" is countered by a mobile anti, and commando is also a core unit, so as units on opposite factions they'd balance each other out if you considered them comparable in utility.

And if you refer to my original post, 1v1 and team games are composed of two opposing teams filling different roles that the map provides. In 1v1 you need to fill more of those roles and stop shrinking from responsibility (and blaming it on allies), just that on some maps 1v1 doesn't last as long, meaning less roles are filled.
0 x

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

Re: Balanced Annihilation 7.31

Post by Wombat » 29 Mar 2011, 04:04

ye becouse fighter wall is always miles away from base...

first of all it sounds like you support making porc in base, secondly viper can be easly killed by 1 commando or even com

making ground porc 'just in case' ,in front of potentially impassable hill is just stupid.
Also, arm "cheap emp" is countered by a mobile anti, and commando is also a core unit, so as units on opposite factions they'd balance each other out if you considered them comparable in utility.

And if you refer to my original post, 1v1 and team games are composed of two opposing teams filling different roles that the map provides. In 1v1 you need to fill more of those roles and stop shrinking from responsibility (and blaming it on allies), just that on some maps 1v1 doesn't last as long, meaning less roles are filled.
totally confused
0 x

User avatar
Aether_0001
Posts: 228
Joined: 25 Feb 2008, 03:41

Re: Balanced Annihilation 7.31

Post by Aether_0001 » 29 Mar 2011, 04:20

Basically if enemy has 9k metal to put into 10 commandos, what were you doing with your 9k? (unless you didn't have it, which meant you're dead anyway) Probably making air (fighter wall) or maybe the things I listed below? Or maybe some fusions to make more nanos that can also reclaim commandos?

Plus, if you were on an impassable hill, wouldn't you put a viper at the ledge so you could reach onto things on the lower ground? To stop siegers like merls and shellshockers and dominators and t2 spiders (if enemy has t3 at base of the hill, youre fucked anyway)?

And no, commando cannot easily kill any sort of porc. At most it can kill an HLLT 1v1, mines taken into consideration (iirc). One viper most definitely can take more than 5 commandos, easily. I don't know why you included that viper can be killed by com. Also dgun rapes commandos SO HARD, because commandos are slow and don't do a ton of DPS.

Also, where you were confused - I was basically saying how your statement of emp nuke to support your point was irrelevant, and I continued talking about how teams and 1v1 are similar.
0 x

User avatar
Iz3
Posts: 37
Joined: 12 Jan 2007, 01:32

Re: Balanced Annihilation 7.31

Post by Iz3 » 29 Mar 2011, 04:36

You will past so damn hours looking for bugs!
I would like to thank Niobium and Nixa for their massive contribution to BA by converting all the fbi's to much more localized and readable lua files, and for the numerous bug fixes they implemented in 7.30.

The hitsphere gadget removal increased all units hitspheres by 70%, blowing them out of proportion. Also I believe that mine layers had small range jammers for a reason - to allow mines that are being built to be radar invisible as well.

I wish to thank TheFatController for all of his hard work on maintaining BA wonderful game that it is, and for entrusting me to continue his work. I am extremely thankful for any contribution - improved widgets, gadgets, and any bug fixes - and will merge them into BA as soon as possible, because I plan to maintain a monthly update schedule.

Please report any bug reports, feedback or suggestions here...
FIX THE FUCKING SPAM LAG!
(and MT version too ;))
0 x

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

Re: Balanced Annihilation 7.31

Post by Wombat » 29 Mar 2011, 04:37

no, i would definitely use it (mean 9k metal) to make some offensive units. i wouldnt make any viper on impassable hill either. thats the whole point.

commandos outmanauver com easly. dont say something is impossible jusr coz u cant do it ;)

i meant that arm doesnt have something like drones, which can easly stop commandos. emp bomber is expensive and dragonfly basicly useless since last release. mobile anti mention made me lol
0 x

User avatar
Aether_0001
Posts: 228
Joined: 25 Feb 2008, 03:41

Re: Balanced Annihilation 7.31

Post by Aether_0001 » 29 Mar 2011, 05:17

You'd make viper on the ledge for enemy units that come by - it's good positioning.

I don't know why you thought emp nukes were effective against moving units, and I don't know why you dislike mobile antis [especially given the fact that emp nukes exist] , but I'm pretty sure fighter wall covers 95% of cases where commando raid could be used on you, and if you die in the other 5% you deserve it since you're just a cluster of fusions, can't make a defense tower with your nanos, or just don't have a clue.

I'm sorry that you died to commandos, but I really want to let you know that it's easily counterable. It's like a nuke, it's used on people who don't care to make the counter or don't know how they work.

(btw commando has same range as commander, so no, it can't be outmaneuvered, even without buildings around to block its path)
0 x

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

Re: Balanced Annihilation 7.31

Post by Wombat » 29 Mar 2011, 05:25

Aether_0001 wrote: I don't know why you thought emp nukes were effective against moving units, and I don't know why you dislike mobile antis [especially given the fact that emp nukes exist]

(btw commando has same range as commander, so no, it can't be outmaneuvered, even without buildings around to block its path)
jesus christ, learn to read, didnt say anything about mobile anti or emp launcher vs units rofl :roll:

again, dont say something is impossible just becouse you dont know how to do it.

and its not like nuke, nuke is stopped by anti, airdrop should be stopped by anti air, but its not.

my whole point is that i personally dont want to make ground defence against airattacks, i want to spend my metal on units and attacking enemy.
0 x

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

Re: Balanced Annihilation 7.31

Post by Nixa » 29 Mar 2011, 05:42

Air should be stopped by anti air... but cost for cost it isnt (when large quantities are concerned)

But then again, the air is completely seperate from ground ATM so I wouldn't expect it to be.
0 x

User avatar
Aether_0001
Posts: 228
Joined: 25 Feb 2008, 03:41

Re: Balanced Annihilation 7.31

Post by Aether_0001 » 29 Mar 2011, 05:49

Look Wombat, I don't want to elaborate anymore. You're just bad - Here's the central idea. Commandos are balanced by costing a fuckton for their performance and easily being stopped by a single ground turret, any sort of legitimate fighter wall, or having killed the opponent earlier when they're at the 9k metal disadvantage when they're building commandos.
my whole point is that i personally dont want to make ground defence against airattacks, i want to spend my metal on units and attacking enemy.
Again, a fighter wall. You'd need that to survive any legitimate air attack, why do you ignore it for a commando drop?
0 x

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

Re: Balanced Annihilation 7.31

Post by Nixa » 29 Mar 2011, 05:57

Aether_0001 wrote:Look Wombat, I don't want to elaborate anymore. You're just bad - Here's the central idea. Commandos are balanced by costing a fuckton for their performance and easily being stopped by a single ground turret, any sort of legitimate fighter wall, or having killed the opponent earlier when they're at the 9k metal disadvantage when they're building commandos.
my whole point is that i personally dont want to make ground defence against airattacks, i want to spend my metal on units and attacking enemy.
Again, a fighter wall. You'd need that to survive any legitimate air attack, why do you ignore it for a commando drop?
Commando's weren't balanced - they were added (without a reason), were way too powerful, then nerfed by a simple resource cost. The question needs to always be "would the game be better if this unit was added". In the commanders case, no the game wouldn't be better (infact TFC also made a gadget that broke transports aswell if I recall correctly...)

To Beherith - before adding units, fix what you have... Pretty please...
0 x

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

Re: Balanced Annihilation 7.31

Post by Wombat » 29 Mar 2011, 05:59

Aether_0001 wrote:Look Wombat, I don't want to elaborate anymore. You're just bad - Here's the central idea. Commandos are balanced by costing a fuckton for their performance and easily being stopped by a single ground turret

Again, a fighter wall. You'd need that to survive any legitimate air attack, why do you ignore it for a commando drop?
why do u ignore fact they survive getting shot by fighters ?

you are bad sir, becouse u cant do it lolz

also TFC said himself it was pretty much lolz unit and didnt plan to keep it
0 x

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

Re: Balanced Annihilation 7.31

Post by Nixa » 29 Mar 2011, 06:03

Wombat wrote:
Aether_0001 wrote:Look Wombat, I don't want to elaborate anymore. You're just bad - Here's the central idea. Commandos are balanced by costing a fuckton for their performance and easily being stopped by a single ground turret

Again, a fighter wall. You'd need that to survive any legitimate air attack, why do you ignore it for a commando drop?
why do u ignore fact they survive getting shot by fighters ?

you are bad sir, becouse u cant do it lolz

also TFC said himself it was pretty much lolz unit and didnt plan to keep it
The amount of time and broken coding that went into the commando was rediculous.

But it serves as a lesson for future maintainers to spend time on things that actually matter, not a few tweaks in energy and random unit additions.
0 x

User avatar
Aether_0001
Posts: 228
Joined: 25 Feb 2008, 03:41

Re: Balanced Annihilation 7.31

Post by Aether_0001 » 29 Mar 2011, 06:07

If your fighters are at the edge of your base, where do the commandos fall? Onto the perimeter of your base where there are things with weapons, obviously.

And I don't know why you didn't mention that earlier. In fact for a while after the addition of the commando I had several discussions with TFC about how to balance it correctly, which is the root of this discussion.

And yes, he broke the transport widget for one release, you could make stuff like invaders drop from downed transports.


Aaaand I can't do what? I'm not the one complaining about getting pwnt by them.
my base | impassable hill | inc commando drop. and i lose

I'm just arguing that Commando is balanced enough in terms of flaws and strengths and makes gameplay interesting enough to stay.
0 x

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

Re: Balanced Annihilation 7.31

Post by Wombat » 29 Mar 2011, 06:19

again, i dont want to make ground def in places i dont expect ground units to appear in few seconds, so no, commandos wont always fall into porc.

looks like ur suggestion failed horribly then.

u say its impossible to stop viper with 1 commando. i say it is ^^

commando is interesting idea, but definitely not in current form
0 x

Post Reply

Return to “Balanced Annihilation”

cron