Rocko cost 20% more compared to Storm , Why ?

Rocko cost 20% more compared to Storm , Why ?

Classic game design, maintained to please you...

Moderators: Content Developer, Content Developer

Drac
Posts: 22
Joined: 26 Jun 2011, 16:00

Rocko cost 20% more compared to Storm , Why ?

Post by Drac »

This fact keep bugging me since day one but lets see how could this price difference can be justified, minor differences and unit selection.

1.
Core factory cost 25 less metal but the builder cost little more metal and energy, after 2 builder factions are equal after that obviously arm gains a little advantage. Of course 25 metal early is more than 25 metal in min 5 after you had your first two builder and took quite a few mexes. This minor difference is balanced.

2.
Ak vs Pw balance. I think there is no reason to discuss their balance but often mentioned so i say a few words about them. Pw is much deadlier with 106 dps and no dmg falloff makes it better for raiding but ak can kite this deadly unit with his superior range for exchange he sacrifice little dps(70) and gain 500 los , so he is able to spot for rocket kbots ( so they can shoot accuretly not just on radar blobs). If arm wants his rocko to shoot accurately he needs to buy a flea to the frontline and spot with it , to problem is they die in a single hit and if the enemy decides to get close their usefulness is negligible while ak is pretty good. Ak and Pw is balanced.

3.
Extra units. Flea usefulness against core kbot player is almost zero but they have their uses hardly justifies the extra cost of rocket kbot. Warrior unit needs a buff they are slow , lose against any combination of kbots and also bad against commanders. Giving it more range would make thud usefullnes questionable, giving it more dps could work but it could use a speedbuff more like 20% that would make it useful, i never use them. Warrior is more like an early Can wannabe much better fit for core imo.

4.
Arm wind is cheaper. Well this advantage is map dependant but every core energy producing building is little more cheaper about 3% and solar offers a tactical advantage llt being able to shoot over it making the base a fortress. This is a general rule of the factions are balanced on windy maps , on non windy maps arm falls behind.

5.
Beamer. The latest changelog still say it has 400dps dont know if it is a bug or something but its true dps is 320 of course has half dps at max range( same dps as double llt) . Compared to Double llt rocket kbots cant outrange it. Double llt has +16% hp for +4.5% cost , and honestly once enemy about 10-12 rocket kbots it does not matter what do you have they just step in range spike it then step out losing 1/3 hp of a single rocket on avarage try.

6.
Dragon's Maw. If you play your cards right this might be the best turret against rocket kbots this baby has 1450 hp and suffer only 1/8 while closed thats 11600 hp, 1 nano can keep it on max health while 13 rocket kbots shooting at it nonstop. Really has 430 dps which also does aoe dmg. The trick is that you have to be very careful with fire at will if they open up rocket kbots will kill it fast , if they are acting like they are waiting for the kill just stay closed and repair them when possible , while they are closed enemy units still shoot at them ( once they seen it ) giving you an insane hp nearly unkillable diversion. Arm version of this building is disappointing significantly less hp, much less dps, no aoe dmg , costs more but still worth it if situation calls for it.


+ Light Plasma kbot is also better at the core side

The true price of Rocko is around 85 compared to 95 costing Storm with a better spotter ( ak ) , ak pretty much the balance for both pw and flea.

So why does Rocko cost 20% more ?
Last edited by Drac on 30 Jul 2011, 14:56, edited 1 time in total.
0 x

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

Re: Rocko cost 20% more compared to Storm , Why ?

Post by Nixa »

Why do Morties only have a 1:6 m:e ratio when most T2 units have 1:20? Why is the karg all terrain, deals rediculous damage for cost and on top of that is one of the most effective AA units in the game? Why can the consul build fatboy and freaker can't build golly or sumo? Why why why.....

Simple answer, BA (or AA) is a mash of random statistics since its formation that have been attempted to be modified on a "this is better than that" basis. Plus most games I watch beherith he spams morties so don't expect that one to change, everyone likes a op unit.
0 x

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

Re: Rocko cost 20% more compared to Storm , Why ?

Post by Wombat »

nixa twists in pain every second he doesnt flame ba just becouse ppl didnt want to play his strange mod :(

anyway, arm got flea and warrior so its pretty obvious other units need small nerfs.

didnt bother to read wall of text after i noticed 'hammer is better...' at the end. i assume rest is same wrong.

User was warned for this post. Felony 1.
0 x

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

Re: Rocko cost 20% more compared to Storm , Why ?

Post by Nixa »

Actually I was just educating the guy. I guess I could've personal attacked him though, my bad.

Btw, even the one sentence you read you get completely wrong, Mr Arrogant.
0 x

User avatar
very_bad_soldier
Posts: 1371
Joined: 20 Feb 2007, 01:10

Re: Rocko cost 20% more compared to Storm , Why ?

Post by very_bad_soldier »

BA is not balanced on a per-unit basis and no human brain is capable of understanding all the inter-unit dependencies to fully judge BA balance as a whole.
0 x

User avatar
Beherith
Moderator
Posts: 4934
Joined: 26 Oct 2007, 16:21

Re: Rocko cost 20% more compared to Storm , Why ?

Post by Beherith »

If you want mirror faction balance, play a different mod. Mirror balance wont ever be put into BA, as that would make half the units redundant.
On morties: the reason they work is the fact that I build two targeting facilities, and keep ample radar with them, and jam if there is sufficient E available.

Cost per cost, snipers with two targeting facilities will fare better against heavier units, while morties work better against light.
0 x

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

Re: Rocko cost 20% more compared to Storm , Why ?

Post by Nixa »

Liez, Morties foreva (like this comment plz :D)
0 x

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

Re: Rocko cost 20% more compared to Storm , Why ?

Post by Niobium »

Beherith wrote:If you want mirror faction balance, play a different mod. Mirror balance wont ever be put into BA, as that would make half the units redundant.
On morties: the reason they work is the fact that I build two targeting facilities, and keep ample radar with them, and jam if there is sufficient E available.

Cost per cost, snipers with two targeting facilities will fare better against heavier units, while morties work better against light.
I believe the guy has a valid point and a good argument, arm has nothing good to offset the higher cost/lower effectiveness of their rocko/hammer. There's also plenty more options than just mirroring balance, for example arm could have cheaper or more effective rezzers, then you have an interesting 'arm units are more expensive, but easier to keep alive if you micro' differential between the factions.

I don't think the current state is defendable, as nixa said the stats are just random, there is no justification or reasoning behind the cost difference.
0 x

User avatar
Johannes
Posts: 1265
Joined: 17 Sep 2010, 15:49

Re: Rocko cost 20% more compared to Storm , Why ?

Post by Johannes »

Arm vs Core bots are overall quite balanced on most maps, so I don't see any reason this single thing was an issue. Randomness of stats is only an issue where there's a demonstrable problem.

1 thing I'd like to see changed with rocko though - make it have 661 hp (now 650) so it could survive a janus shot (does 2x330 dmg) even if it has no xp. It wouldn't really affect anything significantly except this one scenario, which doesn't affect racial balance either.
0 x

Manmax
Posts: 76
Joined: 19 May 2011, 13:57

Re: Rocko cost 20% more compared to Storm , Why ?

Post by Manmax »

Please excuse my ignorance, but what is exactly admg fall off?
0 x

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

Re: Rocko cost 20% more compared to Storm , Why ?

Post by Niobium »

Manmax wrote:Please excuse my ignorance, but what is exactly admg fall off?
All laser weapons in BA have their damage decrease with distance, dealing 100% at point-blank and decreasing linearly to 50% at maximum range.
0 x

Senna
Posts: 315
Joined: 17 Mar 2009, 00:20

Re: Rocko cost 20% more compared to Storm , Why ?

Post by Senna »

Simple answer: Arm has beamer, and Core?, Double LLT?, 1 beamer is better than 2 double llt-s and its cheaper, And beamer stops bulldogs or reapers or even panthers very well.

Arm is better in vehicles than core, just core has that golly but arm got penetrator and panthers, plus a consul.

Core is better in t2 kbots can, sumo, pyro, mortyr and dominator.
0 x

Drac
Posts: 22
Joined: 26 Jun 2011, 16:00

Re: Rocko cost 20% more compared to Storm , Why ?

Post by Drac »

Niobium wrote:
Beherith wrote:If you want mirror faction balance, play a different mod. Mirror balance wont ever be put into BA, as that would make half the units redundant.
On morties: the reason they work is the fact that I build two targeting facilities, and keep ample radar with them, and jam if there is sufficient E available.

Cost per cost, snipers with two targeting facilities will fare better against heavier units, while morties work better against light.
I believe the guy has a valid point and a good argument, arm has nothing good to offset the higher cost/lower effectiveness of their rocko/hammer. There's also plenty more options than just mirroring balance, for example arm could have cheaper or more effective rezzers, then you have an interesting 'arm units are more expensive, but easier to keep alive if you micro' differential between the factions.

I don't think the current state is defendable, as nixa said the stats are just random, there is no justification or reasoning behind the cost difference.
Thanks for reading and thinking about my post, the res bot is a true mirror unit and small price tweak for it is simply not enough to offset the +20% difference but i like where are you going with the idea.
Nixa wrote:Why do Morties only have a 1:6 m:e ratio when most T2 units have 1:20? Why is the karg all terrain, deals rediculous damage for cost and on top of that is one of the most effective AA units in the game? Why can the consul build fatboy and freaker can't build golly or sumo? Why why why.....

Simple answer, BA (or AA) is a mash of random statistics since its formation that have been attempted to be modified on a "this is better than that" basis. Plus most games I watch beherith he spams morties so don't expect that one to change, everyone likes a op unit.
The t2 and the t3 balance is lower priority, you will never use t3 in 1v1 and in teamgames you can just ask for core builder if you like karganeth these units meant to be little extraordinary.
Beherith wrote:If you want mirror faction balance, play a different mod. Mirror balance wont ever be put into BA, as that would make half the units redundant.
On morties: the reason they work is the fact that I build two targeting facilities, and keep ample radar with them, and jam if there is sufficient E available.

Cost per cost, snipers with two targeting facilities will fare better against heavier units, while morties work better against light.
i don't want mirror balance but what if for example the stumpy would cost 20% more compared to raider ( rocket kbot and medium tank both main battle units later). At the end of the day people would run out of excuses why it costs 20% more

I would like to hear reasons why it should cost 20% more and i cant accept that "it is random" or "why bother we get used to it core kbots being awesome"

On morties these unit really strong but that's true for whole t2 core kbots compared to arm pyro,can,morti,dominator,freaker i did a t2 kbot topic not long ago , this topic is for t1 kbot balance.

I think most of us know Beherith you are a diehard core kbot fan i would propose you a challange lets play arm instead every time you would pick core kbots for a month or two.

+Morties cant really be compared to snipers while morties great midgame fast kiting artillery unit which can shoot over units ( no need for targeting bs just bring radar kbots they have 925 los ) snipers are lategame choice, energy demanding to build and operate, slow and cant shoot over eachother and often welcomed by fleaspam by the time it comes to play, even if you have the energy building them in midgame is pointless against t1 most of their dmg is lost. They are best used against a lazy t3 spammer, in 1v1 they are not used.
Senna wrote:Simple answer: Arm has beamer, and Core?, Double LLT?, 1 beamer is better than 2 double llt-s and its cheaper, And beamer stops bulldogs or reapers or even panthers very well.

Arm is better in vehicles than core, just core has that golly but arm got penetrator and panthers, plus a consul.

Core is better in t2 kbots can, sumo, pyro, mortyr and dominator.
Probably you ignored my wall of text but beamer only advantage over dllt is that its able to shoot rocket kbots, for every other situation dllt-s superior hp is better and i rather have dllt as a buildplan than beamer. Beamer can only discourage a few rocket kbots once the enemy get more rkbots, regular towers are generally are a bad idea.
Last edited by Drac on 30 Jul 2011, 21:54, edited 1 time in total.
0 x

User avatar
AF
AI Developer
Posts: 20671
Joined: 14 Sep 2004, 11:32

Re: Rocko cost 20% more compared to Storm , Why ?

Post by AF »

Watching a karganeth suddenly float up a cliff in its path in half a second is hilarious, and I hope its remodel accounts for this ability rather than being a pretty mech

Also the warrior was originally a t1.5 ish unit in OTA, and since then it hasn't really had a proper role as such. You just need to know how to use it. ( any t1 unit will fall to a mix of other t1 units unless you outnumber them and know what your doing )
0 x

User avatar
crazy dave
Posts: 65
Joined: 17 Aug 2010, 21:39

Re: Rocko cost 20% more compared to Storm , Why ?

Post by crazy dave »

kraganeth was originally a powerful bombard mech that took a year to build NO AA and rivaled the krogroth in power and HP. Now its some overly used, extremely deadly versatile unit that can be used for taking out air screens to epic T3 spam or all terrain raids at moderately good speed. :(

Yet ARM have a slow all all terrain heavy cannon to witch units with the speed can easerly out smart when fired at and a Razorback that has no AA protection what so ever and some of the guns it had on OTA where taken out (it had some blue looking D gun thing on its head for spam protection by small units, worked well)

and don't even get me started on morties :-)

don't flame on me i know that old Krag and other units was OTA but cant u see a slight imbalance here u could use some of the old designs to maybe balance it out :wink:
0 x

Drac
Posts: 22
Joined: 26 Jun 2011, 16:00

Re: Rocko cost 20% more compared to Storm , Why ?

Post by Drac »

AF wrote:Watching a karganeth suddenly float up a cliff in its path in half a second is hilarious, and I hope its remodel accounts for this ability rather than being a pretty mech

Also the warrior was originally a t1.5 ish unit in OTA, and since then it hasn't really had a proper role as such. You just need to know how to use it. ( any t1 unit will fall to a mix of other t1 units unless you outnumber them and know what your doing )
Then how do you use the Warrior properly ?

I would only use them for airdrop to save on trans cost, they lose against every single unit for the price.
0 x

User avatar
AF
AI Developer
Posts: 20671
Joined: 14 Sep 2004, 11:32

Re: Rocko cost 20% more compared to Storm , Why ?

Post by AF »

Drac wrote:
AF wrote:Watching a karganeth suddenly float up a cliff in its path in half a second is hilarious, and I hope its remodel accounts for this ability rather than being a pretty mech

Also the warrior was originally a t1.5 ish unit in OTA, and since then it hasn't really had a proper role as such. You just need to know how to use it. ( any t1 unit will fall to a mix of other t1 units unless you outnumber them and know what your doing )
Then how do you use the Warrior properly ?

I would only use them for airdrop to save on trans cost, they lose against every single unit for the price.

I cant advise on their use, but I will make this point:

Sometimes a unit or piece on the battlefield is not intended to be used on its own. No matter how great the numbers it will fail, because that's not the best way to use it.

Would you send 1000 mobile artillery into battle against 300 full feuled and armed tanks and then complain that they got pwned by the tanks because tanks are OP? Or would you complain you had vulnerable support that was undefended?
0 x

Drac
Posts: 22
Joined: 26 Jun 2011, 16:00

Re: Rocko cost 20% more compared to Storm , Why ?

Post by Drac »

AF wrote:
Drac wrote:
AF wrote:Watching a karganeth suddenly float up a cliff in its path in half a second is hilarious, and I hope its remodel accounts for this ability rather than being a pretty mech

Also the warrior was originally a t1.5 ish unit in OTA, and since then it hasn't really had a proper role as such. You just need to know how to use it. ( any t1 unit will fall to a mix of other t1 units unless you outnumber them and know what your doing )
Then how do you use the Warrior properly ?

I would only use them for airdrop to save on trans cost, they lose against every single unit for the price.

I cant advise on their use, but I will make this point:

Sometimes a unit or piece on the battlefield is not intended to be used on its own. No matter how great the numbers it will fail, because that's not the best way to use it.

Would you send 1000 mobile artillery into battle against 300 full feuled and armed tanks and then complain that they got pwned by the tanks because tanks are OP? Or would you complain you had vulnerable support that was undefended?
Your first post kind of suggested that you have found use for them but later you said you cant advise on their use ? The rest of it is just basic rts knowledge about mixing up the your army. Also i dont mind a almost worthless unit in my factory but core users would protest if they get a tremor in t1 and for exchange the main tank would cost +20% more.

I tough it over again triing to find a fitting role for this unit but the problem is it has very low versatility. Pros compared to main competitor (pw):
- less energy intensive
- 2,7 pw builds in the same time, warrior more buildtime intensive
- best used for babysitting rockos, in this specific role he is equal to pw ( warrior good at running away and shooting but pw not , pw-s need to move in so in the meantime rocko fire is mostly blocked and sometimes they shoot pw-s in the back too)

But of course warrior are not good for running around destroying expansions , also not good for taking the offensive and catching enemy rocket kbots but thats not the problem, this unit is built for a specific role and can barely fulfill it while pw can do his job and a dozen other. A specialist unit should be exceptional in the only job he has. ( Thinking of Can the legendary Morty defender , slow, bad agaisnt commanders but deadly agaisnt anything else once they are close)
0 x

Saktoth
Zero-K Developer
Posts: 2665
Joined: 28 Nov 2006, 13:22

Re: Rocko cost 20% more compared to Storm , Why ?

Post by Saktoth »

There was one very close game on brazillian (I forget who won) where I spammed warriors vs Days core bot. However, I seem to remember that Day said that the rationale is indeed that arm gets the warrior and the flea, thus core gets the cheaper/stronger bots (slightly more HP and they dont have the opening anims which slow down their reaction times), though in most situations arms extra bots are inferior, so that means you should just go core on bot maps..

Truth is this change probably dates back to Caydr, which just makes it a legacy thing.
0 x

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

Re: Rocko cost 20% more compared to Storm , Why ?

Post by Nixa »

Drac wrote:
AF wrote:Watching a karganeth suddenly float up a cliff in its path in half a second is hilarious, and I hope its remodel accounts for this ability rather than being a pretty mech

Also the warrior was originally a t1.5 ish unit in OTA, and since then it hasn't really had a proper role as such. You just need to know how to use it. ( any t1 unit will fall to a mix of other t1 units unless you outnumber them and know what your doing )
Then how do you use the Warrior properly ?

I would only use them for airdrop to save on trans cost, they lose against every single unit for the price.
T1 Airdrops are pretty much negated by the nano, especially on larger games. The ability to build defense is just too easy not to mention the generally extreme risk to get to your drop point. Worst still is the BA mechanic of wrecks giving tons of metal so it's just a metal package for the enemy.

So yeah, pretty much makes the warrior useless in all but head on attacks against defenses that can't run away. But again you'd probably be better cost for cost with a core bot option like the storm for that same role.
0 x

Post Reply

Return to “Balanced Annihilation”