Balanced Annihilation 7.6alpha2

Balanced Annihilation 7.6alpha2

Classic game design, maintained to please you...

Moderator: Content Developer

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

Balanced Annihilation 7.6alpha2

Post by TheFatController » 17 Aug 2011, 00:01

Just a few points:
- BA7.6aplha is not the official next BA release - only a test candidate, all official BA changes can currently be found at: http://imolarpg.dyndns.org/trac/balatest/log/
- You can find an autohost dedicated to this now as "BA_Testing_Autohost" desc "BA Alpha Host" (many thanks to [CN]Zydox!)
- May be subject to frequent updates and experimental changes which may not make it to main BA.
alpha2 Changelog wrote:- Fix for energy conversion gadget reporting wrong capacity to the UI.
- Fix for energy conversion gadget shared unit errors.
- Game end gadget should now be functioning in new spring builds.

- "Air Comblast Full Damage" modoption now defaults to 'false'.

- Tweaks to Juno gadget / effectiveness (now uses a default buildtime for how fast the effect is removed)

- Core Anti-Swarm Double LLT upper laser now has same range as beamer (430->475) (bottom laser unchanged), sightdistance raised to 475.
- Core Anti-Swarm Double LLT energycost increased (1467->1617).

- Tweaked/Added some EMP Resistances:
- Arm Bantha (100%->50%)
- Core Juggernaut (100%->50%)
- Both Flagships (100%->75%)
- Core Can (0%->20%)*
- Core Sumo (0%->25%)*
- Arm Dragons Claw (0%->30%)*
- Core Dragons Maw (0%->30%)*
- Arm Warrior (0%->10%)*
- Arm Zeus (0%->10%)*
- Arm Maverick (0%->60%)*
- Arm Razorback (0%->15%)*
- Core Shiva (0%->15%)*
*note: these are small, hard to notice changes - these units have not suddenly become EMP immune

- Core Doomsday small red laser now fires in a burst of 2 shots per round

- Arm Anti-nuke energycost raised (28000->40000) (was 59439 prior to BA 7.4)
- Core Anti-nuke energycost raised (28000->42000) (was 64321 prior to BA 7.4)
- Arm Anti-nuke buildtime raised (28000->60000) (was 95678 prior to BA 7.4)
- Core Anti-nuke buildtime raised (28000->60000) (was 96450 prior to BA 7.4)

- Arm & Core ground mobile antinuke buildcost & missilecost reduced ~20%, coverage reduced (2000->1400).
alpha1 Changelog wrote:Bunch of fixes from http://imolarpg.dyndns.org/trac/balatest/log/ (commit 196 onwards) including:
- Fixed the collision volumes of ships (now subs can hit stuff at their range)
- Energy converter now uses correct efficiencies and capacities from BA 7.31.
- MetalMakers now open/close depending on whether they're in use again.

- Fighters:
- Health Increased
- Kill enemy fighters in 1 shot
- Die to flak in 1 hit
- Do full damage vs gunships
- T1 fighters are now tagged as 'Interceptors' and fly faster than T2 fighters

- Core Hurricane bomb damage increased (283->337)
- Arm Phoenix bomb damage increased (210->250)

- Arm Brawler health increased to 1700
- Core Rapier health increased to 1500
- Core Krow HP reduced to 14000
- Arm Banshee special lower damage vs commanders removed

- Core LRPC (Intimidator) range increased (4000->4950) damage per shot reduced ~30%, heightboost factor reduced (6)
- Arm LRPC (Bertha) range increased (4000->4650) damage per shot reduced ~30%, heightboost factor reduced (8)

- Core Buzzsaw metalcost increased, damage per shot reduced, death explosion made larger
- Arm Vulcan metalcost increased, damage per shot reduced, death explosion made larger

- Arm & Core Shield coverage increased (400->500), charge slower with a higher max charge

- Arm Annihilator weapon damage increased (9000->12000)

- Arm & Core Moho Mine metalcost reduced 20%, energycost reduced 10%, buildtime reduced 20%

- Core Advanced Vehicle Plant metal cost decreased 20%
- Core Advanced Kbot Plant metal cost decreased 20%
- Arm Advanced Vehicle Plant metal cost decreased 20%
- Arm Advanced Kbot Plant metal cost decreased 20%

- Core Advanced Construction kbot metal cost increased (319->558)
- Core Advanced Construction kbot energy cost increased (5428->8142)
- Arm Advanced Construction kbot metal cost increased (290->508)
- Arm Advanced Construction kbot energy cost increased (5105->7658)
- Core Advanced Construction vehicle metal cost increased (452->678)
- Core Advanced Construction vehicle energy cost increased (5512->8268)
- Arm Advanced Consruction vehicle metal cost increased (431->647)
- Arm Advanced Consruction vehicle energy cost increased (5263->7895)

- Arm & Core Kbot, Vehicle & Air T2 builder workertimes increased.

- Arm Dragons Claw weapon can now do a little splash damage to up to 2 nearby units
- Arm Zeus weapon can now do a little more splash damage to up to 2 nearby units
- Core Commando places mines a bit better

- Arm Bulldog weapon damage increased (240->300)
- Core Reaper weapon damage increased (97->120)

- Many Ships footprint size reduced to improve sea pathing
- Arm & Core Missile Ships weapon Area of Effect increased
- Arm & Core Combat Engineers can now build T1 Destroyers & T1 Construction Ships on water

- Arm & Core Advanced Fusion Buildtime raised 40%

- Arm Razorback HP increased (13000)
- Arm Marauder HP increased (4500)
- Core Shiva HP increased (9000)

- Arm & Core Juno is no longer an anti radar weapon, now tagged "Anti-Nano Missile Launcher, Blocks Enemy Repair", does that.
- Arm & Core Juno range & charge cost adjusted.
Download Here

Please post comments, feedback etc here, replays of anything really good/bad would be appreciated

Have fun!
0 x

User avatar
smoth
Posts: 22298
Joined: 13 Jan 2005, 00:46

Re: BA Experimental discussion thread (download inside)

Post by smoth » 17 Aug 2011, 00:27

I like that factories are cheaper. That is something I have been wanting!
0 x

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

Re: BA Experimental discussion thread (download inside)

Post by Nixa » 17 Aug 2011, 01:07

So almost all ground AA is worse against fighters but Fighters are better against Fighters? Yay bringing back fighterspam :twisted:

But except for that, and maybe the bombers as a result of the fighters, and maybe the decrease in Moho Mexes (which should be an increase maybe?) I quite like most of it
0 x

User avatar
albator
Posts: 866
Joined: 14 Jan 2009, 14:20

Re: BA Experimental discussion thread (download inside)

Post by albator » 17 Aug 2011, 02:03

- Fighters:
- Health Increased
- Kill enemy fighters in 1 shot
- Die to flak in 1 hit
- Do full damage vs gunships
- T1 fighters are now tagged as 'Interceptors' and fly faster than T2 fighters

- Core Hurricane bomb damage increased (283->337)
- Arm Phoenix bomb damage increased (210->250)

- Arm Brawler health increased to 1700
- Core Rapier health increased to 1500
- Core Krow HP reduced to 14000
- Arm Banshee special lower damage vs commanders removed


- Arm Dragons Claw weapon can now do a little splash damage to up to 2 nearby units
- Arm Zeus weapon can now do a little more splash damage to up to 2 nearby units

need to play to tell but having a different role for t1 & t2 fighter look promising

- Arm & Core Juno is no longer an anti radar weapon, now tagged "Anti-Nano Missile Launcher, Blocks Enemy Repair", does that.
- Arm & Core Juno range & charge cost adjusted.
range ?
- Core LRPC (Intimidator) range increased (4000->4950) damage per shot reduced ~30%, heightboost factor reduced (6)
- Arm LRPC (Bertha) range increased (4000->4650) damage per shot reduced ~30%, heightboost factor reduced (8)

- Core Buzzsaw metalcost increased, damage per shot reduced, death explosion made larger
- Arm Vulcan metalcost increased, damage per shot reduced, death explosion made larger

- Arm & Core Shield coverage increased (400->500), charge slower with a higher max charge

- Arm Annihilator weapon damage increased (9000->12000)

- Arm Bulldog weapon damage increased (240->300)
- Core Reaper weapon damage increased (97->120)

- Many Ships footprint size reduced to improve sea pathing
- Arm & Core Missile Ships weapon Area of Effect increased
- Arm & Core Combat Engineers can now build T1 Destroyers & T1 Construction Ships on water

I really like all of those.

- Arm & Core Moho Mine metalcost reduced 20%, energycost reduced 10%, buildtime reduced 20%
I dislike this cause of the usual: i-teck-only-to-eco-then-i-can-spam-whatever-i-want-i-win-since-t2-eco-is-so-awsome

- Core Advanced Vehicle Plant metal cost decreased 20%
- Core Advanced Kbot Plant metal cost decreased 20%
- Arm Advanced Vehicle Plant metal cost decreased 20%
- Arm Advanced Kbot Plant metal cost decreased 20%

- Core Advanced Construction kbot metal cost increased (319->558)
- Core Advanced Construction kbot energy cost increased (5428->8142)
- Arm Advanced Construction kbot metal cost increased (290->508)
- Arm Advanced Construction kbot energy cost increased (5105->7658)
- Core Advanced Construction vehicle metal cost increased (452->678)
- Core Advanced Construction vehicle energy cost increased (5512->8268)
- Arm Advanced Consruction vehicle metal cost increased (431->647)
- Arm Advanced Consruction vehicle energy cost increased (5263->7895)

- Arm & Core Kbot, Vehicle & Air T2 builder workertimes increased.
I dont see what it will change, I always go t2 to eco and porc sinc t2 def are so good against any t1/t2s unit in comparison to t1 def vs t1 units. What is the purpose of that ?


- Arm & Core Advanced Fusion Buildtime raised 40%
Awsome.

I always wanted the MM efficency to be decreased in a way, at least now you need more nano to make more Eco at same rate.
- Arm Razorback HP increased (13000)
- Arm Marauder HP increased (4500)
- Core Shiva HP increased (9000)
like it...


Some suggestions:

Code: Select all

- reverse slasher/smason hp back to 7.31
- decrease dps vs ground unit by 30%
they are mainly mobil veh AA and decreasing they hp affect their AA efficiency. You already need a lot of slasher/samson to kill a single t2 gunship with 7.31. With 30% hp less that is even worse. Actually I would suggest to increase their dps vs air.

Code: Select all

- make bantha no empable (again)or increase cost by ~20%
afaik in 7.31:
- 2 banthas kill one krog and one bantha still has 100% hp when krog die
- 2 banthas cost less than a krog
- bantha are a lot faster than krog and still can make huge damage by selfD (like krog)

This look unba but, it was "compensate" by bantha not being empable until 7.4.

Code: Select all

- reverse croc E cost to 2 year old BA
- reverse panther E cost to 2 year old BA
All ffa games only use those unit cause they are the most cost efficient unit.

Code: Select all

- reverse hlt 30% change to ba6.31
Arm can still easily defend against rocko spam (still the most cost effective t1 def is beamer) whereas core is fucked with low HLT hp and no beamer.

Code: Select all

- reverse cost of mobil anti. 
- reverse cost of static anti.
- create small anti with 1/3 of range, and less E and bt cost, lets say 30% M, 25% E, 30%bt wrt to static anti ba6.31   
anti are too easily spammable (especially mobil anti) and make nuke totally usless. reverse the cost back to what they use to be in 6.31 should do the thing. Still having a fast to be build anti that protect just your main base.

Code: Select all

- increase emp launcher range to match berta range.   
seems logical ?
0 x

MrCucumber
Posts: 48
Joined: 31 Oct 2010, 19:09

Re: BA Experimental discussion thread (download inside)

Post by MrCucumber » 17 Aug 2011, 02:26

I like the changes, also I think Abla's ideas could lead to some interesting gameplay.
0 x

User avatar
REVENGE
Posts: 2379
Joined: 24 Aug 2006, 06:13

Re: BA Experimental discussion thread (download inside)

Post by REVENGE » 17 Aug 2011, 09:31

Great changes. :regret:
0 x

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

Re: BA Experimental discussion thread (download inside)

Post by Wombat » 17 Aug 2011, 11:36

- Core Hurricane bomb damage increased (283->337)
- Arm Phoenix bomb damage increased (210->250)
what ? why buff t2 bombers...
- Arm & Core Moho Mine metalcost reduced 20%, energycost reduced 10%, buildtime reduced 20%
finally D: it lets you build more t2 units with t1 e eco.
i dont think reducing the cost of t2 lab was needed, it should be built when u fight and suck enemy wrecks, as some kind of reward. with wrecks reducing cost was not needed.
- Arm Bulldog weapon damage increased (240->300)
as long as i love bulldogs, this is too much. bulldog already eats majority of tanks. it was barely possible to kill it with even many januses (basicly only t1 that can do anything vs bulldog) it rapes t1 and is like equivalent of ffa panther, but against porced area (actually better)
- Core Shiva HP increased (9000)
i dont even... shiva is AMPH t3 which turns out to be one of the best ground units. why buff?
0 x

User avatar
scifi
Posts: 848
Joined: 10 May 2009, 12:27

Re: BA Experimental discussion thread (download inside)

Post by scifi » 17 Aug 2011, 14:10

T2 Factory changes look similar to Pro annihilation.

T2 cons being more expensive is a good choice to compensate.

Recaling how it played, it is a positive change.
0 x

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

Re: BA Experimental discussion thread (download inside)

Post by TheFatController » 17 Aug 2011, 15:15

Yeah that was inspired by Pro Annihilation
0 x

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

Re: BA Experimental discussion thread (download inside)

Post by Pxtl » 17 Aug 2011, 15:41

So, to get this straight:

T1 fighters are for putting a lot of missiles into the sky and dealing the maximal damage to enemy air units, but are made of paper.

T2 fighters are for combat over slightly-hostile airspace and for taking down T1 fighters.

Am I right?

The Juno sounds *very* promising. Not sure about buffing mohomex.
0 x

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

Re: BA Experimental discussion thread (download inside)

Post by Johannes » 17 Aug 2011, 15:53

Not sure about the exact fighter changes. And it'd be nice to include the full changes into the log so people wouldn't always have to dig up the info themselves.
So here goes (from 7.5):
Avenger reloadtime 0.6 -> 1
Freedom fighgter reloadtime 0.92 -> 1
T1 fighter speed ~9.6 -> 13
T2 fighter speed ~12 -> 7
T1 fighter vs bomber damage 240 -> 125
T1 fighter vs VTOL (gunship, trans, etc.) damage 50 -> 125
T2 fighter vs bomber damage 350 -> 265
T2 fighter vs VTOL damage 100 -> 265
Having same dmg toward bombers and others is a step in the right direction I think, just needs playtesting to figure out the right damage, and if bomber hp should to be lowered to compensate or some such. Fighters are still pretty good against bombers, since they can just stay on their tail and constantly shoot, while gunships can evade them a bit. T1 fighters kill transes in 2 shots, too fast maybe?


Pxtl it's kinda the opposite. T2 fighters deal 2x raw dps for cost and have better range compared to T1. T1 fighters on the other hand 1-shot T2 fighters, and have almost same survivability for cost against things other than other fighters and flak which 1-shot both. So T2 as defense and T1 slightly better as offense.
Effect of speed is hard to say though - it helps you get from A to B faster, but the negative side is that a fast fighter gets less shots at something before it has bypassed the target and has to re-aim.
I'd prefer it the way you outlined it though. Put the vs fighter damage of fighters and flak in line with their other dmg outputs, give T2 fighter more cost and more hp, that'd be cool imo. And flak/fighters 1-shotting each other just happens too fast no matter what I think, battle is over in seconds.

Dunno about gunship hp changes, but balance of that is still totally up in the air due to fighter changes anyway.

And no use to tweak brakerate or acceleration (or turnrate) on aircraft since they don't use those tags... Better remove them from the files altogether so they don't confuse people. And seems like verticalspeed=x doesn't do anything for fighters - you added it to Freedom fighter but not to Avenger, but they still takeoff/land in exact same manner to each other. Just a gunships tag, like it says in wiki.



And yeah I see no reason to buff Bulldog or Shiva, they're great already.

Really nice to see reduced factory costs at last.

Oh and not sure of mohomex, its effectiveness is decided by map anyway... How about only decreasing energy cost though?
0 x

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

Re: BA Experimental discussion thread (download inside)

Post by TheFatController » 17 Aug 2011, 16:06

Johannes wrote:And seems like verticalspeed=x doesn't do anything for fighters - you added it to Freedom fighter but not to Avenger, but they still takeoff/land in exact same manner to each other.
Oh yeah I was testing to see if it did anything and forgot to take the tag out :regret:
0 x

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

Re: BA Experimental discussion thread (download inside)

Post by Pxtl » 17 Aug 2011, 16:10

Ah.

Yeah, thanks for the info Johannes. In that case, *neither* fighter sounds like it has decent survivability... but T1 is fast, and T2 deals more damage. I suppose it makes sense from a certain perspective - as the game progresses, you'll be less interested in covering a sprawling area and more just prioritizing an impenetrable defense, and so you're less interested in speed and more interested in firepower.

But either way, having *no* air-to-air option with any survivability or superiority seems sad.
0 x

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

Re: BA Experimental discussion thread (download inside)

Post by TheFatController » 17 Aug 2011, 23:14

You can find an autohost dedicated to this now as "BA_Testing_Autohost" desc "BA Alpha Host" many thanks to [CN]Zydox!
0 x

MrCucumber
Posts: 48
Joined: 31 Oct 2010, 19:09

Re: BA Experimental discussion thread (download inside)

Post by MrCucumber » 18 Aug 2011, 00:56

Crazy idea but: Give juno nuke range, larger AoE and make it destroy wrecks! If you lose a major battle you just juno the wrecks >:D

Maybe make load time longer or something
0 x

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

Re: BA Experimental discussion thread (download inside)

Post by Nixa » 18 Aug 2011, 03:44

Why don't you increase the MM efficency to 1:120 (double e per m) or even 1:180. Most people that like to fight won't care as they like to expand and build MEXES. It will promote expansion and a more flowing game. That alone would get my vote no matter what other changes you make.

Back in AA MM were 1:100 or 1:120 (can't remember) and the games were so much better because of it. IIRC the 1:60 was almost influenced by greenfields with the vision that MM would never be used how they are currently.
0 x

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

Re: BA Experimental discussion thread (download inside)

Post by Pxtl » 18 Aug 2011, 04:58

Caydr's ratio was 1:100. Iirc, he didn't have a similar ratio for mohomakers, which was the big flaw. It simply encouraged players to spam makers at T2 instead of T1.
0 x

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

Re: BA Experimental discussion thread (download inside)

Post by Nixa » 18 Aug 2011, 09:21

well in any case, the idea still stands. In most games it becomes too much hassle/time consuming to cap mexes after the first few fusions.
0 x

Super Mario
Posts: 814
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 02:54

Re: BA Experimental discussion thread (download inside)

Post by Super Mario » 18 Aug 2011, 18:50

Have you consider to add some new units in?
0 x

User avatar
albator
Posts: 866
Joined: 14 Jan 2009, 14:20

Re: BA Experimental discussion thread (download inside)

Post by albator » 18 Aug 2011, 19:28

So about air, what if:

Starting from:
- T2 fighters: same than in 7.31
- T1 fighters: same than in this alpha

you do:
- T1 fighters kill T2 fighters in 1 shot max
- T2 fighters kill T1 fighters in 1 shot max
- T2 fighters are 5 % slower than bombers
- modify all t1 ground AA so t1 fighters are kill in 2 shots max by any T1 ground AA and one shot by T2 flak (if that is not already the case)
- T2 bombers have same dps than in ba7.31 (or like they are in that alpha, i did not try them yet)

As a results:
- T1 fighters are cheapest way to defend against massive air raid
- Still, only an efficient way to counter that defence ofc is to send lot of t1 fighter too, but since they will be kill so fast by ground AA, the way not to make fighter cover instant killed will be to attack with t2 fighters who are much more expansive and slower.
- T2 fighters still have a defence role since they are much, more resistant to ground AA than t1's and have more dps.
- Since T2 fighter are slower it will increase their efficiency against gunship which is a good thing imo.


Next step would be to try a more expensive t2 fighter that can handle more hit from ground maybe.


What should not be done imo: make gound AA kill fighter in one shot cause it result in t1 scout spamm


Feeling ?
0 x

Locked

Return to “Balanced Annihilation”