Screamer and Mercury are still shit

[Kapytii]

I remember about a year ago when I started playing this game, these two towers mentioned in the topic had a helluva long range? I might be wrong, as I didnt understand shit about the game back then. Or I understood shit but thats about all. Anyway, as Josef Mengele there said "airshield will be pulled back when screamers start shooting at it.", wouldnt that be nice? With this current range that cant be done. How usefull it would be to have scr/merc shoot once in a while at enemys fighter shield? Dunno, havent seen that in action beyond my super noob times. But wouldnt that add to some tactics; you keep the fighter shield where it is and keep losing planes or pull it back making front more vulnerable, so you gotta worry and deal with the long range AA too.

They had a bit longer range few month ago? I remember making them at the back of my base so they wouldnt shoot at the scouts/fighters that the flak and fighters deals with and take down bombers that come after, but that didnt work, all long range AA shot at the same scout plane that got thru and were again reloaded after bombers had done their evil deeds. Useless. Also now they shoot three times even at a single plane? So two extra missiles can do funny circles and then land on your metal makers or hit planes...

Cheesecan has nice points. Button for targeting prefs would be so neat. (also would be nice for other single shot long reload units, but how powerful would snipers then be? Then again include that option to units with some experience. Exp could be better used anyway... but telling thoughts about that would be too much off topic).

Speaking of long range AA and off topics, whats with the t1 bigger AA towers? Chainsaw and whatever arm has? In my books the game would be nicer and 'balanced' if all units would be seen on the battlefield. Only super noobs seem to build those, so... are you guys lacking ideas or are they just something to fill the space on menus? Maybe they have been useful years ago? Or do I simply not notice them in the field :/

[Johannes]

I checked the new versions of them. I much prefer the old ones. I won't go and try to gauge their effectiveness in this or that situation, but they're boring now. Just another AA tower, does some burst splash damage. Its stats are very close to a chainsaw now. 1500 vs 1250 range, 290 vs 200 dps, nice aoe, 1550 vs 4000 hp, tripled pricetag. It's more effective in some jobs than the alternatives, less effective in most, but it really doesn't do any job you couldn't easily do with something else.

Whereas the old, long range, single high-damage shot, was unique. You couldn't do its jobs with anything else (thinning down fighter shields, one-shotting radar planes before they see a thing, or one-shotting liches) and did a poor job as conventional base defense AA.

We lost something unique but costly, got a more-of-the-same AA turret that's costly. That to me is a clear net loss for the game.

Speaking of long range AA and off topics, whats with the t1 bigger AA towers? Chainsaw and whatever arm has? In my books the game would be nicer and 'balanced' if all units would be seen on the battlefield. Only super noobs seem to build those, so... are you guys lacking ideas or are they just something to fill the space on menus? Maybe they have been useful years ago? Or do I simply not notice them in the field :/

Those have their use, most people just don't care to consider them because they never saw (or just didnt notice) them in a proper situation.

[klapmongool]

I think going back to the old stats and lowering cost would be a good option.

[albator]

I kinda agree to go back to older stats: no need to try to make a unit effective if other unit doing the same job already exist

If I had to bluff them, I would increase dps a bit so I can kill blade/nukeBomber/and Krow more effectively. Range is key and purpose is: no need to get fighters while being able to prevent airstrike from isolated ground attack plane

[Silentwings]

Speaking of long range AA and off topics, whats with the t1 bigger AA towers? do I simply not notice them in the field :/

Seems you just didn't notice - those are used.

"airshield will be pulled back when screamers start shooting at it.", wouldnt that be nice? With this current range that cant be done. How usefull it would be to have scr/merc shoot once in a while at enemys fighter shield?

Apparently not very - they were almost never used for that, despite plenty of opportunity. Presumably because they didn't kill much even when a fighter shield was in their range.

With their old stats I also can't see how cost was a barrier to use; they didn't cost much! So I don't want to reduce their price below what it used to be and I think returning to old role would just consign them back to never being used.

But I appreciate the comment that they now do a similar job to a fighter shield and maybe its a shame to lose the functionality of something unique. I'm undecided what to do with it for the moment.

[Johannes]

Just because something is not used doesn't always mean much. Often things are just not familiar enough to people to say properly when and how they should be used. And it takes time, not theorising but testing, playing, to figure that out. So if you've got a feeling Screamer would do well in this or that situation, yet never see it used so - try it in practice yourself. Even if it doesn't work out as hoped, you'll probably get your answer as to why it's not used.

But until we have more data, of how Mercurys perform in practice, we're basing any changes almost purely on theory. Until you see screamers used appropriately yet failing, consistently, I would not count them out.

[Silentwings]

You might not collect stats and end up basing your opinions on `pure theory' - I do collect unit stats and sometimes I also base my opinions on them.

Until you see screamers used appropriately yet failing, consistently

Almost no one is stupid enough to use a unit consistently when it also fails consistently for them. Prior to 7.74/5 merc/scr had not changed in over two years and displayed almost no trace of popularity during that time, with also not much trace of usefulness. I agree that it takes time to adapt to changes and for the moment I think I haven't seen enough of teh new merc/scr to pass judgement.

[Neddie]

Players are nothing if not adaptive, options which have no utility will eventually age out of play. I stopped playing BA a long time ago, I stopped using the Mercury and Screamer years before that for the most part, with the exception of situations in which I wanted to provoke a land strike or confuse a newer player.

[Johannes]

Gameplay experience >> looking at stats. Have you actually tried to use them yourself how much? Or have you often watched games where someone loses (partially) because they builts these towers?

If you can point to replays of games featuring merc/scmr, where they fail to carry their weight, then that is proper material to judge them by. But looking at only stats (like these, maybe you've got something more detailed?) doesn't really give a detailed image of how they did. But the existence of the ones with >0,5xp would imply they can be worthwhile. Can you, with your stats, dig up the replays where they're used, preferably ones where they're not built just right before the games conclusion? They don't have to deal much damage to be useful - if they can make the enemy attack them, pull back their fighters, etc., then that is gold in itself.

If there's been no popularity for the last 2 years, how can you say it has been consistently failing for anyone? For my experience I can say I've barely tried them at all, but don't recall really regretting the times when I did.

And if it is genuinely bad, then so what? That means it won't be making anything worse, whereas a newly introduced unit can potentially do that (though shouldn't be the case here, the revised scrm/merc is redundant enough). Right now I'd want to play around with these turrets a bit, to pass better judgment on them, yet I cannot since they're removed.

Players are nothing if not adaptive, options which have no utility will eventually age out of play. I stopped playing BA a long time ago, I stopped using the Mercury and Screamer years before that for the most part, with the exception of situations in which I wanted to provoke a land strike or confuse a newer player.

I don't know about your experience, but vast majority of people never stopped using these - they never even started.
Players are adaptive in that they will shy away from things which don't work, but most people will never innovate, to try to come up with strategies in which Screamer can work as a part of. Just emulating existing things is much easier.

[Silentwings]

Gameplay experience >> looking at stats. Have you actually tried to use them yourself how much?

I both redesigned them, tested out options for them in as near to game situations as was practical and have now started using them in games.

As I said,

for the moment I think I haven't seen enough of teh new merc/scr to pass judgement.

so if you want replays, stats, etc, I suggest you collect them for yourself.

the existence of the ones with >0,5xp...

I think you are misunderstanding what xp means here; there is nothing numerically significant about gaining 0.5xp.

Right now I'd want to play around with these turrets a bit, to pass better judgment on them

You already had two years; more like four since they last had any substantial change.

[Johannes]

What I mean, did you actually try and use the old, long-ranged versions before the change? In real games? If so, how did they feel to you?

I don't really have any problem with the new versions, really, it's the removal of the old one that I dislike. Addition of new AA turrets - potentially good. But removal of old ones, which never proved to be problematic - that sucks.



I do understand how XP works. What I don't get is that killing stuff many times their cost, occasionally, is somehow not relevant. It says that a meaningful percent of Screamers built did something obviously useful.

And yeah, I'm not gonna go and start running old games in hopes of seeing Merc/Scmr in action, nor collect stats from them. But when you say you've collected a meaningful amount of stats yourself, why not share them?

Right now I'd want to play around with these turrets a bit, to pass better judgment on them

You already had two years; more like four since they last had any substantial change.

So? That people didn't use them much before, is a proper reason to remove that option from them? Point to me how it improves the game that I cannot build a long-ranged AA turret. How often I did so in the past, doesn't seem relevant.

[albator]

i only build t1 defender as fix t1 ground AA, cause that just the best for coast if air actually wants to kill it which is the very point of building ground static AA: it must be cheap, if it not what you aim for, you make mobiles one to concentrate maximum power. some flak are also nice if enemy is stupid (not spreading air)

If you want to interdict a zone, you need fighter or.... you could use old mercury screamer (I never use them anyway cause they so always jammed with fighter and you are always (95% of the time) interested into one single target. That the reason why I don't think that have not been used that much. ) cause they can kill the bomber before it fires

Now, the new stats does not solved any of those issue, and if you keep the orientation you heading for (trying to make a much better turret (OP ?)) of course it will be use, but i dont think that is a good thing for game dynamics: I like the fact the only effective way to prevent a one target-air-strike is the fighter shield (that can be destroyed), so super porc can be broken by something else than lol-cannon which is a praise to eco-whoring

Maybe you just need to find another goal to screamer/mercury:
Anti gunship/balde/transport/krow with special damage vs them.

Otherwise I don't see the interest to try to balances those in the direction everyone is going here. There is much more unba stuff to talk about that this (all see should be completely rethink with new unit to compete, etc...)

[Silentwings]

... balances those in the direction everyone is going here.

There is currently no 'direction' or plans for change to merc/scr, as I've now said several times.

What I mean, did you actually try and use the old, long-ranged versions before the change? In real games? If so, how did they feel to you?

Yes, mostly ineffective.

you've collected a meaningful amount of stats yourself, why not share them

Its alot of work to collate together from multiple text files. It's trivial to collect statistics per game & to be honest I'd expect anyone with a genuine interest in balance to put the effort in and do it themselves.

[REVENGE]

Let them stockpile.

[klapmongool]

I disagree with them being removed. With their old range stats they had a unique role. Because the situations in which they could be used were rare and because it was pretty expensive even for that role you won't see their use in the stats.

The stats can't be used the way you do in this case, as Johannes argued.

Players should be able to use them in those rare situations, even if against high costs. Removing them also limits the ground AA options too much.

Again, I suggest putting in with their old stats with a bit lower costs. Or if you think different configuration of targetting makes a big difference, keep the costs the same.

[Silentwings]

The stats can't be used ...

The reason for making any change at all was several people saying merc/scr were never worth building. It was not sparked by reading stats.

suggest putting in with their old stats...if you think different configuration ... makes a big difference, keep the costs the same.

The new costs are substantially more than old costs, so no. This would make them less useful than ever before. Imo they were not expensive before.

Removing them also limits the ground AA options too much.

Sorry, but this is a massive overstatement and barely true. They were very rarely built (pretty much speedmetal only) and the limitations caused by a change of role is small, if any. They have been used significantly more in their new form than before.

With their old range stats they had a unique role. Because the situations in which they could be used were rare...

As I said above, I agree and I think this point has some value.

Let them stockpile.

Good idea imo, because then they won't fire into empty space to complete their burst when all targets are already dead.

[klapmongool]

The stats can't be used the way you do in this case...

The reason for making any change at all was several people saying merc/scr were never worth building. It was not sparked by reading stats.

suggest putting in with their old stats...if you think different configuration ... makes a big difference, keep the costs the same.

The new costs are substantially more than old costs, so no. This would make them less useful than ever before. (Btw, the targetting configuration has not changed, I guess you meant some other part of unitdefs)

The damage they do now to a single target per second with repeated direct hits is much higher than before, although range is different so its not quite a fair comparison.

Removing them also limits the ground AA options too much.

Sorry, but this is a massive overstatement and barely true. They were very rarely built (pretty much speedmetal only) and the limitations caused by a change of role is small, if any.

With their old range stats they had a unique role. Because the situations in which they could be used were rare...

As I said above, I agree and I think this point has some value.

I meant same costs as in how they were before you changed the unit.

With 'different configuration' I was reffering to potential lua stuff you mentioned earlier in this thread. You said that could improve the unit. One of the big downsides of unit was that if you had multiple of em close to each other they would pick the same target. Due to its long range this would waste alot of potential damage. If a script of some sort fixed this it would already make them alot more interesting to build.

About the limiting of ground AA: all other ground AA options are short ranged. Taking out the only really long ranged ground AA unit does limit it. You say that this isnt true because they werent used much. I already explained in my last post that you cannot conclude this from stats.

Whichever way you defend it; removing the unit because it wasn't used much is not a good decision because it was due to being too expensive to fulfill its role, not because it had no role.


PS. By taking sentences out of their context like that their meaning changes.

[Silentwings]

I meant same costs as in how they were before you changed the unit.

So did I.

One of the big downsides of unit was ... If a script of some sort fixed this it would already make them alot more interesting to build.

Please feel free to write one and I'd be happy to look at it. The callins for dealing with projectiles are new and are at the bottom of this page: http://springrts.com/wiki/Lua_SyncedCtrl.

Taking out the only really long ranged ground AA unit does limit it. You say that this isnt true because they werent used much. I already explained in my last post that you cannot conclude this from stats.

You need only 2 of them to cross a width 10 map with their range circles; that is long range. As I said, the change was not provoked by collecting stats. I don't believe it was expensive before (from above I assume you haven't checked the changes to its cost) and I'd side with alba in that the reason it was basically never used in its old form is

... always jammed with fighter and you are always (95% of the time) interested into one single target

Also,

PS. By taking sentences out of their context like that their meaning changes.

Was not my intention; I was confused by your terminology because the bit of unitdefs that is actually 'targetting' has not changed. Please don't quote entire posts.

[klapmongool]

Sorry but I just don't understand what you want now. This thread is filled with misunderstanding.

I'll make it simple:

I say:

Screamer / Mercury sucks.

Screamer / Mercury were underused for their role because they were too expensive.

Solution: make Screamer / Mercury cheaper.

You say:

Screamer / Mercury sucks.

Changed unit stats didnt work

Solution: remove Screamer / Mercury.

Your solution leaves a hole where a well priced, situation specific, Screamer / Mercury could be.

[Silentwings]

Changed unit stats didnt work

Solution: remove Screamer / Mercury.

Said neither.