Reversing conships!

Reversing conships!

Classic game design, maintained to please you...

Moderator: Content Developer

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

Reversing conships!

Post by Johannes » 10 Jun 2013, 02:01

I don't think conships should be able to traverse in reverse, it'd make them significantly better with repair, reclaim, well with anything really. And it's less interesting when you don't have to consider facings and angles of entry as much.

But it does bring an issue to mind - you cannot make out from the model, which way the conship is facing.

Split from BA:R Models thread. The discussion starts because the BA:R conship model looks as though it could travel both forwards and backwards.
0 x

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

Re: BA:R Arm models

Post by knorke » 10 Jun 2013, 15:59

Reversing construction ship sounds like good idea to me.
It is not the kind of unit where taking into account its heading makes it interessting to use. But might make it less likely to get stuck and generally less cumbersome to use.
With other units there is the problem that their move-animation must play in reverse, with a ship that is simple since there is none.
0 x

User avatar
Neddie
Community Lead
Posts: 9406
Joined: 10 Apr 2006, 05:05

Re: BA:R Arm models

Post by Neddie » 11 Jun 2013, 03:03

If a change to behaviour makes the ships too powerful, you can always rebalance them. That said, I don't remember more than three or four times that a ship got stuck.
0 x

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

Re: BA:R Arm models

Post by Johannes » 11 Jun 2013, 03:34

It won't make the ships "too powerful" since everyone can easily get them - just more powerful. If you'd necessarily have to make them worse in other ways, that would be awful (since I see no fault in their current stats) but that's not really the case.

Just think about whether they're more fun, more tactical if they can easily reverse and more easily escape whatever situation they're in. I don't think that's a good idea, it'd make using them in combat situations much more straightforward. Considering units facings and turn speeds is a cornerstone of BA gameplay.
0 x

User avatar
smoth
Posts: 22295
Joined: 13 Jan 2005, 00:46

Re: BA:R Arm models

Post by smoth » 11 Jun 2013, 03:47

This looks like a balance discussion johan, perhaps you should start a different thread.
0 x

User avatar
Silentwings
Moderator
Posts: 3582
Joined: 25 Oct 2008, 00:23

Re: Reversing conships!

Post by Silentwings » 11 Jun 2013, 09:18

Split out the balance discussion.
0 x

User avatar
REVENGE
Posts: 2377
Joined: 24 Aug 2006, 06:13

Re: Reversing conships!

Post by REVENGE » 11 Jun 2013, 11:25

There's no need to make conships more powerful, but making them more powerful would also make them even more fun. :regret: :twisted:

Side-note: please change the naval engineer script to use the delayed closing animation, same as other cons. As is, they're completed dominated by conships for spamming units due to the open/close delay.
0 x

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

Re: Reversing conships!

Post by albator » 12 Jun 2013, 12:51

I think current balance should be kept as it is, not because it would be better or worse absolutely, but just because sea need a complete rethinking and that is just a waste of time to make some small tweaks while the overhaul balance is kinda OK-ish now, I would just break this and bring confusion to the player base (most pips have no clue how to play water already)
0 x

User avatar
FireStorm_
Posts: 664
Joined: 19 Aug 2009, 16:09

Re: Reversing conships!

Post by FireStorm_ » 12 Jun 2013, 13:15

The conship does have a front, really :-) . In the front front bow is higher, and at the back there are 'propulsion cylinders'. But its very hard to see and I think it was good this point was raised. I think I will add a blinking light or something on the front bow in the future.

I don't really doubt that 'gameplay as you know it' will disappear/change because of using new units. I personally don't think this is a bad thing. That said, I do not intent to change gameplay. The initial intention is to keep it the same (but it most certainly won't be :-) )

I don't always look with a ba-gamer's eye at stuff so I don't mind hearing about possible problems or mistakes (seriously :-) ), but, as albator sort of said, balance changes or big unit-behaviour changes are (if at all) something for when the rest is done, I think.
0 x

User avatar
Jazcash
Posts: 5302
Joined: 08 Dec 2007, 17:39

Re: Reversing conships!

Post by Jazcash » 12 Jun 2013, 17:32

albator wrote:I think current balance should be kept as it is, not because it would be better or worse absolutely, but just because sea need a complete rethinking and that is just a waste of time to make some small tweaks while the overhaul balance is kinda OK-ish now, I would just break this and bring confusion to the player base (most pips have no clue how to play water already)
Very much agreed. Naval needs completely redesigning for many reasons.
0 x

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

Re: Reversing conships!

Post by Johannes » 12 Jun 2013, 17:58

Nah, there's just a need for some decent naval maps. Before that even if you want to redesign, you don't have a clue what you're redesigning for. As is there's nothing wrong with playing Sands of War or Flooded Valley for example.


If you want to point out a part of the game that's bad, it's air. Outside of blades and some niche use for other gunships, it's almost unmicroable and too fast, so whoever simply has more stuff wins which is just boring.
0 x

dansan
Server Owner & Developer
Posts: 1190
Joined: 29 May 2010, 23:40

Re: Reversing conships!

Post by dansan » 12 Jun 2013, 21:28

0 x

User avatar
PicassoCT
Journeywar Developer & Mapper
Posts: 10208
Joined: 24 Jan 2006, 21:12

Re: Reversing conships!

Post by PicassoCT » 12 Jun 2013, 23:00

Too much micro
0 x

klapmongool
Posts: 843
Joined: 13 Aug 2007, 13:19

Re: Reversing conships!

Post by klapmongool » 13 Jun 2013, 08:13


This:
38 - Added Aurora - T2 Floating Plasma Deflector (700 range, 700 shield energy cost)
39 - Buildable by Arm Construction Sea Plane
40 - Buildable by Arm Advanced Construction Sub
41
42 - Added Atoll - T2 Floating Plasma Deflector (700 range, 700 shield energy cost)
43 - Buildable by Core Construction Sea Plane
44 - Buildable by Core Advanced Construction Sub
is a bad idea. In combination with underwater eco and plenty of space this makes sea invulnerable to anything but krogs (if/when their headlasers work again in sea).
0 x

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

Re: Reversing conships!

Post by Johannes » 13 Jun 2013, 09:21

I don't like that at all, it might be ok for ship vs ship combat, but it ruins the balance there was between ships and everything else, in favor of ships. I can't for example think of starting on Sands of War with anything else than corvette spam with this patch.
0 x

User avatar
REVENGE
Posts: 2377
Joined: 24 Aug 2006, 06:13

Re: Reversing conships!

Post by REVENGE » 13 Jun 2013, 19:51

lol sea is fucking loco
0 x

dansan
Server Owner & Developer
Posts: 1190
Joined: 29 May 2010, 23:40

Re: Reversing conships!

Post by dansan » 13 Jun 2013, 21:42

a) I also fear sea could become even more powerful vs land, but I am happy someone is taking a bold step to fumble a bit with sea to sea combat. We'll see with the next BA version how that plays out, and can adjust.
Incremental adjustments after a big revamp - give it a try before you cry ;-)

b) If this patch makes sea more attractive and accessible for more and also for less experienced players - it is good. People with broader skills - that's what we want!
0 x

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

Re: Reversing conships!

Post by albator » 13 Jun 2013, 22:37

It is obviously a joke and you all believed it. Some hints:

-> shield make op sea eco whoring even more powerful (best MM efficiency)
-> all t1 defense made stronger make op defense push with sea cons even more op
-> corvette already owning easy hover will make hover even more useless but that corvette bluff.

Too bad it was joke, i would have like to see the plasma shield but then you would need to seriously decease MM sea efficiency (and ground as well but less).

Imo the sea needs:
- more diversity in t1 ship like:
-> generally cheaper, but also with less hp and slower than over
-> a special class of t1 ship that can kite over (~current corvette), but suck vs other ships

=>Sea being (too) fast it the reason why so much game looks like they are definitely lost.


-Sea needs ability to spam something more than triton: right now if you are at the sea, you can win easy if enemy is near the cost. If not, the only way to win is to eco and have 4 time the land eco and to spam shit: They are no really in-between: t2 def are to strong and berta prevent any base to be build...

.... but like I said before, it looks like a huge task: like re-balancing the game and adding unit in the game or make some choice that are quite drastic everywhere, so since BAR might be close, it looks like a waste of time to me. Better keep it OK-ish as it is.

Finally, I think the only reason why pips have the feeling sea is difficult is because it IS a 1v1 most of the time, and most of pips are not used to 1v1 where you pay every single mistakes.
0 x

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

Re: Reversing conships!

Post by Johannes » 14 Jun 2013, 00:27

The cheap yard and tidal are what would mess things the most, and also it wouldn't make early game sea any more forgiving - you get to spam a lot of vettes that way, both players, and this encourages rushing a lot since making cons + mexes gives less extra m in comparison to the amount you can spend right away.

And comm being a uw unit with weapon isn't good either, basically makes you start with a sub. In a base defense battle it isn't that much better than just having him repair, mainly it'd add offensive potential. Same goes for uw torpedo building, it does nothing for defense but adds a sneaky way of attacking and taking out mexes.


If you want a good sea start, you need a map where the comm can assist shipyard from land (and therefor also make llt/depthcharge) and can make more than one mex right away.

Also a simple question is, why do you want more ship on ship combat (as per the patch description)? Ship vs ship combat on the open, is in the end not that interesting compared to ground combat which is the main draw of the game and has many times more units. I don't think anyone's particularly a fan of ship vs ship battles. What makes sea interesting is how it interacts with ground, with hovers, air, amphib raids, etc., I don't think it's a good idea to promote ships over these other options.
0 x

Post Reply

Return to “Balanced Annihilation”