9.51 Forboding Angel revert to 9.46 (dev discussion, split) - Page 2

9.51 Forboding Angel revert to 9.46 (dev discussion, split)

Classic game design, maintained to please you...

Moderator: Content Developer

Ares
Balanced Annihilation Developer
Posts: 412
Joined: 19 Mar 2011, 13:43

Re: 9.51 Forboding Angel revert to 9.46 (dev discussion, split)

Post by Ares »

Forboding Angel wrote:So you don't like the balance of the pyro's self d explosion. Tough shit? That wasn't my decision nor was I even aware of it.
Floris wrote:Forb asked for my permission to go ahead and remove all explosion damages
Forbs your request to remove ALL EXPLOSION DAMAGE is the definition of balance change.
Floris wrote:Feels like I am getting backstabbed
Now you know how the community feel as they sit on 9.46 servers watching their game being changed against their will.

Floris, you are a great dev and you have done a lot for BA. Please accept the proposed balance committee as the future framework for change.

By establishing a committee of active and high skilled players who care about maintaining and perfecting competitive balance you will give BA the future it deserves.
User avatar
Forboding Angel
Evolution RTS Developer
Posts: 14650
Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 02:43

Re: 9.51 Forboding Angel revert to 9.46 (dev discussion, split)

Post by Forboding Angel »

Ares wrote: Forbs your request to remove ALL EXPLOSION DAMAGE is the definition of balance change.
Are you remedial? That's a serious question. Are you remedial? You would literally have to be an idiot to reach the conclusion to which you just arrived.

All of this happened at a time where it was agreed that there wouldn't be a release of BA for a good while. It is necessary to move unit explosions to an easily maintainable format as the old ones were created by people who had no fucking clue what the fuck they were doing and having each unit's explosion in a separate weapon is FUCKING STUPID when those explosions are identical (think regular solar vs advanced solar, or peewee death vs jethro death, etc). Additionally, all unit death explosions have to have a CEG defined, therefor instead of randomly having to grep the entire fucking folder of random weapondefs that have absolutely no order, it makes a lot more sense to put it in a nicely maintained location. Moreover, since the weapons were defined by people who had no idea what they were doing, it is necessary to clean them up A.K.A. rewrite them and remove all the useless tags, considering that unit deaths work like projectiles that explode instantly.

Putting all unit explosions into a single spot where they can be easily maintained is what SHOULD be done, period. As floris said, you then have to go back and put in the outliers manually, which he has done. Whether or not he put them back to what you think they should be, is none of my fucking concern.

In more devvy terms, this is essentially refactoring the way unit explosions happen in a way that is easy to maintain and more simple to balance.

There is only so much idiocy that I am willing to endure.

gajop: User was warned for this post (https://springrts.com/wiki/Felony#1). Third warning in a short time -> results in a ban (2 weeks).
Last edited by Silentwings on 02 Dec 2016, 11:00, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: locked post
User avatar
Floris
Balanced Annihilation Developer
Posts: 609
Joined: 04 Jan 2011, 20:00

Re: 9.51 Forboding Angel revert to 9.46 (dev discussion, split)

Post by Floris »

Ares isn't a dev, he shouldnt even be making replies in this topic.
His first reaction here was offtopic and he obviously didnt read up on or cant understand the dev talk in here.

Give me some time to make it similar to old ba again... previous versions were just test versions, nothing more.
Ares
Balanced Annihilation Developer
Posts: 412
Joined: 19 Mar 2011, 13:43

Re: 9.51 Forboding Angel revert to 9.46 (dev discussion, split)

Post by Ares »

I am a developer and I perfectly understand.

Revert to 9.46 like the community wants and join the Balance Committee.

Forbs you can apply to join too, the purpose is that it empowers change in the direction that the competitive community desires and it is always good to have alternate viewpoints. You need to be less insulting and more professional though, your negative attitude might drive players away.
User avatar
Forboding Angel
Evolution RTS Developer
Posts: 14650
Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 02:43

Re: 9.51 Forboding Angel revert to 9.46 (dev discussion, split)

Post by Forboding Angel »

Ares wrote:I am a developer.
Of what, pray tell?
Ares wrote:...Community Wants...
A couple loudmouths does not a community make.
Ares wrote:Balance Committee.
You have your own mod now,phoenix annihilation! Get crackin! You're gonna need to learn how to use git.

It doesn't really inspire a lot of confidence when you need someone to explain to you how to fork something on github.
User avatar
nixtux
TechA Developer
Posts: 100
Joined: 01 Mar 2009, 15:36

Re: 9.51 Forboding Angel revert to 9.46 (dev discussion, split)

Post by nixtux »

@floris
Nixtux, I don't care much about your opinion any longer when I saw you helped setting up a Ba 9.46 fork for commander_spice a few days ago. Feels like I am getting backstabbed... because you have issues with forb)


I have issue with Forbs, lmfao. Do you not actually read what he types.
Logit
Posts: 3
Joined: 30 Nov 2016, 23:26

Re: 9.51 Forboding Angel revert to 9.46 (dev discussion, split)

Post by Logit »

Forboding Angel wrote: A couple loudmouths does not a community make.
The committee is 9 players, whereas the BA community probably has 50 active members as a generous estimate. Having the top 20% of BA players giving there opinion on balance should be welcomed not laughed at.
User avatar
Forboding Angel
Evolution RTS Developer
Posts: 14650
Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 02:43

Re: 9.51 Forboding Angel revert to 9.46 (dev discussion, split)

Post by Forboding Angel »

A game that is dictated by the top players becomes a game only for the top players. For a perfect example of that, Starcraft 2.

The fact of the matter is that a game should be designed to eliminate as many possible noobtraps as possible, to make the game as accessible and smoothly flowing as possible for newbies, while retaining the complexity that vets desire. The end result is a win win for both sides. Being experience means that you will make better strategy and tactics decisions and even better battle decisions. Meanwhile a newbie is still able to contribute and have fun due to the game itself not fighting against the player.

I'm not going to go into detail, because it is silly to spend hours explaining to someone who has already made up their mind not to understand.
User avatar
Silentwings
Moderator
Posts: 3686
Joined: 25 Oct 2008, 00:23

Re: 9.51 Forboding Angel revert to 9.46 (dev discussion, split)

Post by Silentwings »

There are many risks to game design - of which over-reliance on feedback from strong/vocal players is one - another is that a game that is dictated by its devs becomes a game only for its devs.

++cooperation.
Super Mario
Posts: 820
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 02:54

Re: 9.51 Forboding Angel revert to 9.46 (dev discussion, split)

Post by Super Mario »

It a fallacy to assume that a high skill automatically is a highly skilled game designer.
Logit
Posts: 3
Joined: 30 Nov 2016, 23:26

Re: 9.51 Forboding Angel revert to 9.46 (dev discussion, split)

Post by Logit »

Super Mario wrote:It a fallacy to assume that a high skill automatically is a highly skilled game designer.
Good thing the balance committee will be in charge of Balance and not Design.
Super Mario
Posts: 820
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 02:54

Re: 9.51 Forboding Angel revert to 9.46 (dev discussion, split)

Post by Super Mario »

Logit wrote:
Super Mario wrote:It a fallacy to assume that a high skill automatically is a highly skilled game designer.
Good thing the balance committee will be in charge of Balance and not Design.
Balance is a subset of Design. Point being that a high skill player does not make a high skill game dev. The fact you dismiss other game devs with years of experience speaks highly of your arrogance.

This is coming from a guy who had experience with the spring engine. It's NOT trivial to mess with other people's code.
User avatar
smoth
Posts: 22309
Joined: 13 Jan 2005, 00:46

Re: 9.51 Forboding Angel revert to 9.46 (dev discussion, split)

Post by smoth »

Super Mario wrote:This is coming from a guy who had experience with the spring engine.
do tell what you did? because this is what is known as an appeal to authority.

Sometimes, the best players can give relevant feedback. Godde is one such player who through years of relevant feedback has the ear of most of us here.
User avatar
Silentwings
Moderator
Posts: 3686
Joined: 25 Oct 2008, 00:23

Re: 9.51 Forboding Angel revert to 9.46 (dev discussion, split)

Post by Silentwings »

Playing top trumps with different peoples skills will go nowhere.

A functional gaming community needs good players, weak players, spectators, infra devs, game devs, autohost owners, engine devs, map makers, contributors, moderators, ... it doesn't work without cooperation.
It's NOT trivial to mess with other people's code.
Personally, I'd join Ford Prefect in describing lua coding for Spring as "mostly harmless".
Super Mario
Posts: 820
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 02:54

Re: 9.51 Forboding Angel revert to 9.46 (dev discussion, split)

Post by Super Mario »

smoth wrote:
Super Mario wrote:This is coming from a guy who had experience with the spring engine.
do tell what you did?
Creating libraries for VC and helping amba to compile it.
I swear, spring macro are dark magic...
User avatar
smoth
Posts: 22309
Joined: 13 Jan 2005, 00:46

Re: 9.51 Forboding Angel revert to 9.46 (dev discussion, split)

Post by smoth »

Silentwings wrote:A functional gaming community needs good players, weak players, spectators, infra devs, game devs, autohost owners, engine devs, map makers, contributors, moderators, ... it doesn't work without cooperation.
we had that once in between all the raging fanbois. :(
Super Mario
Posts: 820
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 02:54

Re: 9.51 Forboding Angel revert to 9.46 (dev discussion, split)

Post by Super Mario »

smoth wrote:
Silentwings wrote:A functional gaming community needs good players, weak players, spectators, infra devs, game devs, autohost owners, engine devs, map makers, contributors, moderators, ... it doesn't work without cooperation.
we had that once in between all the raging fanbois. :(
Wait, once? What happen?
User avatar
RageQuitIII
Posts: 1
Joined: 04 Dec 2016, 18:23

Re: 9.51 Forboding Angel revert to 9.46 (dev discussion, split)

Post by RageQuitIII »

[img]

User was banned for ban dodging.
Post Reply

Return to “Balanced Annihilation”