NOTA 1.82

[JohannesH]

about sumo-I find it a bit weird that youd mention sumo as being good on hilly terrain since it shoots a straight up weapon,and anything with an arched weapon would do even better than straight shooting weapons on hilly maps.

Not if going uphill

[nightcold]

Umrug I play many mods I wish you'd calm down a bit and yourself play some other mods as well.

meh, after playing nota(and getting into it)...all other mods felt inferior/more or less the same to me...the only reason i play ba is because there are so few nota games and nothing else to play(xta is cool thu)

anyways nota is a hammer on the nail on what i want in a rts(just my personal taste, nothing objective...i'am sure SA is a great mod)

also forgot to mention something....carriers are more or less useless/unused(and it's expensive too)... i would like to see air carriers actually store planes inside(maybe some gates to the side of the ship that open and close while planes fly in and out, or an elevator thing...and when the ship blow up all the planes will just storm out at the same time, well some will get damaged and you might lose a few)...well you might ask, what's the point of haveing that...well in sea battles there is so much AA that you might wana place you planes somewhere safe from all the aa fire yet close to the action in case you might need them or something...or just keep them hiden and just bust out your plans as a surprise attack....meh, i'am sure people can think of something

also flying fortress's AA guns should hit all directions instead of just behind it(i think it just hits behind it, rarely see them in game anyways)

just an idea, maybe we can have a variation on the flying fortres that can hold planes inside and refuel them and have a bunch of AA....they can play a major role in air combat/supremacy while being vulnerable to AA ground fire....

[==Troy==]

night.. you need to play more.

ever tried to have a good AA figter screen without a carrier?

Do you know that carriers have that long-range heavy-hitting AA missile?

You are just playing on maps where the sea is not extended enough for the carrier to be needed. Try, for example, shore2shore. Its not a great map overall, but you are going to need a carrier if you ever want to take the sea fully under AA control.

Flying fortresses are strong as they are, more is not needed. Only thing that would be nice to see is some AA missiles from them, weak ones, just for the show.

And they shoot everywhere btw*.

[thelawenforcer]

seeing the discussion about sumos and stuff like that, i suggest you download a couple of the demos i uploaded to trademarks site.

I use a sumo:crabe:~3 dominator ratio and air transports to move them to the front.

you'll find that it essentially creates a very hard to break push with a fast and grouped reinforcements.

http://replays.adune.nl/?2412

http://replays.adune.nl/?2411 (this one might not work, atleast thats what morphdog said).

heres the 2 changes id like to see in nota:

faster movement or longer range weapons for peewees and gators/flash.
bigger range and maybe a bit faster reload for aa units.

these are small tweaks to encourage a bit of variation in the ground unit play.

however, artillery when games have gone into line vs line trench warfare style can do alot of damage to thuds, and a good peewee/flash flank (hard to do though) can really destroy enemy lines.

i rather like that NOTA isnt a pure rock paper scissors like game and that you have to fight for position, resources and execute your manouevres properly to win. Good unit combinations should be a big boost, but i wouldnt want to see spam of one unit kind only (which its true can sometimes be said with thuds, depending on the map)

[thelawenforcer]

about the carriers, they are only a little bit useful, i wouldnt say they were really worth the cost tbh. If they had an anti nuke it would be cool though.

[nightcold]

i belive that is the core carrier(i think, might be the other way around).....the arm counter part is not as usefull....

also, if you wanted highly effective AA ship you would just build an AA cruiser...which just happens to be both cheaper and more effective(also takes less time 2 make) than carrier(agian, i'am not 100% sure here, i dont see much of this sort if thing in game)

carriers having anti-nuke is more or less in line with plasma shields(and the problems in casues)...ships are already a huge/very powerfull part of the game...nukes might be needed to counter ships(and ship porking), takeing that away removes one of more critical counters to ships....

anaways you can always placed your ships in your shore lines(which is protected by your anti-nuke), but this forces your ships to be in your own waters rather than just hanging out by your opponents base...gaeving the game more dynamics and give more chances for games to move back and forward(makeing things fun)....if ships where imposiable to counter the game would just be just a race for who can get the most ships in the water fastest

anyway...T2 needs more testing and polishing, and due to the fact the it not seen in game often...we need a way for testes to just jump into T2...we can have something like missons where both sides bases are already made(with T2)

[==Troy==]

Small point - is it possible to make the hold fire option on mines work properly? Nuclear mines are nearly useless when you cant stop them from triggering.

[Gota]

Allow the air carriers to take more dmg so they can actually penetrate AA lines.

[afrossen]

most problems would be sorted if the "support units" just built a bit faster.

[Pxtl]

well you might ask, what's the point of haveing that...well in sea battles there is so much AA that you might wana place you planes somewhere safe from all the aa fire yet close to the action in case you might need them or something...or just keep them hiden and just bust out your plans as a surprise attack....meh, i'am sure people can think of something

Wasn't that the idea of the OTA Seaplanes? That, by landing underwater, they were generally safe?

[nightcold]

well you might ask, what's the point of haveing that...well in sea battles there is so much AA that you might wana place you planes somewhere safe from all the aa fire yet close to the action in case you might need them or something...or just keep them hiden and just bust out your plans as a surprise attack....meh, i'am sure people can think of something

Wasn't that the idea of the OTA Seaplanes? That, by landing underwater, they were generally safe?

gah...i'am trying to get a cool feature in game, and u just had to make it sound less cool/helpfull...

well Seaplanes can't move forward underwater(unlike planes inside of a ship, that can be moved without being spotted/flying)...also by getting a carrier your expanding that luxury to normal planes for a price...also, ffs they are called "carriers" not "useless airplane refueling ships"(ur just better off makeing a few air pads in base), they are ment to hold airplanes in rl....

[thelawenforcer]

i think an anti nuke on carriers would make them more worthwhile.

also, i tried using a slightly alternative kbot army composition in this demo:

http://replays.adune.nl/?2417

morties and AKs mainly.

its very resource intensive (i needed 3 kbot labs) and its not hugely effective vs standard play (dufus, the player opposite me was using hammers, vehicle artillery and levelers). I think i may have been able to wear him down over time but as he got flanked by an ally (and was controlling two armies) theres no way to be sure of that.

[thelawenforcer]

another AK/Morty demo. I use it to push south, but in the end my enemies go for a pure vehicle artillery composition. This should be quite easy for my composition to beat. Except it doesnt. As my AK's start getting close, the arty just switches to low traj and totally destroy my aks before they can do damage. This is a serious flaw imo and should be changed. vehicle artillery should only be able to fire in high trajectory otherwise they tend to work as levelers without the ability to move and fire and with higher rof.

*i quit the game because i was getting bored and frustrated by the artillery spam.

http://replays.adune.nl/?2418

[thelawenforcer]

another cool thing i remember someone tried was to have 2 players be on the same team, but with two control towers. It seemed to me to be a really interesting way of playing, that would actually force teamplay and so forth. Obviously it would possibly be horrible in pure public play, but the option would be awesome.

If its possible already, plz let me know, id really like to try it sometime.

[nightcold]

another cool thing i remember someone tried was to have 2 players be on the same team, but with two control towers. It seemed to me to be a really interesting way of playing, that would actually force teamplay and so forth. Obviously it would possibly be horrible in pure public play, but the option would be awesome.

If its possible already, plz let me know, id really like to try it sometime.

like the co-op mode in CA/BA???? ......

don't know if it will work for nota or not...

anyway, to continue throwing ideas at thor(that will will prob not be read/implement) i would like 2 see nota improved on a visual level...I would like to see vehicles with actually moving wheels instead of wheels being painted on them(it rlly takes away from spring when i see models like that, it can't be that hard to just add wheels to these models right?)...ships could use a bit more polish...just steal some
k-bot models from other models who have better looking ones(like XTA, just stay away from that fugly cluster fuck of ideas and models known as CA)

[==Troy==]

A bug, but is a very cool bug :

Arm Battlecruiser shoots down core transports (not the infantry transes) by main caliber guns. Looks spectacular I must admit.


The core Talwar transport ship is never used as well, it would be nice to see its cost/buildtime considerably reduced, as its basically easier to deploy units with an airdrop than with a talwar. It would also be nice to see talwar being able to transport veh/t2 (if it doesnt do so already)

[hoijui]

@thelawenforcer
this is called com-sharing, and it is an engine feature, so should work in all mods (if they do not take special measures against it). as nightcold said, this is supported by some autohosts through the !coop command:

Ashram> !coop meAndMyFriends
Barneby> !coop meAndMyFriends
Barneby> <3
Ashram> <3

alternatively, if hosting your own game, you can just manually set teamId of you and your mate to the same number (allyTeamId's also have to be equal of course) in the lobby.

[nightcold]

alternatively, if hosting your own game, you can just manually set teamId of you and your mate to the same number (allyTeamId's also have to be equal of course) in the lobby.

yeah, been there.....done that....game crashes

[hoijui]

i guess its a NOTA related bug then. if NOTA guys say it is engine related, and give all the info they have/makes them think so, we'll have a look.

[thelawenforcer]

hoijui, but dont u only get one comm tower then? then point is that you would still get the two towers, except u can both control both of them :)