Maximum Annihilation V1.0

Maximum Annihilation V1.0

All game release threads should be posted here

Moderator: Moderators

[Krogoth86]
Posts: 1176
Joined: 23 Aug 2007, 19:46

Maximum Annihilation V1.0

Post by [Krogoth86] »

UPDATE!
The follow-up version 1.1 has been released: http://spring.clan-sy.com/phpbb/viewtop ... 14&t=14520
UPDATE!

After being in the making for about half a year there finally is the first official version of what you may call the inofficial successor to Balanced Annihilation:

Image

Download Mirrors:
http://www.file-upload.net/en/download- ... 0.sd7.html
http://spring-portal.com/index.php/docm ... lation-v10
more to come

Modinfo / Modit:
http://modinfo.adune.nl/index.php?side=arm&MOD=ma10

Media:
- Trailer #1 (High-Res)
- Trailer #2 (High-Res Version)

FAQ:

Q: What is this?
A: It's a new TA mod which originated from the Balanced Annihilation mod.

Q: What's the difference?
A: In contrast to its origin MA tries to extend and/or change the gameplay at various points to create more tactical possibilities and improve the game where possible and also is oriented towards team games whereas BA is very much tuned for a nice 1v1 experience. There are quite some changes which will not be presented right now. At the end of this posting you'll find a brief guideline which introduces you to the mod's features. There also is a video comment planned which will present this in detail.

Q: Is this finished?
A: No - not at all. There are numerous things still not integrated and many things like not so good looking models or quirky corpses have to be reworked but even if some things may not look like a beauty the functionalities of the units are fully given. The reason why there now is an official release is my need of some more input and to have it on Modinfo / Modit (as you imo let your pants down concerning all your mod's secrects when uploading it there you can make it official right away) for way easier balancing and bugfixing as it's a really helpfull platform for that. So with that said you shouldn't expect the ultimately well done balance yet (especially at later Tech Levels) but it's more than just "playable"... :wink:

Q: Who developes this?
A: Just me.

Q: How can I help?
A:
Image
1.)
You heard the man! Just go ahead, play a bit and come back here with your critique, suggestions or even some praise ( :roll: ). I'm interested in any opinion.

2.)
I'm VERY interested in replays of games with 4 or even better 6 and up players!

Q: What's going to happen next?
A: Well for this I can give a nice small roadmap:
V1.0
Release

V1.1
- introduction of Thud-MK II
- introduction of Arm T3 All-Terr. Mech
- Zulu gets AA too and just one LRPC gun like Arm counterpart
- extend the T3 Sea Tech Tree
- various bugfixes & balance changes which will come up

V1.5 Next Minor Milestone
- introduction of Krogoth & Arm Ultra-Mech

V2.0 Next Majro Milestone
- integration of T3 Tank Tree
- all planned units / buildings now are ingame
----------------------------------

Brief Gameplay Guideline:

General changes from BA that should be known before first gaming:

1.)
New Eco-System without buildtime being a ressource.
Labs now build on their own and cannot be assisted (leading to way higher gamespeed in lategame because of an immense decrease in nano particle numbers).
Metal Makers are more inefficent: 100e per m on T1, 80e per m on T2, 60e per m on T3 (that's T1 level in BA btw).
All Labs now use a certain amount of metal per second - no matter which unit they build:
T1 Ground / Sea Labs: -5m per second
T2 Ground / Sea Labs: -10m per second
T3 Ground / Sea Labs: -25m per second
T1 Air Labs: -2.5m per second
T2 Air Labs: -5m per second
T3 Air Labs: -12.5m per second

So you can plan ahead as how much of your income you want to spend on units.
You'll also find T1 being very cheap...

2.)
Power Plants & Metal Extractors only have a rather tiny storage capacity.
For serious backup ressources you need storages.

3.)
K-Bots now have All-Terrain specialism, Vehicles have Amphibic specialism.
Each tree now has a special All-Terrain / Amphibic worker.
Amphibic K-Bots were removed in the process (i.e. T1 / T2 = KBot ; T3 = Mech).

4.)
K-Bots now have a conquer&hold role as they all have a decent autoheal which turns in when idling for a while (in Spring i.e. not being attacked).
Vehicles still are for brute force.
T1 heal: 10HP per second
T2 heal: 20HP per second

Exceptions: Spies, Scouts & Artillery - they only have half of those values.

5.)
As most people will ask about it here it comes:
Yes - Flash and Instigator now got more reasonable stats.
Another important change is that Samsons / Slashers now actually are AA-only - you have dedicated artillery against ground so use those.

6.)
Lasers now actually do 100% of their damage and don't lose hell of a firepower on distance. Especially at T1 (and also T2) this has the nice effect that it really reduces the effectiveness of one unit spam. So you might want to rethink just charging your Stumpies into the enemy and start using artillery or a different tactic - there have been quite some accomodations on this sector like Merls / Diplomat not moving at turtle speed anymore or having the opportunity to use alternate routes via transports. Mix your units for good!

7.)
Crawling Bombs only detonate in a big manner when you (or they themselves) ignite them. You'll also find out they have a nice special feature now...

8.)
The recent T3 level was extended to a whole Tech Level.
Tech Level 2 got totally revamped building wise.

9.)
Both sides now have a T2 Tactical Nuke Launcher which work just like a Nuke Silo with less damage per missile and being interceptable by Anti-Nukes.

10.)
Lots of new units, buildings, FX and abilities added. I won't go into detail here because it would make this brief overview waaay too long so go ahead and try everything out - the unit descriptions should tell you everything you need to know. :)

11.)
While the damage units deal can be pretty much seen on the explosion, you also can guess the damage a beam laser deals now:
Red Laser: Low Damage
Orange Laser: Medium Damage
Green Laser: High Damage
Turqoise Laser: Very High Damage
Blue Laser: OMFG!!!

12.)
When having reached T3 morphing your Commander will give you access to the "T4 Superweapons". You can only get them via your Commander. Going into lategame without your Com may be your downfall now so keep an eye on him.

13.)
Lifting your (or an enemy ;) ) Com with T1 Air Transports won't work.

14.)
Hosting tip: Use 500e and 500m as starting ressources.

15.)
Enjoy gaming! :)
Last edited by [Krogoth86] on 26 Apr 2008, 13:53, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Otherside
Posts: 2296
Joined: 21 Feb 2006, 14:09

Re: Maximum Annihilation V1.0

Post by Otherside »

tried it out both factions seem exactly identical even more so than in BA
i feel little sense of identity or reason to choose either arm or core for my playstyle

it seems u wanna keep the identical faction thing why not just make 1 faction ?

maybe u wanna do this to keep the mod easier to balance but tis boring :P

and its mega spammy on most maps :/
[Krogoth86]
Posts: 1176
Joined: 23 Aug 2007, 19:46

Re: Maximum Annihilation V1.0

Post by [Krogoth86] »

Otherside wrote:tried it out both factions seem exactly identical even more so than in BA
Well they still are rather similar and as both factions now pretty much have all tactical possibilities (like Arm getting an Amphibic transport) this may be true on some areas. But each sides still has its specialties like for example the stealthy Maverick for Arm (which is a nice idea with All-Terrain-Transports btw) and EMP Lightning weapons while Core has things like advanced bombs and especially on T3 it will become apparent that many of Core's Mechs will be strong but rather immobile due to speeds, turnrates and limited possibilities for fire backwards while Arm is way more mobile on this sector...

But I might think of some more ways to add diversification although keeping both sides pretty similar (and as I don't wont to have some tactics being ARM / CORE only) is kind of an "OTA classic"... :wink:
Otherside wrote:and its mega spammy on most maps :/
That's kinda true at T1 and I'm thinking of reducing this a bit but there are many pros that emerge from this. I'll say all of them in the promised video but for now only so much: With minelayers being more broad available and together with the new Antispam Towers you have some tools to work against that. T1 also has changed in its role a bit. It now is a shorter period of the game than in other mods. It's mainly the start for leaping ahead to conquer some territory and the now more important metal spots. As for this what you call "spam" is somewhat helpful as you now don't have to push forward just at one point but now have to wage war at multiple fronts. You also can choose two tech trees to start with as the labs are rather cheap (and you're probably building 2-4 anyway). While the fronts harden then you'll probaly want to go to T2 relatively soon (what happens way faster in MA) for Adv. Buildings and a higher gain per invested ressources. So with that said T1 is just for the starting period as you'll start to switch over to T2 sooner than in other mods which also is a reason why you may actually see all three tech levels in a game while in BA the 3rd Tech Level is more or less there but only will be seen rarely ingame when not playing SpeedMetall or Green Fields...
User avatar
LordLemmi
Posts: 272
Joined: 13 Apr 2006, 20:17

Re: Maximum Annihilation V1.0

Post by LordLemmi »

:shock:
Great mod, i like the gameplay it´s very nice, and a great balancing ! :)
I love the new units you added ! :)
They make sense and are really usefull.
I hope the next version won´t take so long. xD
Come on people play it !!! :)
It´s fun ! :)
User avatar
overkill
Posts: 500
Joined: 02 Sep 2006, 01:15

Re: Maximum Annihilation V1.0

Post by overkill »

I like the tech tree changes and some of the new tactical/ strategical options. but FFS add some side differences. I hate games each of the side gets ALL of the smae things exept s couple of units. That is one of the reasons i dont like ba. (i wasnt a big fan of vanilla ota either)
[Krogoth86]
Posts: 1176
Joined: 23 Aug 2007, 19:46

Re: Maximum Annihilation V1.0

Post by [Krogoth86] »

LordLemmi wrote:Great mod, i like the gameplay it´s very nice, and a great balancing ! :)
I love the new units you added ! :)
They make sense and are really usefull.
Thank you! :-)
LordLemmi wrote:I hope the next version won´t take so long. xD
Well it won't take another half year that's for sure... :mrgreen:
I can't really give an ETA but expect it rather soon than late... :wink:
overkill wrote:I like the tech tree changes and some of the new tactical/ strategical options. but FFS add some side differences. I hate games each of the side gets ALL of the smae things exept s couple of units. That is one of the reasons i dont like ba. (i wasnt a big fan of vanilla ota either)
Hmmm - yeah I guess some factional differences won't hurt although I want to point out that this won't have influence on specific tactical options i.e. both sides will keep their Amphibic / All-Terrain Transports for example as imo things like that are very basic strategic options and so both side will have them. I also think that such changes won't happen at T1 because I think that the Warrior / Leveler and Banshee / Bladewing difference is enough for now. I might have some ideas for T2 but we'll see...
User avatar
1v0ry_k1ng
Posts: 4656
Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 10:24

Re: Maximum Annihilation V1.0

Post by 1v0ry_k1ng »

so, what letters are left?
SpikedHelmet
MC: Legacy & Spring 1944 Developer
Posts: 1948
Joined: 21 Sep 2004, 08:25

Re: Maximum Annihilation V1.0

Post by SpikedHelmet »

Not many.

This is yet another sad day for Spring.
[Krogoth86]
Posts: 1176
Joined: 23 Aug 2007, 19:46

Re: Maximum Annihilation V1.0

Post by [Krogoth86] »

It's ok if you don't like Total Annihilation and/or mods with this scenario but if you do why do you bother and click on topics like this here at all? Just ignore it because if you mind you automatically get annoyed, annoy those who (still) are interested in this and you spam this topic...

Thank you... :-)

BTT:
An AA bug was reported and I now can confirm that there is a bug with the Arm Phoenix which prevents it from being targeted. It's already fixed and will be in the next version which in the face of this bug and some corpses giving wrong metal amounts will be released pretty soon now. I'd suggest you look for it somewhen in the upcoming week as I want to work on some other things too before the next release... :-)
User avatar
rattle
Damned Developer
Posts: 8278
Joined: 01 Jun 2006, 13:15

Re: Maximum Annihilation V1.0

Post by rattle »

Because it's fun to bash the alphabet soup/stat tweaking mods.
Saktoth
Zero-K Developer
Posts: 2665
Joined: 28 Nov 2006, 13:22

Re: Maximum Annihilation V1.0

Post by Saktoth »

(leading to way higher gamespeed in lategame because of an immense decrease in nano particle numbers).
I hope this is not your primary motivation here as there are so many other ways to solve this problem, if its ever a problem. Of course, i know there are a lot of other reasons for a multi-fac model.
New Eco-System without buildtime being a ressource.
You've actually made buildtime harder to get, as labs are more expensive and have less competative bt/cost ratios than constructors or nanos do in other *A mods. It looks like you decreased buildtimes on most units (by about 40%?), so it would be interesting to see how that pans out on the whole. You have not removed buildtime as a resource, you just shifted to lab-centric buildtime for mobile units.

Note that one consequence of this is that the spare buildtime from constructors can only be used to make static defenses.
K-Bots now have a conquer&hold role as they all have a decent autoheal.
In practice, you'll find this makes them better for skirmishing and raiding, over 'take and hold'.
[Krogoth86]
Posts: 1176
Joined: 23 Aug 2007, 19:46

Re: Maximum Annihilation V1.0

Post by [Krogoth86] »

Saktoth wrote:I hope this is not your primary motivation here as there are so many other ways to solve this problem, if its ever a problem. Of course, i know there are a lot of other reasons for a multi-fac model.
Well not quite a primary motivation but improving the performance by not using any type of assisting nano-spraying (or a different kind of FX which is not so performance heavy) was one of the goals as I hated the very low speeds in bigger BA team games. Now I'm always amazed as how fast a Bantha for example really moves because I most of the time had experienced them as rather slow... :mrgreen:
Saktoth wrote:You've actually made buildtime harder to get, as labs are more expensive and have less competative bt/cost ratios than constructors or nanos do in other *A mods. It looks like you decreased buildtimes on most units (by about 40%?), so it would be interesting to see how that pans out on the whole. You have not removed buildtime as a resource, you just shifted to lab-centric buildtime for mobile units.
Well there was no %ual reduce in buildtime but it now calculates from the metal per second ratio a lab delivers. With that said there is no real value in % you can give for a decrease in general as the buildtime really was a 3rd ressource independent from metal and energy which let you need more or less time for spending specific ressource amounts. To give two examples:

Buildtime Bulldog
BA: 17228
MA: 4200
-> -75,6%

Buildtime Shiva:
BA: 30609
MA: 2880
-> - 90,6%

So I guess the buildtime actually is easier to get in MA. At least I don't know how many Nanos it would take to get that Shiva difference equaled and if 8 players do this I don't want to know about the performance... :wink:
Saktoth wrote:In practice, you'll find this makes them better for skirmishing and raiding, over 'take and hold'.
Well "autoheal" doesn't mean the same like the autoheal the Maverick has in BA. As I said - only after not being under attack for a short while (so pretty much the same every unit has but with a not so long delay and as said with a higher effect) they can heal themselves. So they don't take advantage of it when being in a battle. Well that's not entirely true. They now are very profitable if you micro them a bit like taking the damaged front guys to the back while advancing against an inferior enemy so you don't lose that unit. With that said you now have "taken" an enemy position and in a rather short time you will have gained full strength again and can "hold" the position against a counter attack which you might have lost if you wouldn't have had the regeneration possibility. That way K-Bots also make nice patrols on routes where they don't frequently pass a Nano of yours...
Andrej
Posts: 176
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 18:55

Re: Maximum Annihilation V1.0

Post by Andrej »

Q: What's the difference?
A: In contrast to its origin MA tries to extend and/or change the gameplay at various points to create more tactical possibilities and im
ange is that Samsons / Slashers now actually are AA-only -
anyone noticed how all the nub mods (tired A, BOTA, CA, whatever this one is named etc) make samsons worse
and how they all suck
i see connection
User avatar
LordLemmi
Posts: 272
Joined: 13 Apr 2006, 20:17

Re: Maximum Annihilation V1.0

Post by LordLemmi »

Andrej wrote:
Q: What's the difference?
A: In contrast to its origin MA tries to extend and/or change the gameplay at various points to create more tactical possibilities and im
ange is that Samsons / Slashers now actually are AA-only -
anyone noticed how all the nub mods (tired A, BOTA, CA, whatever this one is named etc) make samsons worse
and how they all suck
i see connection
Omg try the mod out, i hate the stupid people who say bad things first and never tested it ;)

When you used Samsons or Slashers to attack LLT´s or so, you can do the same with the lvl 1 kbot rocketartillery.....

It´s a great mod with much work and so many people are just shittin in this topic O.o that make me angry...

Don´t think i´m unfriendly or so but i know how much work this was and if you don´t want to try it out, fine, that should be your problem.
But why you post than(spam) in the topics of the mod Creators.....

I think this is one of the best balanced mods so far out! ;)

With that amount of new units.

so far,
LordLemmi.

If some admin dislike my comment plz delete the post thx! ;)
User avatar
Soulless1
Posts: 444
Joined: 07 Mar 2006, 03:29

Re: Maximum Annihilation V1.0

Post by Soulless1 »

Played it, loved it - nice one, I hope to see some more games around once people notice the mod :)

Love what you've done with the buildtimes, I hadn't realised how bad they are on some mods till I played this. Not that faster is always better of course, but it really was a breath of fresh air to be able to tell a unit to build a few things at level 2 or 3, and come back a couple of minutes later to actually find it had got something done!

I'm sure there's room for improvement of course, but it's a good start 8)
User avatar
Fanger
Expand & Exterminate Developer
Posts: 1509
Joined: 22 Nov 2005, 22:58

Re: Maximum Annihilation V1.0

Post by Fanger »

Look Im not trying to knock this mod, or anything like that.. but why was this made, and why does it not use BA's title. If this is the "successor" to BA, which was the "successor" to AA.. can we stop making up new names.. could we just stick with the original name..

DAMN YOU CAYDR..

Didnt tired say his mod was the "successor" to BA.. when did BA stop being developed..

WTF is with this shit...
Saktoth
Zero-K Developer
Posts: 2665
Joined: 28 Nov 2006, 13:22

Re: Maximum Annihilation V1.0

Post by Saktoth »

Yes fang, he should not have said that and should remove that comment.

Its just a fork of BA, same as TiA, SA or CA. Noize and Day probably dont even know about this let alone support it. Perhaps you should allow people to make forks of EE, then maybe they would and we wouldnt have nothing but OTA mods? ATM, OTA is the only thing out there for a player who wants to make a mod but dont know how to make units- it even has a bunch of third party content, like MA is using.

As for idleautoheal- yes i understood this, comment still stands.

As for BT as a resource, what you mean is all resources are standardized, which is a good step, and SA and TiA did it AFAIR and we've tried to do it with CA as well (and are still trying to, but to preserve some current ratios up to a point which takes a lot of poring over data and finding good averages).

But, BT is still a resource in MA.
Ill take a plant making stumpies as an example here, and compare with CA (which has rates pretty close to BA).

In CA, a stumpy costs 200 metal and 3000 bt, thats 15 build time for 1 metal.
In MA, it costs 100 metal and 2000 bt, thats 20 build time for 1 metal.

In his case, the m/bt ratio is actually worse, and unless you've changed the metal extraction rate the metal consumption will be slower. Yes the stumpy is cheaper but your resource consumption remains the same (you just end up with twice the units).

As for the cost of workertime itself, the only way to get workertime in MA is from plants.

The cost for one unit of workertime from the t1 Vehicle Plant is 3.75 metal. The plant has 100.
The cost of one unit of workertime from a nanotower in CA is 0.985. A nanotower has 200 buildpower. Buildtime is almost 4x cheaper in CA.
For a vehicle constructor, the cost is 1.44. Still a lot cheaper assisting with vechcons than making a new factory in MA.

Yes, your plants are a lot cheaper, so there is a much higher initial overhead in CA of getting the factory up. But subsequent expansion of the economy through assist is more fluid and is cheaper.

Anyway, i hope you see from all this that buildpower is still a relevant resource even with a fac based system. Im not against fac-based systems, its good for decentralization of bases (with nanotowers, people tend to stack their whole base around this little block of nanos) and other things. And i know that as you get higher up the scale (t3 etc) your buildtimes become much, much smaller (In the case of the Shiva, 1/10th of the rate on CA).
User avatar
Fanger
Expand & Exterminate Developer
Posts: 1509
Joined: 22 Nov 2005, 22:58

Re: Maximum Annihilation V1.0

Post by Fanger »

I dont want people to fork EE, because that would be even more of a waste than a fork of TA, irregardless of what this mod offers, I highly doubt it will get more than few games in during a week if even and thusly I again dont see the point..
Desinity
Posts: 4
Joined: 24 Mar 2008, 05:02

Re: Maximum Annihilation V1.0

Post by Desinity »

I looked a game between an AAI-Arm and AAI-Core and noticed that the Decoy Coms explode,if killed the same way as the real Com (this explosion is anyway much bigger than in BA). Don't think that this was supposed or am I wrong? (would give in combination with airtransport cheap and dangerous bombs...)

I get the message "Command canceled - two unit can't guard each other" so it seems that combat units can't guard other combat units

the adv. windgenerator are to big as that the would be useful...

the energieproduction from light fusion should be lower (or it should be more expensive) at the moment it cost 500 metal und and produce 500 energie and the normal fusion cost 1250 metal und produce only 1000 energie

Behemoth has same firerate in low and high traj. (shouldn't it be slower in high traj.?)

And why has KrogTaar in the fps-mode beside Heavy Riot Cannon and PewPew a point that called "NoWeapon: Aiming"?
and he has a D-Gun button too,thats work like the normal attack button (both things are unnecessary)
[Krogoth86]
Posts: 1176
Joined: 23 Aug 2007, 19:46

Re: Maximum Annihilation V1.0

Post by [Krogoth86] »

Fanger wrote:Look Im not trying to knock this mod, or anything like that.. but why was this made, and why does it not use BA's title. If this is the "successor" to BA, which was the "successor" to AA.. can we stop making up new names.. could we just stick with the original name..
Saktoth wrote:Yes fang, he should not have said that and should remove that comment.
Well first of all I said "what you may call the inofficial successor to BA"! So not "this is" but "you may call"! Why did I say so? Well this mod has BA as basis and at many points there still are rather original BA unit stats but on the other hand many things changed and many many things were added. So imo if you want to give a very short initial description of the mod you on the one side have to name BA as it is its basis and in order to give credit to it and on the other side you have to make clear that it actually did something BA won't see and that are numerous changes and additions meant to improve it. What else is this then a successor - an inofficial of course?!

The proposal to keep "BA" in its name is a very bad idea. Apart from the fact that there is very little left of BA when you compare gameplay 1:1 what makes this a no-go I strongly believe you'd probably also be upset if I would have called Balanced Annihilation Plus or something like that because now there starts the whining "Buhu - I joined a BA game and only noticed after the start that it was "BA Plus"!". Choosing a different "non-Annihilation" name will make people whining that you cannot identify this as a TA mod on first sight - so what options are left especially when looking at the standard that the naming got as there are mods like XTA, AA, BA, NOTA and even the not so TA CA which still chose this naming although moving away from many 0815 OTA concepts is the way to go?

Although if this is the only concern you have towards this mod I can be quite happy with its outcome I guess... :-)
Saktoth wrote:But, BT is still a resource in MA.
Saktoth wrote:Anyway, i hope you see from all this that buildpower is still a relevant resource even with a fac based system.
Well I don't see any point in your argumentation showing that buildtime is a ressource in MA - you just said something about buildtime per metal (and that's no ressource but a design decision). Having no buildtime as ressource means that there is no difference in how much time you have to spend per needed ressources (which decreases for the labs with increasing tech level)...

Concerning your buildtime/costs calculations - ok it appears you get Lab buildtime cheaper in CA than in MA. But I think that's not too bad as you have some pros with the mobile fac system because of which you have to apply some penalties when comparing 1:1 with the rather static assistance model... :-)

Although you just made me thinking of making Labs cheaper... :mrgreen:
Desinity wrote:I looked a game between an AAI-Arm and AAI-Core and noticed that the Decoy Coms explode,if killed the same way as the real Com (this explosion is anyway much bigger than in BA). Don't think that this was supposed or am I wrong? (would give in combination with airtransport cheap and dangerous bombs...)
You have just noticed a change on the Decoy Commanders which make them way more worthy than in BA for example. In those mods you could immediately see if you killed a Decoy Com or not. In MA the Decoy Commander now also has a "Decoy Explosion" which creates the very same smoke'n'stuff but its damage is - don't know would have to look it up - like 100? So although it's just a weak explosion its FX in many times will be enough to make your enemy scroll away with the satisfied feeling he finally got your com. He might be surprised when his beloved Mechs get D-Gunned in his follow up attack... :mrgreen:
Desinity wrote:I get the message "Command canceled - two unit can't guard each other" so it seems that combat units can't guard other combat units
That's a standard command if one of your selected units already gets guarded by the one you select. So go ahead an select the unit you want to guard too and give a stop command to apply the guard command afterwards (because even if you have only one unit with this guarding each other situation will prevent the guard order being applied for all the units you have selected)...
Desinity wrote:the adv. windgenerator are to big as that the would be useful...
Actually the size is its whole point. Compared to the standard windmills you get way more energy output per invested ressources. As its the same tech level it has to have some compensations and that would be the in comparison little HP and of course its size which makes it space consuming and more difficult to defend...
Desinity wrote:the energieproduction from light fusion should be lower (or it should be more expensive) at the moment it cost 500 metal und and produce 500 energie and the normal fusion cost 1250 metal und produce only 1000 energie
:shock:
Oh wow - you're right. It said 900m in my design doc but for some reason I put 500 to it. Thank you! :-)
Desinity wrote:Behemoth has same firerate in low and high traj. (shouldn't it be slower in high traj.?)
I thought about that but didn't do it for two reasons:

1.)
In contrast to Guardian, Ambusher & Co the weapon does not get stronger when firing in High Traj.

2.)
The accuracy really gets bad due to the longer flight time so no need to make it even worse.
Desinity wrote:And why has KrogTaar in the fps-mode beside Heavy Riot Cannon and PewPew a point that called "NoWeapon: Aiming"?
and he has a D-Gun button too,thats work like the normal attack button (both things are unnecessary)
Yeah, I didn't notice the D-Gun button yet. Thanks for reporting..

The "noweapon" point comes in as the cannons are on weapon slot1 and the laser is on weapon slot3 and ingame there is an empty no-weapon-slot added on position 2. Just a very minor disfigurement but I'll go ahead and fix it (although it probably isn't the only unit with that)... :-)
Last edited by [Krogoth86] on 24 Mar 2008, 13:00, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply

Return to “Game Releases”