Absolute Annihilation 2.11

KlavoHunter · Post by **KlavoHunter** » 01 Jul 2006, 00:36

NOiZE wrote:
Caydr wrote:
NOiZE wrote:I think it would be good if all Tech 1 builders could build torpedo launchers, so that getting back to the water becomes a bit easier.
They're called depth charge launchers... they have a longer range than torpedo launchers, decent DPS, and cannot be attacked by subs in any way. Also great for defending against amphibious landings. Plus you have the added option of building guardians for ship defense
Fair enough.

How about a LLT or something on the shipyards, so skeeter rush becomes a bit less dominating?

I have absolutely no clue why my rebuttal to this idea has disappeared.

FuzionMonkey · Post by **FuzionMonkey** » 01 Jul 2006, 00:36

comm should be given torpedoes.

Pxtl · Post by **Pxtl** » 01 Jul 2006, 00:40

el_matarife wrote:Can the combat engineer units build nuke mines? Ideally they'd work great on the Consul and Freaker. I dunno anyone who'd be crazy enough to use a nuke mine at T1 anyway, they seem to be useful for countering swarms of T2 or T1 units, and maybe T3 stuff too, but 500 metal is way more than you'd want to spend on one risky play at T1 when you probably aren't at more than 10-15 metal anyway.

Also, can you upload 2.11's unit stats? The ones on your Sourceforge and PlanetAnnihilation page are still at 1.46 making it sort of hard to make arguments about costs, specific damages, and other things for 2.12 if we've gone through so many versions since then. Especially if balancing the 2.11 level 3 changes is the main point for 2.12. None of us will really be able to talk about what's been done specifically without a guide. I'd generate one myself, but no PHP on this box. Maybe I'll try to go "borrow" my younger brother's laptop I installed PHP on for his WoW guild's DKP stuff.

Caydr lost his template that he used to make the 1.46 unit guide, so somebody else is probably gonna have to do it.

And imho, the build list of the Consul/Freaker could use some work - does anybody ever use the T1 mobile units they can build?

el_matarife · Post by **el_matarife** » 01 Jul 2006, 00:57

Pxtl wrote: Caydr lost his template that he used to make the 1.46 unit guide, so somebody else is probably gonna have to do it.

And imho, the build list of the Consul/Freaker could use some work - does anybody ever use the T1 mobile units they can build?

Oh, that explains why there hasn't been any new guides in a while. Did he lose it in that hard drive crash? I didn't know he lost that too. Is there a default template in ModWeb?

Meanwhile, yeah, the Consul/Freakers build list is weird. They can't build some really useful T1 defenses like HLTs or LLTs or anti-bomber turrets, but can build beamers/HLLTs and some even heavier T2 defenses like vipers/pitbulls and other stuff like T1 units. I'd personally take them being able to build HLTs over the beamer/HLLT since the beamer really isn't that useful in a lot of situations I think. Also, the consul should probably be able to climb slopes like the amphib cons if you want to make it as useful as the Freaker since their nano speeds are the same and their HP and metal/energy costs are mostly the same too.

Finally, has anyone else noticed the Prude safe geothermal plant doesn't seem to have any energy storage? In fact, the stats we have list it as -700 energy storage.

Edit: I just checked armgmm.fbi look what I found

Code: Select all

Name=Prude;
UnitName=ARMGMM;
//    Resources
EnergyMake=0;
EnergyStorage=0;
EnergyUse=-750;
MakesMetal=0;
MetalStorage=0;

krogothe · Post by **krogothe** » 01 Jul 2006, 01:17

el_matarife wrote:
Pxtl wrote: Caydr lost his template that he used to make the 1.46 unit guide, so somebody else is probably gonna have to do it.

And imho, the build list of the Consul/Freaker could use some work - does anybody ever use the T1 mobile units they can build?
Oh, that explains why there hasn't been any new guides in a while. Did he lose it in that hard drive crash? I didn't know he lost that too. Is there a default template in ModWeb?

Meanwhile, yeah, the Consul/Freakers build list is weird. They can't build some really useful T1 defenses like HLTs or LLTs or anti-bomber turrets, but can build beamers/HLLTs and some even heavier T2 defenses like vipers/pitbulls and other stuff like T1 units. I'd personally take them being able to build HLTs over the beamer/HLLT since the beamer really isn't that useful in a lot of situations I think. Also, the consul should probably be able to climb slopes like the amphib cons if you want to make it as useful as the Freaker since their nano speeds are the same and their HP and metal/energy costs are mostly the same too.

Finally, has anyone else noticed the Prude safe geothermal plant doesn't seem to have any energy storage? In fact, the stats we have list it as -700 energy storage.

Edit: I just checked armgmm.fbi look what I found
Code: Select all
Name=Prude;
UnitName=ARMGMM;
//    Resources
EnergyMake=0;
EnergyStorage=0;
EnergyUse=-750;
MakesMetal=0;
MetalStorage=0;

noob. x2.

Min3mat · Post by **Min3mat** » 01 Jul 2006, 02:09

lol
what krogoth means is...energy use is the ... um ENERGY that is USED :D
not the ENERGY that is STORED
a NEGATIVE energy USE means it GIVES energy.
:)
(nEneeeeeeneeeeeebbebbbebbbbbb)

Caydr · Post by **Caydr** » 01 Jul 2006, 02:20

I guess I'll rebuild my template, but it was a lot of work to make the first one. As I said earlier, it'll probably be done in time for 2.12 or something...

esteroth12 · Post by **esteroth12** » 01 Jul 2006, 02:22

i think he is talkin about the fact that it has no E storage (right? agree with me!

)

personally I don't care, because I typically build mohos, and prudes arent very common anyway

Pxtl · Post by **Pxtl** » 01 Jul 2006, 02:25

Wait, you want to build HLTs instead of Bulldogs/Vipers? Why? And the HLLT is quite useful anti-horde - a Viper will have a problem with 20 zippers, while a line of HLLTs will rip them to shreds.

I was just more curious about the AK and the raider in the build list. Anybody ever make those instead of Pyros and Cans?

el_matarife · Post by **el_matarife** » 01 Jul 2006, 02:32

By current stats, I meant http://aa.planetannihilation.gamespy.co ... rmgmm.html That lists the prude as having -750 energy use and no storage. I was referring to what I had seen in one game several versions back that the prude had no storage. The stats from the FBI were posted because it said it had no storage. I'd think the prude should get at least some energy storage as all the rest of the geo plants have storage. Anyway, I did two ingame tests on Alt Divide with the nocost cheat and an empty ai. I built two prudes and a moho geo, neither of the prudes seemed to generate energy. The moho geo and advanced fusion I built worked. Whether this means they're broken or not I don't know. Also, this is the code for the other geo plants:

Code: Select all

	Name=Geothermal Powerplant;
	UnitName=ARMGEO;
//    Resources
	EnergyMake=350;
	EnergyStorage=1000;
	EnergyUse=0;
	MetalStorage=0;

Code: Select all

Name=Moho Geothermal Powerplant;
	UnitName=AMGEO;
//    Resources
	EnergyMake=1500;
	EnergyStorage=2500;
	EnergyUse=0;
	MetalStorage=0;

Code: Select all

Name=Geothermal Powerplant;
	UnitName=CORGEO;
	//    Resources
	EnergyMake=250;
	EnergyStorage=1000;
	EnergyUse=0;
	MetalStorage=0;

Code: Select all

Name=Moho Geothermal Powerplant;
	UnitName=CMGEO;
	//    Resources
	EnergyMake=1000;
	EnergyStorage=2500;
	EnergyUse=0;
	MetalStorage=0;

I checked all the others before I made that post so I could be sure that it did not infact have storage, and that also the -750 energy did not seem to be like what the others were set to, since that also was reflected on the 1.46 mod web entries.

esteroth12 · Post by **esteroth12** » 01 Jul 2006, 02:37

yeah, why does the prude use a negative cost while every other geo uses energymake? (just curious)

Caydr · Post by **Caydr** » 01 Jul 2006, 02:39

Just tested them. They work fine. Using .nocost removes their energy output since the engine reads it as an energy drain.

The other ones use energymake because they were not at one time a structure that armors itself when attacked. Prude was though. It's just a trick of the onoff states and whatnot... I think solars use this too, but I'm usually wrong.

I could easily switch it to the "standard" method, but meh. If you're playing .nocost, you don't need the energy income

el_matarife · Post by **el_matarife** » 01 Jul 2006, 02:45

Pxtl wrote:Wait, you want to build HLTs instead of Bulldogs/Vipers? Why? And the HLLT is quite useful anti-horde - a Viper will have a problem with 20 zippers, while a line of HLLTs will rip them to shreds.

I was referring to wanting HLTs instead of beamers or HLLTs since beamers aren't quite as versatile as HLTs. Yeah, the HLLT is pretty all around useful since it's basically two LLTs in a small package with more heath, but the beamer seems to be more of a niche defense that's good against either small numbers of high hp slow units, or large numbers of low hp fast units. I was also trying to say that it was weird that the tier 2 popup gauss and rockets were there, as well as some tier 1 defenses like the beamer/HLLT and anti-swarm stuff, but the HLT was not there which is usually the T1 defense people build the most. So, if we had to trade units for the combat engineers, I'd trade the beamer/HLLTs for the HLTs since I'd probably use the HLT more at that stage.

Pxtl · Post by **Pxtl** » 01 Jul 2006, 02:45

esteroth12 wrote:yeah, why does the prude use a negative cost while every other geo uses energymake? (just curious)

Maybe they're based on solar code? Solars also have negative energy.... perhaps they're based on solar code? I never built one - do they open/close when damaged?

Quick thought on making them better: combat autoregen and a beefy built-in nanolathe tower. That'd make them more useful in a front line, similar to the Core special-geotherm.

el_matarife · Post by **el_matarife** » 01 Jul 2006, 02:50

Caydr wrote:Just tested them. They work fine. Using .nocost removes their energy output since the engine reads it as an energy drain.

The other ones use energymake because they were not at one time a structure that armors itself when attacked. Prude was though. It's just a trick of the onoff states and whatnot... I think solars use this too, but I'm usually wrong.

I could easily switch it to the "standard" method, but meh. If you're playing .nocost, you don't need the energy income

Mea culpa about suggesting it might have been broken. I tested a couple different energy buildings and so I assumed they'd all behave the same way in no cost mode. Still, I was testing to see if they had energy storage or not when I ran into all that weirdness, which they definately do not have.

Caydr · Post by **Caydr** » 01 Jul 2006, 03:03

Lacking energy storage is an oversight, I'll make a note to fix it.

Min3mat · Post by **Min3mat** » 01 Jul 2006, 03:13

but the beamer seems to be more of a niche defense that's good against either small numbers of high hp slow units, or large numbers of low hp fast units

but the beamer seems to be more of a niche defense that's good against BOTH small numbers of high hp slow units AND large numbers of low hp units...YEAH ITS REALLY SPECIFIC TBH, ONLY WORKS AGAINST MOST UNITS, I MEAN SHOULDN'T IT LIEK HAVE TEH AA CANNONZ??? ;.;

el_matarife · Post by **el_matarife** » 01 Jul 2006, 03:52

YEAH ITS REALLY SPECIFIC TBH, ONLY WORKS AGAINST MOST UNITS, I MEAN SHOULDN'T IT LIEK HAVE TEH AA CANNONZ???

Not what I'm saying. I'm saying I find the HLLT seems to be much better T1 overall antiswarm unit since it does pretty well vs thuds and rockos, and the beamer does do well in a few situations but it does die pretty easy to even 5 or so T1 kbots and not kill that many before it goes compared to the HLLT. The only swarms it seems to do great against on are the really fast attack low HP stuff like Pewees/Aks and Flashes/Instigators, and of course fleas. I've never really found that much of a use for it since I prefer the LLT for early defense then getting up an HLT. I find the HLLT more useful and use it more than I do the beamer. Your milage might vary. And anway, I'm not trying to say the HLLT and Beamer are unbalanced vs each other or anything, just that's they're not as good as the HLT and I think the ability to build an HLT would be way more useful on T2 units designed to build a lot of defensive structures and units.

Caydr · Post by **Caydr** » 01 Jul 2006, 05:16

Instead of LLT, HLLT and Beamer. Instead of HLT, Viper and Pitbull. Instead of missile turret, flak gun. Makes sense to me.

MR.D · Post by **MR.D** » 01 Jul 2006, 05:48

What would happen if the Beamer had a very small Impulse factor at the impact point? That would slow down the approaching units a little if done right, and would counter the firepower of the HLLT better for an antiswarm.

In my experience "as is" the beamer is no more usefull than a LLT with the small exception of a little more HP which a couple dragons's teeth will easily provide, the beamer still needs something to be a viable option.

In effect it could be a very primitive repulsion weapon at the same time dishing out a steady stream of damage, you guys think might be worth concidering?

Spring RTS Engine

Absolute Annihilation 2.11