Spring RTS Engine

QMan wrote:As to the maxSlope thing, here's the code that pulls the maxslope from the unit file:

Code: Select all

tdfparser.GetDef(ud.maxSlope, "0", "UNITINFO\\MaxSlope");
...
ud.maxSlope = cos(ud.maxSlope*(PI/180));

That looks like it expects degrees to me. :)

however i have the feeling that only the info in the moveinfo.tdf is being used. Although i never fully tested it.

Noize is correct - it's only the movement classes, unless the movement class doesn't specify the slopetolerance

The main problems right now with T3 are as follows:

1. Buildtimes are too long. It takes way too long to make anything but Banthas or Krogoths. You're basically forced to make a giant field of nanoturrets if you want to use Kargs or Catapults or Razorbacks right now.

2. T3 units are too slow. They're giant mechs, they should move faster. It takes a Krog ages to cross a map, which is why people are so unhappy about T2 transports not being able to pick up T3 anymore.

3. They cost too much. A Jugg is like a third or half the cost of a Krogoth, and two or three Juggs definitely aren't as useful as one Krogoth. Juggernauts move way too slow and don't do enough damage to be useful. They also have an overly long buildtime.

T3 should be transportable. Who cares if it looks funny with big robot hanging in air, it ads A LOT to gameplay. T3 is horribly underused atm anyway. This made it worse. Transporting T3 is risky but well awarded when u get bantha behind enemy lines.

Revert this plz. Other changes feel fine.

IMO, everything except Krogoth should be transportable.

Krog is like 5x the size fo the transport, and in relation to scale.. at least the other mechs below Krogoth look the size of something that could be transported.

Krog is OP anyway, so that should be 1 place that Core should suffer.

Something I find a little odd is the Core Storm vs Arm Rocko comparison.

Both have the same range, same weapon/DPS.
The Core Storm costs 85/879 vs. 97/944 but has 670 hp vs 650 hp.
Both aim at essentially the same speed.

The Arm Rocko is marginally faster. (ArmRocko: 1.74, CoreStorm: 1.65)

If the logic is that you pay for movementspeed, then alright. Someone more experienced than me judging this is perfectly acceptable, as long as it is judged to be correct and not simply an artifact of the past or just random.

It just seems odd that the Core bot would have higher hp (negligible, really) and lower cost (8:9, roughly). To me, at least, it would just make sense to have the Core rocket bot cost more, have notably more hp, and be somewhat slower in fitting with Core Tradition.[/i]

Uberleechen wrote:Something I find a little odd is the Core Storm vs Arm Rocko comparison.

Both have the same range, same weapon/DPS.
The Core Storm costs 85/879 vs. 97/944 but has 670 hp vs 650 hp.
Both aim at essentially the same speed.

The Arm Rocko is marginally faster. (ArmRocko: 1.74, CoreStorm: 1.65)

If the logic is that you pay for movementspeed, then alright. Someone more experienced than me judging this is perfectly acceptable, as long as it is judged to be correct and not simply an artifact of the past or just random.

It just seems odd that the Core bot would have higher hp (negligible, really) and lower cost (8:9, roughly). To me, at least, it would just make sense to have the Core rocket bot cost more, have notably more hp, and be somewhat slower in fitting with Core Tradition.[/i]

I've looked at this some time ago and also was about to say something, but in the end does it really matter? Yes core has an advantage in this respect, but arm has an advantage in other units e.g (from the top of my head) stumpy/raider balance. With so many similar units, the arm/core balance probably equals itself out.

Rocko is better than Storm imo. And the extra move speed does make a difference in micro, all be it a small difference. (dodge rockets more often due to quicker speed, chase comms etc)

For some reason i remember the rocko having a marginally higher DPS than storm, and always knew storms had more hp. Dunno if it's been changed or if I am just imagining things.

Rocko and Storm uses same weapon, so no, they dont have different DPS.

Im not really happy when i hear that rocko is faster than storm. Speed is never balancing solution for anything... its just not fair when your rockos can retreat, and my storms cant.

Where the Dragon's teeth changed? Played a game of BA last night with a friend, and we both (as Arm) had enemy units slipping through the DTs.

It seemed as if gaps were bigger than usual, and we had to go two rows deep to cut any ground troops off.

with regards to the rocko/storm thing, if you look you will noticed that hammers are bit better to spam than thuds, though thuds still have a bit more health (about 10% more),while hammers cost about 21% less metal. Arm effectively gets more firepower (becasue the number of actual units will be higher) and they are slightly faster and almost as durable.

Hammer:
M:121
Health:810
Speed:1.54

Thud:
M:147
Health:900
Speed: 1.5

But in the end these kind of differences are really insignificant and just add a little flavor to play.

well, 21% is actually much. If you build 100 units, other side can build 121 units instead of just 100. That is 2600 less metal used with that cheaper unit..

MasterChiefRulZ wrote:Where the Dragon's teeth changed? Played a game of BA last night with a friend, and we both (as Arm) had enemy units slipping through the DTs.

It seemed as if gaps were bigger than usual, and we had to go two rows deep to cut any ground troops off.

Really?

The new DT´s should prevent that..... (only ARM for new DT)

can you upload the replay?

TradeMark wrote:well, 21% is actually much. If you build 100 units, other side can build 121 units instead of just 100. That is 2600 less metal used with that cheaper unit..

exactly, but this contrats well with people saying the storm was better/cheaper than the rocko.

Arm hammer is better than core thud
core storm is better than arm rocko (according to some)

Since there are small diferences between all units in the game its natural that
one of the 2 teams may have this one or that one better and its also natural that one of the teams is better. (Core! )

NOiZE wrote:

MasterChiefRulZ wrote:Where the Dragon's teeth changed? Played a game of BA last night with a friend, and we both (as Arm) had enemy units slipping through the DTs.

It seemed as if gaps were bigger than usual, and we had to go two rows deep to cut any ground troops off.

Really?

The new DT´s should prevent that..... (only ARM for new DT)

can you upload the replay?

Demo would be at my friend's house, don't know if he still has it. The gaps look pretty big though. You can go ingame real quick and just lay a straight line of DTs, and you'll notice even though the exo-skeletons (when you cue them up) are side by side, when they are lathed they are spaced apart.

Apart from that, I disconnected late ingame, but I think that's a Spring (not a BA) issue.

May I suggest, if it's possible, to add Airborne Mass troop carriers to BA? I detest having to do airborne troop drops one at a time per one troop carrier. Could unit makers create a "Flying Hovercraft" or something?

I recently noticed that the Nuke launchers became cheaper a few iterations ago. Scince then, i build them in every game, which makes gameplay just a little bit more dull than before, dont you think ?

The "find the anti-nuke-bomb-it-and-win" game is entertainig for a while. Sadly, if we want to prevent nukes having to be disabled before the start of every game, we should double the cost for a nuke launcher, and also double the time it takes to build one.

They are too easy to obtain and ruin most games when you could have faught decent land or air battles instead.

Andreask wrote:I recently noticed that the Nuke launchers became cheaper a few iterations ago. Scince then, i build them in every game, which makes gameplay just a little bit more dull than before, dont you think ?

The "find the anti-nuke-bomb-it-and-win" game is entertainig for a while. Sadly, if we want to prevent nukes having to be disabled before the start of every game, we should double the cost for a nuke launcher, and also double the time it takes to build one.

They are too easy to obtain and ruin most games when you could have faught decent land or air battles instead.

1. im not sure wtf you are talkinga bout

2. anti nukes are so much cheaper than regular nukes

Do not rely on one antinuke IMO.

nukes are fine. They are somtimes the only way to kill porcers.

wanna good anitnuke defense? Get 3 mobile antinukes, move them around and noone can touch em (they are not ghosted and they move - some say, they dont allways fire though )