Absolute Annihilation 2.23 - Page 44

Absolute Annihilation 2.23

All game release threads should be posted here

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Caydr
Omnidouche
Posts: 7179
Joined: 16 Oct 2004, 19:40

Post by Caydr »

http://www.caydr.com/

Whuddya think?
User avatar
Min3mat
Posts: 3455
Joined: 17 Nov 2004, 20:19

Post by Min3mat »

swwweeeeeeeeeeet.
Don't you worry your little head bout the unit guide though get some noob grunts or something to do it and do some GEM! :D
Helix
Posts: 24
Joined: 25 Aug 2006, 23:54

Post by Helix »

Caydr wrote:Does anyone have the slightest idea why that happens?
no idea, but that doesn't happen if they are units and not building. and single pads seem to be more "stable" ( at least they don't move around >.> )
User avatar
Caydr
Omnidouche
Posts: 7179
Joined: 16 Oct 2004, 19:40

Post by Caydr »

My head not little, my head big. Like football.
hawkki
Posts: 222
Joined: 01 Jan 2006, 19:47

Post by hawkki »

im really looking forward to the day you finish those models and we can have a mod with units fitting todays requirements.
Lippy
Posts: 327
Joined: 16 Jul 2006, 00:24

Post by Lippy »

Caydr wrote:http://www.caydr.com/

Whuddya think?
Nice!
Latest version is 2.24? Since when?? :p

I also like it how u say you've renamed it to abolition, but then carry on using AA later. :-)

BTW, you say you are replacing it with the tech trees with original content.... Do you mean completely original units or....?
User avatar
1v0ry_k1ng
Posts: 4656
Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 10:24

Post by 1v0ry_k1ng »

if you remove the peewee the world will fall into darkness and sauron will find the ring1
raneti
Posts: 148
Joined: 21 Sep 2006, 00:12

Post by raneti »

When i reclaim something of my own i want the E too not just the M(i dont' mean wrecks). It used to be that way in TA.
Arco
Posts: 75
Joined: 17 Jun 2006, 16:28

Post by Arco »

raneti wrote:When i reclaim something of my own i want the E too not just the M(i dont' mean wrecks). It used to be that way in TA.
I mostly notice this when I cancel a unit in a factory (the M is refunded but not the E), but there's nothing "wrong" with the way it's done now. It implies a greater difference between metal and energy--you pretty much always lose the energy you use, but you can generate energy more easily. Metal is harder to get in the first place, but easier to recover. It's just another way of differentiating metal from energy, even on metal maps. In OTA-style gameplay, there was very little functional difference between energy and metal. (Non-building activities sometimes, but not always, required energy, and that's about it.)

With the further differentiation we have, you can allow for such things as metal-eating weapons without losing a functional distinction between energy and metal.
User avatar
LordMatt
Posts: 3393
Joined: 15 May 2005, 04:26

Post by LordMatt »

Energy was always lost forever in OTA.
tombom
Posts: 1933
Joined: 18 Dec 2005, 20:21

Post by tombom »

The term abolition makes no sense in terms of blowing things up.
Wikipedia wrote: Abolition is the act of formally repealing an existing practice through legal means, either by making it illegal, or simply no longer allowing it to exist in any form.
answers.com dictionary wrote: ab├é┬Ào├é┬Àli├é┬Àtion (ăb'ə-lĭsh'ən) pronunciation
n.
1. The act of doing away with or the state of being done away with; annulment.
2. Abolishment of slavery.
I can't think of any better ideas at the moment though.
User avatar
Foxomaniac
Posts: 691
Joined: 18 Jan 2006, 16:59

Post by Foxomaniac »

Pssst - Unit guide.

Technichal Unit Guide - Someone's going to be pissed if you ignore it completely.

Just gimme dem templates if you ever whoop any and I'll gladly maintain that.

>_>.
User avatar
Caydr
Omnidouche
Posts: 7179
Joined: 16 Oct 2004, 19:40

Post by Caydr »

Abolish. Abolitition. To abolish.
doing away with
User avatar
LordMatt
Posts: 3393
Joined: 15 May 2005, 04:26

Post by LordMatt »

Last night I won a game on Painted Desert, without building a single radar! For those who are familar with this map in OTA, that is insane--you would never do that. Currently in AA, however, to takes enough micro time place radars on the map and check that you have proper coverage that it is more worthwhile to use a lot of scouts instead. Please, Please, Please, revert radar back to OTA stats. If you need to increase advanced radar range and cost to compensate, do that.

Also, AA played at a high level has gone from gator spam to flash spam. Maybe both of these units need some kind of nerf so that other vehicles need to be built as well?
User avatar
Peekaboom
Posts: 94
Joined: 09 Mar 2006, 03:54

Post by Peekaboom »

To quite myself :
I really feel like there are too many rediculous anti-air units in the game. Personally, I think the best defense against bombers/gunships SHOULD be air-2-air fighters or stealth fighters. Gone are the days of using planes to guard your attack forces, since there are now adv. missile kbots (rediculously good), impossible to kill Flak trucks, and the AA ships are insane.

I just think that AA defenses should be generally weak to fend off lvl1 planes early on, and let the static flak guns handle point defense of critical sites. Plane patrols should constitute the major air defense.

In OTA (not that this is OTA) you needed both flak AND fighters to effectively protect you from an air raid of ANY size. Now, a few units smattered around the map effectively takes air out of the mid-game.
Better AA fighters, less static defenses, and a boost to the gunships is needed IMO
User avatar
Min3mat
Posts: 3455
Joined: 17 Nov 2004, 20:19

Post by Min3mat »

Also, AA played at a high level has gone from gator spam to flash spam. Maybe both of these units need some kind of nerf so that other vehicles need to be built as well?
I tried to bring this up and had quite a good discussion on whether they should be like cavalry. Got bogged down with the noobs saying things though. This post is a good example of such moronity :( i just want to discuss flash/gator balance ;.; is it so much to ask!!!
User avatar
LordMatt
Posts: 3393
Joined: 15 May 2005, 04:26

Post by LordMatt »

My post Min3mat? :shock:
User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Post by Pxtl »

Min3mat wrote:
Also, AA played at a high level has gone from gator spam to flash spam. Maybe both of these units need some kind of nerf so that other vehicles need to be built as well?
I tried to bring this up and had quite a good discussion on whether they should be like cavalry. Got bogged down with the noobs saying things though. This post is a good example of such moronity :( i just want to discuss flash/gator balance ;.; is it so much to ask!!!
Really, they should both be weak units. The heavy tanks should be the assault units - these are the "fast attack" vehicles that are used to probe for weak spots, explore, and punch in - in short, they should be left to maps where there are very wide, lightly defended borders to raid - you should rarely ever see them on chokepoint maps. Compare how much late-game usage you see from the Peewees/AKs - peewees are for quick demolitions, and AKs are the Core Zipper. Not mainstream combat units. Meanwhile, in vehicles, the Gator/Flash are the de-facto mainline combat vehicles, to the diminishment of other tank units - especially now that impact has been diminished that let you just scatter these light units to the wind.
User avatar
Snipawolf
Posts: 4357
Joined: 12 Dec 2005, 01:49

Post by Snipawolf »

From what I have played with, I think both should support a ~25% health decrease, to enforce the fact they are supposed to be light raiders and scouts..
User avatar
Caydr
Omnidouche
Posts: 7179
Joined: 16 Oct 2004, 19:40

Post by Caydr »

I'll give them a 10% reduction to start with, 25% would be too big of a jump.
Last edited by Caydr on 30 Oct 2006, 04:16, edited 2 times in total.
Post Reply

Return to “Game Releases”