Balanced Annihilation v4.7 !!

MR.D · Post by **MR.D** » 13 Dec 2006, 13:30

To build an LLT, all you need is a commander which is given to you when you start or a construction unit.

Which makes that LLT cost the ammount of the factory, the construction unit, and then the metal and energy of building the actual LLt.

To make a crawling bomb is much more expensive, you have to build a lab, then a conbot, then a LVL-2 lab, then the bomb itself, and have enough economy to afford the Energy costs to build it.

And what is even better, is you wanting to make the Bomb even easier to kill, when all you need to do in the first place is intercept with 1 of the 5 cheapest units in the game, ak, peewee, jeffy, weasel, or the cheapest "the Flea".

ginekolog · Post by **ginekolog** » 13 Dec 2006, 13:52

trade u would NERF unit that is even now allmost useless? I rarely see any usage...

Pxtl · Post by **Pxtl** » 13 Dec 2006, 15:09

The problem with crawling bombs in AA is that they're such small and speedy targets that only super-accurate beamlasers can really hit them... and most units with such weapons don't do enough damage/range to kill them before they close into detonation range. I haven't tried them in BA yet, but that's my experience.

Machiosabre · Post by **Machiosabre** » 13 Dec 2006, 15:24

thats not the problem with crawling bombs, thats the only reason crawling bombs still exist.

NOiZE · Post by **NOiZE** » 13 Dec 2006, 15:35

Myg made us a installer again:

http://www.unknown-files.net/index.php? ... &dlid=2027

Peekaboom · Post by **Peekaboom** » 13 Dec 2006, 16:05

NOiZE wrote:
LordMatt wrote:
NOiZE wrote: Remember that depthcharge range is less then the gun range.
Of course, I mean the destroyer fires the depthcharge but can't hit the sub until it gets closer, even if the sub isn't moving. That is bad behavior IMO. If you don't want it to hit things at max range just reduce the range.
ok i tested it , and indeed it looks a bit buggy. I will look into it.

Garr! This is percicely what was I was saying ws going to happen when that change was proposed. Oh well, I'll go back to my corner...

NOiZE · Post by **NOiZE** » 13 Dec 2006, 16:47

Peekaboom wrote:
NOiZE wrote:
LordMatt wrote: Of course, I mean the destroyer fires the depthcharge but can't hit the sub until it gets closer, even if the sub isn't moving. That is bad behavior IMO. If you don't want it to hit things at max range just reduce the range.
ok i tested it , and indeed it looks a bit buggy. I will look into it.

Garr! This is percicely what was I was saying ws going to happen when that change was proposed. Oh well, I'll go back to my corner...

Well it looks more like a bug, the depthcharge apears to go right trough the sub....

Day · Post by **Day** » 13 Dec 2006, 16:50

for all information BA was based on the AA2.2 base file or something.. somehow something went wrong with adding the other stuffz hence some bugs

LordMatt · Post by **LordMatt** » 13 Dec 2006, 17:18

NOiZE wrote: Well it looks more like a bug, the depthcharge apears to go right trough the sub....

I didn't notice it before. Maybe you should add back a wee bit of the tracking.

Neddie · Post by **Neddie** » 14 Dec 2006, 12:14

I believe the Crawling Bomb units as they are simply aren't good enough for widespread use, and it is foolish to further nerf them. Indeed, the best use I've had for them in a long time was in destroying some unsupported ships on a Small Supreme - and I had to use the Core cloakable ones even then.

Peekaboom · Post by **Peekaboom** » 14 Dec 2006, 20:17

I have a question that's been haunting me since I started playng AA.

What is the role/difference between the anti-air turrets? I'm fine the basic missile tower, flak, and the advanced towers, but what use does the Anti-Swam (SAM like) launcher and the Chainsaw/Eradicator Anti-Bomber turret provide?

It seems that it makes more sense to put your resources into flak or the adv missile towers and skip over these two towers.

Along similar lines, does anyone build the anti-swarm light laser tower thing?

Day · Post by **Day** » 14 Dec 2006, 20:18

anti swarm are if you dont want to spam missile towers all over or are cramped in space.. you can put a aa placement that resembles a couple of Mts. the bomber turrets well the name says enough doesnt it

Pxtl · Post by **Pxtl** » 14 Dec 2006, 20:37

Is that it? In AA I know Caydr was always changing it up. For a while, the anti-swarmer was really anti-fighter, and the anti-bomber was also "longest range other than the Screamer".... then later he tried to get rid of the unit-specific damages and it became really ambiguous.

To me, the real feature of anti-swarmers is their toughness - the Core one is armoured out the wazoo, and the Arm one is a pop-up.

Kixxe · Post by **Kixxe** » 14 Dec 2006, 22:45

meh, i'll build antibomber over antiswarm anytime of the day. If you want better AA at ceatin points, just build some extra MT's or wait untill your lvl2.

jackalope · Post by **jackalope** » 14 Dec 2006, 23:11

if you look at the BA modweb you'll see that the anti-swarm does crap damage to gunships.

IMO the best lvl 1 AA is defender spam, at 76 metal each you can make enough to do the job

Acidd_UK · Post by **Acidd_UK** » 15 Dec 2006, 01:10

Kixxe wrote:meh, i'll build antibomber over antiswarm anytime of the day. If you want better AA at ceatin points, just build some extra MT's or wait untill your lvl2.

Anti swarms are a lot cheaper than Anti bombers though...

hunterw · Post by **hunterw** » 15 Dec 2006, 03:25

pack0s have their place, ffs a nuke doesn't take them out, that's pretty advantageous.

i don't use the chainsaw though, it doesn't seem that great.

jackalope · Post by **jackalope** » 15 Dec 2006, 03:35

Defender:
79 metal
295 health
range 765
damage 113 (gunships:84)
reloadtime 1.7
DPS 66 (49)
DPS per metal 0.84(0.62)

Packo
423 metal
1200 health
range 840
damage 63 (gunships:40)
burst 2 (effective *2 damage?)
reloadtime 0.8
DPS 158(100)
DPS per metal 0.37(0.24)

Chainsaw
702 metal
2500 health
range 1200
damage 90 (gunships: 67)
reloadtime: 0.5
DPS 180(134)
DPS per metal 0.26(0.19)

Defenders have highest DPS per metal by far, that's why I like them.

Peekaboom · Post by **Peekaboom** » 15 Dec 2006, 04:32

The only thing is that gunships can take out missile towers in a single burst/voll, and a pack of gunships can wade through a lot of missile towers without loosing much.

Of course, it has always seemed to me why build these random air defenses when you could be building flak or adv missile towers instead. Most people don't have gunships before you'd be able to build flak.

DemO · Post by **DemO** » 15 Dec 2006, 06:52

Air is made up of more than gunships:p Anti Air is pretty important in most team games because generally at least 1 enemy will use air t1 in early/mid game, then t2 air later.

Also not everyone techs early so some people wont have the ability to make flak/LRMT for a longer time. Flakkers are overpowered anyway IMO and basically render air inert as soon as people have a few. Bombers will still hit and kill single targets and maybe get 3 runs at most before even a few flak take them all out. Makes it more or less a stalemate from mid/late game when enemies can afford to easily remake flakkers after a bombing run takes them out. By the time the guy who masses air has another raid the enemy has replaced the flakkers he had before and made even more flakkers beyond that making it harder and harder to break through with bombers.

Simply put, its quicker to spam a few flakkers here and there than it is to mass a big enough army of bombers to be effective. Personally i think the build times on flakkers should be substantially bigger, OR flakkers get somewhat of a nerf

Bombers are reduced to runs on strategic targets like anti nukes, gantrys and T2 labs, comms and heavy defence (anni/doomsday) because they only have enough for a couple runs at best on expensive targets where they can make back the cost of losses by killing important and/or expensive structures.

Spring RTS Engine

Balanced Annihilation v4.7 !!