My take on Arm vs Core is:
Arm prefers speed, maneuverability, and firepower. They favor specialized units over all-rounder types. Their weaknesses are hit points, range, and staying power.
Core prefers hit points, range, and economy. They have some specialized units, but not to the degree that Arm has them, and not with the same sort of focus. Arm has specialized units which help to overcome its weaknesses, while Core has specialized units which help to augment their strengths even further.
Classic OTA examples include:
-Warlord battleship, with both direct-fire laser for close range targets and high-arc plasma for long-range targets
-Flash light tank, which has high firepower, maneuverability, and speed, but relatively low health
-Sharpshooter sniper kbot, which has super-long range, high damage shots which are good for taking out the individual super-heavy targets Core specializes in
-Krogoth experimental assault kbot, which is a freaking Krogoth
-Pyro, which serves both raider and assault unit roles, depending on numbers
-Higher accuracy of Big Bertha vs. higher damage (and HP?) of Intimidator
-Generally higher HP of Core units
-Generally high speed and turning rate of Arm units
-Core resurrects units, adding to its army, while Arm reclaims and builds faster (Necro vs Fark), allowing Core to inflate its numbers almost for free while Arm builds only the most appropriate units for the situation
-Can and Sumo are a "walking front line", as I call it. Where they go, the battle goes, and they are all but unstoppable to normal attacks.
What's your take? What are the differences in Arm and Core's design philosophies, how can these be exploited, how have these been improved upon or reduced by mods you've played? How would you see the two sides compare in an ideal situation? What are their strengths and weaknesses, both in OTA, in Uberhack, in compilations like TAUCP and TAUIP, in CA, in BA, in AA? What would you change, and why? What makes you think that your changes fit in with the general design of the race? What units would you like to see added or removed? How are the differences exploited by players, and is this fair or unfair?
Arm and Core design philosophy
Moderator: Moderators
I agree but there are a few distinctions.
I dont believe range is a weakness of arm at all, I think instead it should be more that arm is more efficient and accurate, more likely to make a precision strike than blanketting an area. In OTA the intimidator ahd more firepower, health, range, and a higher cost than the bertha, and the bertha had better precision.
I dont think that core has 'specialized untis to augment there general brute force'. I think core is a generic well refined wargame role faction, you have the classic roles beefed up to that end, so you have the general mix you usually see, then several extreme versions, e.g. the core lvl 2 attack sub, and then the leviathan, the can then the sumo, the reaper then the goliath.
As long as you keep in mind that Core is big heavy guns, and as tech progresses they get heavier, and arm are light fast and maneuverable and get more specialized as they get more advanced, you should be fine.
A note:
In OTA I felt there was more an emphasis on buildings, 'oh noes he built a bertha!!' or 'oh noes he built a nuker!' or 'you shouldnt have let him build that in the first place'. I remember sending in attack forces specifically to take out buildings of interest such as a nuker or an antinuker.
Whereas in the current mod scene the emphasis is on armies and the defences at the gates, 'oh noes he built a krogoth' or 'crap theres a sumo coming and I aint ready'. Its all people seem to care about, build a big army, destroy the defences at the edge of the enemy base, clean up.
I dont believe range is a weakness of arm at all, I think instead it should be more that arm is more efficient and accurate, more likely to make a precision strike than blanketting an area. In OTA the intimidator ahd more firepower, health, range, and a higher cost than the bertha, and the bertha had better precision.
I dont think that core has 'specialized untis to augment there general brute force'. I think core is a generic well refined wargame role faction, you have the classic roles beefed up to that end, so you have the general mix you usually see, then several extreme versions, e.g. the core lvl 2 attack sub, and then the leviathan, the can then the sumo, the reaper then the goliath.
As long as you keep in mind that Core is big heavy guns, and as tech progresses they get heavier, and arm are light fast and maneuverable and get more specialized as they get more advanced, you should be fine.
A note:
In OTA I felt there was more an emphasis on buildings, 'oh noes he built a bertha!!' or 'oh noes he built a nuker!' or 'you shouldnt have let him build that in the first place'. I remember sending in attack forces specifically to take out buildings of interest such as a nuker or an antinuker.
Whereas in the current mod scene the emphasis is on armies and the defences at the gates, 'oh noes he built a krogoth' or 'crap theres a sumo coming and I aint ready'. Its all people seem to care about, build a big army, destroy the defences at the edge of the enemy base, clean up.
I think this could possibly depend a lot on map choice. The maps that are played all the time are:AF wrote:A note:
In OTA I felt there was more an emphasis on buildings, 'oh noes he built a bertha!!' or 'oh noes he built a nuker!' or 'you shouldnt have let him build that in the first place'. I remember sending in attack forces specifically to take out buildings of interest such as a nuker or an antinuker.
Whereas in the current mod scene the emphasis is on armies and the defences at the gates, 'oh noes he built a krogoth' or 'crap theres a sumo coming and I aint ready'. Its all people seem to care about, build a big army, destroy the defences at the edge of the enemy base, clean up.
Speedmetal (and variants)
-no comment
Greenfields
-this is also stupid, no comment
Comet Catcher
This map I associate with quick flash rush gameplay that's decided in level one. Good for having something resembling a serious sharp to the point pro-game imo, kind of like the hunters or lost temple in starcraft. Obviously you never will see any nukes or berthas on here unless people are fooling around.
Altored Divide
This map is porcy like hell and big so you would expect a lot of berthas and stuff. However the huge mountains make artillery a bit inneficient.
Maps that are just right for berthas, bigger then comet catcher but where the bertha can reach over most of the map, are usually rarely played... examples would be painted desert or greenhaven in OTA, I don't even know the name of such maps in spring.
Yeah that was just some random toughts, It depends on a lot of stuff what happens in an TA-mod game. Mood of the players for example (rushkill!!! vs simcity-build-porc, win vs "play for fun").smoth wrote:I don't know zpock we got berthas up in our games. AA is different then TA.
That being said I always saw arm and core as follows:
arm, lots of units will make the difference
core, slow and steady, when we get there you are dead.
As for Arm and Core: Core is the powerhouses, Arm is the guys who are not powerhouses but try to be good in other ways. They tend to be more similar then different however.
The only unit's that are different in plain vanilla OTA is:
Flash vs Gator (flash lags more and is better)
Pewee vs AK (one is ok the other sucks alot, but flash owns both so it dosn't matter)
Pyro-Zeus - ironically the arm is powerful here...
The can vs Fido... classical power vs mobility + range
Goliath.. has no equal, the biggest tank, tough very similar to a Reaper/bulldog but little bigger and better and slower..
Zipper - fast but crappy kbot, kind of like a lvl1 unit.
Warlord - Millenium... the warlord is useful, the millenium sucks compared to cruisers.
Brawler - Rapier... think the biggest difference here is that one lags a lot more.
So there's like 4 units that don't have a direct counterpart (fido, can, zipper, goliath) and 5 pairs with slight differences.
I think there's plenty of room for interpretation by the modmaker since the backstory is so vague, but here's my own take, as seen in NOTA.
The Core has to take both the advantages and disadvantages that come with being an oversized, bureaucratic empire. On the one hand, they generally have superior technology and more powerful units. Right from the start (in nota), the Core already have access to a heavy tank and a powerful self-propelled gun, to which there are no Arm equivalents. They have an ideal ground attack aircraft with the vashp, which has guided rockets and enough armament to make several passes before going back for fuel. And in general their ships are superior as well. On the other hand, their units lack versatility and often have design flaws you just wouldn't see in Arm units that lower their "real world" effectiveness. For instance, the instigator's slow turret speed, the vashp's lack of a tailgun, the leveler's poor speed, or the inquisitor battlecruiser's over-armored design, which leaves no room for the decent anti-air and firepower/range you would expect to see on a capital ship.
The Arm are the more practical side that relies less on fancy technology and more on cheap, simple, efficient designs that can be churned out in large numbers. They are also better at quick expansion and raiding. The flash of course is a fantastic and versatile early game unit, and the fark is much faster than the necro, giving the Arm a stronger early game economy. While the Core need to worry about coordinating their fighters with their vashps when interdicting enemy forces, the Arm have the toadfoot fighter-bomber that can do both jobs by itself, and all their bombers have at least a tailgun. Arm designs are often more inspired and unconventional, with units like the rocket box, panther, and missile destroyer. And whle the Core ships in general are slightly superior, the Arm make up for it by having early access to a missile ship as well as their battlecruiser, which is arguably the best ship in the game.
The Core has to take both the advantages and disadvantages that come with being an oversized, bureaucratic empire. On the one hand, they generally have superior technology and more powerful units. Right from the start (in nota), the Core already have access to a heavy tank and a powerful self-propelled gun, to which there are no Arm equivalents. They have an ideal ground attack aircraft with the vashp, which has guided rockets and enough armament to make several passes before going back for fuel. And in general their ships are superior as well. On the other hand, their units lack versatility and often have design flaws you just wouldn't see in Arm units that lower their "real world" effectiveness. For instance, the instigator's slow turret speed, the vashp's lack of a tailgun, the leveler's poor speed, or the inquisitor battlecruiser's over-armored design, which leaves no room for the decent anti-air and firepower/range you would expect to see on a capital ship.
The Arm are the more practical side that relies less on fancy technology and more on cheap, simple, efficient designs that can be churned out in large numbers. They are also better at quick expansion and raiding. The flash of course is a fantastic and versatile early game unit, and the fark is much faster than the necro, giving the Arm a stronger early game economy. While the Core need to worry about coordinating their fighters with their vashps when interdicting enemy forces, the Arm have the toadfoot fighter-bomber that can do both jobs by itself, and all their bombers have at least a tailgun. Arm designs are often more inspired and unconventional, with units like the rocket box, panther, and missile destroyer. And whle the Core ships in general are slightly superior, the Arm make up for it by having early access to a missile ship as well as their battlecruiser, which is arguably the best ship in the game.
Summary so far, let me know if you think it's accurate:
-Core is good all-rounder but with extremes
-Arm prefers accuracy and subtlety to brute force
-You would be in favor of shorter build times and less cost to super-structures like nuke launchers and berthas
-Nukes need "moar power"... or was this sarcasm? Have you used an AA Core nuke? wtfomgbbbqpwn in warhead form.
-Berthas are not very useful on some maps because of terrain
-More of arm's strengths include mobility and expansion
-Core is more easily countered if you spy your opponent out or otherwise have knowledge of what is likely headed your way, otherwise they are difficult to turn back...
-...While Arm has a little of everything, not not a lot of anything (in most cases)
-Core is good all-rounder but with extremes
-Arm prefers accuracy and subtlety to brute force
-You would be in favor of shorter build times and less cost to super-structures like nuke launchers and berthas
-Nukes need "moar power"... or was this sarcasm? Have you used an AA Core nuke? wtfomgbbbqpwn in warhead form.
-Berthas are not very useful on some maps because of terrain
-More of arm's strengths include mobility and expansion
-Core is more easily countered if you spy your opponent out or otherwise have knowledge of what is likely headed your way, otherwise they are difficult to turn back...
-...While Arm has a little of everything, not not a lot of anything (in most cases)
The concept of my mod, now an epic version, in the CORE x ARM view is the follows:
Ive started the OTA TA-BattleFleet years ago with UH in mind,
but after so many modifications and tests, (and porting it to Spring before release) these led to a diferent concept, pointing still more the ARM versus CORE strategies.
The former utilizing more and more hit and run tactics and attacks,
and the later ever a massive, heaviest and slow war.
The new ARM planes were developed for tactical fight, like the Sea Ravager long range cruise missile attacker, and CORE, instead, utilizes very heavy bombers like the new Carnage for mass destruction.
For the ARMada, unique ships as the Impero strike cruiser,
designed to long range attack and run, and the Tiburon "sniper" submarine, for example, can perform that strategy.
Core Navy have, for a massive fleet attack,
needs for an "air umbrella", that is done by the unique air-control ship,
the Fireshield, and their carriers, that have better only SAM defenses,
versus ARM all purpose missiles.
ARM unique ARMarsenal very slow ship, designed to off shore attacks,
to be deployed, depends of the earlier destruction of the Core naval forces, and the latter have unique attack armoured carriers and missile battleships, to stay in sea command.
The Core Leviathans sport the intended, but never implemented by Cavedog, cruise missiles, firing as true subs.The ARM answer is a cheap specialized anti-sub slow seaplane.
Land forces followed the same priciple.New tanks and tactical mobile nukes, "troops" carriers, land big attack hover transports & a Land Control Transport vehicle (for ARM) - a kind of mobile base - and slow trans attack planes (for CORE), in the epic version, allied to new base complexes - for ARM, larger and better protected to launch raiding and flanking forces, and for CORE the biggest defended walls to limit the territory conquered before the next expansion.
VonGratz
Ive started the OTA TA-BattleFleet years ago with UH in mind,
but after so many modifications and tests, (and porting it to Spring before release) these led to a diferent concept, pointing still more the ARM versus CORE strategies.
The former utilizing more and more hit and run tactics and attacks,
and the later ever a massive, heaviest and slow war.
The new ARM planes were developed for tactical fight, like the Sea Ravager long range cruise missile attacker, and CORE, instead, utilizes very heavy bombers like the new Carnage for mass destruction.
For the ARMada, unique ships as the Impero strike cruiser,
designed to long range attack and run, and the Tiburon "sniper" submarine, for example, can perform that strategy.
Core Navy have, for a massive fleet attack,
needs for an "air umbrella", that is done by the unique air-control ship,
the Fireshield, and their carriers, that have better only SAM defenses,
versus ARM all purpose missiles.
ARM unique ARMarsenal very slow ship, designed to off shore attacks,
to be deployed, depends of the earlier destruction of the Core naval forces, and the latter have unique attack armoured carriers and missile battleships, to stay in sea command.
The Core Leviathans sport the intended, but never implemented by Cavedog, cruise missiles, firing as true subs.The ARM answer is a cheap specialized anti-sub slow seaplane.
Land forces followed the same priciple.New tanks and tactical mobile nukes, "troops" carriers, land big attack hover transports & a Land Control Transport vehicle (for ARM) - a kind of mobile base - and slow trans attack planes (for CORE), in the epic version, allied to new base complexes - for ARM, larger and better protected to launch raiding and flanking forces, and for CORE the biggest defended walls to limit the territory conquered before the next expansion.
VonGratz
Last edited by VonGratz on 08 Jun 2007, 17:32, edited 1 time in total.
-
1v0ry_k1ng
- Posts: 4656
- Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 10:24
its a bit like a nazi/allies comparison.
if you look at it in terms of plot;
core are dominant, and their forces are either part of large military garrisons or large attack amardas. Occupying metal planets and having the great brute military power, core designs sacrifice speed and mavuverability as they only need to grind foward to fulfill their role.
as technology advances, core relies more upon fewer, stonger and more centralised units which lack mobility but in battle will easily match their arm equivlanet (say, tiger vs sherman).
core has the power when its units are in position, but relying upon large sweeps mean in smaller scale conflict cores lack of manuverability becomes an issue.
Cans are very hard to break through, but if bypassed, they are too slow to move back and defend your base from the faster arm units. because of this they are only useful in two roles, a grinding attack or stationnary defence.
core units lack flexebility, manuverability and specialisation.
arm units are designed for mobility, flexibility and agressive attacks.
their units are cheaper and more numerous, but inferior in a straight fight because more of their cost is invested in mobility. think of it as sherman vs tiger again; there were many more shermans than tigers, the sherman was faster, more manuverable, but in a pitched battle against tigers would be blown to peices. arm units are flexible in the defence; if the first line is bypassed units can move back faster than their attackers to form another line.
however, arm units pay for their flexibility and are at a disadvantage forming a ridgid defence line, where cores more centralised units can overmatch the light arm forces even on the defence. because of this, an arms defence of mobile unit plays more like an attack, so a defence is a counter attack.
in the attack, arm relies on either coaxing the core forces into long range fire, or bypassing the core forces where they will be too slow to give chase.
core is brittle and hard. attacks will bounce right off, right until an attack gets through, and cracks the main line.
arm is flexible and tough. an attack will push foward into arm, but forces will cut off and flank the attack.
arm has specialised units to assist attacking; spiders for bad terrian, snipers for destroying high threat targets, ravens for making a hole in the enemy line, panthers for fast reaction against any unit type, and a zeus which is a limited version of the can.
core has specialised units for either defence or linebreaking; cans are a mobile wall, sumos are a mobile strongpoint. goliaths are a slow but very centralised assault unit, krogoths are even more so.
core relies upon gaining a superior economy and rolling right over arm, leaving no gaps for flanking.
arm relies upon fast attacks on unexpected locations, flexibility to stop atacks, and speed to get the best odds against the more powerful core units.
because of this, core are at a disavdantage at the begining of a battle; they can be easily flanked, lack the numbers for a solid wall.
but as the battle gets bigger scale and economies increase, they can fill in the gaps and then arm is forced to fight frontaly.
core centralised units mean the bigger scale the battle, the greater advantage to core. core might lose 5:5 odds but win 50:50.
if you look at it in terms of plot;
core are dominant, and their forces are either part of large military garrisons or large attack amardas. Occupying metal planets and having the great brute military power, core designs sacrifice speed and mavuverability as they only need to grind foward to fulfill their role.
as technology advances, core relies more upon fewer, stonger and more centralised units which lack mobility but in battle will easily match their arm equivlanet (say, tiger vs sherman).
core has the power when its units are in position, but relying upon large sweeps mean in smaller scale conflict cores lack of manuverability becomes an issue.
Cans are very hard to break through, but if bypassed, they are too slow to move back and defend your base from the faster arm units. because of this they are only useful in two roles, a grinding attack or stationnary defence.
core units lack flexebility, manuverability and specialisation.
arm units are designed for mobility, flexibility and agressive attacks.
their units are cheaper and more numerous, but inferior in a straight fight because more of their cost is invested in mobility. think of it as sherman vs tiger again; there were many more shermans than tigers, the sherman was faster, more manuverable, but in a pitched battle against tigers would be blown to peices. arm units are flexible in the defence; if the first line is bypassed units can move back faster than their attackers to form another line.
however, arm units pay for their flexibility and are at a disadvantage forming a ridgid defence line, where cores more centralised units can overmatch the light arm forces even on the defence. because of this, an arms defence of mobile unit plays more like an attack, so a defence is a counter attack.
in the attack, arm relies on either coaxing the core forces into long range fire, or bypassing the core forces where they will be too slow to give chase.
core is brittle and hard. attacks will bounce right off, right until an attack gets through, and cracks the main line.
arm is flexible and tough. an attack will push foward into arm, but forces will cut off and flank the attack.
arm has specialised units to assist attacking; spiders for bad terrian, snipers for destroying high threat targets, ravens for making a hole in the enemy line, panthers for fast reaction against any unit type, and a zeus which is a limited version of the can.
core has specialised units for either defence or linebreaking; cans are a mobile wall, sumos are a mobile strongpoint. goliaths are a slow but very centralised assault unit, krogoths are even more so.
core relies upon gaining a superior economy and rolling right over arm, leaving no gaps for flanking.
arm relies upon fast attacks on unexpected locations, flexibility to stop atacks, and speed to get the best odds against the more powerful core units.
because of this, core are at a disavdantage at the begining of a battle; they can be easily flanked, lack the numbers for a solid wall.
but as the battle gets bigger scale and economies increase, they can fill in the gaps and then arm is forced to fight frontaly.
core centralised units mean the bigger scale the battle, the greater advantage to core. core might lose 5:5 odds but win 50:50.
-
Shadowsage
- Posts: 73
- Joined: 01 Dec 2005, 05:50
-
1v0ry_k1ng
- Posts: 4656
- Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 10:24
-
KingRaptor
- Zero-K Developer
- Posts: 838
- Joined: 14 Mar 2007, 03:44
http://smuggoat.net/?p=92#comment-475KDR_11k wrote:When was that upgraded to perma? Last I heard was one week and that was a while ago.Ishach wrote:the op of the thread is permabanned as well
=/
Swiftspear on Smuggoat.net wrote: Caydr stays banned, because I don├óÔé¼Ôäót ever want to read an essay length thread with no topic aside from flaming someone on the spring forums ever again.