Balanced Annihilation 5.5 is OUT
Moderator: Moderators
By the way speaking of the core cloaking crawling bomb it still has an incredibly high buildtime and energy cost for such a niche unit, might want to edit that.
Energy cost 27470, buildtime 38861
the metal cost might be a little high as well, but 506 dosn't seem outrageous.
for comparison the basic crawling bomb has an energy cost of 5471 ad buildtime of 7899, and only costs 65 metal. It pretty much takes a nanoblock to produce them at any reasonable rate.
They both have in common that they 90% of the time are shot down before they can connect with a target, if there is even a little bit of fire directed at them. More HP might help? I'm not sure. Unless your enemy has his whole front line and base jammed up with longrange/shortrange jammers, the skuttle still appears as a radar dot, and as slow moving as it is even showing up as a radar dot dosn't help it evade much fire.
Energy cost 27470, buildtime 38861
the metal cost might be a little high as well, but 506 dosn't seem outrageous.
for comparison the basic crawling bomb has an energy cost of 5471 ad buildtime of 7899, and only costs 65 metal. It pretty much takes a nanoblock to produce them at any reasonable rate.
They both have in common that they 90% of the time are shot down before they can connect with a target, if there is even a little bit of fire directed at them. More HP might help? I'm not sure. Unless your enemy has his whole front line and base jammed up with longrange/shortrange jammers, the skuttle still appears as a radar dot, and as slow moving as it is even showing up as a radar dot dosn't help it evade much fire.
Stealthed submerged units are not what i'd like to see ~~hunterw wrote:something that's really dumb about advanced crawling bombs is that they aren't amphibious
both regular crawling bombs are
the reason behind the vulcans not becoming high traj is excactly what dragon said happened to him in the game;
small bumps and walls made his gun ineffective.
now if you think about it you can actually plan your building layout so that you put your valuables (fusions 'n shit) behind hills so that the enemy's vulcan/bertha cant hit them.
UNLESS you actually think about where to put the vulcan, high ground is usually a good choice since it makes the gun shoot downwards, making less shots go over the targets and nullifying smaller bumps.
also high trajectory makes the vulcan more efficient because the shots dont go "over" the units, making more hits (even if they land randomly)
@least in my opinion anyway. . .
could be wrong tho since this unit is so rarely seen ~___~
every team should be completely assured on their goals and that they can achieve it. We all know what happened when caydr was in charge of aa, lots and lots of changes were made just because someone in the forums said "LOL UNIT X SUX BUFF PLZ" *OH OK I BUFF UNIT X WITH +5K HP AND 3 NEW GUNS 8D"the team is completely self-assured of their superiority in all things balance. That said, I do like the game that DayWalker and NOiZE have given us.
YES! this is why BA was made in the first place!make your own version if you disagree with a dev and try it out (its easy enough to modify a units parameters)
NO!Just stop flaming mods and taking away the enjoyment devs get from working on stuff.
i thought they were just cloaked, not stealthedSleksa wrote: Stealthed submerged units are not what i'd like to see ~~
yea they would really fuck up underwater bases
also the main reason high traj would make vulcan/buzz OP is that high traj bertha bullets would probably go right through bertha shieldsSleksa wrote:high traj
i'm sure there's some variable that would fix that though
i would like to see them buffed in some way, as building the 8 berthas that one vulcan costs is way, way better for these reasons
-much more accurate
-spread out targets instead of one big target
-you can start shelling as soon as you build one of them
i would actually not mind if the rate of fire was turned down for them as long as accuracy increases. atm they fire 27 times faster than berthas, so you do get about 3.5x more shells cost-for-cost once it's built, but they have an inaccuracy diameter 3x larger than a bertha. that's diameter though - you have to apply the formula for area of a circle, thus it gets squared, and misses 9x as much.
On the plus side, the huge armour on the vulcan makes it nuke-proof. I haven't used them in a very long time - how much of a burden is the energy-cost of firing the vulcan? That could be another area of focus where it could be better than the bertha. If your weapon is way less accurate, then the gobs of resources your shoving into all those misfires hurts, bad.hunterw wrote: i would actually not mind if the rate of fire was turned down for them as long as accuracy increases. atm they fire 27 times faster than berthas, so you do get about 3.5x more shells cost-for-cost once it's built, but they have an inaccuracy diameter 3x larger than a bertha. that's diameter though - you have to apply the formula for area of a circle, thus it gets squared, and misses 9x as much.
Personally, I still think that converting the Buzzsaw into a shorter-ranged (like the OTA buzzsaw), high-trajectory artillery weapon would be way cool. But that's just me.
Personally, I still think that converting the Buzzsaw into a shorter-ranged (like the OTA buzzsaw), high-trajectory artillery weapon would be way cool. But that's just me.
i agree it would be cool!
on the other hand i've always wanted to implement jetpack peewees and mavs that ride fidos into ba but thats just me
i agree it would be cool!
on the other hand i've always wanted to implement jetpack peewees and mavs that ride fidos into ba but thats just me
there are some 3rd party ota units that are missing from ba such as the peewee cannon. :< add these asapSleksa wrote:Personally, I still think that converting the Buzzsaw into a shorter-ranged (like the OTA buzzsaw), high-trajectory artillery weapon would be way cool. But that's just me.
i agree it would be cool!
on the other hand i've always wanted to implement jetpack peewees and mavs that ride fidos into ba but thats just me
How about a vehicle(for other side kbot) unit that has deflector shield(smaller than Deflector area of Effect(Drain No E, but when deflecting draining E)) when Off and a Stealth Globe when turned on(Drains energy)?
Can be destroyed by anti radar/jammer Juno!
Comments---
EDIT: Oh and switching on or off would take 5 or 10 secs
Can be destroyed by anti radar/jammer Juno!
Comments---
EDIT: Oh and switching on or off would take 5 or 10 secs
I don't get why they were removed??? They were the least op of all sea units coz... well they couldn't hold their own actually on the sea. They had a role, which no other unit had, and are useless at basically anything else.hunterw wrote:bertha ships are good because they make controlling an ocean tactically more beneficial - you can attack land targets further in than any other ship
Hell you know they might even be one of the most balanced units in the game
nixa has a point strangely enough O_o
i want to point out that water's ability to strike land was severly cut when Shiva/Maruader were removed from the UW plants' build menus (understandable i guess, but the poor plant needed it).
Sea's ability to strike into land consists of the following:
flagships
missile boats
amphib tanks
seaplanes
hovers
the problem with the first two is that their range is limited. the problem with the last three is that they are killed by the equivalent capacity in land defense and offense. Poison arrows are good, but they're still no match for a goliath, or penetrators/snipers, solid def lines, etc. seaplanes are countered with equivalent T2 air.
Sea has no real long range offensive capability. land can strike easily at sea with massed berthas, and krogs (if water is shallow enough, and it usually is because krog is so big). Sea has no bertha shield.
I think keeping sea with no bertha shield and no nuke is a Good Decision, but its underwhelming range in land-response means that if two foes are entrenched well, the land guy will simply porc and mass berthas, screamers, and Pitbulls/vipers (just outside of range of missile ships ofc). suddenly sea is toast with onl a matter of time.
the bertha ships at least could give the sea a chacne against long range land IMHO. meanwhile land would retain the advantage of superior econ, AA, plus nukes.
i want to point out that water's ability to strike land was severly cut when Shiva/Maruader were removed from the UW plants' build menus (understandable i guess, but the poor plant needed it).
Sea's ability to strike into land consists of the following:
flagships
missile boats
amphib tanks
seaplanes
hovers
the problem with the first two is that their range is limited. the problem with the last three is that they are killed by the equivalent capacity in land defense and offense. Poison arrows are good, but they're still no match for a goliath, or penetrators/snipers, solid def lines, etc. seaplanes are countered with equivalent T2 air.
Sea has no real long range offensive capability. land can strike easily at sea with massed berthas, and krogs (if water is shallow enough, and it usually is because krog is so big). Sea has no bertha shield.
I think keeping sea with no bertha shield and no nuke is a Good Decision, but its underwhelming range in land-response means that if two foes are entrenched well, the land guy will simply porc and mass berthas, screamers, and Pitbulls/vipers (just outside of range of missile ships ofc). suddenly sea is toast with onl a matter of time.
the bertha ships at least could give the sea a chacne against long range land IMHO. meanwhile land would retain the advantage of superior econ, AA, plus nukes.
Not that we need to bring realism into the discussion, but naval units in RL typically have the longest range capabilities for firing inland of anything. Modern missile destroyers or WW2 -> Vietnam era battleships could shoot massive distances inland. You could make an arguement that a birtha ship at sea is a much more plausible thing than the big birtha tower.
Not that I'm suggesting that change, but I think if the birtha ship costs enough extra to cover the fact hat you can move it around, I don't see what the big deal is. Make it some % more expensive than the land based birtha's, make the model 50% bigger than it was in AA, and pat your self on the back.
Or put the level 3 amphibous back into the sub pen. I don't understand why that decision was ever made.
Not that I'm suggesting that change, but I think if the birtha ship costs enough extra to cover the fact hat you can move it around, I don't see what the big deal is. Make it some % more expensive than the land based birtha's, make the model 50% bigger than it was in AA, and pat your self on the back.
Or put the level 3 amphibous back into the sub pen. I don't understand why that decision was ever made.