CA Strategies - Page 5

CA Strategies

A dynamic game undergoing constant development and refinement, that attempts to balance playability with fresh and innovative features.

Moderator: Content Developer

User avatar
Tribulexrenamed
Posts: 775
Joined: 22 Apr 2008, 19:06

Re: CA Strategies

Post by Tribulexrenamed »

Scikar wrote:Pillager?
You cant use that name its TA IP content.
User avatar
ginekolog
Posts: 837
Joined: 27 Feb 2006, 13:49

Re: CA Strategies

Post by ginekolog »

Since no good answers came along looks like i ll use T3 + aks + AA in my future CA games. In BA T3s die to air for example, but here my 2 quite expensive brawlers died to razor (which is ground bot but hurts air very well).

But my CA posts dont weight much as i am not expert in CA.
User avatar
Acidd_UK
Posts: 963
Joined: 23 Apr 2006, 02:15

Re: CA Strategies

Post by Acidd_UK »

I think annis, banishers, reapers and snipers will do good jobs. Commander + mobile jammer/cloaker also. T2 arty will soften them up as said. Well aimed strat/nape bombers also help soften them.
User avatar
Scikar
Posts: 154
Joined: 30 Jan 2006, 07:13

Re: CA Strategies

Post by Scikar »

ginekolog wrote:Since no good answers came along looks like i ll use T3 + aks + AA in my future CA games. In BA T3s die to air for example, but here my 2 quite expensive brawlers died to razor (which is ground bot but hurts air very well).

But my CA posts dont weight much as i am not expert in CA.
Precision bombers are better than brawlers against T3. You're also assuming you'll be able to get a Karg out before your AKs get mauled by Warriors/Outlaws, and T3 isn't fast enough to be able to protect your base from raiders effectively. The whole point is that your strategy isn't and shouldn't be hopeless, just that like any strategy it has its disadvantages and you'll lose against a competent opponent who is able to exploit them. The disadvantages of early T3 just happen to be bigger than the disadvantages of e.g. late T2.
Jasper1984
Posts: 196
Joined: 25 Jan 2008, 20:04

Re: CA Strategies

Post by Jasper1984 »

Tribulex wrote:
Scikar wrote:Pillager?
You cant use that name its TA IP content.
As you said, its a name, can't be copyrighted. Nor is it a trademark; doubt they would accept a game unit name trademark.
Can you make more replies that make sense?
User avatar
CarRepairer
Cursed Zero-K Developer
Posts: 3359
Joined: 07 Nov 2007, 21:48

Re: CA Strategies

Post by CarRepairer »

Pillager will be renamed to Plunderer. Or not.
User avatar
Gota
Posts: 7151
Joined: 11 Jan 2008, 16:55

Re: CA Strategies

Post by Gota »

Rename Krogoth to Gota kthx.
User avatar
Tribulexrenamed
Posts: 775
Joined: 22 Apr 2008, 19:06

Re: CA Strategies

Post by Tribulexrenamed »

Jasper1984 wrote:
Tribulex wrote:
Scikar wrote:Pillager?
You cant use that name its TA IP content.
As you said, its a name, can't be copyrighted. Nor is it a trademark; doubt they would accept a game unit name trademark.
Can you make more replies that make sense?
Im going to have to reverse that question back onto you. Why cant you formulate ideas that when typed, cause themselves to be unformulated and thus cannot be physically typed within any sort of bounded universe?


Gota: your namesake is shitty dgunfodder. I am currently designing a unit called the Tribulex that will be added to XTA. I chose my namesakes wisely, infact i create them.

Plunderer is like a worse name than pillager lol.

Question about CA strategy: how do you counter precision bombers?
User avatar
Acidd_UK
Posts: 963
Joined: 23 Apr 2006, 02:15

Re: CA Strategies

Post by Acidd_UK »

Tribulex wrote:Question about CA strategy: how do you counter precision bombers?
Fighters, missile towers, aa units.
Jasper1984
Posts: 196
Joined: 25 Jan 2008, 20:04

Re: CA Strategies

Post by Jasper1984 »

@Tribulex: Because by definition, they'd be unformulated; not formulated. Edit: i am an idiot for trying to answer a nonsense-question. What is the definition for (un)formulated? How is that the question reversed?
@Acid, of course, AA units make precision bomber cost-ineffective for their damage.(If they fly over them) But they could still be cost-effective for focusing firepower on single important targets.(That could turn around a game.) Anyway, imo i haven't seen much evidence that it is OP.
Last edited by Jasper1984 on 12 Nov 2008, 23:59, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Acidd_UK
Posts: 963
Joined: 23 Apr 2006, 02:15

Re: CA Strategies

Post by Acidd_UK »

I don't think anyone was suggesting precision bombers are OP...

As for the com-guarded mumbo though... :-/
User avatar
REVENGE
Posts: 2382
Joined: 24 Aug 2006, 06:13

Re: CA Strategies

Post by REVENGE »

Gota wrote:Rename Krogoth to Gota kthx.
DAMMIT! :twisted:
User avatar
Tribulexrenamed
Posts: 775
Joined: 22 Apr 2008, 19:06

Re: CA Strategies

Post by Tribulexrenamed »

Whenever I play CA someone does something stupid (actually the opposite) and snipes my com with bombers even though I have plenty of AA cover. Planes are so fucking fast. The other thing I hate is when people do stupid things like make an annihilator instead of a hlt, and have t3 mechs walking through my base at 10 minutes.

Coms are dgun resistant, which is also stupid for when I want to spite someone for doing one of the above mentioned stupid things to me.


There should be an upgrade for commanders that makes them dgun UNresistant.
User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Re: CA Strategies

Post by Pxtl »

Decoys?
User avatar
Tribulexrenamed
Posts: 775
Joined: 22 Apr 2008, 19:06

Re: CA Strategies

Post by Tribulexrenamed »

Pxtl wrote:Decoys?

yeah its hopeless for me.
Saktoth
Zero-K Developer
Posts: 2665
Joined: 28 Nov 2006, 13:22

Re: CA Strategies

Post by Saktoth »

The Razorback and Vanguard were slightly OP, the razorback lost a little range and the Vanguard AoE and HP. The Razorback should be easier to skirmish with heavy skirms like the banisher, penetrator, etc.

The best counter is to kill him before he can afford it. I know Universel makes a mech rush (its technically incorrect to call it 't3') look easy but against det, myself, or google, he loses more often than not purely because he tries this tactic. Its popularity is mostly due to him.

D-gun works if you have it, natch (unless he brings radar, then you gotta use jammers or kill the radar).

Prescision, Nuke and EMP bombers are the most surefire counters to t3. Gunships vs razorback? Not so much. Works on Vanguard/Catapault though. If you want to use gunship factory vs mech, use the Dragonfly. A few can paralyze and then lift a mech easily (supplement with Bladewings if you like), and then you can either Return To Sender (Pinball it on his fusions), drop it in a pit somewhere, drop it next to com for d-gun, or make a bunch of rectors and capture it while keeping it EMP'd.

Granted, those are mostly Arm counters. Core tends to focus on heavy units and stuff thats good for killing lighter units, while arm on lighter units and stuff thats good for killing heavy units. Flamers works well vs mechs, pyros are a little fragile but dragons eggs might work. Shields can stop vanguards but thats a stop-gap measure.

On air (Fixed-wing aircraft specifically): CA bombers are fast, but it has to reload at an air pad between shots. This means you have time to get AA into position before he comes around for another attack (and that bombers arent just 'suicide' units that you send in massive swarms to try and overwhelm his AA).
Tribulex wrote:yeah its hopeless for me.
QFT.
TheThinker
Posts: 46
Joined: 02 Jun 2008, 21:34

Re: CA Strategies

Post by TheThinker »

About AA:

I used to make lines of AA, yet eventually realized that scattering your AA is actually the best tactic because of the aforementioned speed of bombers AND the fact that a line of AA WILL target the closest enemy, not the closest ENEMIES. When it comes to AA, scattering far and wide is supreme.

And to add more oomph to your AA, I'd use T2 fighters to patrol the map for those buggers since they are unable to target ground units.

Too bad air units can't be reclaimed when they go down.
Ashnal
Posts: 104
Joined: 24 Jun 2008, 00:57

Re: CA Strategies

Post by Ashnal »

TheThinker wrote:Too bad air units can't be reclaimed when they go down.
Oh but they can!
I changed it so they could about a month ago. You'll see planes drop reclaimable debris that falls to the ground when they die now.
User avatar
Pressure Line
Posts: 2283
Joined: 21 May 2007, 02:09

Re: CA Strategies

Post by Pressure Line »

Ashnal wrote:
TheThinker wrote:Too bad air units can't be reclaimed when they go down.
Oh but they can!
I changed it so they could about a month ago. You'll see planes drop reclaimable debris that falls to the ground when they die now.
does it still fall like a wafting feather?
Ashnal
Posts: 104
Joined: 24 Jun 2008, 00:57

Re: CA Strategies

Post by Ashnal »

Pressure Line wrote:does it still fall like a wafting feather?
People would have noticed if it did now wouldn't they?
No they fall at a decent rate that looks alright.
Post Reply

Return to “Zero-K”