[old] Balanced Annihilation V6.84 - Page 4

[old] Balanced Annihilation V6.84

Classic game design, maintained to please you...

Moderator: Content Developer

el_matarife
Posts: 933
Joined: 27 Feb 2006, 02:04

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.84

Post by el_matarife »

T1 fighters could probably use an effectiveness boost against T2 air. Last I checked, T1 fighters were practically useless against T2 bombers. If a T1 fighter screen could be moderately effective against T2 bombers I think the rush strategy would be a lot riskier.
YokoZar
Posts: 883
Joined: 15 Jul 2007, 22:02

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.84

Post by YokoZar »

el_matarife wrote:T1 fighters could probably use an effectiveness boost against T2 air. Last I checked, T1 fighters were practically useless against T2 bombers. If a T1 fighter screen could be moderately effective against T2 bombers I think the rush strategy would be a lot riskier.
Yeah. Intuitively, I would balance t1 fighters as having very low hitpoints and being weak against t2 fighters - that way, you could easily get air superiority by sending a few t2 fighters in with your bombers. It's rather frustrating having a bunch of "air cover" and having it not be able to actually kill anything (bombers or gunships)
User avatar
Niobium
Posts: 456
Joined: 07 Dec 2008, 02:35

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.84

Post by Niobium »

Yeah, mar3usmc uses the same bomber rush I used to use, I stopped using it because it makes it far too easy to win games. Especially in team commander ends game, my entire team could die and I could pull off a win with rushed hurricanes via bombing coms (After bombing all enemy air players and then any who attempt to go air)

Not enough people appreciate T1 AA (chainsaw/eradicator especially, although they won't stop the bombers from hitting their target, they stop the bombing player from flying over your team with the same set of bombers killing everything)

Also even if T1 fighters did many times the damage they currently do against T2 bombers, the T2 air player would just send T2 fighters, which absolutely massacre T1 fighters, while the T2 bombers fly through the fighter-battle to win.
User avatar
TheFatController
Balanced Annihilation Developer
Posts: 1177
Joined: 10 Dec 2006, 18:46

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.84

Post by TheFatController »

There's quite a large disadvantage already in:
- Starting air.
- Blowing up your commander near the start.

But I suppose in really large games this doesn't mean a lot if you can hide behind someone.

I'll give the buildorder a go and see if any parts of it are too fast :P
el_matarife
Posts: 933
Joined: 27 Feb 2006, 02:04

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.84

Post by el_matarife »

Another dumb unit chasing: Krows chase planes they can't fire at. I'm beginning to believe the engine shouldn't have units chasing anything in their "no target" category by default.
YHCIR
Posts: 190
Joined: 12 Aug 2006, 23:06

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.84

Post by YHCIR »

Not sure what can be done about this but it's possible to make fighters not fire (T1 at least).
e.g. You are using a dragonfly, with a fighter chasing you, just as it catches up with you, if you fly towards it, it will not fire and will go around for another pass.
Another thing, sometimes if you order fighters to attack a moving plane, they will shoot the ground.
Probably both engine bugs though.

As for improving T1 fighters, increasing their speed would help a fair bit.
User avatar
ginekolog
Posts: 837
Joined: 27 Feb 2006, 13:49

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.84

Post by ginekolog »

jellyman wrote:Should something be done about Mar3usmc style heavy bomber rush?

That is Self D commander going for t2 as soon as possible, and then send a solid squad of heavy bombers to bomb everything in the opponent's back row.
Very easy counter is that one member goes fast T2 air himself and makes some T2 figters.. gg bombers. And in big games u allways need 1 air start or its just a bad team. Or T1 bombing as u said..

This fast t2 bombing is very risky strat and should win unprepred opponents.. just like fast, unscouted nuke . Thats why 1 air start is must in big teamgames, doh.
User avatar
Gota
Posts: 7151
Joined: 11 Jan 2008, 16:55

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.84

Post by Gota »

But why must flacks and long range missiles be useless for their cost?
User avatar
caldera
Posts: 388
Joined: 18 Oct 2005, 20:56

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.84

Post by caldera »

if the commander wreck had less m there would be no nuke or bomber-rush.
the wreck should have enough m to prevent senseless combombing though.
User avatar
TheFatController
Balanced Annihilation Developer
Posts: 1177
Joined: 10 Dec 2006, 18:46

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.84

Post by TheFatController »

Gota wrote:But why must flacks and long range missiles be useless for their cost?
Thanks for your feedback gota :)
erkicman
Posts: 3
Joined: 12 Mar 2009, 16:25

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.84

Post by erkicman »

Is there a centralized database for Balanced Annihilation information? Or a Wiki? Can't seem to find tech-trees or any reason why anyone would possibly want to play Core over Arm (Core doesn't seem to have an answer to Warriors or Janus).
User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.84

Post by Pxtl »

http://modinfo.adune.nl/index.php?MOD=ba684 contains the stats of the units.

imho, Core instigators and AKs tend to reward micromanagement a little better than their Arm counterparts. Also, there's the bladewing, which, while useless for stand-alone assaults (unlike it's counterpart), is freakishly useful in supporting your ground-troops. And there's the core Leveller, which makes spectacularly short work of flashtanks (but very little else, unfortunately).
User avatar
Gota
Posts: 7151
Joined: 11 Jan 2008, 16:55

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.84

Post by Gota »

TheFatController wrote:
Gota wrote:But why must flacks and long range missiles be useless for their cost?
Thanks for your feedback gota :)

Pff pm me any time and ill give u plenty of it.
YokoZar
Posts: 883
Joined: 15 Jul 2007, 22:02

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.84

Post by YokoZar »

Pxtl wrote:http://modinfo.adune.nl/index.php?MOD=ba684 contains the stats of the units.

imho, Core instigators and AKs tend to reward micromanagement a little better than their Arm counterparts. Also, there's the bladewing, which, while useless for stand-alone assaults (unlike it's counterpart), is freakishly useful in supporting your ground-troops. And there's the core Leveller, which makes spectacularly short work of flashtanks (but very little else, unfortunately).
The leveler makes even shorter work of peewee and AK
erkicman
Posts: 3
Joined: 12 Mar 2009, 16:25

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.84

Post by erkicman »

Okay, thanks. Found out how to use the site.

The way I see it, Leveler makes short work of flash, Peewee and AK. However, Janus makes short work of everything, and it can shoot over wreckage; Arm still wins.

I guess that whatever equivalent units and buildings exist between Arm and Core, Core can build it cheaper. Gotta make use of that in my play.
Raptor
Posts: 33
Joined: 01 Feb 2009, 08:12

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.84

Post by Raptor »

Core T1 stuff is usually cheaper, but not always.
AK's have slightly more range than Peewees (but lower dps, even more so when they are using theyr only advantage over peewees and stay out of theyr range).
Peewee is better. Ak makes the better spotter for Rocket Kbots, but that hardly matters since fleas are even better.
Generally speaking Storms and Thuds are slightly better than Rockos and Hammers. Rez Kbots are 100% the same.
Having Fleas and Warriors still makes arm the better side at T1 Kbot combat imho.
Its fine though, at least with the situation we have right now (Core T2 Kbots having alot more usefull units than Arm T2 Kbots).

On vehicles... imho in 1vs1's going core is suicide, thx to flash. I've only played a handfull of 1vs1's, so any 1v1 pros feel free to correct me, but afaik there are only very few maps where core stands a chance.
Levelers are fine though, imho. They slaughter any light kbots, even pyros and zippers. You've just gotta have about 5 of them, 1-2 wont be able to keep the enemy at bay. Janus doesnt have the rate of fire to keep knocking fast kbots back.
For the same reason Janus gets swarmed so much easier by scoutspam. Janus is a little bit like a T1 Banisher, Levelers are closer to Gollis.
User avatar
kburts
Posts: 134
Joined: 22 Mar 2009, 00:36

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.84

Post by kburts »

this is a very nice game!
YokoZar
Posts: 883
Joined: 15 Jul 2007, 22:02

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.84

Post by YokoZar »

So, some tests on the "partially submerged krogoth" on tabula v3 (in the middle, depth = -38 or -50)

1) Krogoth can fire all his weapons
2) Krogoth can also walk straight through sharks teeth. It isn't destroyed or anything, he just goes through it.
3) Krogoth is helpless against 4 or so t1 submarines, who can stand in front of it and block its path. He can't shoot them, or use his step-on attack. Even if he did manage to attack ground at them somehow, all his weapons only do 5 damage.


So, I recommend Krogoth destroys sharks teeth when he walks through them much like he does trees. As for subs, he should be able to use his step on attack to kill them (since he can use it on amphib). Also, make sure the crush weapon can fire even when the Krog is completely underwater.
User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.84

Post by Pxtl »

The Janus is the best unit in the game in any battle that will only last 1 Janus shot. If the Janus has to reload to fire again, it's less useful. The Leveller, by contrast, can take a second shot if the first one doesn't kill everything you need to kill. Which, when you're dealing with a farking river of raider tanks, is kind of important. Plus it has a bigger blast and more impact.

But yeah, I'd rather the Leveller was an arced shot, too.
YokoZar
Posts: 883
Joined: 15 Jul 2007, 22:02

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.84

Post by YokoZar »

Also sharks teeth are still really expensive (20 m / 600 e a piece). This should probably be changed since they're not nearly as useful as dragons teeth in the open ocean
Post Reply

Return to “Balanced Annihilation”