[old] Balanced Annihilation V6.85

[Pxtl]

So, to reiterate, why not just give the comm a powerful short-ranged torpedo launcher as a standard, non-D-gun weapon? Make him into an oversized Gimp. Even if he eats Destroyers for breakfast, no sane player would let a Destroyer get into his firing range, considering how freakishly slow he is compared to boats, particularly underwater.

Is it possible to change a unit's primary weapon in-game? If so, that's where I'd go - if the comm is underwater, his laser is replaced with a torpedo-launcher with about the same range as the Destroyer's depthcharges (400), with equal (or possibly greater) power.

It won't break the main seagame since the Comm is too slow to use in such occasions. If you're worried about commpushing, just give static torpedo-launchers an anti-comm bonus like every other static defense in the game.

[Sleksa]

So, to reiterate, why not just give the comm a powerful short-ranged torpedo launcher as a standard, non-D-gun weapon? Make him into an oversized Gimp. Even if he eats Destroyers for breakfast, no sane player would let a Destroyer get into his firing range, considering how freakishly slow he is compared to boats, particularly underwater.

Is it possible to change a unit's primary weapon in-game? If so, that's where I'd go - if the comm is underwater, his laser is replaced with a torpedo-launcher with about the same range as the Destroyer's depthcharges (400), with equal (or possibly greater) power.

It won't break the main seagame since the Comm is too slow to use in such occasions. If you're worried about commpushing, just give static torpedo-launchers an anti-comm bonus like every other static defense in the game.

Well a commander is pretty hard to spot when he goes underwater, which can be used for things like , killing the enemy's tidal farms, camping his sealine so he cant build a seayard, or pushing his army off (nanoshield+repeat on+underwater metal storage)

Also the thing about destroyers and sea in general is that they are VERY clumsy, and if youre going head on towards a invisible commander, turning around would take 10+ seconds

And the problem with torp launchers being the counter to commpushing is their cost, its not feasible to use 300+ metal turrets to defend against the commander in early-mid game.

Giving the commander the ability to defend itself alone underwater would seriously break the way seamaps are played currently, and its not a serious option to implement into a conservative mod~~

[Klopper]

Thx for doing a great job with BA for a long time Noize!

Any opinions about the flying comwreck stuff?

[Pxtl]

In hindsight you're right - the powerlevel I had in mind is way too drastic - but perhaps a weak weapon, strong enough that he could take down scouts and scare off frigates? TheFatController is looking to fix the unforgiving nature of the very beginning of the sea game, and I see arming the comm underwater as the best option - much better than a floating LLT, which was apparently the original idea.

I do worry about a straight-up commrush, but I don't know if the comm is fast enough to be effective at that. Could a comm even _arrive_ at the enemy base before there was at least one anti-sub weapon in play? Then again, you're right about the barrier to entry - the cheapest anti-sub weapon is the TL, which is 300 metal. Sonar is dirt cheap, but sonar just tells you that you're screwed, not what to do about it.

I still think an torpedo-comm would work fine on maps with large oceans, but I agree that commrushing would be a problem on smaller water-maps.

[pintle]

Torp com would royally fuck up sands of war.

I dunno about BA but in SA and XTA com can reclaim scout boats very very fast (he can capture them even faster in xta - didn't TFC recently buff com capture speed?)

I think sea is one of the more enjoyable elements of BA tbh

[ginekolog]

sea is fun and balanced.. torpedo laucnher is cheap and very good against initail rush. Sea have many diff start tactics.. scouts, vets, subs or even odd fast dest (mostily fail).

[Sleksa]

The earlygame counters that i know are land-torp launchers, llts and reclaiming like pintle said.

and the best part is that the commander can build both, so arming him more seems just weird.

You also have the option to tank the enemy corvette with your own, while repairing it with the commander's insane repair speed~~

[Pxtl]

Yeah, 'vette tanking while using the comm for repair is my usual approach. Positioning torpedo launchers (land or sea-based) is too risky since it's easy to find sweet spots with the defense-range widget. I was just trying to think of something better than the "LLTs for boats" thing.

[Pressure Line]

you could make the comm laser fire underwater...

also making it so the laser towers will target partially submerged land units might be nice (also see: any game on Tropical)

[YokoZar]

Using your comm to capture scout boats is surprisingly viable given the recent increase in capture speed.

Also bug: I had a torpedo launcher built next to an underwater metal extractor, and even though it could see it it kept missing. This was on Tropical (lower left metal extractor), with the torp launcher really close to it. It would aim down but hit the sea floor next to it somehow.


Also I'm curious what the reason that naval engineers can't make the advanced torpedo launchers is. Advanced torp launchers are the best anti-sub-killer weapon (though cruisers are ok), however they can only be built by the construction submarine, which tends to die very quickly to a single shark.

[Idleking]

[..]Advanced torp launchers [..] can only be built by the construction submarine, which tends to die very quickly to a single shark.

But the Naval Engineer does not?
Hum.. I never tested this, but i can't imagine the Naval Engineer has much more HP..

[Raptor]

Advanced torp launchers are the best anti-sub-killer weapon (though cruisers are ok)

Cruisers are kinda meh as a anti-sub weapon.
Destroyers depthcharge has 84 dps, range 400, sonar 400.
Cruisers adv. depthcharge has 73 dps, range 500, sonar 375.

Destroyers accelerate faster and have higher speed.. and you can make 2 for the price of 1 cruiser. Buildtime is not a problem anymore either once you have a few sea engineers and thanks to those you can recycle em just as faster after they are done with the subkillers (since in a T2 seabattle, I dont see them being good for much more than killing subkillers... they become a specialist unit at that point).

[..]Advanced torp launchers [..] can only be built by the construction submarine, which tends to die very quickly to a single shark.

But the Naval Engineer does not?
Hum.. I never tested this, but i can't imagine the Naval Engineer has much more HP..

Well, for one its not a sub. (sub killer vs subcon... )
And... actually the Naval Engineer has over 3 times the HP of a subcon.

/Edit: So in other words: a subkiller will only need 2 shots* to kill a subcon while it needs 6 torpedos to kill a Naval Engineer (and you can build 3 Engineers for the same cost and buildtime of 1 subcon, so make that 18 torpedos).

But to get to the point... I also think Naval Engineers should be able to build Adv. Torpedo launchers & Adv. Sonar.

Right now they have 2 functions:
1.) Making T1 ships when one is at T2 and has recycled his t1 shipyard,
2.) Assisting T2 shipyards and subcons. (where they often get replaced later by subcons anyway since they stack and dont block other ships path.)
Would be nice if they had a additional role, such as making T2 d-fenz and sonars.
Maybe take the T1 torpedo and T1 sonar out of theyr buildmenu instead? If someone would, for whatever reason, still want to build T1 d-fenz at T2, he can just make himself a T1 seacon with the Naval Engineer.

*Shouldn't the subcon be in the category L2 sub and take 400 dmg from the subkiller? Cuz right now it ain't and takes only 250.

[karton]

Krows cant attack planes which landed on the ground ... kinda weird.

[Idleking]

[..]actually the Naval Engineer has over 3 times the HP of a subcon.[..]

Hell yeah, checked that recently.

And i agree 'bout that T2-capability of the Engineer...

[Pxtl]

Krows cant attack planes which landed on the ground ... kinda weird.

BA (and Spring in general) doesn't make a distinction between units that are on the ground and units that are in the air for the purposes of selecting targets.

Imho, this is a bug - there should be target category tags that are available for units that are underwater, on the land, or in the air, regardless of what the unit's actual type is. I'd love to see SAM weapons that targetted kbots knocked into the air by concussion fire.

[Pxtl]

[..]actually the Naval Engineer has over 3 times the HP of a subcon.[..]

Hell yeah, checked that recently.

And i agree 'bout that T2-capability of the Engineer...

I do wonder if it isn't making the consub useless for anything but econ. The eng's stats make the consub look pretty sick - the sub's only edge is that it's submerged, and that it can build those T2 doodads.

[Abaddon]

Krows cant attack planes which landed on the ground ... kinda weird.

And AA can, which is weird too..

[Idleking]

[..]Imho, this is a bug - there should be target category tags that are available for units that are underwater, on the land, or in the air, regardless of what the unit's actual type is. I'd love to see SAM weapons that targetted kbots knocked into the air by concussion fire.

That screwed targetting thingie...
I generally wonder why Missiles (the flying things with "lock-on"-feature ) can not be locked on onto vehicles..
I think a missile doen't necessarily care about onto what it is locked on - but that would totally screw up the balance-thing, so let's just forget about it

And to summarize all this.. I think i forgot what i intended to say when i started writint this post

[YokoZar]

[..]actually the Naval Engineer has over 3 times the HP of a subcon.[..]

Hell yeah, checked that recently.

And i agree 'bout that T2-capability of the Engineer...

I do wonder if it isn't making the consub useless for anything but econ. The eng's stats make the consub look pretty sick - the sub's only edge is that it's submerged, and that it can build those T2 doodads.

Which is fine, honestly. The main problem is that the t2 torpedo launcher is hardly ever used because it requires the consub, and it's very easy (and cost effective) to suicide a single shark to kill any consub that's approaching the line. This makes forward building adv torp launchers almost impossible.

Consubs have a nice advantage in that if you have entirely consubs you can secretly make a completely underwater econ monster.

Also naval engineers have an interesting disadvantage: unlike every other con unit, they don't have their own built in energy/metal production. t1 construction ships make .25 metal and 25 energy for a cost of 16 more metal than the engineer. Now, they have 250 instead of 400 build power, so you can think of it like this:

8 conships = 2000 total build power, same as 5 engineers

8 conships cost 255*8 metal and 2130 * 8 energy = 2040 metal and 17040 energy, or 139440 total energy cost

5 engineers cost 213*5 metal and 3725 * 5 energy = 1065 metal and 18525 energy, or 82425 total energy cost

but those 8 conships produce .25 * 8 metal and 25*8 energy = 2 metal and 400 energy, quite significant. So, for an extra expense of 975 metal and -1485 energy you get +2 metal and +400 energy, so you're paying 975 -1485/60 = 950.25 metal cost for 2*60 + 400 = 520 energy per tick, which is very much worth it (520 / 950.25 = .54, which is way more efficient than building advanced fusions)*

So, basically, construction ships making tidals are better econ than naval engineers making tidals. They have slightly higher build time though.

* If tide >= 49, then it's actually not worth it since building tidals is more efficient than this. But tide that high is way too high anyway -- tide >= 26 is already more efficient than advanced fusions. Tide >= 21 is more effiicent than underwater fusions.

[YokoZar]

So basically:
Advanced con sub: Is a sub, can make underwater moho mines and underwater moho makers. Underwater fusion is ok if you need to conserve space, which isn't true on big water maps. can also make the targetting facility and the t2 torp launcher. Feels fine.
Engineer: Can repair, build pelicans/gimps, can also make tidals when it's not busy with combat stuff, can make destroyers which are ok antisub.
Resurrection sub: is cheap, relatively fast, can reclaim wrecks and repair just like res bots unless they have a shark
Construction boat: best econ unit period unless tide <= 20, in which case you need a single adv con sub to start the underwater fusions


It's not clear to me what the best way to counter sub killers is other than lots of sub killers. It'd be nice to have the advanced torpedo launcher as well, but that means it needs to be built by engineers (now, let's be honest - how often have you seen them used?). Most players should have only 1 advanced con sub tailed by a bunch of con ships for econ.

I think we haven't really had this discussion about t2 sea balance because it's so rare to have t2 sea face eachother, even on maps with large open oceans. In fact you might be more likely to see t2 sea on maps with glorified rivers precisely because you can make land defences to counter the early rush (llt kill scout boats). So, make floating LLT please - they'd stop the rush without killing destroyers quite nicely.