Balanced Annihilation V6.95 - Page 8

Balanced Annihilation V6.95

Classic game design, maintained to please you...

Moderator: Content Developer

Locked
User avatar
Wombat
Posts: 3379
Joined: 15 Dec 2008, 15:53

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.95

Post by Wombat »

no, i mean sea is porc mainly coz of torp launcher (in t1)
123vtemp
Posts: 217
Joined: 20 Mar 2008, 11:02

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.95

Post by 123vtemp »

BA balance fails.

If you want balance go elsewhere.

Same for game play.
User avatar
Wombat
Posts: 3379
Joined: 15 Dec 2008, 15:53

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.95

Post by Wombat »

go play tetris ful, its balanced
User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.95

Post by Pxtl »

Wombat wrote:no, i mean sea is porc mainly coz of torp launcher (in t1)
You mean the same torp launcher that can be raped by a single hover? Do they even outrange Destroyers? I don't remember.
eyu100
Posts: 182
Joined: 05 Jul 2008, 04:10

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.95

Post by eyu100 »

Pxtl wrote:
Wombat wrote:no, i mean sea is porc mainly coz of torp launcher (in t1)
You mean the same torp launcher that can be raped by a single hover? Do they even outrange Destroyers? I don't remember.
No, destroyers outrange them. Unfortunately for sea players, destroyers are the only cost-effective way to kill them (a hover platform would be expensive).
User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.95

Post by Pxtl »

How the hell is that "unfortunate"? At level 1, destroyers are the de-facto standard combat unit unless you're fighting hovers. They can destroy torp launchers with impunity.

And at 300 metal each, torps are a pricey investment for an immobile defense with such weaknesses.
eyu100
Posts: 182
Joined: 05 Jul 2008, 04:10

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.95

Post by eyu100 »

Pxtl wrote:How the hell is that "unfortunate"? At level 1, destroyers are the de-facto standard combat unit unless you're fighting hovers. They can destroy torp launchers with impunity.

And at 300 metal each, torps are a pricey investment for an immobile defense with such weaknesses.
Torp launchers cost less than HLT's and are harder to rush (because sea units are more expensive), making them extremely effective against anything but destroyers and hovers. Each (large) sea on Small Supreme Battlefield rarely has more than 4 players, and even with two players a few torp launchers are built. Compare this to small games on large land maps, where HLT's are hardly ever built. Part of this is because there is no LLT equivalent for sea, but it is also because torp launchers are good defenses. Even using destroyers to attack torps in the early game is risky. If you make a mistake, your destroyer can take a lot of damage and then get killed by subs, leaving the enemy with a lot of metal. It also slows your expansion a lot. This is especially important on SSB, probably the most played sea map, which has a lot of sea mex spots. (I'm not saying that sea is too porcy - I think it is easier to kill people in sea than on land. I'm just saying that torp launchers are quite powerful.)
User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.95

Post by Pxtl »

I agree they're quite powerful... I just think they're the correct magnitude of "quite powerful" and not OP in any way. Torp launcher is the LLT of the sea.

Personally, if I were doing a TA-style mod, I'd take it further and buff the cannons while nerfing the DCs of the destroyer (and cutting the range of the TL) - this would make subs king of the open water, but force the player to fall back on destroyers wherever defenses occur. And make torp launchers (but not subs) hit hovertanks.

Fortunatley for all who don't want to experience such gameplay, I'm not doing anything like that.
moriarty
Posts: 30
Joined: 17 Jul 2009, 18:27

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.95

Post by moriarty »

Hi,
I've tried spring with this mod (6.95), but whenever it gets to 0 on the count-down at the start of a new game, the game crashes out. Doesn't seem to matter what map or how many AI's, always happens.
Any ideas why?

See also, this thread: http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=19474
YokoZar
Posts: 883
Joined: 15 Jul 2007, 22:02

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.95

Post by YokoZar »

flop wrote:
YokoZar wrote:Once you get past early t1, the sea game gets much more lively - hovers, cruisers, battleships, pelicans, gimps, subs, real torpedo launchers -- these are fun units to battle with, but it's incredibly rare to have t2 ship to ship.
REAL TORPEDO LAUNCHERS?! :0
Ok so the t1 torpedo launcher is good enough to own scout boats and corvettes but it's pretty expensive
User avatar
TheFatController
Balanced Annihilation Developer
Posts: 1177
Joined: 10 Dec 2006, 18:46

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.95

Post by TheFatController »

Just so everyone knows as I haven't been in the lobby much the last week or two, partly busy with RL stuff and partly waiting for the resurrect bug to be fixed in the engine before any new BA release goes ahead..
User avatar
Jazcash
Posts: 5309
Joined: 08 Dec 2007, 17:39

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.95

Post by Jazcash »

I know there's been a couple load screen submissions for future releases, but I've been wondering this for awhile now.

Would there be any way to make load screens for many resolutions and then Spring loads the right resolution image according to your resolution input in the Spring Settings?

This would be epic cause atm, a lot of load screens look awesome on the right resolution and ugly on others.
User avatar
hunterw
Posts: 1838
Joined: 14 May 2006, 12:22

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.95

Post by hunterw »

JAZCASH wrote:I know there's been a couple load screen submissions for future releases, but I've been wondering this for awhile now.

Would there be any way to make load screens for many resolutions and then Spring loads the right resolution image according to your resolution input in the Spring Settings?

This would be epic cause atm, a lot of load screens look awesome on the right resolution and ugly on others.
probably, but then this makes the mod way bigger in filesize and fuck that. best to just use high resolution ones and stretch them smaller.

afaik the only thing we are waiting on is a BA logo to overlay on all my scrennys 8)
User avatar
CCBlackmilk
Posts: 62
Joined: 03 Jul 2009, 03:20

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.95

Post by CCBlackmilk »

For the most part, the two major problems need to be fixed:

Resurrection Bug (HATE IT because a com is worthless thereafter, and, if you don't pay attention it will disappear eventually.)

Sea Balance (this is more long-term but, imo lots of issues need to be fixed. Range does not mean that a cons should have an incredibly slow turn rate which also includes an incredibly slow unpack/repack time.
User avatar
Jazcash
Posts: 5309
Joined: 08 Dec 2007, 17:39

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.95

Post by Jazcash »

New exploit discovered: You can nap moving coms. You probably know about this already. If not, PM me.
User avatar
1v0ry_k1ng
Posts: 4656
Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 10:24

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.95

Post by 1v0ry_k1ng »

any chance of that pw/ak e-cost/bt adjustment someday?

http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=44&t=19436
User avatar
Wombat
Posts: 3379
Joined: 15 Dec 2008, 15:53

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.95

Post by Wombat »

decrease pw m cost and aks e cost thats all D: (tho i vote 1 that they are balanced)
eyu100
Posts: 182
Joined: 05 Jul 2008, 04:10

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.95

Post by eyu100 »

JAZCASH wrote:New exploit discovered: You can nap moving coms. You probably know about this already. If not, PM me.
It's apparently been possible since OTA. It would probably (with my limited understanding of the engine) be hard to fix without an engine change since whether napping is successful or not depends only on the position of the transport and the com, and not on the com's movement.
User avatar
ChaosMonkey
Posts: 180
Joined: 06 Jul 2009, 21:21

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.95

Post by ChaosMonkey »

eyu100 wrote:
JAZCASH wrote:New exploit discovered: You can nap moving coms. You probably know about this already. If not, PM me.
It's apparently been possible since OTA. It would probably (with my limited understanding of the engine) be hard to fix without an engine change since whether napping is successful or not depends only on the position of the transport and the com, and not on the com's movement.
no it depends on if u have the widget or not sillyface
User avatar
TheFatController
Balanced Annihilation Developer
Posts: 1177
Joined: 10 Dec 2006, 18:46

Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.95

Post by TheFatController »

A fix should be possible in Lua so expect a new version soon with it patched.
Locked

Return to “Balanced Annihilation”