I bet youre wrong ^^
Join PA channel on lobby to see our work (yes i am not alone), first release may be done next weekend, but as i dont want to spam new release it may be longer.
For first big arguing session we were close to be 12-15 BA players for suggestions, and few no-BA players.
New project
Moderator: Moderators
Re: New project
Vehicule/Kbots T2 Factory -20% energie and metal cost
this sounds like death to t1 for me
this sounds like death to t1 for me
Re: New project
On the commbomb:
The problem with the comm is that it's more than a sum of its features - each feature of the comm works with the others. You take away one part of the comm, and it falls apart like a house of cards. The expensive wreck counteracts the commboom. The commboom counteracts the D-gun or putting your entire resources into a comm-assassination. The D-gun and firepower make the comm an important defense/offense, but the comm cost helps reduce its effectiveness as offense.
You take any of these away and the comm starts to fall apart.
Also, I have to agree with the other sentiments - if you want to hit L2, then you have to make L1 super-porcy. This is why DSD is so popular - DSD's bases are tough to crack (except for the lowland starts), which buys players the time to hit L2.
The problem with the comm is that it's more than a sum of its features - each feature of the comm works with the others. You take away one part of the comm, and it falls apart like a house of cards. The expensive wreck counteracts the commboom. The commboom counteracts the D-gun or putting your entire resources into a comm-assassination. The D-gun and firepower make the comm an important defense/offense, but the comm cost helps reduce its effectiveness as offense.
You take any of these away and the comm starts to fall apart.
Also, I have to agree with the other sentiments - if you want to hit L2, then you have to make L1 super-porcy. This is why DSD is so popular - DSD's bases are tough to crack (except for the lowland starts), which buys players the time to hit L2.
Re: New project
So dont make t1.Wombat wrote:Vehicule/Kbots T2 Factory -20% energie and metal cost
this sounds like death to t1 for me
next
Re: New project
hahaha now that was funny :D looks like i dont have to worry, this will die fast :D
Re: New project
triton, just an idea on the topic of *annihilation... i'd like to see you do something with "the lost legacy".
heres a link to a mod "supreme legacy" by wingflier. iirc, it has similar balance to SA, and has gameplay features that are more akin to BA. we played it a lot for about 2 weeks, but then wingflier seemed to go missing
and people hated the balance. i'd be interested to see what a *pro* player such as yourself might do with the balance in this mod... and as it's essentially TA with 3 races instead of 2... adds a ton more possible strategies.
DO EEET.
http://www.springfiles.com/show_file.php?id=1839
heres a link to a mod "supreme legacy" by wingflier. iirc, it has similar balance to SA, and has gameplay features that are more akin to BA. we played it a lot for about 2 weeks, but then wingflier seemed to go missing
and people hated the balance. i'd be interested to see what a *pro* player such as yourself might do with the balance in this mod... and as it's essentially TA with 3 races instead of 2... adds a ton more possible strategies.DO EEET.
http://www.springfiles.com/show_file.php?id=1839
Re: New project
Pxtl You don't have to make t1 porcier.
What you can do is decrease T2 lab costs and make t2 units powerful enough to return the investment and make sure the overall process does not take too long so that it can work even in top tier 1v1 games.
Also,expect more T2-T3 in your team games.
Of course if you introduce T2 earlier in game expect some units from the later t1 game to be used for a shorter period of time.
Question is do you want to finish the game with Stumpy spam or golly spam?
Another point is that IMO the popularity of DSD shows that having a bit porcier mod does not decrease the fun and only opens more opportunities to use more elaborate tactics and strategies.
Kaiser.
Supreme Legacy was incomplete in several ways.
Many unit types were missing in the third faction,like the entire navy for example.
Also build pics need to be completely remade.
and the third faction needs to be fixed balance wise.
Also from what i know about Wing's balance changes it did not have a more BAish gameplay.
For PA.
I think that making the gameplay more balanced by giving t2 a bit more room at higher tiers by making labs cheaper while making T2 a bit less porcy and decreasing com wreckage will create a but better overall gameplay.
What you can do is decrease T2 lab costs and make t2 units powerful enough to return the investment and make sure the overall process does not take too long so that it can work even in top tier 1v1 games.
Also,expect more T2-T3 in your team games.
Of course if you introduce T2 earlier in game expect some units from the later t1 game to be used for a shorter period of time.
Question is do you want to finish the game with Stumpy spam or golly spam?
Another point is that IMO the popularity of DSD shows that having a bit porcier mod does not decrease the fun and only opens more opportunities to use more elaborate tactics and strategies.
Kaiser.
Supreme Legacy was incomplete in several ways.
Many unit types were missing in the third faction,like the entire navy for example.
Also build pics need to be completely remade.
and the third faction needs to be fixed balance wise.
Also from what i know about Wing's balance changes it did not have a more BAish gameplay.
For PA.
I think that making the gameplay more balanced by giving t2 a bit more room at higher tiers by making labs cheaper while making T2 a bit less porcy and decreasing com wreckage will create a but better overall gameplay.
Re: New project
That might work, but prolly you'll just see people skip a lot of T1 in serious games. 1-3 Jeffy / Weezl, done.What you can do is decrease T2 lab costs and make t2 units powerful enough to return the investment and make sure the overall process does not take too long so that it can work even in top tier 1v1 games.
Ran into that problem with P.U.R.E., had to set the speed-bump in terms of cost pretty high to make it go away. It's better (imo) to simply make T2 well worth the cost, once you get there, by being able to do things T1 can't... like kill T1 defense pretty easily. RPS, and all that.
It's important (imo) that T1 be able to rush- one-shot kills should be possible, at least on maps designed for match play (who gives a hoot about huge maps for lolz). It should be a betting-man's game, though, imo. If they build some defenses, your early raid should get eaten if you don't pull out immediately, and then you lost your resources. If they didn't, or you scout around it and they don't respond, you win.
Problem is, in BA, it's really not a betting-man's game atm. It's difficult to cover your base and your mines on maps that don't have a lot of choke, vs. an aggressive opponent who knows the metal spots well (or just has that view on all the time, or a Widget, etc.). So it's basically rush to weezl or whatever-is-slightly-op-cheap-and-fast-today, since that changes slightly every release.
That, and making static defense, especially the early stuff, work better is sooooo much nicer for nubs. It gives them a little breathing room, and a little safety to try and actually play for a bit before the more experienced player pwns them after teching up or scouting their base.
Yeah, yeah, experienced players whine about "nub porc"... well, that's mainly because it's such a complete waste of resources atm. Make it work better, and it won't be whining about "nub porc"- everybody will build some defense, and teching up will become a much bigger part of the game's flow, unless somebody's just really skilled / lucky today.
Re: New project
Wait.
From what I understood you want it to be possible to rush from the start and if the opponent bet right and build counter you will most likely lose and if he didnt you will most likely win?
On the other hand you say BA is not like that BECAUSE defences suck?
If defences suck it means its harder to defend overall which means the game's outcome depends much more on what units you both made(its more a betting game).
I think in BA it is like what you described you want.
It IS a betting game because defences are not that good.
The better the players and the more micro they are capable of,the worse defences get.
I dont know much about pure but I can guess that it wasnt stress tested as much as BA(no offence).
The better the players the cheaper T2 labs need to get to get included in the game because good players know better how to exploit the lack of resources/troops of the enemy(cause he is investing in a T2 lab) and win.
Maybe you had to Make T2 in PURE more expensive because it wasnt played enough and nobody became suffeciently profecient to show that you dont need T2 to cost much to make that cause the investing player to lose?
I agree about the point that people will use T1 less if you also have T2 included more in the average game.
I wrote a gigantic post about my thoughts on the matter (http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.ph ... &start=160).
If say,BA,starts including T2 more but also retains all the T1 play it had before T2 than The average game time must have increased.
If addin gT2 but not decreasing T1 play time is truly the desire than I think several things can achieve this(without making defences more effecient).
#1 The Commander needs to become tougher or have several power layers that can be striped down by suffecient attacking(like if u cause it enough dmg(but not enough to kill it) it will start producing less resources(or whatever other punishment).
#2 Metal makers need to become more effecient to make the game a bit less depandant on expansion(or maybe they already are effecient enough to allow that but this option was not explored enough yet).
Or T2 mexes need to be much less effecient or just provide a smaller eco boost by costing less but also producing less.
#3 defences should have less build time but cost more to make them more effecient when being repaired but not change their effeciency when they are not being repaired.
#4 make T2 units just a bit more effecient than T1.
These are however huge chanegs in gameplay.
I do think that without doing something similar or somehting else to increase the average gametime T1 units,upon the introduction of T2 units will get less play time.
From what I understood you want it to be possible to rush from the start and if the opponent bet right and build counter you will most likely lose and if he didnt you will most likely win?
On the other hand you say BA is not like that BECAUSE defences suck?
If defences suck it means its harder to defend overall which means the game's outcome depends much more on what units you both made(its more a betting game).
I think in BA it is like what you described you want.
It IS a betting game because defences are not that good.
The better the players and the more micro they are capable of,the worse defences get.
I dont know much about pure but I can guess that it wasnt stress tested as much as BA(no offence).
The better the players the cheaper T2 labs need to get to get included in the game because good players know better how to exploit the lack of resources/troops of the enemy(cause he is investing in a T2 lab) and win.
Maybe you had to Make T2 in PURE more expensive because it wasnt played enough and nobody became suffeciently profecient to show that you dont need T2 to cost much to make that cause the investing player to lose?
I agree about the point that people will use T1 less if you also have T2 included more in the average game.
I wrote a gigantic post about my thoughts on the matter (http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.ph ... &start=160).
If say,BA,starts including T2 more but also retains all the T1 play it had before T2 than The average game time must have increased.
If addin gT2 but not decreasing T1 play time is truly the desire than I think several things can achieve this(without making defences more effecient).
#1 The Commander needs to become tougher or have several power layers that can be striped down by suffecient attacking(like if u cause it enough dmg(but not enough to kill it) it will start producing less resources(or whatever other punishment).
#2 Metal makers need to become more effecient to make the game a bit less depandant on expansion(or maybe they already are effecient enough to allow that but this option was not explored enough yet).
Or T2 mexes need to be much less effecient or just provide a smaller eco boost by costing less but also producing less.
#3 defences should have less build time but cost more to make them more effecient when being repaired but not change their effeciency when they are not being repaired.
#4 make T2 units just a bit more effecient than T1.
These are however huge chanegs in gameplay.
I do think that without doing something similar or somehting else to increase the average gametime T1 units,upon the introduction of T2 units will get less play time.
Re: New project
I just plain disagree with everything you've said there.
1. It doesn't matter whether T2's cheaper. The game stays at T1 in serious play because you can generally win with a handful of units, 1V1. There are various ways to fix that, but the easiest and most nub-friendly by far is to make T1 defenses actually worth building.
Try it. It takes 30 seconds to alter the LLT and make it not suck. Just increase either it's damage or range by 150%- that should be about right, IDK, haven't looked at the numbers lately. See how that one change affects the game. I think you will be very surprised what happens, if a LLT can be expected to kill 3 weezl every time, period, as a for-instance.
2. If you make metal extractors work better, that just means that rush players will rush harder, sooner, and have more stuff streaming in. That's just dumb- it won't bring T2 faster, it will just let rushers get there quicker. If you want a better power curve, you can go look at the numbers for upgrading mines to T2, and get rid of the stupid clunky OTA stuff where you have to vaporize your mine- I put a straightforward upgrade Gadget in P.U.R.E. for the Resistance energy buildings, maybe read it?
3. Defenses that cost even MORE vs. their crappy effectiveness sounds like a complete disaster. Especially since increasing cost == choke early, due to the way the economy works. I thought you were supposedly a fan of doing game design via math... so maybe do some, it doesn't take a genius to see that making something that doesn't work cost even more and demand more payout during a shorter time period is not a step forward.
And the real solution is NOT COST, IT IS EFFECTIVENESS. Make LLTs KILL THINGS, like they did in OTA.
4. If you don't want static defenses to work, take them out of the game entirely and just make T1 counters to rushers that totally pwn them for cost and are worthless vs. buildings or a third RPS unit- that's pretty much what CA did. They also have static defenses that still aren't quite worth cost, but at least they recognized that tech tiers have to have inherent RPS to allow for a structured flow.
Lastly... if you haven't played P.U.R.E., tbh I suggest trying it out, it's basically implementing everything I'm talking about. I would be the first to say that it isn't perfectly balanced yet, but it got pretty close at the end, and offers more real counters during early play, imo, and you will usually see T2 and T3 in serious games. The Demo's free, and comes with 3 missions and Skirmish (which will pwn you on hard), so no, there's no excuse for you, go get it, and see what I'm talking about.
1. It doesn't matter whether T2's cheaper. The game stays at T1 in serious play because you can generally win with a handful of units, 1V1. There are various ways to fix that, but the easiest and most nub-friendly by far is to make T1 defenses actually worth building.
Try it. It takes 30 seconds to alter the LLT and make it not suck. Just increase either it's damage or range by 150%- that should be about right, IDK, haven't looked at the numbers lately. See how that one change affects the game. I think you will be very surprised what happens, if a LLT can be expected to kill 3 weezl every time, period, as a for-instance.
2. If you make metal extractors work better, that just means that rush players will rush harder, sooner, and have more stuff streaming in. That's just dumb- it won't bring T2 faster, it will just let rushers get there quicker. If you want a better power curve, you can go look at the numbers for upgrading mines to T2, and get rid of the stupid clunky OTA stuff where you have to vaporize your mine- I put a straightforward upgrade Gadget in P.U.R.E. for the Resistance energy buildings, maybe read it?
3. Defenses that cost even MORE vs. their crappy effectiveness sounds like a complete disaster. Especially since increasing cost == choke early, due to the way the economy works. I thought you were supposedly a fan of doing game design via math... so maybe do some, it doesn't take a genius to see that making something that doesn't work cost even more and demand more payout during a shorter time period is not a step forward.
And the real solution is NOT COST, IT IS EFFECTIVENESS. Make LLTs KILL THINGS, like they did in OTA.
4. If you don't want static defenses to work, take them out of the game entirely and just make T1 counters to rushers that totally pwn them for cost and are worthless vs. buildings or a third RPS unit- that's pretty much what CA did. They also have static defenses that still aren't quite worth cost, but at least they recognized that tech tiers have to have inherent RPS to allow for a structured flow.
Lastly... if you haven't played P.U.R.E., tbh I suggest trying it out, it's basically implementing everything I'm talking about. I would be the first to say that it isn't perfectly balanced yet, but it got pretty close at the end, and offers more real counters during early play, imo, and you will usually see T2 and T3 in serious games. The Demo's free, and comes with 3 missions and Skirmish (which will pwn you on hard), so no, there's no excuse for you, go get it, and see what I'm talking about.
Re: New project
I just wan to make it clear that I am trying to discuss Pro AnnihilationArgh wrote:I just plain disagree with everything you've said there.
1. It doesn't matter whether T2's cheaper. The game stays at T1 in serious play because you can generally win with a handful of units, 1V1. There are various ways to fix that, but the easiest and most nub-friendly by far is to make T1 defenses actually worth building.
Try it. It takes 30 seconds to alter the LLT and make it not suck. Just increase either it's damage or range by 150%- that should be about right, IDK, haven't looked at the numbers lately. See how that one change affects the game. I think you will be very surprised what happens, if a LLT can be expected to kill 3 weezl every time, period, as a for-instance.
2. If you make metal extractors work better, that just means that rush players will rush harder, sooner, and have more stuff streaming in. That's just dumb- it won't bring T2 faster, it will just let rushers get there quicker. If you want a better power curve, you can go look at the numbers for upgrading mines to T2, and get rid of the stupid clunky OTA stuff where you have to vaporize your mine- I put a straightforward upgrade Gadget in P.U.R.E. for the Resistance energy buildings, maybe read it?
3. Defenses that cost even MORE vs. their crappy effectiveness sounds like a complete disaster. Especially since increasing cost == choke early, due to the way the economy works. I thought you were supposedly a fan of doing game design via math... so maybe do some, it doesn't take a genius to see that making something that doesn't work cost even more and demand more payout during a shorter time period is not a step forward.
And the real solution is NOT COST, IT IS EFFECTIVENESS. Make LLTs KILL THINGS, like they did in OTA.
4. If you don't want static defenses to work, take them out of the game entirely and just make T1 counters to rushers that totally pwn them for cost and are worthless vs. buildings or a third RPS unit- that's pretty much what CA did. They also have static defenses that still aren't quite worth cost, but at least they recognized that tech tiers have to have inherent RPS to allow for a structured flow.
Lastly... if you haven't played P.U.R.E., tbh I suggest trying it out, it's basically implementing everything I'm talking about. I would be the first to say that it isn't perfectly balanced yet, but it got pretty close at the end, and offers more real counters during early play, imo, and you will usually see T2 and T3 in serious games. The Demo's free, and comes with 3 missions and Skirmish, so no, there's no excuse for you, go get it, and see what I'm talking about.
and Balanced annihilation That is BA.Games which most player do not want to have better defences.
PA is not a one man project so many options and opinion must be considered and none want BA to have more effective defences(at least from the discussions i read in PA channel).
to 1:t2?T2 labs cheaper,T2 untis cheaper or both?
If only T2 labs and we are talking about BA-PA it means that it is possible T2 units in BA are just more cost effective in most situations since htis has not been tested enough.
If T2 units are indeed more cost effecient than T1 units
than there will be a cost of T2 tha twil lrended T1 untis almost useless in all cases.
If you meant only T2 units than at the current T2 lab costs if you make T2 untis extremly effecient(much more than they are now) than it will be possible for a player to porc up completely and make a T2 lab jus tto have the first 2-3 T2 units completely obliterating the T1 unit mass of the opponent.
2:you did not read my post carefully,I wrote metal makers.
3:I wrote make em cost more but build faster.
Build time and Cost in metal and energy are part of a total cost which means that you can play with build time and M and e but keep the unit at the same effeciency(to a certain extant).
If your defences build less time but increase M and E costs properly to keep the unit at the same effeciency defending as a whole will improve since with micro you can repair turrets faster without losing resources since repair costs 0(repair speed is influanced by a units build time).
4:I did not say I dont want them to work.
Statics in BA do get used even in top tier games.
Aside from M e and build time Statics also have a micro cost and a psychological influance.
Also I want to remind you again that I am discussing BA-PA both projects that are not interested in increasing the cost of defences hence i am immidietly took that into account.
I really feel you did not spend anough time reading my post(or maybe I was just unclear in which case its my fault).
Do you also disagree that to allow T2 play time without taking any time from t1 play and leaving it as it is you need to make the average game last longer?How else can you try and keep all the gameplay elements and unit use that is currently present in BA while adding more and all in the same time frame?
Last edited by Gota on 08 Dec 2009, 11:25, edited 1 time in total.
Re: New project
== choke.I wrote make em cost more but build faster
Anyhow, if you're not going to address the problems, I'm done here. Good luck with yet-another completely pointless rebal.
Re: New project
LolMake LLTs KILL THINGS, like they did in OTA.
It sure would be interesting to see an llt that can kill 3 weasels.
Re: New project
Just to see what I mean:
CORFAV:
buildcostenergy=256;
buildcostmetal=24;
buildtime=1104;
maxdamage=95;
Has CORE_LASER:
reloadtime=1;
default=50;
So, 3 of them do 150 DPS.
buildcostenergy=652;
buildcostmetal=84;
buildtime=2724;
maxdamage=585;
reloadtime=0.48;
default=75;
Takes 2 hits to kill Weasel. If it engages fast enough.
3 Weasels should win pretty easily, because the LLT only gets the first shot for free, so they're going to get an average of 3 rounds at 150 DPS, 2 at 100, and the LLT's dead. And gee, build 4 if you want to make sure (and you really think your opponent's so stupid they'll build LLT). Your opponent won't even have another LLT up, so it's up to the Com. And gee, with that massive 480 range, I'm sure that LLT can defend your early expansions and your base...
Oh, wait... maps in Spring are often larger than OTA, very few mine-spots are within range of a single LLT. So, for all that cost (plus walk-time to get yer Boy there, don't forget)... you get defense that can't even reliably protect one mex... or your base. Gosh, a smart player wouldn't just conclude that instead of taking the chance of losing those Weasels, that you're completely unprotected elsewhere, eh? Gosh, who would play with metalmap on and just make a beeline for either your E or a mex, once they know you committed that much M&E&T to a LLT?
So, for LESS METAL and SLIGHTLY MORE ENERGY and SLIGHTLY MORE BUILDTIME, you get 3 MOBILE UNITS THAT CAN DEFEAT L1 DEFENSE, KILL THE BASE, RAID ENEMY MEXES, AND SCOUT.
And if it gets lucky, or you just make a beeline for the enemy's E... they can bring down a Com. Ok, 3's pushing it, but 3's the price of one LLT.
Oh, and did I mention that you can just keep streaming them, and then use a Widget to auto-micro them home when they get wounded so you can repair them? Oh, you don't have that Widget? I'm sorry, I guess you'll have to code it.
And that's just the Weasel.
T1 defenses are totally, completely worthless for cost. A T1 defense should eat Weasels in large numbers, and be a serious impediment to heavier T1, or have enough range to provide real coverage, so that if you invest in D, it eventually means you have... IDK, defenses that work, like they do IRL?
I mean, IRL, you don't expect an assault to work without 3:1 force ratios. That's, uh, 9 Weasels (at that point, realistically, it's time to invest in a different unit, like IDK, maybe the OP rocket trucks that can kite LLTs, which in OTA were countered by the equally-OP MTs that could shoot at ground).
IOW, that area of the map is now defended in a meaningful way. The whole reason I keep bringing this up is that the math's so fricking obvious, yet oh noes, we want to solve these things by doing something totally worthless, like decreasing the cost to tech up... instead of creating a good reason to tech up in the first place.
CORFAV:
buildcostenergy=256;
buildcostmetal=24;
buildtime=1104;
maxdamage=95;
Has CORE_LASER:
reloadtime=1;
default=50;
So, 3 of them do 150 DPS.
buildcostenergy=652;
buildcostmetal=84;
buildtime=2724;
maxdamage=585;
reloadtime=0.48;
default=75;
Takes 2 hits to kill Weasel. If it engages fast enough.
3 Weasels should win pretty easily, because the LLT only gets the first shot for free, so they're going to get an average of 3 rounds at 150 DPS, 2 at 100, and the LLT's dead. And gee, build 4 if you want to make sure (and you really think your opponent's so stupid they'll build LLT). Your opponent won't even have another LLT up, so it's up to the Com. And gee, with that massive 480 range, I'm sure that LLT can defend your early expansions and your base...
Oh, wait... maps in Spring are often larger than OTA, very few mine-spots are within range of a single LLT. So, for all that cost (plus walk-time to get yer Boy there, don't forget)... you get defense that can't even reliably protect one mex... or your base. Gosh, a smart player wouldn't just conclude that instead of taking the chance of losing those Weasels, that you're completely unprotected elsewhere, eh? Gosh, who would play with metalmap on and just make a beeline for either your E or a mex, once they know you committed that much M&E&T to a LLT?
So, for LESS METAL and SLIGHTLY MORE ENERGY and SLIGHTLY MORE BUILDTIME, you get 3 MOBILE UNITS THAT CAN DEFEAT L1 DEFENSE, KILL THE BASE, RAID ENEMY MEXES, AND SCOUT.
And if it gets lucky, or you just make a beeline for the enemy's E... they can bring down a Com. Ok, 3's pushing it, but 3's the price of one LLT.
Oh, and did I mention that you can just keep streaming them, and then use a Widget to auto-micro them home when they get wounded so you can repair them? Oh, you don't have that Widget? I'm sorry, I guess you'll have to code it.
And that's just the Weasel.
T1 defenses are totally, completely worthless for cost. A T1 defense should eat Weasels in large numbers, and be a serious impediment to heavier T1, or have enough range to provide real coverage, so that if you invest in D, it eventually means you have... IDK, defenses that work, like they do IRL?
I mean, IRL, you don't expect an assault to work without 3:1 force ratios. That's, uh, 9 Weasels (at that point, realistically, it's time to invest in a different unit, like IDK, maybe the OP rocket trucks that can kite LLTs, which in OTA were countered by the equally-OP MTs that could shoot at ground).
IOW, that area of the map is now defended in a meaningful way. The whole reason I keep bringing this up is that the math's so fricking obvious, yet oh noes, we want to solve these things by doing something totally worthless, like decreasing the cost to tech up... instead of creating a good reason to tech up in the first place.
-
1v0ry_k1ng
- Posts: 4656
- Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 10:24
Re: New project
You could have tested the above in 2 minutes and proved yourself completely wrong without looking like an idiot BUT NO,
Last edited by 1v0ry_k1ng on 08 Dec 2009, 13:33, edited 1 time in total.
Re: New project
I forgot about the stupid way the Weasels work in BA, and have been massively and artificially nerfed. Sue me.
Fine, fine, LLTs pwn Weasels, thanks to artificial crap. 2 Instigators at:
buildcostenergy=1042;
buildcostmetal=118;
buildtime=1761;
Always win, and neither dies. It's almost a twofer on metal, admittedly, but you can repeat it on the cheap, just send it back to base.
Slashers always win, and they don't have to enter range, because they have magic vision and see farther than Instigators for no particular reason.
Instigators are apparently blind- never mind that we can see the CEG and beam of stuff attacking us, so we know right where that LLT is.
And I'm sure there are many other things in T1 which eat LLTs for far less than real cost. The point's the same- at T1, there aren't any defenses in BA that can't be very easily countered without having to lose units.
Meh, I just tested, and 2 Slashers utterly pwned a GAAT and a HLLT- supposedly T2 defenses.
They couldn't even engage without radar, then due to not having falloff fixed and firing a low-area beamweapon at a radar target, the GAAT couldn't take down either Slasher, and the HLLT was totally unable to engage.
This is balanced, eh? These are defenses worth buying? Why? What are they defeating? 'Gator rushes? At more than cost?
Last edited by Argh on 08 Dec 2009, 13:44, edited 1 time in total.
-
1v0ry_k1ng
- Posts: 4656
- Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 10:24
Re: New project
You could have played the game online once and proved yourself completely wrong without looking like an idiot BUT NO,
Re: New project
Fine. Tell me, genius, when do you build a GAAT? What situation would legitimately call for it? Why wouldn't your opponent just pwn it with Slashers, let alone other counters?
Re: New project
Sometimes its best not to wade into foreign waters, regardless of how correct or incorrect you are
It's also disrespectful to attack foreigners who wade into your pond, they may not know everything about your patch, but you shouldnt treat them as if they're veterans of your clan. If they speak the truth it will show, else it will be plain as day
It's also disrespectful to attack foreigners who wade into your pond, they may not know everything about your patch, but you shouldnt treat them as if they're veterans of your clan. If they speak the truth it will show, else it will be plain as day
-
Google_Frog
- Moderator
- Posts: 2464
- Joined: 12 Oct 2007, 09:24
Re: New project
In CA defences are the most cost effective units beating many times their cost. CA's progression to heavier units works partially with defences that make raiding unviable past a certain point. It staggers me how Argh can be so wrong so often.If you don't want static defenses to work, take them out of the game entirely and just make T1 counters to rushers that totally pwn them for cost and are worthless vs. buildings or a third RPS unit- that's pretty much what CA did.
I think a game needs a way to cement territory if costly tech is going to be viable. PA is probably planning something like that so I'll stop here instead of looking stupid like Argh.