Balanced Annihilation Development - Page 4

Balanced Annihilation Development

Classic game design, maintained to please you...

Moderators: Content Developer, Content Developer

User avatar
Jazcash
Posts: 5302
Joined: 08 Dec 2007, 17:39

Re: Balanced Annihilation Development

Post by Jazcash »

Can the non-BA players please get out.
0 x

User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Re: Balanced Annihilation Development

Post by Pxtl »

Everybody who plays Spring plays BA, because 90% of the time it's the only game online.

But seriously, BA sea is pretty well broken. There are a million ways to fix it, but almost all of them would involve tearing out so much it would be a completely new game. The piecemeal changes just break it worse (like nerfing FHLT, which made FHLTs totally useless).
0 x

User avatar
Jazcash
Posts: 5302
Joined: 08 Dec 2007, 17:39

Re: Balanced Annihilation Development

Post by Jazcash »

Pxtl wrote:Everybody who plays Spring plays BA, because 90% of the time it's the only game online.

But seriously, BA sea is pretty well broken. There are a million ways to fix it, but almost all of them would involve tearing out so much it would be a completely new game. The piecemeal changes just break it worse (like nerfing FHLT, which made FHLTs totally useless).
Yeh, I've been wanting BA to scrap sea or redo it completely for a long time.
0 x

User avatar
TradeMark
Posts: 4867
Joined: 17 Feb 2006, 15:58

Re: Balanced Annihilation Development

Post by TradeMark »

why dont you do it yourself instead of waiting someone else do it? not that hard to change some numbers in FBI files...
0 x

User avatar
Jazcash
Posts: 5302
Joined: 08 Dec 2007, 17:39

Re: Balanced Annihilation Development

Post by Jazcash »

TradeMark wrote:why dont you do it yourself instead of waiting someone else do it? not that hard to change some numbers in FBI files...
Because I'm not a BA dev. And it's not so much the traits and stats of the units, more the models, the bugs, slowness and general failure of them.
0 x

User avatar
JohannesH
Posts: 1793
Joined: 07 Apr 2009, 12:43

Re: Balanced Annihilation Development

Post by JohannesH »

What bugs...
0 x

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

Re: Balanced Annihilation Development

Post by Wombat »

what, ba got no bugs
0 x

User avatar
TradeMark
Posts: 4867
Joined: 17 Feb 2006, 15:58

Re: Balanced Annihilation Development

Post by TradeMark »

JAZCASH wrote:Because I'm not a BA dev. And it's not so much the traits and stats of the units, more the models, the bugs, slowness and general failure of them.
you can do all that in the FBI files, the look of units wont affect gameplay.
0 x

User avatar
Jazcash
Posts: 5302
Joined: 08 Dec 2007, 17:39

Re: Balanced Annihilation Development

Post by Jazcash »

Units getting stuck in the land.

Water transports not being able to path, unload/load, move or exist correctly.

Most the units that should be able to kill sea labs, can't.

Can't see water mexes properly in current Spring version.

It's cramped to have tons of cons assisting a lab rather than a nice neat block of nanos.

Once a land player has a BB, water pretty much is screwed seeing as it can't defend against plasma.

You pretty much can't defend against air if you're in sea on most maps due to the sea AA sucking and the fact most bombers shoot way before the AA even starts shooting back.

Com has no way of defending against sub attacks apart from reclaim or capture.

There's a few other reasons but I can't be bothered to go digging for more. Naval units are generally slow and suck at pathing, exiting from labs. They turn to the side when they stop and loads of other annoying things so yeah.
0 x

User avatar
TradeMark
Posts: 4867
Joined: 17 Feb 2006, 15:58

Re: Balanced Annihilation Development

Post by TradeMark »

JAZCASH wrote:Units getting stuck in the land.
engine bug?
JAZCASH wrote:Water transports not being able to path, unload/load, move or exist correctly.
engine bug?
JAZCASH wrote:Most the units that should be able to kill sea labs, can't.
engine bug?
JAZCASH wrote:Can't see water mexes properly in current Spring version.
engine bug?
JAZCASH wrote:It's cramped to have tons of cons assisting a lab rather than a nice neat block of nanos.
yeah maybe we should have water nanos...
JAZCASH wrote:Once a land player has a BB, water pretty much is screwed seeing as it can't defend against plasma.
well... you already failed the game if you gave them time to build a BB. And you failed even more if you didnt build Air units on water/ground map... amphibious units ftw.
JAZCASH wrote:You pretty much can't defend against air if you're in sea on most maps due to the sea AA sucking and the fact most bombers shoot way before the AA even starts shooting back.
Move your AA on front of your base, not in the middle of your base.
JAZCASH wrote:Com has no way of defending against sub attacks apart from reclaim or capture.
I like it that way, com is not meant to be some all-capable-superman... if we want it to shoot torpedos, then we need to give him AA cannon too, and ability to fly.
0 x

User avatar
Jazcash
Posts: 5302
Joined: 08 Dec 2007, 17:39

Re: Balanced Annihilation Development

Post by Jazcash »

TradeMark wrote:
JAZCASH wrote:Once a land player has a BB, water pretty much is screwed seeing as it can't defend against plasma.
well... you already failed the game if you gave them time to build a BB. And you failed even more if you didnt build Air units on water/ground map... amphibious units ftw.
I can rush a BB in less than 10 mins on a traditional 3 1.8 mex setup. So yeh, a quick elimination for water tbh.
TradeMark wrote:
JAZCASH wrote:You pretty much can't defend against air if you're in sea on most maps due to the sea AA sucking and the fact most bombers shoot way before the AA even starts shooting back.
Move your AA on front of your base, not in the middle of your base.
That's why I said most maps as most water maps don't have enough room to protect the base sufficiently.
TradeMark wrote:
JAZCASH wrote:Com has no way of defending against sub attacks apart from reclaim or capture.
I like it that way, com is not meant to be some all-capable-superman... if we want it to shoot torpedos, then we need to give him AA cannon too, and ability to fly.
It already can shoot at air and can fly ( with trans ^_^ ).
0 x

User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Re: Balanced Annihilation Development

Post by Pxtl »

Idunno, build seaplanes? Are those swarmer planes any good?

As for shield-gens, the problem is that usually there's a building-gap between land and sea. Few sea-maps let you build your shield-gens right on the shoreline to protect your facs and surface-econ. Very few maps are like Tabula_v3 which provides a nice natural bertha-proof nook you can hide your L2 sea in (which is at risk of somebody plonking land-based arty on the shoreline).
0 x

User avatar
Jazcash
Posts: 5302
Joined: 08 Dec 2007, 17:39

Re: Balanced Annihilation Development

Post by Jazcash »

Sea should have mobile shield ships.
0 x

User avatar
TradeMark
Posts: 4867
Joined: 17 Feb 2006, 15:58

Re: Balanced Annihilation Development

Post by TradeMark »

JAZCASH wrote:Sea should have mobile shield ships.
then ground should have mobile shield tanks lol.

i prefer sea would have static shield buildings...
0 x

User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Re: Balanced Annihilation Development

Post by Pxtl »

or you could just put shields on the carrier. It already wears every other hat, why not shields too?
0 x

User avatar
TradeMark
Posts: 4867
Joined: 17 Feb 2006, 15:58

Re: Balanced Annihilation Development

Post by TradeMark »

yeah lets make antinuke in the ground shields too! and put aircraft carrier around it! and with just 1500 metal! and 7640 HP!
0 x

Hacked
Posts: 116
Joined: 15 Aug 2008, 18:06

Re: Balanced Annihilation Development

Post by Hacked »

that would have to have a pretty high buildtime and/or cost to be balanced
which wouldnt be too good since there are alot of circumstances where a timely construction of plasma shield is vital

i agree with the anti air issue
if you were the engineer designing anti air for your faction
why the hell would you give it such a short range?
flak can be set to explode later too,

i like how nota handled aa
0 x

User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Re: Balanced Annihilation Development

Post by Pxtl »

... I was actually joking about the shield-in-the-carrier.

To me, the best solution would be to focus on getting as much L2 stuff to be submersible as possible. Maybe even make the L2 lab submersible. Then make sure that surface-based weapons can't harm underwater units.

Right now, you can have underwater L2 econ - use consubs, fus, mexes, makers. Combined with using seaplane swarmers for AA and subs for your mainline military, you can have a force that doesn't float on the surface. The only real risk is your carrier, since you need antinuke coverage. Haven't tried it myself though.

The Amphibious Complex is underwater, isn't it? Iirc the seaplane lab used to be. Relying on those two facilities (after reclaiming your exposed L2 lab and all your L1 floating econ) would suck, though - there's no buildpower in them. Between consubs, conseaplanes, and amphicons, your buildpower/cost ratio is totally hosed.

Alternately, the jammer will help protect your mobile surface ships - you can keep them moving so that the LRPC player will have to keep scouting to hit them. Your L2 lab is still screwed though, since it gets spotted once and then LRPC'd into oblivion.
0 x

User avatar
JohannesH
Posts: 1793
Joined: 07 Apr 2009, 12:43

Re: Balanced Annihilation Development

Post by JohannesH »

If enemy has several berthas up shooting at your sea, how do you not deserve to lose? And you can still do some stuff since your buildpower moves.

And I'm not totally sure but underwater stuff can be harmed by berthas and other aoe weapons, depending on water depth.

Pure land vs sea combat, where does it even happen, besides some ffas, where 1 side likely has huge economy advantage anyway? Better would be to think how land&sea vs land&sea works, how they support each other.

Aand make core uw mex taller
0 x

Saktoth
Zero-K Developer
Posts: 2665
Joined: 28 Nov 2006, 13:22

Re: Balanced Annihilation Development

Post by Saktoth »

Can the non-sea players please shut up?

Bertha does extra damage to ships, you guys. If TFC/Noize didnt want bertha to beat ships, he'd just remove that.
JAZCASH wrote:Units getting stuck in the land.
Been unable to reproduce this since latest spring version.
Water transports not being able to path, unload/load, move or exist correctly.
Who uses water transports?
Most the units that should be able to kill sea labs, can't.
Fixed, and there are workarounds.
Can't see water mexes properly in current Spring version.
Huh?
It's cramped to have tons of cons assisting a lab rather than a nice neat block of nanos.
I thought you are dead by 10 mins with a bertha, how many cons you gonna have here? You'll have beaten the other sea player by the time you get to this point, so by then you'll switch to hovers, seaplanes etc.
You pretty much can't defend against air if you're in sea on most maps due to the sea AA sucking and the fact most bombers shoot way before the AA even starts shooting back.
Scout boats.
0 x

Post Reply

Return to “Balanced Annihilation”