Eternal Annihilation (v1.04)
Moderator: Content Developer
-
- Posts: 86
- Joined: 23 Dec 2008, 20:26
Re: Yet Another BA Fork - Eternal Annihilation (v1.02)
on the other hand, i feel that different poeple have different opinions, which would contradict when working on the same mod
somebody should have the last word
somebody should have the last word
Re: Yet Another BA Fork - Eternal Annihilation (v1.02)
Seems to play fine so far for me.
Although i agree dropped bomb number nerf might be too much, bombers already got recent heavy reload time nerf from BA and cost increase in this one.
Although i agree dropped bomb number nerf might be too much, bombers already got recent heavy reload time nerf from BA and cost increase in this one.
Re: Yet Another BA Fork - Eternal Annihilation (v1.02)
What is the reasoning behind the EMP vs moving targets thing? As far as i can see, its just a good reason to keep everything on patrol or repeat move all the time, or is it actually to make EMP better vs buildings (In which case, why not make it better vs buildings?).
- BrainDamage
- Lobby Developer
- Posts: 1164
- Joined: 25 Sep 2006, 13:56
Re: Yet Another BA Fork - Eternal Annihilation (v1.02)
just wanted to say that this is not necessary; you could have for example the same base content then all tweaks done in separate mutators; or even a self contained archive that switches balance modes with modoptionsGota wrote:Nobody ever wants to.I have asked several people.
I suppose everyone wants to be king of their own game,have their own vision and are not willing to compromise on it.
We are all basically doing the same work like 10 times...adding the same models same effects same widgets adjusting and fixing the same bugs etc..
It's a great use of man hours...especially in a small community like this one.
Re: Yet Another BA Fork - Eternal Annihilation (v1.02)
Yes..BrainDamage wrote:just wanted to say that this is not necessary; you could have for example the same base content then all tweaks done in separate mutators; or even a self contained archive that switches balance modes with modoptionsGota wrote:Nobody ever wants to.I have asked several people.
I suppose everyone wants to be king of their own game,have their own vision and are not willing to compromise on it.
We are all basically doing the same work like 10 times...adding the same models same effects same widgets adjusting and fixing the same bugs etc..
It's a great use of man hours...especially in a small community like this one.
This would mean though that people will need to actually cooperate and accept the idea that other people's work might also be good.
- TheFatController
- Balanced Annihilation Developer
- Posts: 1177
- Joined: 10 Dec 2006, 18:46
Re: Yet Another BA Fork - Eternal Annihilation (v1.02)
Imo it's incorrect to determine that this will never affect non-buildings because the extreme case of autopacing every unit technically exists. Only a minority of people even autopace their com for comnaps so doing this for every unit isn't likely (plus the problems this would cause with units facing the wrong way and blocking stuff would outweigh the minor benefit). Even in the extreme case this still affects stopped builders using their nanolathes.Saktoth wrote:What is the reasoning behind the EMP vs moving targets thing? As far as i can see, its just a good reason to keep everything on patrol or repeat move all the time, or is it actually to make EMP better vs buildings (In which case, why not make it better vs buildings?).
The general direction is to make attacks vs an EMP guarded enemy a bit more effective, tho the actual impact ingame is quite small.
I also want to note that there was an unintentional change to Bladewings which made them less effective than intended which is fixed for 1.03 (their beamtime was doubled which causes them to waste a lot of damage).
- SirArtturi
- Posts: 1164
- Joined: 23 Jan 2008, 18:29
Re: Yet Another BA Fork - Eternal Annihilation (v1.02)
Problem with reducing effectiviness of EMP to moving targets is that stilettos and spiders become even less worthwile cost/buildtime effective etc. than before.
Re: Yet Another BA Fork - Eternal Annihilation
Sorry, DA is already taken - Drolito Annihilation. Couldn't find working links anymore... :<luckywaldo7 wrote:He skipped DA and went right to EA! This man means business!
Re: Yet Another BA Fork - Eternal Annihilation (v1.02)
Next up, GA - Gratuitous Annihilation.
Re: Yet Another BA Fork - Eternal Annihilation (v1.02)
does anyone dare to write all the *A mods in spring's history?
Re: Yet Another BA Fork - Eternal Annihilation
Iirc, there was also a Delta Annihilation.Teutooni wrote:Sorry, DA is already taken - Drolito Annihilation. Couldn't find working links anymore... :<luckywaldo7 wrote:He skipped DA and went right to EA! This man means business!
I know GA was Gundam Annihilation. And H was Hardcore Annihilation. Was there an F? Or an I?
Re: Yet Another BA Fork - Eternal Annihilation (v1.02)
I dont think anyone would be stupid enough to call his mod FA...
Re: Yet Another BA Fork - Eternal Annihilation (v1.02)
forb-dorbing angellation!
edit: i'd really love to see you do a complete re-vamp of t1 sea, any plans on changes in that area?
edit: i'd really love to see you do a complete re-vamp of t1 sea, any plans on changes in that area?
Re: Yet Another BA Fork - Eternal Annihilation (v1.02)
TheFatController wrote:Imo it's incorrect to determine that this will never affect non-buildings because the extreme case of autopacing every unit technically exists. Only a minority of people even autopace their com for comnaps so doing this for every unit isn't likely (plus the problems this would cause with units facing the wrong way and blocking stuff would outweigh the minor benefit). Even in the extreme case this still affects stopped builders using their nanolathes.Saktoth wrote:What is the reasoning behind the EMP vs moving targets thing? As far as i can see, its just a good reason to keep everything on patrol or repeat move all the time, or is it actually to make EMP better vs buildings (In which case, why not make it better vs buildings?).
The general direction is to make attacks vs an EMP guarded enemy a bit more effective, tho the actual impact ingame is quite small.
I also want to note that there was an unintentional change to Bladewings which made them less effective than intended which is fixed for 1.03 (their beamtime was doubled which causes them to waste a lot of damage).
Noone complain about blades except jazz anyway. Even Johan who sometime is playing arm too much is not complaining about that. There is a reason. To make EMP effective, you need good micro skill. Cause you can loose all your blade realy fast: one AA shoot and you loose 60 metal and 1K energy.
Blade did not need to be weaked at all: you actually see very few poeple using them. Poeple should focus on other balance issue than that. It is like if I was starting to complain forever about janus being able to fire above wreak in all thje threads whereas riot cannot.
Just revearse blades as they used to be
Re: Yet Another BA Fork - Eternal Annihilation (v1.02)
my 4 bulldogs + 2 flak just got ground to a halt by blade spam on tabula-v2 BA. They did have to take a timeout though.. >.>
Re: Yet Another BA Fork - Eternal Annihilation (v1.02)
I agree with albator, blades are fine. Only one person complains about them, and he just complains really loudly. They were balanced just fine as they were.
Re: Yet Another BA Fork - Eternal Annihilation (v1.02)
Things have to change if its a new mod. Sounds like bladewings haven't changed much. See if you can spot the difference and revert it if it breaks anything.?
Re: Yet Another BA Fork - Eternal Annihilation (v1.02)
Change for the sake of change is dumb. It needs focus and reason.momfreeek wrote:Things have to change if its a new mod. Sounds like bladewings haven't changed much. See if you can spot the difference and revert it if it breaks anything.?
Bladewings are balanced, thus, rebalancing is pointless and a step backwards.
Re: Yet Another BA Fork - Eternal Annihilation (v1.02)
Is it now unbalanced? If not, then what is the issue? There is more to unit behaviour than just balance (what about gameplay?) and any change will have its objectors.
Re: Yet Another BA Fork - Eternal Annihilation (v1.02)
I know many people who complain about Blades. And it's the opposite of me sucking with them, I find them too easy. You have a giant army rushing at you, raiders, stumpys, flash, maybe even a few sams. I'm Core, wut 2 do? I know! Spam Blades in their dozens, easily EMP the whole army, kill them all with scouts.albator wrote:Noone complain about blades except jazz anyway. Even Johan who sometime is playing arm too much is not complaining about that. There is a reason. To make EMP effective, you need good micro skill. Cause you can loose all your blade realy fast: one AA shoot and you loose 60 metal and 1K energy.
Blade did not need to be weaked at all: you actually see very few poeple using them. Poeple should focus on other balance issue than that. It is like if I was starting to complain forever about janus being able to fire above wreak in all thje threads whereas riot cannot.
Just revearse blades as they used to be
Seriously, say what you like, Blades were OP, now they're not so bad. If this change is reverted I will assassinate Albator myself.