I made a little spreadsheet: http://www.fileuniverse.com/?p=showitem&ID=2377
This is for arm, but I assume core isnt much different. I was a little surprised to find how efficient con ships, nanotowers and seaplanes were. I think that this really shows the need for a core assist vehicle that is a equivalent to a fark. In each cateegory(buildtime, energy cost, metal cost), the lvl 2 convehicle is 10th in efficiency at best. The lvl 1 is not much better.
Absolute Annihilation: Spring[old]
Moderator: Moderators
-
Forboding Angel
- Evolution RTS Developer
- Posts: 14673
- Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 02:43
-
Forboding Angel
- Evolution RTS Developer
- Posts: 14673
- Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 02:43
dave, I believe that you were on TS at the time... but deci figured out a really good algorithm for fixing core vehicle nano power, because I know for a fact that caydr does not want to give core an assist vehicle, so we are working around that for a solution.
Edit:
Does any of you arm players notice that any competant core player has lv 2 kbots before branching to any other tech? The answer is freakers.
Edit:
Does any of you arm players notice that any competant core player has lv 2 kbots before branching to any other tech? The answer is freakers.
Latest changelog:
Code: Select all
more changes added, scroll down a bit
Last edited by Caydr on 11 Feb 2006, 08:33, edited 1 time in total.
well, me and NOiZE have been playing comet a lot recently. could the flash dmg per round be reduced to 9? (from 10). it does seem overly powerful.
also maybe make the anti-swarm AA have less HP and make them a bit faster to build?
also one weird thing is the banisher missiles. if they are targetting a radar blob they will almost always hit it dead on, the missile will do the normal innacuracy thing, get close to the point on the map it is supposedly targetting and then at the last mniute swerve and hit the actual target head on. strange.
And make nukes more expensive but faster to build? i mean even when your opponent has no anti it still takes a stupidly long time to get A nuke let alone 4-5!
Changes to mobile nuke seem OTT. maybe make it cheaper and slightly faster to build and not mess with it's LoS etc? thats what RADAR/peepers are for! :)
oh and also maybe make the nuke slower but more powerful? its damn effective vs swarms right now when i invision it as more of a stalemate breaking weapon
Oh and deflectors are a bit too expensive and too long to build, for something that stops both your and your enemies arty its a bit silly. liking the large explosion radius but perhaps make it cheaper and reduce resistance to bombers?
also maybe make the anti-swarm AA have less HP and make them a bit faster to build?
also one weird thing is the banisher missiles. if they are targetting a radar blob they will almost always hit it dead on, the missile will do the normal innacuracy thing, get close to the point on the map it is supposedly targetting and then at the last mniute swerve and hit the actual target head on. strange.
And make nukes more expensive but faster to build? i mean even when your opponent has no anti it still takes a stupidly long time to get A nuke let alone 4-5!
Changes to mobile nuke seem OTT. maybe make it cheaper and slightly faster to build and not mess with it's LoS etc? thats what RADAR/peepers are for! :)
oh and also maybe make the nuke slower but more powerful? its damn effective vs swarms right now when i invision it as more of a stalemate breaking weapon
Oh and deflectors are a bit too expensive and too long to build, for something that stops both your and your enemies arty its a bit silly. liking the large explosion radius but perhaps make it cheaper and reduce resistance to bombers?
There are two common misonceptions I'd like to clear up. Firstly, energy nanostalling is virtually impossible if you build a solar collector first off. A lot of people build a mex first off, but this alone will eat away at your energy storage quite a bit. Naturally if it's a windy map, you probably want to go for wing gens at least at the beginning.
If you look at the history of OTA map making, the amount of wind available in Spring maps is unprecidented. It seems that people are starting to get smart about where they put metal and how much, but this still leaves wind power as something that needs to be fixed up. A good OTA-ish amount of wind would be 2-17 or so. Having it be 10-25 or something is way off the mark. A good forumla is, pick whatever number you want to be the maximum, and then subtract 15 from it to be the minimum. A variance of at least 15 is necessary in order to keep wind generators in their rightful place - a backup or emergency power supply. Right now it's been reversed - you build solars just in case wind goes below 20 for a few seconds.....
Anyway, AA has OTA stats for solar collectors. If they've worked for the past 8 years, there's obviously no reason to complain now. In an ideal situation, say on my map Altored Divide, wind gens should provide some extra energy income when you're low, or whatever, but they should be second to solars (and of course fusions etc). The problem isn't with AA being broken, it's the map-makers who aren't familiar with Total Annihilation standards. They've confused the community (who are almost all newbies) into thinking that this is the standard, while it's not.
The second thing is to do with Krogtaars. I hear them get complained about a lot, and I'm giving them a small boost now, but I don't see any reason for it to be honest. They're very good units which, alone, aren't comparable to something like a Bantha, but if you do a cost-for-cost analysis, you'll find that you can get somewhere in the vicinity of 2 Krogtaars for the price of one Bantha. Two Krogtaars will win versus a Bantha, regardless of the scenario.
If you'd like to see this for yourself, start up a game alone and type in:
.cheat
.give armbanth
(move the cursor to a location a short distance away)
.give 2 krogtaar
Now, give one of the "teams" to an AI opponent and see how the battle unfolds.
If you look at the history of OTA map making, the amount of wind available in Spring maps is unprecidented. It seems that people are starting to get smart about where they put metal and how much, but this still leaves wind power as something that needs to be fixed up. A good OTA-ish amount of wind would be 2-17 or so. Having it be 10-25 or something is way off the mark. A good forumla is, pick whatever number you want to be the maximum, and then subtract 15 from it to be the minimum. A variance of at least 15 is necessary in order to keep wind generators in their rightful place - a backup or emergency power supply. Right now it's been reversed - you build solars just in case wind goes below 20 for a few seconds.....
Anyway, AA has OTA stats for solar collectors. If they've worked for the past 8 years, there's obviously no reason to complain now. In an ideal situation, say on my map Altored Divide, wind gens should provide some extra energy income when you're low, or whatever, but they should be second to solars (and of course fusions etc). The problem isn't with AA being broken, it's the map-makers who aren't familiar with Total Annihilation standards. They've confused the community (who are almost all newbies) into thinking that this is the standard, while it's not.
The second thing is to do with Krogtaars. I hear them get complained about a lot, and I'm giving them a small boost now, but I don't see any reason for it to be honest. They're very good units which, alone, aren't comparable to something like a Bantha, but if you do a cost-for-cost analysis, you'll find that you can get somewhere in the vicinity of 2 Krogtaars for the price of one Bantha. Two Krogtaars will win versus a Bantha, regardless of the scenario.
If you'd like to see this for yourself, start up a game alone and type in:
.cheat
.give armbanth
(move the cursor to a location a short distance away)
.give 2 krogtaar
Now, give one of the "teams" to an AI opponent and see how the battle unfolds.
Code: Select all
Yeah, it was updated again, try the next page.
Last edited by Caydr on 13 Feb 2006, 08:38, edited 1 time in total.
Does this mean that the HLLTs (double LLTs) have been removed?Caydr wrote:Code: Select all
LT variant removed
If so; nooooo, I love those things!
-
DavetheBrave
- Posts: 281
- Joined: 22 Jun 2005, 02:52
Why the remove radar/jammer hovers??? Hovers have a tiny line of sight. The artillery and missile hovers cant even see to their range. Also, hardly anyone ever goes hovers because they are so expensive but generally useless.Caydr wrote:Code: Select all
1.42 --> 1.43 Inferno, Helios, MRUs, radar/jammer hovers, Mumbo removed, total unit count is now 381
The LT variant has nothing to do with HLLTs... it's just an idea I had. You probably noticed it in your list of game types to start, "AA 1.42-LT". Meant low tech, so there were no gantry units. This seemed to be in really high demand but I haven't seen more than one or two games of it played, total.
Radar/Jammer hovers had to be removed because they threw off what I'm trying to do with regular jammers/radars. Arm gets one as vehicle, one as kbot, and core vice versa... just for some variety.
Mobile nuke launchers.. remember they're not actually nukes, basically just a MERL or Diplomat on steroids. Ehh.... I guess I could call off that change though, for now.
Radar/Jammer hovers had to be removed because they threw off what I'm trying to do with regular jammers/radars. Arm gets one as vehicle, one as kbot, and core vice versa... just for some variety.
Mobile nuke launchers.. remember they're not actually nukes, basically just a MERL or Diplomat on steroids. Ehh.... I guess I could call off that change though, for now.
Ive never actually ever seen anyone use a tac nuke, maybe discard changes and make the explosion bigger, I hit an annihilator smack right in the centre and it was still standing - they dont seem very nukey! as you said just like a merl on steroids but takes 20 times longer to reload hehe
Annihilators are already easy to take down, if its on its own you can do it with 7 stumpys, or 8 zippers even less probably, making them weaker seems little too much maybe?
Annihilators are already easy to take down, if its on its own you can do it with 7 stumpys, or 8 zippers even less probably, making them weaker seems little too much maybe?
And a across the board CORE powerup. 