well?Fatboy firing sound fixed
Anti-Air ships now <--- ???
HLLT guns now aim up/down properly rather than just aiming left/right,
Absolute Annihilation 1.5
Moderator: Moderators
-
RedDragonGecko
- Posts: 31
- Joined: 08 Jan 2006, 17:15
Now that you've withdrawn the Fark proposal, this new changelog looks pretty good to me, though we really need to address Water V Land balance soon.
I'm thinking elevation based range penalties (10% or so) for firing up onto cliffs, and weaker L2 ships... but I've been up for 66 hours now and I'm not making a lot of sense.
I'm thinking elevation based range penalties (10% or so) for firing up onto cliffs, and weaker L2 ships... but I've been up for 66 hours now and I'm not making a lot of sense.
Cadyr, i really don't like the gaurdian dubbleing as a coastal defence gun.
It's just that in some maps where water is always present, pepole build guardians for gaining ground (guardian pushing) and can acidently fend off any level 1 ship attacks thanks to the 3x damage the guardian does.
I'd rather have a coastal bombarer with fast moving shells to counter ships and possibly hovercrafts. With much less damage then a guardian (cept agint sea offcourse) and lower range (half of gaurdian? half and 1/3?) but lower cost, pepole won't use it agsint land targets.
I just hate it when you acidently counter something. Like building a peewee sqwad and they where able to shot down bombers. (okay, extreme example, but you get the point).
It's just that in some maps where water is always present, pepole build guardians for gaining ground (guardian pushing) and can acidently fend off any level 1 ship attacks thanks to the 3x damage the guardian does.
I'd rather have a coastal bombarer with fast moving shells to counter ships and possibly hovercrafts. With much less damage then a guardian (cept agint sea offcourse) and lower range (half of gaurdian? half and 1/3?) but lower cost, pepole won't use it agsint land targets.
I just hate it when you acidently counter something. Like building a peewee sqwad and they where able to shot down bombers. (okay, extreme example, but you get the point).
The trouble is that once you have a bit of sea secured, you can build ships, hovers, amph, aircraft. You can go anywhere, take the fight anywhere. But once you've lost access to the sea, you will never get back in if your opponent isn't completely useless. There is no way to take the fight back into the water unless you go air or loooots of hovers. But maybe that's just the way to go: If you lose access to the ocean, screw it and go air. tbh, I've never tried that before, but maybe a different strategy is better than new units or hacky balancing.
espylaub wrote:The trouble is that once you have a bit of sea secured, you can build ships, hovers, amph, aircraft. You can go anywhere, take the fight anywhere. But once you've lost access to the sea, you will never get back in if your opponent isn't completely useless. There is no way to take the fight back into the water unless you go air or loooots of hovers. But maybe that's just the way to go: If you lose access to the ocean, screw it and go air. tbh, I've never tried that before, but maybe a different strategy is better than new units or hacky balancing.
Guaridans cover HUGE amount of ground a will push back any level 1 sea attack in a couple of hits. just build a guardian and a then build torpedo launchers, (depthcharge if he's using subs) sonar and then a factory.
I would like to keep that option, but not so you "acidently" counters all attacks!
Hmm
Imho, OTA had the best approach: aquatic economy sucked. The real truth is that if you want to balance it out properly, the obvious solution is either to nerf the boats across the board (making them balance with land units) or to do something equally unpopular: remove the underwater moho mine and aquatic moho makers. This cripples the equatic economy and means that land-based players can overwhelm their aquatic counterparts by force of numbers, and that aquatic players _must_ claim land bases in order to have a viable economy. It worked well that way in OTA, and AA's introduction of high-economy water units broke that.
Unfortunately this suggestion will be so disgustingly unpopular (hell, I don't even like the idea) that it will get crushed under the weight of the flaming.
Of course, the alternate approach (across-the-board-nerfing of boats) would help make hovers useful (which are balanced against land units).
As for the complaints about the Fark: if you want to remove it's use as a "bulk assist unit" so that Core doesn't suffer because of not having it, you could convert it into a "combat assist unit" similar to the current function of the construction vehicle. That is, give it a tonne of armour and a long-ranged nanolathe so you can use it to reclaim fields and repair units outside of the safety of your base. Then you could set up it's nano strength to be proportional to that of a con-unit. Just make it low-mass so that swarms used for in-combat repairs can easily be broken up (but not destroyed) by artillery.
Of course, personally, I would just rather give the Core a corresponding "bulk assist unit" rather than removing the Fark's function as one.
Unfortunately this suggestion will be so disgustingly unpopular (hell, I don't even like the idea) that it will get crushed under the weight of the flaming.
Of course, the alternate approach (across-the-board-nerfing of boats) would help make hovers useful (which are balanced against land units).
As for the complaints about the Fark: if you want to remove it's use as a "bulk assist unit" so that Core doesn't suffer because of not having it, you could convert it into a "combat assist unit" similar to the current function of the construction vehicle. That is, give it a tonne of armour and a long-ranged nanolathe so you can use it to reclaim fields and repair units outside of the safety of your base. Then you could set up it's nano strength to be proportional to that of a con-unit. Just make it low-mass so that swarms used for in-combat repairs can easily be broken up (but not destroyed) by artillery.
Of course, personally, I would just rather give the Core a corresponding "bulk assist unit" rather than removing the Fark's function as one.
True Kixxe, but I was thinking more about lvl2 units.
The thing is, from a realism/scale/law of pyhsics point of view, huge ships should crush any land based opposition, it just makes sense. Yes, coastal batteries can work to some extent, but eventually, you will be outranged by ships. And while they grind your base into dust, you have no viable land based lvl2 weapon to counter a long range ship attack. Ok, nukes. Ok, lrpcs, but they hardly ever hit moving ships. If you ever reach that point all you can really do is abandon your base and build another one behind a hill somewhere.
Seriously, how do you win against someone who controls the sea with lvl2 ships? He can reach nearly anywhere with long range ships, and send aircraft, shivas, hovers around the hills where his ships can't fire, he has all options. You, on the other hand, can forget about amphib because they suck against a real navy, same holds true for hovercraft (in most cases), land units cant reach, so the only option is to go air like mad.
The question is: do we like that, because it is realistic and doable to some extent, or do we think this state of affairs makes the game too unbalanced?
e: what would be very nice if large ships where actually large. Cruisers twice as large, battleships 3 times as large, while retaining stats. Would make them a lot easier to hit, and it would look much more realistic. Yes, I have watched that Supcom trailer a lot. But it does make sense. I just don't know whether it can be done. Think of the lvl 2 shipyard size
The thing is, from a realism/scale/law of pyhsics point of view, huge ships should crush any land based opposition, it just makes sense. Yes, coastal batteries can work to some extent, but eventually, you will be outranged by ships. And while they grind your base into dust, you have no viable land based lvl2 weapon to counter a long range ship attack. Ok, nukes. Ok, lrpcs, but they hardly ever hit moving ships. If you ever reach that point all you can really do is abandon your base and build another one behind a hill somewhere.
Seriously, how do you win against someone who controls the sea with lvl2 ships? He can reach nearly anywhere with long range ships, and send aircraft, shivas, hovers around the hills where his ships can't fire, he has all options. You, on the other hand, can forget about amphib because they suck against a real navy, same holds true for hovercraft (in most cases), land units cant reach, so the only option is to go air like mad.
The question is: do we like that, because it is realistic and doable to some extent, or do we think this state of affairs makes the game too unbalanced?
e: what would be very nice if large ships where actually large. Cruisers twice as large, battleships 3 times as large, while retaining stats. Would make them a lot easier to hit, and it would look much more realistic. Yes, I have watched that Supcom trailer a lot. But it does make sense. I just don't know whether it can be done. Think of the lvl 2 shipyard size
What's the point of such a unit?? Experience target for destroyers?I'd rather have a coastal bombarer with fast moving shells to counter ships and possibly hovercrafts. With much less damage then a guardian (cept agint sea offcourse) and lower range (half of gaurdian? half and 1/3?)
Short/Medium-Range defense is already done by gaat-lasers.
Fine. same range as guardian then. Or longer. But unable to fire at land units. or something.Rayden wrote:What's the point of such a unit?? Experience target for destroyers?I'd rather have a coastal bombarer with fast moving shells to counter ships and possibly hovercrafts. With much less damage then a guardian (cept agint sea offcourse) and lower range (half of gaurdian? half and 1/3?)
Short/Medium-Range defense is already done by gaat-lasers.
I basicly want to seprate the gauridan's "I will kill your defences and push you back" function and the "I will pwn level 1 ships before you can say peewee and completly eliminate a level 1 navy to bombard coast line option" function. If you have a suggestion how to do this, please bring it to the table.
You're definately right Kixxe there is an unbalance between coast defense and lvl 1 ships.
Even if you build 2 destroyers they will deal less damage as a guardian and cost more metal. Additional they have less range.
And i have a solution proposal: Increase the armor of ships! Compared to land units a Guardian does about double to tripple damage to lvl 1 ships than lvl 1 bots. So a slight hp and major armor boost to lvl1 ships could help.
Even if you build 2 destroyers they will deal less damage as a guardian and cost more metal. Additional they have less range.
And i have a solution proposal: Increase the armor of ships! Compared to land units a Guardian does about double to tripple damage to lvl 1 ships than lvl 1 bots. So a slight hp and major armor boost to lvl1 ships could help.
Oh come on, that is no problem at all. In fact if you ask me they should pwn L1 ships, if he manages to build enough of them(one or two won't make a difference against massed attack). But building tons of guardians along the coast is just slowing your downfall, because you are investing a lot of resources into something that will get pwned by L2 ships/air. The point is that you can build one or two to protect the coast from raids long enough to build your own shipyard. And thy usually miss as hell anyway.Kixxe wrote:Cadyr, i really don't like the gaurdian dubbleing as a coastal defence gun.
It's just that in some maps where water is always present, pepole build guardians for gaining ground (guardian pushing) and can acidently fend off any level 1 ship attacks thanks to the 3x damage the guardian does.
I'd rather have a coastal bombarer with fast moving shells to counter ships and possibly hovercrafts. With much less damage then a guardian (cept agint sea offcourse) and lower range (half of gaurdian? half and 1/3?) but lower cost, pepole won't use it agsint land targets.
I just hate it when you acidently counter something. Like building a peewee sqwad and they where able to shot down bombers. (okay, extreme example, but you get the point).
OMG, LLT owned my two peewees! NERF!!! NERF!!!!
...Oh come on, that is no problem at all. In fact if you ask me they should pwn L1 ships, if he manages to build enough of them(one or two won't make a difference against massed attack). But building tons of guardians along the coast is just slowing your downfall, because you are investing a lot of resources into something that will get pwned by L2 ships/air. The point is that you can build one or two to protect the coast from raids long enough to build your own shipyard. And thy usually miss as hell anyway.
OMG, LLT owned my two peewees! NERF!!! NERF!!!!
TEST
POST
WIN
Guardians PWN lvl1 ships like there is no tommorow
Guardians being compared to LLTs is as stupid as Dstroyers being compared to PW
You need l2 ships to kill a guardian??? you do realise the only t2 ships worth getting are the messenger thingeys (maybe LRPC and AA ships in certain circumstances)...
Sea balance in AA is crap enough without there being a major imbalance between sea and land AND sea and air (torp bombers :\)
-
esteroth12
- Posts: 501
- Joined: 18 May 2006, 21:19
this should at least be done to the flagships... i was always wondering about how a flagship is so strong; its barely bigger than a battleship!espylaub wrote:...e: what would be very nice if large ships where actually large. Cruisers twice as large, battleships 3 times as large, while retaining stats. Would make them a lot easier to hit, and it would look much more realistic...
so... maybe a 1.33x size on cruiser, 1.75x size on B-ship, and 2.5x size on flagship? this would need an increase for the naval yard, but... why not?
this would also make it easier to hit them with lrpc's/guardians
also, i thought that you could that the current model for the mini lrpc for Core, and give it lrpc range, guardian cost, 0 damage to all land, and about guardian damage at sea or so, lrpc rate of fire... only effective at sea, because it does no damage to land... obviously, damage value and cost can be tweaked, but it shouldn't coast as much as a lrpc, huh? also you would make guardians do less specific damage, as they are less necessary