Spring RTS Engine

Aun wrote:

Min3mat wrote:noob ;P
(+1)

Ya mum is a (+1) =P

So... back on topic?

Are there any glaring issues with 1.46 that need to be addressed that we haven't yet raised?

Actually there is something I've been mearning to bring up.

Gunships, will try to target other gunships and circle around them but they can't fire at eachother..

I still don't know how the Unit Classes are setup, but are there individual groups setup for different types of planes? or is it a whole group setting?

So if 1 unit can't attack for example fighters or bombers, its not that specific, but includes any air unit?

A fundamental problem arises when gunships try to target other gunships and remain locked on target instead of attacking nearby ground targets, simply because the first thing they encountered on a partol or non-forced attack route was another gunship.

I do like to have my air units on active patrol if I can, just to have a view and protection units at locations I might neglect during a heated conflict elsewhere.

Min3mat wrote:what do you mean? i think Caydr was pointing out the guy was a utter noob because a 'radar jamming plane flying the same speed as transort planes' = transport with jammer loaded.

I thought there was a bug in the spring engine that meant transported jammers left a permanent area of jammed space when they were active in-flight, or has this changed?

(Bear in mind I haven't played that much over the last month due to revision)

Here is a idea of making the big berthas more of a strategical weapon, so that it would not bee so hatered and banned as often as it is now:

Make it drain energy something like 50000 / shot. You would need to build energy storages to be able to shoot with one, and building many BBs' would not benefit that much since you would need insane amounts of eng to shoot with multiple cannons at once. (let's face it, they are cheap to build and shoot atm.)

You could make them cost more but i think this way (making the shots cost more) would bring more tacticality to the game.

Then another point: Remove the energy storage capacity from the fusion reactors and stuff, which renders the E storages useless. I think the E storage is a nice building and using them should be encouraged. The storage capacity of a storage is nice as it is atm.

hawkki wrote:Here is a idea of making the big berthas more of a strategical weapon, so that it would not bee so hatered and banned as often as it is now:

Make it drain energy something like 50000 / shot. You would need to build energy storages to be able to shoot with one, and building many BBs' would not benefit that much since you would need insane amounts of eng to shoot with multiple cannons at once. (let's face it, they are cheap to build and shoot atm.)

It will cost the equivalent of 600+ metal to fire it.
Buzzsaws/vulcans should be cheaper tbh ive never seen anyone ever build one seriously. Radar targetting is way too expensive as well, should be 5x cheaper

The effect LRPC's is far more psycological than anythign else now. I've played plenty of games where I've been bombarded with them and it's annoying sure, but not really base threatening (unless you have lines of explosive builkdings, but then that's you're fault).

Removing (or at least reducing) the e-storage from factories and fusions etc could well be a good idea as e-storage buildings very rarely get used.

They rarely get used because they suck so hard. They are like bombs in your base and provide shitty amounts of storage. They should have XTA values (both M and E storage), so that you dont have to farm them to reclaim a comm etc

Deathblane wrote:The effect LRPC's is far more psycological than anythign else now. I've played plenty of games where I've been bombarded with them and it's annoying sure, but not really base threatening (unless you have lines of explosive builkdings, but then that's you're fault).

Removing (or at least reducing) the e-storage from factories and fusions etc could well be a good idea as e-storage buildings very rarely get used.

E storage is more of a backup plan.

What, after plans a,b,c and d have failed?

Seriously thogh, although they can sometimes be useful in the late game (probably comparable to something like the Juno) that doesn't really fit well with their ostensible role as a l2 building.

Ive only seen the bertha banned in one game so far. And I have a scary amount of time logged playing this mod.
Berthas are perfect, they arent cheap to build, you need to build fusions to back them up, If you want to do any serious base damage you need 3 or more - that costs alot in metal and energy if you count the 2 or 3 fusions you need to support them properly.
They are fragile and if you let youre opponent build 5 or 6 and bombard you with them then its youre own fault and you've played badly, not the fact the bertha isnt balanced properly.
Find them and bomb them or construct youre own and fire back.

Silly me forgot to type cost into my post...
a bertha costs 4184 metal and 60680 energy...
cheap you say? I dont know where youve been shopping for berthas hawkii but I wanna know :)

agreed berthas aren't a problem!

Still, has the whole transported jammer thing been fixed?

guess not

Unit proposal for 1.47:

submarine with rocket for water to land attacks.

Updating the water units probably needs to wait untill torpedo bombers are fixed. As it is once you've been pushed out you're really screwed.

at least depthcharge launchers work now - that's something, at least...

Deathblane wrote:Updating the water units probably needs to wait untill torpedo bombers are fixed. As it is once you've been pushed out you're really screwed.

That's why I think we need a depthcharge hovercraft, just as a band-aid solution until there's a torpedo bomber. Gunships do fine for anti-ship attacking as an interrim until we get torpedo bombers, but we need something for clearing out subs.

Don't even make a new model - just reskin one of the existing hovers and throw it out when torp bombers behave.

Pxtl wrote:Gunships do fine for anti-ship attacking as an interrim until we get torpedo bombers, but we need something for clearing out subs.

uh, torp bombers *do* exist and do work on ships IIRC - they just don't target subs

Soulless1 wrote:

Pxtl wrote:Gunships do fine for anti-ship attacking as an interrim until we get torpedo bombers, but we need something for clearing out subs.

uh, torp bombers *do* exist and do work on ships IIRC - they just don't target subs

Well that's great and all, but that's all I use torp bombers for. There are plenty of other expedient ways to obliterate boats. Subs, on the other hand, are pretty much at an advantage against boats, and can't really be attacked by any other mobile object - except, theoretically, the dysfunctional torp bombers.

Hence my desire for depthcharge subs, as a substitute for torp bombers.