Page 7 of 17
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.31
Posted: 09 Jul 2008, 09:43
by KDR_11k
andre wrote:I have nothing against this new modes but I think you should try to get it working correctly before makeing a public-release with it included.
I noticed many times, that players in one game got different modes in their own script.txt, so has one "comcontrol" and another "killall" as deathmode in his script.txt while host is killall (just an example, doesn't matter what mode the host has). This causes that the players with "comcontrol" will desync as soon as the first com dies and he can't give orders any more.
You should fix this problem or make 3 different mods for every game mode as soon as possible cause so it is very annoying
The user is using a crappy lobby then, no way to prevent that. 3 different mods means you have to close and reopen the game every time the rule is changed.
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.31
Posted: 09 Jul 2008, 14:15
by andre
So TAS-Client and Springlobby are crappy clients
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.31
Posted: 09 Jul 2008, 14:27
by KDR_11k
Well, yeah. Seriously, there's nothing mod authors can do when the lobbies fail to properly write the settings to the start script.
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.31
Posted: 09 Jul 2008, 14:36
by El Capitano
Honestly, that sounds like the old "switch the options the second you hit start game" 'trick' that some hosts seem to like.
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.31
Posted: 09 Jul 2008, 14:40
by andre
Yes that is the only possibility to avoid this bug, so the battle settings get re-send to all clients and then all should have the same options.
But the problem could also be on the Hosts side, that he doesn't send the correct information to the clients, because when you switch the options all have the same then
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.31
Posted: 09 Jul 2008, 15:39
by jellyman
Who thinks hammers and zippers are underpowered?
Hammers are slower more expensive, shorter in range and weaker in combat than rockos. But they can fire over wreckage. But I've never really found that very useful as if the game has lots of wreckage there is enough defenses that the hammers short range,slow speed and meciocre health makes them dog meat.
And zippers are a lot of fun. But I can't really figure out how they are better than peewees in any way. Admittedly being better than a peewee is a fairly high standard to achieve.
Or do I just use them wrong?
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.31
Posted: 09 Jul 2008, 15:48
by Sleksa
jellyman wrote:
Or do I just use them wrong?
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.31
Posted: 09 Jul 2008, 15:51
by Hoi
Sleksa wrote:jellyman wrote:
Or do I just use them wrong?
they are made to counter slow units and attack heavy defences
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.31
Posted: 09 Jul 2008, 16:18
by Elkvis
and attacking in hills.
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.31
Posted: 09 Jul 2008, 16:47
by Hoi
Elkvis wrote:and attacking in hills.
yep
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.31
Posted: 09 Jul 2008, 17:55
by Jazcash
And to create ubber lag in mass armies.
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.31
Posted: 09 Jul 2008, 21:44
by Acidd_UK
jellyman wrote:Hammers are ... weaker in combat than rockos.
I'm fairly sure checked hammers have both more hp and more dps than rockos...
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.31
Posted: 11 Jul 2008, 14:06
by Raxxman
More DPS, less hp. EDIT meant more hp, and more build time...
Both suffer from accuracy, Rockos having slllllllllllllllllooooow rockets, and hammers having high arc.
My problem with the hammer in BA is it's an artie bot yet it has basically no range. Compare it to the CA version (oh yeah I just went there) and that one is actually useful.
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.31
Posted: 11 Jul 2008, 20:14
by Acidd_UK
Hammers accuracy is a lot better than rockos vs moving targets due to the shorter range and higher projectile speed. Also their ability to shoot over the top of each other makes them easier to use en-masse if your micro skills suck.
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.31
Posted: 11 Jul 2008, 23:01
by sillynanny
They don't shoot that well over eachother. At least not when they are too close, which is how they tend to move.
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.31
Posted: 12 Jul 2008, 02:22
by UAF
An enemy took my Commander today using a transport...
Now while it is an amusing evil little trick, I still feel that it might be better to make it impossible. Thoughts?
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.31
Posted: 12 Jul 2008, 02:56
by Acidd_UK
Build AA?
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.31
Posted: 12 Jul 2008, 03:27
by Neddie
It is easily prevented.
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.31
Posted: 12 Jul 2008, 04:37
by jellyman
Elkvis wrote:and attacking in hills.
Yeah I did forget that they can be good if you get them on top of a hill before the enemy. Have you had much luck attacking using hammers to attack against a hill that is already defended? I usually stay right away from occupied hills unless I have v-launch or vehicle artillery, or overwhelming force.
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.31
Posted: 12 Jul 2008, 06:20
by Scratch
I realize I am just another player to Noize and Smoth, and no real loss if I left.
Of course, OTA players tend to say things I agree with from the very beginning. Klopper said the DGUN should kill anything. Since you trying to copy TA's gameplay making the com the main thing, you may as well make the dgun a weapon that can kill anything with one shot.
If you make the dgun actually worth HP less than infinity, I will consider you an idiot.
I know what you meant, but homosexual slurs are not tolerated here. Avoid using them in future. -Neddiedrow