they're cool and anti-swarm?NOiZE wrote:Dragon's Claw and Dragon's Maw added back in as stationary units with
stealth and no movement
Why?
They are not really needed IMO
Absolute Annihilation: Spring 1.46
Moderator: Moderators
b1tch1n9 tym3!
Adding more strategic value to the com...wtf it has 10k metal or when ressed a free nuke. it has dgun and a fair chunk of HP. it can cloak. its a damn fast builder.
Com ressing? and the reason is a bit suspect too...don't like agressive com use? limit dgun anybody? or com ends? or both if you are really paranoid X.x. I really don't like the implications for gameplay tbh
they are going to be really useful midgame whereas i thought that they should really be just a way to get some e if you have little land or need to protect it well, could be a interesting step between a t1 and t2 economy i guess...
Changes to the mav were needed, its going to OWN level 1 units stupid enough to gohead to head with it now >:D whilst still being vulnerable to t2 <3 <3 <3
Chaning the HP of the com is also a good idea but i think it should still be possible to have a com with ~6k HP by mid-late game. really makes your life easier vs those damn mechs
Talking of mechs i thought that the factory cost was going to be massively increased and i cant see that in the changelog?
Adding more strategic value to the com...wtf it has 10k metal or when ressed a free nuke. it has dgun and a fair chunk of HP. it can cloak. its a damn fast builder.
Com ressing? and the reason is a bit suspect too...don't like agressive com use? limit dgun anybody? or com ends? or both if you are really paranoid X.x. I really don't like the implications for gameplay tbh
Firstly i hate the fact that CORE get a 800% more HP boost for their jammer and leave ARM in the dust. Secondly its a CLOAKBLE RADAR JAMMER. Why the fuck would it need more health???"Castro" operating cost reduced by 5 (30->25), hit points increased by 800% (120->960)
So subs have to skirmish with destroyers now and subs are less effective vs other subs. so you have corvettes for the grunt work, skeeters for the rush and AA subs to kill stuff once the torps (/enemy destroyers) are downed. Like it because before the destroyer didn't have much of a role to play (attacking torps innaccurately from long range T.T)Destroyer depth charge damage increased by 25%, rate of fire increased
10%, AoE increased 100%
Adv solars are now more effiicient than solars in both space and in metal cost O,oAdvanced Solar energy cost reduced 1000, buildtime reduced 1000, metal cost reduced 50
they are going to be really useful midgame whereas i thought that they should really be just a way to get some e if you have little land or need to protect it well, could be a interesting step between a t1 and t2 economy i guess...
Changes to the mav were needed, its going to OWN level 1 units stupid enough to gohead to head with it now >:D whilst still being vulnerable to t2 <3 <3 <3
Chaning the HP of the com is also a good idea but i think it should still be possible to have a com with ~6k HP by mid-late game. really makes your life easier vs those damn mechs
Talking of mechs i thought that the factory cost was going to be massively increased and i cant see that in the changelog?
er....the castro doesn't cloak - its the crappy one with the tiny radius and like 1/10 the health of the sneaky pete, remember? Its getting the HP boost to make it worth using on the front lines...Min3mat wrote:Firstly i hate the fact that CORE get a 800% more HP boost for their jammer and leave ARM in the dust. Secondly its a CLOAKBLE RADAR JAMMER. Why the fuck would it need more health???"Castro" operating cost reduced by 5 (30->25), hit points increased by 800% (120->960)
I think it's a intresting changeMin3mat wrote:b1tch1n9 tym3!
Adding more strategic value to the com...wtf it has 10k metal or when ressed a free nuke. it has dgun and a fair chunk of HP. it can cloak. its a damn fast builder.
Com ressing? and the reason is a bit suspect too...don't like agressive com use? limit dgun anybody? or com ends? or both if you are really paranoid X.x. I really don't like the implications for gameplay tbh
Min3mat wrote:Firstly i hate the fact that CORE get a 800% more HP boost for their jammer and leave ARM in the dust. Secondly its a CLOAKBLE RADAR JAMMER. Why the fuck would it need more health???"Castro" operating cost reduced by 5 (30->25), hit points increased by 800% (120->960)
the castro is NOT cloakable. And look @ this:
The arm one has a bigger jamming range!
Last edited by NOiZE on 26 May 2006, 12:32, edited 1 time in total.
"Maverick HP reduced 250 units"
sigh...
Mavs just got useful again... why are you reducing their health by 250?
I'll never build them again, they cost 800 metal have a small range and are slow, take 250 hp of them and theyre useless.
Why change the razor back? its perfect I really wouldnt change this unit atall the gantry is already x2 as expensive ^^
"Increased Stiletto, Twilight paralyzetime to 15 seconds
Decreased EMP Spider, Bladewing paralyzetime to 7 seconds"
The emp bomber does not need more paralyse time, those units are awesome as it is, I think the emp ground units units in the game are good too, cant see the point in changing them
"Plasma batteries now do 3x damage against ships"
???
I love the tac nuke reintroduction and the emp missile changes, targetting facility change good as are the naval changes I think, oh and the jamming change is sweet
almost forgot... the rezzing thing.... pleaseeeee make this a separate version! no offense intended
It wont elminate rushing and bombing, you can reclaim units and use them to build new stuff so you dont need a rezzer really...
sigh...
Mavs just got useful again... why are you reducing their health by 250?
I'll never build them again, they cost 800 metal have a small range and are slow, take 250 hp of them and theyre useless.
Why change the razor back? its perfect I really wouldnt change this unit atall the gantry is already x2 as expensive ^^
"Increased Stiletto, Twilight paralyzetime to 15 seconds
Decreased EMP Spider, Bladewing paralyzetime to 7 seconds"
The emp bomber does not need more paralyse time, those units are awesome as it is, I think the emp ground units units in the game are good too, cant see the point in changing them
"Plasma batteries now do 3x damage against ships"
???
I love the tac nuke reintroduction and the emp missile changes, targetting facility change good as are the naval changes I think, oh and the jamming change is sweet
almost forgot... the rezzing thing.... pleaseeeee make this a separate version! no offense intended
It wont elminate rushing and bombing, you can reclaim units and use them to build new stuff so you dont need a rezzer really...
-
Machiosabre
- Posts: 1474
- Joined: 25 Dec 2005, 22:56
-
Machiosabre
- Posts: 1474
- Joined: 25 Dec 2005, 22:56
meh screw that, its revenge for annihilators!, if its gonna be fairly short range then it should be really cheap.BigSteve wrote:Core "Catalyst" reverted to tactical nuke weapon, range reduced to 3200
(4500)
If this is the range in the current alpha 1.47 then i think it shoukld be reduced by 500 - 800, it has very long range
it think its fine. Anni range is 1900 and kills stuff for "free" nonstop, huge damage. This only fire every few minutes for like 4k damage? And every shot costs 1k metal so if u miss u basiclly waste goliath...
With 3200 range u can only kill some defence or pesky annis, nothing else. (i mean only moron would let u build NEXT to his base). TBH even with 4500 range it wasnt very usefull on bigger maps unless enemy had total map control (and would win anyway)
Good to see it back.
With 3200 range u can only kill some defence or pesky annis, nothing else. (i mean only moron would let u build NEXT to his base). TBH even with 4500 range it wasnt very usefull on bigger maps unless enemy had total map control (and would win anyway)
Good to see it back.
Well, before, they were equally efficient in terms of metal cost, but hideously inefficient in terms of energy and buildtime. Like, 25% the cost:benefit of a regular solar.Min3mat wrote:Adv solars are now more effiicient than solars in both space and in metal cost O,oAdvanced Solar energy cost reduced 1000, buildtime reduced 1000, metal cost reduced 50
they are going to be really useful midgame whereas i thought that they should really be just a way to get some e if you have little land or need to protect it well, could be a interesting step between a t1 and t2 economy i guess...
the range is too big you cnt compare it with an anni anyway, you cant mass annis at the back of youre base and use them effectively can you?
you can with the cruis when it has this range
500 less is not that much really but we should priob play a few games with it first and see how it goes i suppose
you can with the cruis when it has this range
500 less is not that much really but we should priob play a few games with it first and see how it goes i suppose
Mavericks with 1500 HP and uberfast autorepair isn't a good thing. I wanted to reduce its HP so that, even though it can regen HP really fast, it can also be overwhelmed without too much trouble by concentrated fire.
Plasma cannons: 3x damage vs. ships. Let me explain this one. There's been a lot of talk about how hard it is to get back into the water. The problem, in my view, is that there's simply no land-based weapon besides massed Annihilators (screwing Core completely) that are capable of even putting a dent in a boat's hull. I mean, to put things in perspective:
Destroyer HP: 2583
Cruiser HP: 5506
Battleship HP: 10810
Arm "Guardian" plasma battery damage per second: 80.9 on low traj, 67 on high traj (wow, that's pretty messed up. I'll have to buff them a bit after all)
Anyone see the logical conclusion? A plasma battery is virtually useless versus ships. Even if you had 5 or 10 of them, they wouldn't stand up to a few cruisers, let alone any of the nastier things.
By multiplying the damage of plasma guns by 3, this at least brings them closer to being in the same league as ships. You can now build coastal defense guns and have them actually... defend your coast and stuff. This, in combination with the longer range on depth charge launchers and WORKING torpedo planes should give a shrewd player the chance to get back into the water they've been forced out of.
Its true that generally speaking I try to avoid special damage values - but boats are in a class of their own. They're meant to be virtually impervious to any land unit attack besides heavier tanks and that sort of thing. But there needs to be some sort of recourse for the player on the defending side - not just, ok there's a battleship coming at me, I guess I'll run the hell away and try not to let him see where I'm going.
As for the rezzing commanders, I'm going to leave it in for a little while at least and see if it's received at all once people have adjusted to it. (crap, I think I forgot to remove rezzers from the build tree)
I'll reduce Catalyst range by 200 and see how that works.
Plasma cannons: 3x damage vs. ships. Let me explain this one. There's been a lot of talk about how hard it is to get back into the water. The problem, in my view, is that there's simply no land-based weapon besides massed Annihilators (screwing Core completely) that are capable of even putting a dent in a boat's hull. I mean, to put things in perspective:
Destroyer HP: 2583
Cruiser HP: 5506
Battleship HP: 10810
Arm "Guardian" plasma battery damage per second: 80.9 on low traj, 67 on high traj (wow, that's pretty messed up. I'll have to buff them a bit after all)
Anyone see the logical conclusion? A plasma battery is virtually useless versus ships. Even if you had 5 or 10 of them, they wouldn't stand up to a few cruisers, let alone any of the nastier things.
By multiplying the damage of plasma guns by 3, this at least brings them closer to being in the same league as ships. You can now build coastal defense guns and have them actually... defend your coast and stuff. This, in combination with the longer range on depth charge launchers and WORKING torpedo planes should give a shrewd player the chance to get back into the water they've been forced out of.
Its true that generally speaking I try to avoid special damage values - but boats are in a class of their own. They're meant to be virtually impervious to any land unit attack besides heavier tanks and that sort of thing. But there needs to be some sort of recourse for the player on the defending side - not just, ok there's a battleship coming at me, I guess I'll run the hell away and try not to let him see where I'm going.
As for the rezzing commanders, I'm going to leave it in for a little while at least and see if it's received at all once people have adjusted to it. (crap, I think I forgot to remove rezzers from the build tree)
I'll reduce Catalyst range by 200 and see how that works.
Last edited by Caydr on 26 May 2006, 18:58, edited 2 times in total.
-
Machiosabre
- Posts: 1474
- Joined: 25 Dec 2005, 22:56
but you can mass annis or even make one, whereever two defencive lines clashed before lvl2 and completely obliterate the other line at very little cost.BigSteve wrote:the range is too big you cnt compare it with an anni anyway, you cant mass annis at the back of youre base and use them effectively can you?
you can with the cruis when it has this range
500 less is not that much really but we should priob play a few games with it first and see how it goes i suppose
Last edited by Machiosabre on 26 May 2006, 21:11, edited 1 time in total.