Spring RTS Engine

+1 to triton's suggestions

i thought balanced annihilation should be balanced for race's not 1v1 etc (used same fail grama so i dont have to quote).

dont nerf stumps, buff raiders, decrease their ridicously high build time and cost really a little (still, both should be higher coz raider got more hp)

Play 1vs1 on DSD and there will be T2. Time is the most valuable resource!

Stumpy is not too OP, people just don't know how to use mines and especially the PASSIVE mode.

i played many 1vs1 on big map pako, no T2 too, sometimes liche, but T2 fail on 1vs1 to 3vs3 with only good players, in 99% games.
Mainly because T2 factory cost too much metal, energie and bt.
During the time ure building T2 factory, ure opponent can make tons of units or 2 T1 factory for air drop etc..
in good games 3 T1 factory is better than a T2 factory.

triton wrote: in good games 3 T1 factory is better than a T2 factory.

so dont make t2.

next

triton wrote:trolling war...

this topic is fucked

Hmm, you are of the school of smoth. Disagreement = trolling.

disagreement without any argue is trolling, or useless.
if u wanna speak about useless things dont use that topics thx.

maybe ill make a topic without trolling allowed or flawless or useless reply if its possible.

last wombats response is stupid...
so dont make T2...

why ba have T2 if good players cant use it in a good way?

If a mod cant use T2 in 1vs1 or team games with good players only i think its not well balanced.

i am not the only one who think this but, maybe others players understood that trying to use forum to make ba better is a useless way.

moderator should do their work, i am not sure that copy paste my sentence and say : nah , is really interesting.

if this topic stay crappy i wont waste my time anymore to try to help gl

triton wrote:disagreement without any argue is trolling, or useless.
if u wanna speak about useless things dont use that topics thx.

maybe ill make a topic without trolling allowed or flawless or useless reply if its possible.

last wombats response is stupid...
so dont make T2...

why ba have T2 if good players cant use it in a good way?

If a mod cant use T2 in 1vs1 or team games with good players only i think its not well balanced.

i am not the only one who think this but, maybe others players understood that trying to use forum to make ba better is a useless way.

moderator should do their work, i am not sure that copy paste my sentence and say : nah , is really interesting.

if this topic stay crappy i wont waste my time anymore to try to help gl

Here's an argument for you: The T2 lab/con cost change will not happen because it's too big of a change. TFC told you this before, I told you this several times. Hence the "Nah".

You're repeating yourself and zealously push forward your idea of what BA should be like. Feel free to make your own fork under a different name.


EDIT: accidentally whole post, back now

True i spoke about T2 cost lab changes with u and tfc.
but tfc is afraid by doing crappy changes, and he manage ba only to maintain it working with spring changes.
i just want to speak about this with more players.
example of wat id like to see : instead of 30 stumpys i want to see 20 stumpys and 2 or 3 bulldog, or few T2 arty or one pene.
same for kbots : instead of armys with 50 rokos id like to see armys with 20 rockos and 4 or 5 fidos,

its just crappy example but imo if we could make T2 lab for its units and not systematicly make factory to make cons then reclaim factory to use its metal (2800 metal to be able to have T2 units is not possible without a uber eco) ba would be better : we would use gremlins more often, and all weak T2 units.

ba have many units but cause of its T2 and T3 lab cost we cant use all units well,

if T2 lab cost were smaller and T2 cons cost were bigger we would use factory for its units more often and gameplay would be more interesting, respecting BA units balance.

If it will be better BA then go and fork your own mod just like BA did with AA.

Regret wrote:If it will be better BA then go and fork your own mod just like BA did with AA.

How did you get to be so damn smart?

sadly i cant make my own mod i dont know how to develop myself

ps: CarRepairer u are a good example of troll with nothing usefull to say

CarRepairer wrote:

Regret wrote:If it will be better BA then go and fork your own mod just like BA did with AA.

How did you get to be so damn smart?

Wombat wrote:i thought balanced annihilation should be balanced for race's not 1v1 etc (used same fail grama so i dont have to quote).

dont nerf stumps, buff raiders, decrease their ridicously high build time and cost really a little (still, both should be higher coz raider got more hp)

+1 (same e and bp cost)

Or the other way around, just reduce the unba between them.

raider cost more metal,is slower and less manoeuvrable this "balances" their higher hp.

CarRepairer wrote:

Regret wrote:If it will be better BA then go and fork your own mod just like BA did with AA.

How did you get to be so damn smart?

Why is your icon Cobra Commander riding a pig? I really can't wait to see your new mod.

triton wrote:
last wombats response is stupid...
so dont make T2...

u are stupid sir... u said urself that 3 t1 is better than 1 t2, so dont make t2... thats logic, forcing lower t2 cost just to make it ? thats not logic...

its the classic TA resource distribution.

When resources are scattered all over the place without any defendable positions or chokepoints like on e.g. Comet Catcher or pretty much any other map for that matter its only natural that aggressive use of T1 units wins the game.

edit:
in 8v8 games its different because the game tends to start with 2 sides having access to half of the resources of the map from the beginning, and can defend their frontlines better, so the 50/50 resource distribution tends to stay for a while.

Still waiting for an intelligent rebuttal of Triton's points...

pintle wrote:Still waiting for an intelligent rebuttal of Triton's points...

Regret wrote:The T2 lab/con cost change will not happen because it's too big of a change. TFC told you this before, I told you this several times.

Regret wrote:The T2 lab/con cost change will not happen because it's too big of a change

I think pintle means a justification that it wouldnt improve the game rather than a justification for not making the change (since BA development is anal conservative its pretty obviously not happening)

1v0ry_k1ng wrote:improve the game

Improvement is incredibly relative, some would find it an improvement to have atlas not be able to transport commanders, some wouldn't.

As such it doesn't require any counter-argument, merely a statement of disagreement (or agreement).

So I respond: -1