Naval balance in BA - and Seaplanes

DemO · Post by **DemO** » 29 Dec 2006, 18:42

This topic is not for the discussion solely of hovers. If you want T1 hovers that's another topic but personally I like hovers where they are in the build tree. They are used regularly, and to good effect, so why make them better? Lets stay on topic here: Seaplanes:p

LordMatt · Post by **LordMatt** » 29 Dec 2006, 18:59

DemO wrote:This topic is not for the discussion solely of hovers. If you want T1 hovers that's another topic but personally I like hovers where they are in the build tree. They are used regularly, and to good effect, so why make them better? Lets stay on topic here: Seaplanes:p

+1

Pxtl · Post by **Pxtl** » 29 Dec 2006, 19:10

Fine. Can we discuss changing land-planes in ways that will help differentiate them from L2 seaplanes? Give the sonar to the L2 torp-plane instead of the L2 radar plane. Then you differentiate the sea/torp from the land/torp and the sea/sonar from the land/radar nicely. Of course, this can cause problems if the turnaround of the torp-plane is less than it's sonar range, as it could lose it's sight of the target after dropping the torp.

Dunno how to differentiate the Core sea-gunship from the land-gunship - they're nearly the same, just the sea one is bigger.

PauloMorfeo · Post by **PauloMorfeo** » 29 Dec 2006, 21:34

DemO wrote:Alright, after having a discussion with NoiZe earlier this morning about the position and viability of Seaplanes in the tech tree, and having read the recent discussion over it in the forums, i was inspired to go get some raw data for comparison. Here's what I established:

Construction:

├é┬½Comparison between the costs and resource making of 2 units, disregarding the technology they give access to.├é┬╗

Adv Con Vehicle gives you access to mohos, fusions, BBs, nukes, Flakkers, and much more. The Con Ship gives you access to .. torpedo launchers, tidals, underwater mexxes. You can't compare things like that, you must take into account the value of the technology they give access to.

Gave a quick look to things more below but haven't really continued.

DemO · Post by **DemO** » 29 Dec 2006, 21:39

That comparison was specifically to compare the worker time of each construction unit - in order to determine whether a seaplane lab could be assisted to the same extent as a land based air lab would be with nano turrets.

I never intended to compare the construction units in every specific detail, the point I was trying to make was that the L1 con ship as of BA 4.41 is by far the most cost effective unit to assist naval builds, and that it infact has more worker time than a nano turret.

PauloMorfeo · Post by **PauloMorfeo** » 29 Dec 2006, 21:49

I thought you were argueing that that was wrong.

Of course they would be more cost effective, just like a buldog with it's short cannon is more effective in taking damage than the same cost of snipers, which carry they're long range weapons.

Saktoth · Post by **Saktoth** » 30 Dec 2006, 00:53

Dunno how to differentiate the Core sea-gunship from the land-gunship - they're nearly the same, just the sea one is bigger.

They are almost identical.

It has a much larger blast than any other gunship

I was wrong here. The graphical blast is larger, but the actual AoE is the same size as the Rapiers.

Lets stay on topic here: Seaplanes

The most important thing for seaplanes is where they are placed in the tech tree. Any changes to power, role and cost will ultimately stem from that. I think that needs to be decided before we speculate too much as to the specific roles of individual seaplanes.

Sea balance as a whole really needs to be addressed though. As it is, ships are far too scarce in most games, despite the fact that many of the most popular maps are in fact water maps (SSB, tangerine, delta siege). In maps where they are built, they rarely play a large deciding role in the outcome. Hovers are far more likely to be used to control the sea.

Ill be running some sea games to see what needs to be addressed. That is, afterall, how BA has always been developed- from experience (And there isnt really anyone out there with experience in sea battles).

DemO · Post by **DemO** » 30 Dec 2006, 07:20

Sea is scarcely used because the maps arn't designed to accomodate them. SSB has no metal in the water, for example. Like we said earlier ships is a slow start, so games on a map like tangerine where its usually 5v5 on a 16x16 map just doesnt work - the map is simply too small.

Tangerine would be easy to win every game within 10 mins considering the way its played right now - 2 people take the front and porc, 3 people take other places and make either t2 air/t2 vec/hovers. All that needs to be done is the opposing team gets all 5 players to push through the middle - make it 2v5 and the game is over quick (we infact tried this last week or something and the game lasted no time).

Anyway, recent news -- Seaplanes will be buildable by T1 con ships in the next BA. We can take things from there and don't expect it to be balanced straight away, its effectively going into unknown territory here, but things will be evened out and balanced with time and observation. At least now we may see seaplanes in games.

I suggest people try to use them so that we can establish trends and information on how they fit in and can be used at their new place in the tech tree.

LordMatt · Post by **LordMatt** » 30 Dec 2006, 07:39

DemO wrote: I suggest people try to use them so that we can establish trends and information on how they fit in and can be used at their new place in the tech tree.

If they're OP we can safely assume they will be exploited very quickly. ^^

Neddie · Post by **Neddie** » 30 Dec 2006, 10:37

Alright, let us deal with Seaplanes. I need to be on when Day is, I think, since I seem to have been out of touch with him for a while.

Saktoth · Post by **Saktoth** » 31 Dec 2006, 13:18

Since this topic is about naval balance... Ships are underused, and underpowered. As they are, they just arent practical. Due to their highly limited application, they should at least do what they do well, and be capable of dominating the seas. They do not, hovers can compete with ships and torpedo planes utterly slaughter ships and NS anti-air.

Hovercraft also cannot be hit by torpedo platforms, which are very effective against ships. Ships are unable to raid land bases or attack land-based hovercraft factories. Hovers can easily dispatch shipyards though.

Ships need to be buffed, and Torpedo planes nerfed. If we are ever going to get naval balance right, people are actually going to need to want to build ships. IMO, it doesnt really matter if ships are OP. Make them OP and balance them back down if its really needed. Its not like they are going to sprout legs and start running into peoples bases.

DemO · Post by **DemO** » 31 Dec 2006, 13:54

Since this topic is about naval balance... Ships are underused, and underpowered. As they are, they just arent practical. Due to their highly limited application, they should at least do what they do well, and be capable of dominating the seas. They do not, hovers can compete with ships and torpedo planes utterly slaughter ships and NS anti-air.

Actually Saktoth, i dont know where you get this impression that torpedo planes are awesome from. I spectated a game on small supreme islands last night with noize and lordmatt where one of the players made at least 15 torp bombers and sent them (with sonar/radar planes) to the enemy T2 shipyard which was surrounded with warlords and cruisers.

Needless to say, we were very surprised with what we saw - the torp bombers missed almost every shot, and infact only 2 torpedo's hit enemy ships (which were barely moving by the way, it wasnt even like the guy was trying to avoid the torps, and these are big, slow, lumbering ships).

The torpedo bombers made several fly by's in their attempt but completely failed for 90%+ of the time to actually hit their target. I suggested to NoiZe that the aiming script be looked into, and that the torpedos hit the water sooner - because from observation it looked like several times the torpedos hit the water AFTER they had passed their target. Perhaps even that they get some tracking on their weapon like the Banisher/Janus.

Hovers were also used to attack the ships in this particular game, and the hovers got completely owned by the small number of ships they were attacking. I actually had worries about ships myself but after spectating this game, I'm pretty confident that ships are pretty safe in the seas, so far as unit-to-unit battles go.

On a side note, more people went ships in this game than hovers - hardly underused.

LordMatt · Post by **LordMatt** » 31 Dec 2006, 19:04

Lets be careful what balance ideas we get from a game like that (beyond the obviously broken units). Not a single player knew how to properly micro their units in that game, it seemed, even though they were all stars.

DemO · Post by **DemO** » 31 Dec 2006, 19:19

True, micro changes things to a certain extent, e.g. hovers quickness and ability to out micro ships somewhat, but theres only so much micro you can do with bombers. Simply put the torp bombers should have done a lot more damage than they did, but seem to have buggy firing/targetting code or ineffective weapons. Doesnt matter that they do 2.5k dps if they never actually HIT their target.

But yeah, the use of units in that game was dysmal to say the least, and quite stereotypically the players that were losing huge masses of units were complaining that the units they used were crap, when really it was just that they couldnt use them well. Hence why I feel that elitism has it's place sometimes - in the balance decisions for mods the experienced players should get priority because the less experienced players complain about unbalance based on their inability to use units and misunderstanding of why the results are the way they are in games they play.

LordMatt · Post by **LordMatt** » 31 Dec 2006, 19:51

DemO wrote:Simply put the torp bombers should have done a lot more damage than they did, but seem to have buggy firing/targetting code or ineffective weapons. Doesnt matter that they do 2.5k dps if they never actually HIT their target.

Note part where I say "obviously broken units." ^^

Saktoth · Post by **Saktoth** » 01 Jan 2007, 01:55

Actually Saktoth, i dont know where you get this impression that torpedo planes are awesome from.

Ive been playing quite a lot of water maps, in an attempt to figure out naval combat. Lord Matt can attest at least to my enthusiasm, as many of them have been played with him and his clanmates.

Torpedo bombers do need to be micro'd and supported, but when they are they are devastatingly effective, even if the enemy builds significant anti-air cover.

In every game i have played in which planes and ships are used, the planes get the better of it.

However, i defer to your experience in the matter and hope you play some more water maps and come to some conclusions regarding naval balance.

I still do feel they are unbalanced against hovers, if only due to their lack of versatility.

LordMatt · Post by **LordMatt** » 01 Jan 2007, 07:03

That previous post made no sense to me.

Edit: Oh right. Keep in mind we expanded much more than you guys did. It was that, rather than brawlers that killed you guys.

Saktoth · Post by **Saktoth** » 01 Jan 2007, 08:58

No, obviously i didnt use seaplanes, they were in the wrong part of the tech tree when we were playing. You used hovers, anyway, and the next game we got killed by brawlers before we could do very much. Im talking about naval balance in general, and regular torpedo bombers.

Are you talking about Torpedo Seaplanes Dem0? I discovered they were broken a while ago, should have mentioned it

. Torpedo Seaplanes have noautofire=1. Its that simple, turn it to 0 and they should work fine.

The torpedo seaplanes are irregular in other ways though. They launch two torpedoes right on top of each other doing 700 damage each for a total of 1400 damage (100 less than the torpedo bomber). They also have a missile, which does 130 damage and is highly effective at anti-air, though slightly less effective vs naval targets (missiles often hit the water before they reach their target). Naturally neither of these weapons fire unless ordered to, because of noautofire=1.

If noautofire is set to 0, torpedo seaplanes will become just as, if not more effective than, torpedo bombers.

MR.D · Post by **MR.D** » 01 Jan 2007, 10:29

You guys completely forgot about the Naval Engineers..

richw · Post by **richw** » 01 Jan 2007, 17:21

I'd love to see the build of the const seaplanes reduced, too me they feel very slow to build.

I'd also love to see them build lvl1 const ships, Naval Engineers + lvl1 kbot and vechicle factories. It would make them more useful and might get people using them more

I'm sure someone wont like what I suggested

Spring RTS Engine

Naval balance in BA - and Seaplanes

Move Seaplanes down the tech tree?

Re: Naval balance in BA - and Seaplanes