Absolute Annihilation 2.11
Moderator: Moderators
- Machiosabre
- Posts: 1474
- Joined: 25 Dec 2005, 22:56
Alright, I think I'm probably through for today... I might come back later and do some more work (and whoop MRD at chess) but I'm exhausted after the last few days.
Orcone, as you're probably panicking over, has been removed. I've decided to buff up the Bantha a little more and make it more cost-effective so that, cost for cost, kroghths and banthas have roughly the same dynamic that krogs and orcos had. Krogoth should be a uniquely powerful unit.
The artillery adjustment works very, very well. Vrocs and artys now have much more clearly-defined roles. Artillery is for fighting units and general bombardment, vertical-launch rockets are for attacking structures, especially defenses. But both much remain at a distance to be at their most effective. For instance, artillery becomes wildly inaccurate as their target approaches them, and artillery cannot fire in their rear 90 degree arc. However, if you can keep them shielded by support units, they can be used to tremendous advantage on the battlefield.All artillery rebalanced for lower trajectory firing
Arm moho mine HP decreased to 2500 (3000), core moho mine HP
increased to 3500 (2500) and damage is now multiplied by 0.25
when closed (0.4)
Flash/Peewee EMG weapons seperated into two different classes
Peewee range increased to 180 (176)
Flash range increased to 190 (176)
Instigator damage per second reduced to 97 (107)
AK damage per second increased to 87 (79)
Commander laser damage versus L1 air transports increased to 180
(125)
Metal extractors in (A) fixed
Units removed: hyper radars, bertha ships, bertha tanks, orcone,
krogtaar, artillery hovers, requiter
Depthcharge launchers added to commander build menus
All vehicle speed, acceleration, braking, and turnrate values
increased by 10%
All corpse and heap values normalized to 66% and 33%, respectively
(more thanks to TradeMark)
Orcone, as you're probably panicking over, has been removed. I've decided to buff up the Bantha a little more and make it more cost-effective so that, cost for cost, kroghths and banthas have roughly the same dynamic that krogs and orcos had. Krogoth should be a uniquely powerful unit.
Last edited by Caydr on 24 Aug 2006, 21:34, edited 1 time in total.
- Mars Keeper
- Posts: 240
- Joined: 25 Jan 2005, 21:00
Hover artillery because it is impossible to balance, taar isn't needed when other units can fill its place, and I just explained orcone.
The vehicle boost is still being decided upon. I'm probably going to just improve their handling (accel/brake/turnrate) since Spring renders these things differently than OTA did.
Basically, everything in Spring is about 5-10% slower than it was in OTA. I boosted all unit speeds (to great community enthusiasm) by about 10%, but vehicles have got stiffed because while 5-10% of a reduction to kbots' turnrate and all that isn't noticable since all kbots turn and everything almost instantly, vehicles suffer badly for it. It's needed, there's no question about it.
~~~
I'll elaborate on the hovery arty a bit. The problem is that everything in aa is sort of tiered. A level 1 tank doesn't stand a chance against a level 2 defense structure, as a general rule for instance. a level 1 artillery has exactly the range it needs to fight HLTs and stuff, without being overpowering and rendering a lot of defenses totally useless.
But hover artillery breaks this rule, since it's level 1.5 sort of, like all hovers. So now you have a unit that overpowers all level 1 defenses without any difficulty, accessible in a level 1 timeframe.
Normally this isn't SO bad since hover plants are pretty expensive, but that's about to change. hover plants will be cheaper in the next version, making these artillery hovers readily available to a player putting up his second factory. The ability to completely outrange HLTs at level 1 without risking a single unit, at minimal cost, is a huge imbalance.
So do I make hover artillery have the same range as L1 artillery? That's retarded.
I'm trying to simplify a lot of things, especially things that are precariously balanced between extremely overpowered and useless.
The vehicle boost is still being decided upon. I'm probably going to just improve their handling (accel/brake/turnrate) since Spring renders these things differently than OTA did.
Basically, everything in Spring is about 5-10% slower than it was in OTA. I boosted all unit speeds (to great community enthusiasm) by about 10%, but vehicles have got stiffed because while 5-10% of a reduction to kbots' turnrate and all that isn't noticable since all kbots turn and everything almost instantly, vehicles suffer badly for it. It's needed, there's no question about it.
~~~
I'll elaborate on the hovery arty a bit. The problem is that everything in aa is sort of tiered. A level 1 tank doesn't stand a chance against a level 2 defense structure, as a general rule for instance. a level 1 artillery has exactly the range it needs to fight HLTs and stuff, without being overpowering and rendering a lot of defenses totally useless.
But hover artillery breaks this rule, since it's level 1.5 sort of, like all hovers. So now you have a unit that overpowers all level 1 defenses without any difficulty, accessible in a level 1 timeframe.
Normally this isn't SO bad since hover plants are pretty expensive, but that's about to change. hover plants will be cheaper in the next version, making these artillery hovers readily available to a player putting up his second factory. The ability to completely outrange HLTs at level 1 without risking a single unit, at minimal cost, is a huge imbalance.
So do I make hover artillery have the same range as L1 artillery? That's retarded.
I'm trying to simplify a lot of things, especially things that are precariously balanced between extremely overpowered and useless.
Last edited by Caydr on 24 Aug 2006, 21:45, edited 1 time in total.
- Machiosabre
- Posts: 1474
- Joined: 25 Dec 2005, 22:56
why remove the arty hovers? they're the only things keeping hovers slightly interesting after the element of surprise.
Actually don't even mind the other units, though it'd be good if they made room for some other nasties, maybe some kind of mechanical variant of fireships, that would be awesome, though maybe more something for a pirate mod..... I mean yeah, artyhovers, they're cool.
edit: just read the edit, that does seem alright, but I'd still like to keep the pasma arty hovers, even at the same range as lvl1 arty vehicles, the rounds do way more damage and you could take out llts on the shoreline and stuff.
Actually don't even mind the other units, though it'd be good if they made room for some other nasties, maybe some kind of mechanical variant of fireships, that would be awesome, though maybe more something for a pirate mod..... I mean yeah, artyhovers, they're cool.
edit: just read the edit, that does seem alright, but I'd still like to keep the pasma arty hovers, even at the same range as lvl1 arty vehicles, the rounds do way more damage and you could take out llts on the shoreline and stuff.
Last edited by Machiosabre on 24 Aug 2006, 21:50, edited 1 time in total.
Maybe the Hovers need a bit of a buff? Let's compare the Anaconda to the Stumpy and Bulldog:
Stumpy:
Cost: 234/1746/2904 (M/E/B)
HP: 1380
Speed: 2.93
Range: 300
DPS: ~79
Anaconda:
Cost: 372/2856/8115
HP: 970
Speed: 2.53
Range: 320
DPS: ~82
Bulldog:
Cost: 844/14593/17228
HP: 4200
Speed: 1.67
Range: 470
DPS: ~170
Uh. Yeah. The Anaconda costs more than the Stumpy and is worse in pretty much every respect, other than the ability to go out onto the water and get owned by naval units that totally outclass it.
Stumpy:
Cost: 234/1746/2904 (M/E/B)
HP: 1380
Speed: 2.93
Range: 300
DPS: ~79
Anaconda:
Cost: 372/2856/8115
HP: 970
Speed: 2.53
Range: 320
DPS: ~82
Bulldog:
Cost: 844/14593/17228
HP: 4200
Speed: 1.67
Range: 470
DPS: ~170
Uh. Yeah. The Anaconda costs more than the Stumpy and is worse in pretty much every respect, other than the ability to go out onto the water and get owned by naval units that totally outclass it.
- Foxomaniac
- Posts: 691
- Joined: 18 Jan 2006, 16:59