Absolute Annihilation 2.11
Moderator: Moderators
Amphibious stuff has been at a major disadvantage for a while now because of all the units that have extra damage against them (torpedos, depth charges, shore defenses, you name it)... I'm eliminating these. This'll mean 2-3 times as many hits before they are blown up.
I'm going to do some playtesting and see if this helps the problem or maybe even solves it. I know that amphibious stuff is expensive compared to regular stuff. It's just that, in addition to the obvious underwater ability, they can also climb very steep slopes, almost as good as kbots.
Anyway... I'll make sure that's made right.
What's the deal exactly with hovers? I've never done a throurogh cost/benefit analysis on them, but they seem like basically the L1 vehicle lineup (and then some) which can go virtually anywhere unobstructed. When you get right down to it, raw firepower like stumpies will win over units that cost extra for their mobility, but they can attack with little warning... and all that good stuff... Anyway I've reduced the cost of hover plants by 100 metal so far, that's as far as I've gone. I'll do some testing tomorrow and see what unit-specific changes are necessary.
Any suggestions for what you'd like to see done with amphibious/hovers would be helpful.
My todo list is now only about 6 or 7 items long. Unfortunately I won't be able to post a beta or anything since AA 2.2 will almost certainly be incompatible with the current stable build of Spring. Seems like I'm waiting on the devs to decide when they've fulfilled their objectives. Don't try to rush them though, they're hard at work on some really impressive stuff.
~~~
Actually, it looks like it might not be too long before the next version of Spring is out. I wonder if it'll have SM3 support? There's a lot of mention of SM3 in the dev log. #1964 mentions a release branch being set up, which happens... eh, before a release, would be my guess.
If the new version of Spring comes in the next few days, I'll post what I have done as 2.2, then post patch 2.21 once I've had a chance to tackle the last colossal issues (like naval balance, anti-air kbots, commando...)
Even the changes as have already been done are just huge. You can see for yourself, so many things have been fixed. The wreck values for instance, I think are going to make a huge difference. No more things like fatboys giving 300 metal while costing 4000. All units will have the same ratio of unit metal to corpse metal.
The OTA standard "unit metal:corpse metal" is 100:80.. so you get 80% of the metal value back. I've decided it might be in the best interests of the mod to try decreasing this. It's only a difference of 10%, but let's see where it takes us.
The idea is that less resources being left for the defender should mean less advantage in playing mostly defensively.
I think you'll all be pleased when you see your first nuke explosion in 2.2
.... the craters they leave are much deeper than before. Rather than a slight indentation, there's a proper crater like as if a bigassed megaton warhead was let off. I'd post some screenshots but I'm on my feeble laptop and I've got all the options turned down or off to get a good FPS for testing.
I'm going to do some playtesting and see if this helps the problem or maybe even solves it. I know that amphibious stuff is expensive compared to regular stuff. It's just that, in addition to the obvious underwater ability, they can also climb very steep slopes, almost as good as kbots.
Anyway... I'll make sure that's made right.
What's the deal exactly with hovers? I've never done a throurogh cost/benefit analysis on them, but they seem like basically the L1 vehicle lineup (and then some) which can go virtually anywhere unobstructed. When you get right down to it, raw firepower like stumpies will win over units that cost extra for their mobility, but they can attack with little warning... and all that good stuff... Anyway I've reduced the cost of hover plants by 100 metal so far, that's as far as I've gone. I'll do some testing tomorrow and see what unit-specific changes are necessary.
Any suggestions for what you'd like to see done with amphibious/hovers would be helpful.
My todo list is now only about 6 or 7 items long. Unfortunately I won't be able to post a beta or anything since AA 2.2 will almost certainly be incompatible with the current stable build of Spring. Seems like I'm waiting on the devs to decide when they've fulfilled their objectives. Don't try to rush them though, they're hard at work on some really impressive stuff.
~~~
Actually, it looks like it might not be too long before the next version of Spring is out. I wonder if it'll have SM3 support? There's a lot of mention of SM3 in the dev log. #1964 mentions a release branch being set up, which happens... eh, before a release, would be my guess.
If the new version of Spring comes in the next few days, I'll post what I have done as 2.2, then post patch 2.21 once I've had a chance to tackle the last colossal issues (like naval balance, anti-air kbots, commando...)
Even the changes as have already been done are just huge. You can see for yourself, so many things have been fixed. The wreck values for instance, I think are going to make a huge difference. No more things like fatboys giving 300 metal while costing 4000. All units will have the same ratio of unit metal to corpse metal.
The OTA standard "unit metal:corpse metal" is 100:80.. so you get 80% of the metal value back. I've decided it might be in the best interests of the mod to try decreasing this. It's only a difference of 10%, but let's see where it takes us.
The idea is that less resources being left for the defender should mean less advantage in playing mostly defensively.
I think you'll all be pleased when you see your first nuke explosion in 2.2
.... the craters they leave are much deeper than before. Rather than a slight indentation, there's a proper crater like as if a bigassed megaton warhead was let off. I'd post some screenshots but I'm on my feeble laptop and I've got all the options turned down or off to get a good FPS for testing.
Last edited by Caydr on 27 Aug 2006, 05:25, edited 1 time in total.
I think the main issue is that they're an inefficient L1 vehicle lineup that can only be brought out around the time L2 starts rolling out. This means that most bases have a decent amount of defence, both sides have reasonable swarms of L1 units, etc. You do get mobility, but you pay a really high premium for it, and in exchange you get a unit that can't be massed effectively and dies as soon as it encounters conventional forces due to its large size and abysmal HP. Never mind what happens when they encounter real ships! You're almost always better off going air.Caydr wrote:What's the deal exactly with hovers? I've never done a throurogh cost/benefit analysis on them, but they seem like basically the L1 vehicle lineup (and then some) which can go virtually anywhere unobstructed. When you get right down to it, raw firepower like stumpies will win over units that cost extra for their mobility, but they can attack with little warning... and all that good stuff... Anyway I've reduced the cost of hover plants by 100 metal so far, that's as far as I've gone. I'll do some testing tomorrow and see what unit-specific changes are necessary.
(Also, the TA maps Hover units were designed for - wide-open maps with numerous deep but narrow waterways that land units can't cross and ships can't navigate effectively - simply don't exist in Spring.)
Never mind that their factory costs twice as much energy and 1.5 times as much BT as an Air plant.
I'd say reducing the factory cost is a good start. Upgrading the Hovers (and increasing the cost correspondingly) so they can hope to survive 1-on-1 with a vehicle of the same type (IE, Anacondas VS Stumpies) might be good too. That way, you actually get something worthwhile for your resources!
I just noticed that Hovercraft are almost as good at climbing as KBots. (If I'm reading the numbers right?) That's good.
Yes, they have to be very good at climbing to get up the steep shorelines many maps have.
So what would you say to a physical size reduction on these units? It might mean.. *grimace*... repathing your maps again... but you'd have hovers the same size as their vehicle equivalents and, say, only 10% metal and 20% energy more expensive with about 10% less HP. Way more maneuverable though.
So what would you say to a physical size reduction on these units? It might mean.. *grimace*... repathing your maps again... but you'd have hovers the same size as their vehicle equivalents and, say, only 10% metal and 20% energy more expensive with about 10% less HP. Way more maneuverable though.
-
Forboding Angel
- Evolution RTS Developer
- Posts: 14673
- Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 02:43
Thats right Angel, if you actually spend the money going into a LVL2 vehicle army, those units should not only be really slow, but they should be nearly immobile to boot.
Wtf is the rationale behind that?
Or maybe I am reading you wrong?
I can agree with those heavier units being slower to balence for their firepower vs lvl1, but ffs let them move around through more diverse terrain.
LVL1 units are made light and for speed, the heavier LVL2 tanks are made to be slower and get more traction, makes sense to me.
I don't really see a problem, they're still no where near the slope climb of kbots or hovers, its inbetween lvl1 mobility and hover mobility and thats how it works best.
Maybe its an issue of LVL1 should have the same abilities to track steeper slopes as well?
You folks gotta remember that OTA maps were actually very flat in comparison to all these user made Spring maps, they were fine tuned and setup by CaveDog to allow just about everything to move anywhere.
No, LVL2 vehicles should never be able to climb super steep slopes, but there has to be a compromise vs most Spring map's scale and typical elevation maps that use high rise hills.
Wtf is the rationale behind that?
Or maybe I am reading you wrong?
I can agree with those heavier units being slower to balence for their firepower vs lvl1, but ffs let them move around through more diverse terrain.
LVL1 units are made light and for speed, the heavier LVL2 tanks are made to be slower and get more traction, makes sense to me.
I don't really see a problem, they're still no where near the slope climb of kbots or hovers, its inbetween lvl1 mobility and hover mobility and thats how it works best.
Maybe its an issue of LVL1 should have the same abilities to track steeper slopes as well?
You folks gotta remember that OTA maps were actually very flat in comparison to all these user made Spring maps, they were fine tuned and setup by CaveDog to allow just about everything to move anywhere.
No, LVL2 vehicles should never be able to climb super steep slopes, but there has to be a compromise vs most Spring map's scale and typical elevation maps that use high rise hills.
-
Lolsquad_Steven
- Posts: 488
- Joined: 27 Jun 2006, 17:55
Hovers are great on specific maps, I've absolutely pummeled people with them on Small Supreme Battlefield.
They're perfect just the way they are.
I'm kind of dissapointed that LV3 Kbots are still in this mod. I was sort of hoping they'd be more of an emphasis on large scale battles in the late game like in OTA, rather than a few tactical battles with superunits.
It'd also be nice to see a little more simplification, with more units removed. I'm pretty good at AA now, but I've still not built many of these units, or know what the hell they do. You can't expect people to rememeber how effective 300 units are in relation to each other.
Of course the noobs will always say More = Better. And the noobs are essentiel to keeping the mod the most popular in Spring.
They're perfect just the way they are.
I'm kind of dissapointed that LV3 Kbots are still in this mod. I was sort of hoping they'd be more of an emphasis on large scale battles in the late game like in OTA, rather than a few tactical battles with superunits.
It'd also be nice to see a little more simplification, with more units removed. I'm pretty good at AA now, but I've still not built many of these units, or know what the hell they do. You can't expect people to rememeber how effective 300 units are in relation to each other.
Of course the noobs will always say More = Better. And the noobs are essentiel to keeping the mod the most popular in Spring.
-
Machiosabre
- Posts: 1474
- Joined: 25 Dec 2005, 22:56
Man, i am personally waiting so much for this version ! I think this will be an even bigger jump in development compared to the jump to 2.x version numbering (though that was motivated it was because of the huge development leap)
What about if AA version number would always change when spring version number changes ? So next version compatible with nex spriong version would be AA 3.0 and then 3.1, 3.2 and so on. The b1 b2 b3 parts of spring versions would not change the aa version number as these are only planned to be bugfixes (iirc)
What do you think ?
What about if AA version number would always change when spring version number changes ? So next version compatible with nex spriong version would be AA 3.0 and then 3.1, 3.2 and so on. The b1 b2 b3 parts of spring versions would not change the aa version number as these are only planned to be bugfixes (iirc)
What do you think ?
I'm curious, will hovercraft basically be an army of Pelicans now? Or will they maintain any of their OTA eccentricities, like extreme top-speed, pathetic rotation rate, etc.
Personally, I'd make the hovercraft pricing premium only minimal, but keep their eccentric playstyle... then nerf their slope-tolerance somewhat. Then nerf the amphibs a bit value-wise, so that you have a reason to choose between hovers and amphibs. Hovers get you high-speed, low-slope-tolerance, low rotation - like vehicles, whereas amphibs get you the underwater/stealth, high slope-tolerance, and otherwise normal handling, like kbots.
Then get a few L2 hovercraft into the L2 vehicle lab or aircraft plant or something.
Personally, I'd make the hovercraft pricing premium only minimal, but keep their eccentric playstyle... then nerf their slope-tolerance somewhat. Then nerf the amphibs a bit value-wise, so that you have a reason to choose between hovers and amphibs. Hovers get you high-speed, low-slope-tolerance, low rotation - like vehicles, whereas amphibs get you the underwater/stealth, high slope-tolerance, and otherwise normal handling, like kbots.
Then get a few L2 hovercraft into the L2 vehicle lab or aircraft plant or something.
As they are now, they've lost most of those eccentricities. They turn faster than vehicles, they climb slopes faster than they do, they even accelerate faster.Pxtl wrote:I'm curious, will hovercraft basically be an army of Pelicans now? Or will they maintain any of their OTA eccentricities, like extreme top-speed, pathetic rotation rate, etc.
I hardly think this is a bad thing, as the "eccentricities" in OTA usually translated to "bloody useless, even on maps that were made for them".
If your late game turns into "a few tactical battles with superunits", you're doing something wrong.Molloy wrote:I'm kind of dissapointed that LV3 Kbots are still in this mod. I was sort of hoping they'd be more of an emphasis on large scale battles in the late game like in OTA, rather than a few tactical battles with superunits.
Why is it bad? They're much larger and have more traction, so it makes sense from that angle. And they're slightly less cost-efficient (IIRC) and are slower to move and turn, so that helps balance things out.Forboding Angel wrote:L2 Vehicles can climb better than lv1. That is bad. It should be the other way around.
Idunno, I'd have fun with it. Core's already got an "amphibious assault tank" - in the Croc. If, as you say, the poisoin arrow really needs to be revamped, you could do it as something special. Like a superslow-superheavy tank, or a mobile amphibious artillery unit with antinaval damage (so you basically get a small mobile Guardian). Considering the slope-tolerance of amphibs, an amphib-arty unit would be freakishly useful even on non-water maps like AltoredDivide.Machiosabre wrote:I have one suggestion regarding amphibians, the poison arrow sucks, it's so slow at everything it has a hard time fighting lvl1 kbots, I'd suggest making it sort of the same as a reaper, but more expensive to make up for it being amphibious.
The triton and crock seem to work pretty good though.
And as for hovers: is there any way to control how a unit responds to impact? Like, a way to make their moment of inertia (rotational mass) differ from their positional mass? That is, to say "hovers are knocked really hard by impacts, but they don't flip around so they can keep fighting once knocked airborne"? Plus a way to make them nigh-immune to the landing-damage. I dunno - I guess my point is just that Hovers were, in OTA, something far different from just "tanks that can go across water". Now, they're just turning into Pelicans. I'm not saying the OTA hovers were _good_.... I'm just hoping that there's some way to make them into a more... distinct... unit class.
Hell, my dream would be to be able to give Gunship-class units a maxslope value and to better obey unit-collisions and then make Hovers into gunship-style units. But that would really require a new unit-class and rescripting the damn things, so that's just a silly dream.
Last edited by Pxtl on 27 Aug 2006, 17:15, edited 1 time in total.
-
KlavoHunter
- Posts: 141
- Joined: 28 May 2006, 21:41
True enough, but I thought you were going to start on a major revamp of the water units to fix 'em up for balance?Caydr wrote:LRPC ships are leaving AA because water already has the firepower advantage and the ability to fire a great distance inland. I'm also just trying to simplify things and bring AA back to its OTA roots.
I can somewhat understand that you'd want to ditch the "floating Berthas" as some sort of wonder unit. However, I'd still like to see some sort of "bombardment ship" still in, seeing as you axed the others as well. Maybe bring back the LRPC ships, with a new weapon with, say, 2x Guardian/Toaster range?
As it stands now, without LRPC ships, it makes things even more biased towards the defender on shore, as his LRPCs can shell your fleet and base with impunity. If you can't fire back at all, with the removal of LRPC ships, then perhaps it's time to consider adding in water-based Shield Generators.