Absolute Annihilation 2.11

Cabbage · Post by **Cabbage** » 28 Aug 2006, 20:07

Making this change would allow them to make it up a steep slope, but they would do so, slowly.

It will not unbalance anything. Good lord guys come on. If any of you had any experience with mods you would most likely know this.

You couldn't be more wrong. Vehicles designed to cope badly with steep slopes. Increasing their tolerenace would ruin dozens of maps which have this specificly in mind. vehacles are significantly stronger than their kbot counterparts and pay for this with limited mobility, as it should be.

Acidd_UK · Post by **Acidd_UK** » 28 Aug 2006, 20:19

Forboding Angel · Post by **Forboding Angel** » 28 Aug 2006, 20:19

Cabbage, you have no idea what you are talking about. When I get home tonight I will post some screenies for ya.

Dude. If vehicles get a slope tolerance of 26, they WILL cope badly with steepish slopes, the differance is the fact that they will be able in some capacity to traverse said slopes, to some extent.

If you're gonna argue with me will you please get a clue first? This is really frustrating. Do this, extract the aa sdz into your mods folder, edit the move tdf file and change the flash tank class to maxslope 26. Edit the modinfo so that when you repackage it doesn't fuck up your existing, then take a look for yourself.

Cabbage · Post by **Cabbage** » 28 Aug 2006, 20:37

Clearly you haven't though through what you are saying. I never claimed that they would be able to reach the tops of these slopes etc easily, but that is besides the point, becuase they should NEVER be able to reach places where only kbots can currently go.

If vehicles get a slope tolerance of 26, they WILL cope badly with steepish slopes, the differance is the fact that they will be able in some capacity to traverse said slopes, to some extent.

They should not be able to travel up steep slopes full stop. It simply dosent need to change, everyone else seems to understand vehacles only have a limited capacity to climb hills, why don't you?

Caydr · Post by **Caydr** » 28 Aug 2006, 20:39

Everyone is crazy but me

From the top:

Now, will someone tell me why the light tanks have worse slope tolerance than the heavy tanks???

. . .

It may not seem like a big differance, but it does have an impact.

This is completely untrue. Ok, what happens when you try to push a couch up a flight of stairs? It's hard, but after a while you'll get it up there. NOW PUSH A CAR UP THE STAIRS. A 5x5 tank has a much more difficult time finding a place to climb a hill that's wide enough for its entire width, than a 2x2 tank.

Quote:
Commander metal value reduced (15000->2500)
May I ask the reasoning behind this/what noob whined for it?

Argumentitive Discussion 1 Comon, you're better then this caydr - moderator

2x2 vehicles have a maxslope of 10, 3x3s a maxslope of 12. (Presumably due to their larger size, this results in a similar behaviour) KBots are anywhere from 14 to 20. The values in the .FBI file apparently override the values in the movement class.

Also completely wrong. The movementclass what determines a unit's climbing ability and real footprint. Everything in the FBI file is for when that unit is built. For instance, a gator needs to have relatively flat ground when built by a combat engineer... etc.

Umm, changing the model basically means a new unit, which Caydr doesn't do

That's right. I have never, ever, designed and modelled units for two mods, such as giant spacecraft. No, you've never heard of this. Also I didn't post pictures of the anti-air kbots I'd made. This *never* happened.

Why are we reverting Shields back to the old, ridiculously effective Repulsor-type?

Because for two months there's been clowns riding my ass on MSN, PMs, forum posts, emails, via TASClient, etc, telling me that shields suck ass.

Quote:
Bladewing metal cost increased by 6, energy cost increased by 250

Once again, a request by people who dont know how to counter the buggers. Bladewings die like flies even to Insti lasers! Why increase their cost? 6 metal may not be a lot, but it adds up, and the +250 energy will DEFINATELY hurt.

Argumentitive Discussion 1 moderator

Egarwaen · Post by **Egarwaen** » 28 Aug 2006, 20:51

Caydr wrote:OH NOES!!! CHANGE!!

Not all change is positive. Make the Flash cost 0 and the Instigator cost 1,000,000 energy. This is a change. It even corrects a gameplay problem, which is more than can be said for the Bladewing modification. Is it good? No.

Cabbage · Post by **Cabbage** » 28 Aug 2006, 20:54

well, seeing as i usually play arm, i wouldnt mind

Machiosabre · Post by **Machiosabre** » 28 Aug 2006, 20:55

It's a madhouse!
edit: nevermind, where the hell did I even get that

Pxtl · Post by **Pxtl** » 28 Aug 2006, 20:59

Hmm. Bladewings are already rare in combat (but that can be accounted for the rarity of offensive use of L1 units in general) so I don't see the nerf as needed.

Oh, and Caydr, I didn't mean to imply that you can't model - I was just pointing out that, as a rule, you avoid making any model changes or new models for units for AA, simply because it's easier and more fun to make it work with the extensive library of units already available. And as such, asking Caydr to modify a unit in such a way that requires a model change is roughly as successful as asking Mom for a pony for christmas.

BigSteve · Post by **BigSteve** » 28 Aug 2006, 21:00

Egarwaen wrote:
Caydr wrote:OH NOES!!! CHANGE!!
Not all change is positive. Make the Flash cost 0 and the Instigator cost 1,000,000 energy. This is a change. It even corrects a gameplay problem, which is more than can be said for the Bladewing modification. Is it good? No.

+ infinity

PRO_rANDY · Post by **PRO_rANDY** » 28 Aug 2006, 21:04

You guys are all crazy

Egarwaen · Post by **Egarwaen** » 28 Aug 2006, 21:04

PRO_rANDY wrote:You guys are all crazy

Duh.

Molloy · Post by **Molloy** » 28 Aug 2006, 21:13

Most of the balance issues are to do with badly designed maps. Every map seems to have tons of steep hills, or be completely flat. So it's a very obvious choice about wether you go kbot or vehicle first.

Drone_Fragger · Post by **Drone_Fragger** » 28 Aug 2006, 21:26

Yes, Which is why vehicles are so immensely hard to start with.

Thinking about it, I should be askiung map designers to make better maps, and not making vehicles better.

*looks at map designers*

MAKE BETTER MAPS DAMN YOU! I WANT MY VEHICLES TO WORK!!! :p

LordMatt · Post by **LordMatt** » 28 Aug 2006, 21:27

I dont either understand the fusion nerf, even now it is cheaper to build 37.5 solars to gain 750E.
115M*37.5 = 4312.5M
Fusion cost: 4504M

In next version fusion will cost 5404M

So it is cheaper to just build solars...

And with advanced solars you need to build 10 to gain 750E
343M*10 = 3430M !!!!

So i suggest not to build fusions at all, you will save 5404-3430 = 1974 Metal Neutral

I agree, if these stats remain the same in the release there'll be no reason to build regular fusions ~2000 metal isn't worth the space savings.

Cabbage · Post by **Cabbage** » 28 Aug 2006, 21:28

Yes, Which is why vehicles are so immensely hard to start with.

Wrong. The only thing that would make veh hard to start with is a hilly map with very little metal in their start positions..

Three or four spots and a fairly flat map and its no probelm..

Day · Post by **Day** » 28 Aug 2006, 21:34

if its flat enough NOT going veh is suicide

Caydr · Post by **Caydr** » 28 Aug 2006, 21:35

Play speedmetal, it's nice and flat.

For the first 14 seconds.

Cabbage · Post by **Cabbage** » 28 Aug 2006, 21:35

Day · Post by **Day** » 28 Aug 2006, 21:35

you can deform speedmetal?

Spring RTS Engine

Absolute Annihilation 2.11