Spring RTS Engine

Drone_Fragger wrote: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

Have you ever noticed EE:GD playing really badly on any of my maps? Did the reason why ever occur to you?

Felony 1 keep arguments apersonal forb. - moderator

Kinda like all building in AA having a maxslope of 10 instead of 20 stupid. Good thing caydr gave the mexes a buildslope of 20, otherwise you all would be shit out of luck.

I don't blame it all on map makers. Anyways, the GD have to have the same tolerance as URC because they don't have any All terrain stuffs.


I'm just that perhaps theres too many maps where going vehicles isn't an option because of the crazily small choke points and the whole "forcing your enemy to clambour over the hills with Kbots things" instead.

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

No, they're not. It depends on the map, but even on moderately hilly maps, vehicles are perfectly viable to start with. (See: The vast majority of tournament games.) Only on maps with very broken terrain or large and obviously advantageous hills is a vehicle start suicide.

Arm vehicles might be immensely hard to start with, but that's because the Flash is immensely underpowered in 2.11. Even then, the Arm player can usually put up a spirited fight before being run over. (See: Bhaal v rANDY, Sun August 27th tournament.)

Day wrote:you can deform speedmetal?

Isn't it the one that has super low terrain hardness?

Kinda like all building in AA having a maxslope of 10 instead of 20 stupid

Isn't it a shame that AA is the standard to which maps must be designed, not EE, so this does't have any effect? Enough already.

Reverting the fusion change. The guy who shall remain nameless had no clue after all, I guess...

I'll rethink the bladewing change.

Drone_Fragger wrote:I don't blame it all on map makers. Anyways, the GD have to have the same tolerance as URC because they don't have any All terrain stuffs.

ARUUGH </frustration>

In EE URC does NOT Have the same slope tolerance as GD. GD has MUCH LESS than URC. It was simply an example.

Felony 1 - moderator

I give up. To some of us it is clear the minor things that would help out AA a lot while having no noticeable effect to gameplay, except to make it inexplicitly smoother.

Caydr, please for the love of god you did not just give me an argument based on realism... NANOLATHES <- nuff said.

As I said, I give up. This mod is free to self destruct eventually, as it will at some point.

Have you ever noticed EE:GD playing really badly on any of my maps? Did the reason why ever occur to you?

Perhaps you haven't realised why GD tanks in EE have such a high slope tolerance?

I'll explain for you: GD are all tanks, URC are all bots, it's fundamental game design for all units to be able to traverse most terrain, else URC would ofc win on any hilly map as they could reach places that tanks can't. They do exactly the same things, but just look diffrennt.

If you actualy thought about it rather saying hte first thing that popped into your head, you'd realise that what you've said is a completely pointless argument. AA several unit categories, each side has kbots for dealing with hills, there is no reason for vehacles to be able to cope with them.

and tbh, its safe to ignore drone, he rarely makes reasonable requests :p

Realism didn't enter into my statement. I was pointing out that it doesn't matter what slope tolerance AA's buildings have, nor your opinion of it. AA is played by easily 2/3rds of Spring's players, so maps must be designed to be playeable on it since it's the de facto standard. EE's higher slope tolerance on buildings is, if anything, detrimental to gameplay, just allowing structures to be placed where the map designer did not want them to be.

snip

I give up. To some of us it is clear the minor things that would help out AA a lot while having no noticeable effect to gameplay, except to make it inexplicitly smoother.

If something has no noticable effect on gameplay, why impliment it? unless its a purely visual effect ofc.

As I said, I give up. This mod is free to self destruct eventually, as it will at some point.

With you giving up, i expect exactly the opposite will happen.

Cabbage wrote:

Have you ever noticed EE:GD playing really badly on any of my maps? Did the reason why ever occur to you?

Perhaps you haven't realised why GD tanks in EE have such a high slope tolerance?

I'll explain for you: GD are all tanks, URC are all bots, it's fundamental game design for all units to be able to traverse most terrain, else URC would ofc win on any hilly map as they could reach places that tanks can't. They do exactly the same things, but just look diffrennt.

If you actualy thought about it rather saying hte first thing that popped into your head, you'd realise that what you've said is a completely pointless argument. AA several unit categories, each side has kbots for dealing with hills, there is no reason for vehacles to be able to cope with them.

and tbh, its safe to ignore drone, he rarely makes reasonable requests :p

Ahh a reasonable reply. I can deal with this.

It's not really a pointless argument, however it is being argued way too much. BTW for vehicles 26 really isn't that much.

As it stands there is a huge gaping hole when someone goes kbots and someone goes vehicles on an even moderately hilly map. ATM there is just no reason to go with vehicles. Better to tech up to lv2 with kbots and then climb the veh tech tree super fast.

Look at the slope values for kbots vs veh, kbots still have MASSIVE advantage, which is fine, that's the way it's supposed to be, however, atm the gap is a bit too large. As I said, when I get home I will post some screens of your favorite maps displaying the differance.

I still give up, but your post was quite nicely formulated and deserved a reply imo.

edit:

Caydr wrote:EE's higher slope tolerance on buildings is, if anything, detrimental to gameplay, just allowing structures to be placed where the map designer did not want them to be.

Hardly. Caydr, seriously, you should try setting them to 20, open a map and use f2, the experience should be somewhat enlightening.

GD are all tanks, URC are all bots, it's fundamental game design for all units to be able to traverse most terrain, else URC would ofc win on any hilly map as they could reach places that tanks can't. They do exactly the same things, but just look diffrennt.

The URC bots are better at getting up walls. Try "Redux Canyon" as an example, tanks cant reach the high plateaus while URC can. Still EE is balanced imo because GD has an very usefull level 1 airtransport (can be build quite fast) which the URC does not. URC transport is level 2 I think.

Back to AA:
Once on Small Divide several Arm Shellshockers (the level 1 arty) got up the right hill, almost to the top...I think only kbots should be able to do this.

Cabbage wrote:

and tbh, its safe to ignore drone, he rarely makes reasonable requests :p

CAydr! I demand nukes be made 20 times more deadly, Cost nothing, and be built by the commander in 1 second!


Actaully, Half the time I do make reasonable requests.

knorke wrote:Back to AA:
Once on Small Divide several Arm Shellshockers (the level 1 arty) got up the right hill, almost to the top...I think only kbots should be able to do this.

I agree with this, I was thinking mainly the attack tanks, flash, insty raider stumpy etc.

As an added note, if you open up small divide in SMFED and look at the height values, the map is actually quite short/low/etc and with the gradual slopes it would be perfectly possible to get the arty up there withut much work.

Small divide has a bit of an optical illusion going for it, meaning that the height Looks a lot higher than it is. I use the same illusions for my maps quite a lot.

Edit:

Quote:

and tbh, its safe to ignore drone, he rarely makes reasonable requests :p


CAydr! I demand nukes be made 20 times more deadly, Cost nothing, and be built by the commander is 1 second!


Actaully, Half the time I do make reasonable requests.

----

Hehehe, +1 to ub3r n3wks 0f d3wm!

CAydr! I demand nukes be made 20 times more deadly, Cost nothing, and be built by the commander is 1 second!

Sounds like most of your other requests to me

If I Want to see the actuall Height, i just put the view into "Total War" View. :D

Drone_Fragger wrote:If I Want to see the actuall Height, i just put the view into "Total War" View. :D

It's truly suprising how many people don't.

Cabbage wrote:

CAydr! I demand nukes be made 20 times more deadly, Cost nothing, and be built by the commander is 1 second!

Sounds like most of your other requests to me

And Peewees should fire Dual Dguns. As standard. Only way to give arm some chance against the immensily overpowered Core Doomsday Device (Which you are just about to buff to have a LRPC on the back of it, Right)

Opps pressed 'back' and posted again ^^

[Deleted]

Drone_Fragger wrote:

Cabbage wrote:

CAydr! I demand nukes be made 20 times more deadly, Cost nothing, and be built by the commander is 1 second!

Sounds like most of your other requests to me

And Peewees should fire Dual Dguns. As standard. Only way to give arm some chance against the immensily overpowered Core Doomsday Device (Which you are just about to buff to have a LRPC on the back of it, Right)

I'mma fork AA, simply to incorporate every single request that drone make.

Wouldn't play much different than Nooberhack.