Absolute Annihilation 2.11

[PRO_rANDY]

12 Hammers > HLT ez with 8 to 10 surviving

[Egarwaen]

12 Hammers > HLT ez with 8 to 10 surviving

HLT + a handful of LLTs + Guardian? Your micro must be much better than mine.

[Cabbage]

Bigsteve Wrote

Flak range increased 10%, mobile flak range increased to same as stationary, all special damage values removed from anti swarm and anti bomber turrets.

Gunship brake rate reduced 25%, acceleration reduced 20%, speed
reduced 15%, rotation reduced 10%

(guships have a resistance to anti swarm and anti bomer if im not mistaken, so as of next version they wont)

Given the above changes you might aswell remove gunships from the game. They already become almost obsolete once a LR tower goes up.
These changes dont seem to make sense.
Id leave the whole gunship balance the way it is at the moment, its good, theyre useful ( very, if you keep them for a suprise) but easily countered once theyre in play.

[/quote]


+100

[BigSteve]

A few more thngs I forgot Caydr, the prude, does it need an hp increase? last time I nuked one Im pretty sure it took the hit and was still standing with about 25% of its health remaining.

Also dont remove the Krogtarr! that unit is so cool, its a great alternative if you cant afford a krog, I have a feeling youre mind is already made up on this one though

The 50hp reductiion on the recluse seems unecessary, those things break if the wind gets up, not to mention they kick each others ass with friendly fire half of the time ^^

Also, does the ak still outrange the peewee with the range changes? I hope so as Ive had some good peewee vs ak micro battles, it did always seem a tad too easy to micro the ak against a peewee though so a slight range boost is good as long as the ak still outranges the little fella.

[FireCrack]

^oh yeah, spiders are made of paper..

Though i dont beleive the krogtaar is that usefull...

[Neddie]

I still use the L1 Banshee for ARM, and I consider it a pretty good pay off. I mean, sure, almost nobody ELSE uses it - but I've used them to take out Big Berthas. Wind Farms. Early ocean structures.

They have a niche. Hell, I can run one behind enemy lines to deactivate all his solars early game on certain maps. Plus, they are a must if you're using the Air/Vehicle Combo. Getting smacked by K-Bots on hills? Toss a few Banshees up there and thin the herd. AKs/PeeWees scouting around? Wipe them with two or three Banshees.

The sheer number you can field remains useful even into late game. Nothing distracts a player pushing into your territory than a bunch of little annoying gunships swooping down from all directions to cover for the advance of more substancial units.

Alright, so I like them.

[jellyman]

Well 5 bombers vs 12 thuds - the extra energy cost is significant. But my argument isn't really about the balance of bombers/banshees vs level 1 ground. Its about the relationship between level 1 air, anti air, and level 2 air.

What do you think would happen if banshees and bombers were buffed by say 10% damage per second. Players would be forced to build more anti air to counter. Players who build no anti air early on will be pwned by level 1 instead of being inconvenienced as is currently the case. Every player will have to build some reasonable level 1 anti air. So level 1 air will not be overpowered as they will often be shot from the sky by missiles. And then the anti air that has been built against level 1 air will help against level 2 brawler rushers. There will be less cases of entire bases being wasted by say 20 brawlers. And less need to nerf brawlers.

I think it would be interesting to buff level 1 air by about 10% per release, until it becomes overpowered, and then nerf it by 5 or 10% and see what happens.

[Day]

wreck AA balance just to see what would happen? nothxkbai

[krogothe]

I think it would be interesting to buff level 1 air by about 10% per release, until it becomes overpowered, and then nerf it by 5 or 10% and see what happens.

How about no you crazy bastard?

[Acidd_UK]

(Stupid question:?) Could we get range indicators that would show antinuke and jammer-ranges before they are built? Those would come in handy. (And radars? Would that be better or worse?)

Actually, trhis would be really useful for mines imho - at the moment there's no indication of trigger distance or blast radius..

[espylaub]

(Stupid question:?) Could we get range indicators that would show antinuke and jammer-ranges before they are built? Those would come in handy. (And radars? Would that be better or worse?)

Actually, trhis would be really useful for mines imho - at the moment there's no indication of trigger distance or blast radius..

Quoted for so much truth.

[Day]

mines could use some love in general now that i think of it

anybody remember those XTA mines? now they were good

[MR.D]

Krogtaars are amazingly usefull, they're like.. Super Mavs!!

When comparing a Krogtaar against a Bantha, its an easy decision which one will win, (BLOD = pwn).

But in any other normal scenario vs ground units or other light mechs, Krogtaar is a menace and definately something to be feared.

Its amazing vs Tanks, Kbots and base smashing with its good damage and impulse attacks to break up swarms.

I know that I'm not the only person that would sincerly miss the Krogtaar.
With it gone, there will be a big hole in CORE's Mechlab lineup.

and Btw, mines could benefit from not chain reacting so easily from mine Det or from random explosions.

[Machiosabre]

mines are good already but they're sort of a pain to have alot of, maybe they could lose the cost to cloak, since they're mines, or they should be renamed to cloaked bombs

[Ishach]

I once got a group of freakers to walk into an attacking group of pyros and build mines under them while they were attacking an HLT


It was pretty cool

[Egarwaen]

Its about the relationship between level 1 air, anti air, and level 2 air.

Which is perfectly fine. You need a hefty investment in anti-air to ensure that your enemy can't use his massively more mobile L1 airforce to take out anything important. Rather like the LLT spam most players use to ensure that a small group of KBots or Vehicles can't trash your economy at will. L2 air can then effectively attack through most L1 anti-air solutions, but is much more expensive... Just like L2 ground.

If you think there's an imbalance, join today's tournament and exploit it.

[Machiosabre]

While we're un the subject of air, fighters need to be butchered in their strength vs ground, and dont gimme that fighters die so easy stuff.

I'm not talking about fighters attacking bases, just defening them, like everytime you break through fighterswarms kill your attack, of course jethros etc are good against fighters but they don't get more than a few shots of if they're targeted, so they only help for about 5 seconds unless you have a ton of them.

This has been mentioned a bunch of times before and fighters are already getting more expensive next version, but I still think they have no business killing ground units.

[LordMatt]

2.11 --> 2.2

I didn't see much in there for level one sea, so here are some ideas:

1. Destroyers are rediculously overpowered, as they can effectively kill anything else out of the lvl 1 shipyard except more destroyers, making a destroyer rush the only viable way to win at sea. The problem is that they are just as effective at close range as they are at a distance, which means swarming them with cheaper units doesn't work as well as it should. The weakness of the bigger ships should be close combat, making them need support from corvettes and skeets against swarms.
I think they should:
*lose the deck laser
*have trouble little trouble hitting things that get really close to their hull with their big gun.
*have a small cost reduction (50-100 metal and a proportionate amount of energy and build time) to offset these changes

2. With the recent changes to the torpedo launchers, and the current superiority of destroyers, subs are basically useless. At 300 metal you can make two torpedo launchers for the cost of one sub and effectively cover any small naval base from sub attack.
Subs need a buff or defenses against them need a nerf:
*A destroyer can survive a sub attack with a little less than half of its health left; this should be closer to even (or the sub needs a drastic cost reduction). That way the player who micros his units better wins, rather than the destroyer automatically.
*A sub should be able to take out one but not two torpedo launchers. As it is now a torpedo launcher can take out a sub in 3 shots, with the sub maybe getting one or two hits in, and doing very little damage. At a minimum, torpedo launchers need to do less damage to subs per shot, and subs need faster torpedos to match the torpedo launchers.

3. Transport ships cost 1000 metal. This is far too expensive, they should cost 500-700 metal to be more viable.

4. The seaplane platform should be buildable by the construction ship and or the lvl 1 construction aircraft (which IMO should be able to build all the level one navel structures, since it can go over the water just fine ). As it is it is too hard to get.

Thoughts? I would be happy to help playtest any changes to naval balance.

(Seriously. L1 bombers are hawt. Try them sometime. You have to know where your target is, but if they have an attack order from the moment they take off, they're scary.)

Shh! don't tell them

[Pxtl]

2.11 --> 2.2

I didn't see much in there for level one sea, so here are some ideas:

1. Destroyers are rediculously overpowered, as they can effectively kill anything else out of the lvl 1 shipyard except more destroyers, making a destroyer rush the only viable way to win at sea. The problem is that they are just as effective at close range as they are at a distance, which means swarming them with cheaper units doesn't work as well as it should. The weakness of the bigger ships should be close combat, making them need support from corvettes and skeets against swarms.
I think they should:
*lose the deck laser
*have trouble little trouble hitting things that get really close to their hull with their big gun.
*have a small cost reduction (50-100 metal and a proportionate amount of energy and build time) to offset these changes

Corvettes and subs do quite fine against Destroyers. They don't kill the destroyer perfectly - you'll take some losses, but it'll be worthwhile. Not to mention aqua-HLTs.

2. With the recent changes to the torpedo launchers, and the current superiority of destroyers, subs are basically useless. At 300 metal you can make two torpedo launchers for the cost of one sub and effectively cover any small naval base from sub attack.
Subs need a buff or defenses against them need a nerf:
*A destroyer can survive a sub attack with a little less than half of its health left; this should be closer to even (or the sub needs a drastic cost reduction). That way the player who micros his units better wins, rather than the destroyer automatically.

Subs are not - and never have been - assault units the idea is that subs control the open water and defense, while you _need_ destroyers to attack a base. The _only_ sub suitable for base attack is the big LR-torp sub. Attacking a torpedo launcher with an L1 sub or a subkilller is like using Pillagers to fight HLTs.

4. The seaplane platform should be buildable by the construction ship and or the lvl 1 construction aircraft (which IMO should be able to build all the level one navel structures, since it can go over the water just fine ). As it is it is too hard to get.

This, I agree with. Seaplanes should be reformatted into L1.5 units - balanced against L2 units, but with less variety and no L2 con.

[Machiosabre]

This, I agree with. Seaplanes should be reformatted into L1.5 units - balanced against L2 units, but with less variety and no L2 con.

wouldn't it be easier to just keep them the way they are and just let lvl1ships and planes build them?, I don't think theres a need for lvl1.5 air, and you wouldn't be able to get good air at sea anymore