Page 15 of 17
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.21
Posted: 16 Jun 2008, 06:04
by LordMatt
Saktoth wrote:
Fixed in CA, this is an acceleration issue, up accel to CA's levels.
+1
Korogth I'll just bomb your plan with a licho while you're doing all those machinations.
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.21
Posted: 16 Jun 2008, 10:02
by Sleksa
As it's now about all the details maybe let's bring up another point that got ignored: If you think floating nanos are totally UP in comparison then what about making them underwater?
What about not making them at all? 8)
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.21
Posted: 16 Jun 2008, 11:46
by [Krogoth86]
LordMatt wrote:Korogth I'll just bomb your plan with a licho while you're doing all those machinations.
And after it gets damaged by my fighter shield the Nanos it has to pass will reclaim it - thanks for the 2100 metal, I'll make 12 more bombers from it...
Sleksa wrote:What about not making them at all?
Nah - talking of what's going to happen anyway is boring...
Just admit some of the pros it definetely has (remember: it's not about being the ultimate solution but just being handy in a couple of situations) and everyone is happy...
Except for Licho as he obviously now is riding the Liche's little nuky...
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.21
Posted: 16 Jun 2008, 16:07
by LordMatt
[Krogoth86] wrote:
And after it gets damaged by my fighter shield the Nanos it has to pass will reclaim it - thanks for the 2100 metal, I'll make 12 more bombers from it...
What fighter shield (remember you are investing an additional 3K metal in an unnecessary lab instead of building planes)? I could have spent that on a licho and enough radar planes to find your factories and distract whatever AA you do have.
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.21
Posted: 16 Jun 2008, 16:46
by [Krogoth86]
LordMatt wrote:What fighter shield (remember you are investing an additional 3K metal in an unnecessary lab instead of building planes)? I could have spent that on a licho and enough radar planes to find your factories and distract whatever AA you do have.
Lol - we're slowly getting very childish...
Possible Answer A)
My T1 fighters?
Possible Answer B)
Reread my last posting in page 14...
Possible Answer C)
Uber micro skillz let me assign an attack order on that Liche of yours...
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.21
Posted: 16 Jun 2008, 17:45
by Day
yes lichos are very deadly...
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.21
Posted: 17 Jun 2008, 18:38
by Klopper
I demand immediate renaming of the Liche to Licho to better emphasize it's deadliness
Also, while i agree that sea nanos aren't really needed, the calculations about their buildpower compared to conboats didn't take into consideration the fact that conships take up more space than a single nano (i'd estimate you could have 2 nanos or so in the space a conship takes up), and they wouldn't block the shipyard by having to make cons but help to have it free for unit production instead.
Having to make 2-4 conships for assistance usually isn't much of a hassle though, and at the time you could effectively use the buildpower of more your main units usually come from a nice fresh t2 shipyard or other sea-based lab so that making more t1 cons isn't a problem.
And, as stated somewhere before, you can always make your shipyards near land so you can use land-based nanoblocks to assist
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.21
Posted: 17 Jun 2008, 18:44
by smoth
I demand rename of "lichos" to "EL lichos" so they can have a guitar case full of guns!
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.21
Posted: 18 Jun 2008, 07:01
by MR.D
Solution = extend the range of Conships, ConSubs, and anything that would assist building other units in the water.
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.21
Posted: 18 Jun 2008, 13:08
by ginekolog
Water nanos would not hurt although consips are awsome for assisting. On water map i usually have 150 conships and they produce well
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.21
Posted: 24 Jun 2008, 22:29
by NOiZE
NOiZE wrote:[19:41:43] <[WarC]NOiZE> U guys ever used the radar bot/veh ?
[19:45:00] <[WarC]NOiZE> im considering moving them to level 1, and maybe shorten their radar range a bit
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.21
Posted: 24 Jun 2008, 22:53
by Pxtl
I use the radar veh often, and like it where it is - 900 sight range is nothing to sneeze at. SAM trucks already double as sight-boosters for L1 vehicles, and radar tower are cheap to spike down when you need them and are a very familiar part of BA gameplay (I always bring a con in my strike forces for just such purposes). I'm sure it's similar on KBot maps.
I think it's kind of violating the whole "BA is about stability" rule to move that stuff to L1.
However, I'm a casual player - hardcores might have better insight.
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.21
Posted: 24 Jun 2008, 23:02
by el_matarife
NOiZE wrote:NOiZE wrote:[19:41:43] <[WarC]NOiZE> U guys ever used the radar bot/veh ?
[19:45:00] <[WarC]NOiZE> im considering moving them to level 1, and maybe shorten their radar range a bit
Hmm, I kind of like them at T2 where they can provide radar / LOS for the longer range mobile artillery. Why not just give scout cars radar or something like that?
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.21
Posted: 24 Jun 2008, 23:22
by Acidd_UK
It is wierd to me that fleas have radar when scout vehicles do not...
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.21
Posted: 25 Jun 2008, 01:03
by Pxtl
Acidd_UK wrote:It is wierd to me that fleas have radar when scout vehicles do not...
Wait, fleas have radar? Since when?
/plays Core mostly.
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.21
Posted: 25 Jun 2008, 01:50
by LordMatt
NOiZE wrote:[19:41:43] <[WarC]NOiZE> U guys ever used the radar bot/veh ?
[19:45:00] <[WarC]NOiZE> im considering moving them to level 1, and maybe shorten their radar range a bit
This was my idea, I thought that it might make the units more useful and add some additional strats and tactics to BA. It would be good to hear any reasoned and sensible arguments for or against this from good players though.
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.21
Posted: 25 Jun 2008, 02:17
by el_matarife
You know there's another option: You could move them to T1 then create an "Information Warfare" kbot / vehicle that does both radar & jamming, with a large LOS at T2 as a replacement. Also, you could throw on seismic to enhance the "value" even more, if that's possible.
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.21
Posted: 25 Jun 2008, 04:19
by LordMatt
I've only very rarely seen mobile jammers and radars used at lvl 2, so I suspect there isn't a whole lot of demand for them there.
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.21
Posted: 25 Jun 2008, 07:47
by Hobo Joe
NOiZE wrote:NOiZE wrote:[19:41:43] <[WarC]NOiZE> U guys ever used the radar bot/veh ?
[19:45:00] <[WarC]NOiZE> im considering moving them to level 1, and maybe shorten their radar range a bit
While I want to say yes, I can't help but agree with pxtl that it seems to go against the usual BA/OTA style.
I'm a big mobile radar user. And jammers. Nothing like surprising the enemy with a well stealthed attack. :)
Re: Balanced Annihilation V6.21
Posted: 25 Jun 2008, 08:42
by Pressure Line
el_matarife wrote:You know there's another option: You could move them to T1 then create an "Information Warfare" kbot / vehicle that does both radar & jamming, with a large LOS at T2 as a replacement. Also, you could throw on seismic to enhance the "value" even more, if that's possible.
one thing to note, iirc radar jammers jam ALL radar, even friendly radars...