Page 17 of 59
Posted: 12 Dec 2005, 19:18
by Min3mat
shhh! im trying to convince someone to make another map like that (awesome map btw ^-^)
Posted: 14 Dec 2005, 02:47
by Forboding Angel
Caydr, can core kbot lab pls get 2 units like these?
http://www.planetannihilation.com/corep ... p?id=80135 <-- WE NEED THIS BADLY!
http://www.planetannihilation.com/corep ... p?id=80699 <-- possible kbot counter to teh UB3R maverick?
Mavs are broken. Core has nothing in lv 2 kbot factory that is remotely as powerful as the maverick, no to mention cost and build time.
Lets see, mix a much too much damage gun on a really fast unit and you have the maverick.
I would like to be able to use something else other than vehicles to counter mavericks.
Posted: 14 Dec 2005, 03:10
by Das Bruce
Back in the day they were supposed to have a strong weapon but be very weakly armoured, they should go back to that.
Posted: 14 Dec 2005, 08:55
by Archangel of Death
Ok, why in the world would we want to add something that looks exactly like a fido with different guns and a supped up AK in the Core kbot lab. Well, at least the supped up AK wouldn't stick out like an arm commander at an all-Krogoth party.
Counter for Mav?
Posted: 14 Dec 2005, 16:24
by Pxtl
For k-bots, use The Can against the Mav, if you can't trap the mav and bombard with Mortys. Also, consider aircraft.
Posted: 14 Dec 2005, 17:17
by Forboding Angel
mavs are can openers.
Posted: 14 Dec 2005, 20:18
by Pxtl
Forboding Angel wrote:mavs are can openers.
Really? I find cans to be a little tougher - they don't win enough to justify their sluggish speed, but they seem to win. Okay, have you tried Pyros?
Posted: 14 Dec 2005, 20:51
by Caydr
More new Spring versions than AA versions, bet you didn't see this one coming
I may reduce Maverick's weapon damage a bit. I don't want to reduce their HP too much though. In my ideal world, Mavericks are half-mechs, sort of like a little brother to a Razorback. 5 or 6 mavs equal 1 razorback, something like that. Their costs are quite high as well, and they have a decent amoung of HP. This is to balance the fact that core gets the superior Krogoth. Think of them as a commando (not the core commando unit, but a commando, badass, heavily armed, tough to kill, etc, but rare and hard to get).
Of course, that's just my impresion of how they should be. Probably not any good... dunno. tired. I'll do something with them.
For the sake of it, here's a compararison between Mav and Can:
Code: Select all
Maverick
BuildCostEnergy=12180;
BuildCostMetal=689;
BuildTime=18384;
MaxDamage=1400;
MaxVelocity=1.49;
Can
BuildCostEnergy=8722;
BuildCostMetal=522;
BuildTime=11734;
MaxDamage=3500;
MaxVelocity=0.9;
Maverick has a stronger weapon, but in direct combat I don't think it would make up for a 2100 unit armor deficiency, especially with their costs being as high as they are.
Posted: 15 Dec 2005, 01:29
by Forboding Angel
umm, mavs can stay out of can range easily and just pot shot them. Even if the mav stood still it would kill the can before the can could kill the mav.
You're balancing a Level 2 against a level 3??!?! Wtf?? That is borked.
That's nice that you think they should be that way, but you might wanna balance them so that core kbots can stop them. As it is, if my enemy uses mavs I'[m pretty much screwed if I went kbots.
Posted: 15 Dec 2005, 01:38
by Forboding Angel
btw, you forgot that the mav fire faster. Even a little differance can change a lot.
Look at the peewee vs the ak
Posted: 15 Dec 2005, 01:42
by SwiftSpear
Fast Kbots with strong weapons should never have decent range. It's just a micromanagement nightmare if nothing I have can attack a maveric because he'll just run away and potshot me. The cocept is harrassment units, and they are powerful worth about 10 times whatever health they have, expecially for defencive purpouses.
Posted: 15 Dec 2005, 02:03
by Forboding Angel
oh btw, pyro's get blown up in 2 shots. Do you know what kind of range the mav has?
throw a horde of pyros against 4 mavs. I will take bets on what wins
Posted: 15 Dec 2005, 02:36
by Decimator
The problem with that sort of thinking, Caydr, is that you almost never see a krogoth, and therefore they have no bearing on balance. But think about how often you see mavs...
Posted: 15 Dec 2005, 02:53
by Forboding Angel
OK i just conduicted a few tests
I have the demo if no one believes me
1 mav vs 1 can
can wins with a sliver of health
5 mavs vs 5 cans
mavs win, 3 standing, all slightly wounded
3 wounded mavs vs 1 sumo
Sumo got owned with 1 mav left standing somewhat damaged
20 pyros vs 5 mavs
3 mavs left standing, all pyros got owned
50-60 mavs vs 90 morties.
THe morties got slaughtered.
If you don't believe me I have the demo, you can watch for yourself
Posted: 15 Dec 2005, 03:07
by Das Bruce
Whats the cost ratio on those battles?
Posted: 15 Dec 2005, 03:12
by Forboding Angel
2160 for 5 cans metal
43610 en for 5 cans
60900 for 5 mavs EN
3445 metal for 5 mavs
mavs cost a little bit more, but they own way too much to balance their cost.
I have no idea how much pyros cost.
Posted: 15 Dec 2005, 05:23
by Caydr
1.3 final changelog
Code: Select all
1.25a --> 1.3
"Samson", "Slasher" energy costs increased by 50%
"Samson", "Slasher" HP reduced by 100
"Samson", "Slasher" maxvelocity reduced by 10%
"Samson", "Slasher" rotation speed reduced by 100
"Samson", "Slasher" damage versus "raider"
armorclass reduced by about 30%
"Samson", "Slasher" damage versus all other units
reduced by about 10%
"Shellshocker", "Wolverine" weapon velocity
increased 15 and 10 respectively, hopefully
allowing them to reach their maximum range
"Shellshocker", "Wolverine" weapon damage increased
to 170, 160 (130, 115)
Core "Necro" should no longer get stuck after
rezzing units
Core "Sumo" cloaking cost when moving increased to
225 (100); Cost when stationary remains at 75
AI compatibility improved by making "Tech Forge"
structures in the F variant seperate structures
from regular factories
Repulsor builings now require 1250 energy per tick
to operate, regardless of whether they're even
deflecting anything or not
Repuslor building metal cost increased 50%
Advanced Underwater Storage buildings removed,
bringing the total unit count to 396
Maverick costs increased very slightly
Maverick firepower decreased very slightly
Storage building capacities tweaked
New variant included, "-B" for Barebones: This
version includes a more conservative selection of
units for people who prefer a smaller unit count
I think that the B variant will be popular with people who just want to play plain old TA but on Spring, with fixed up balance in a few places. Basically it's identical to OTA gameplay, except where a compromise had to be found between OTA gameplay and the reality of how Spring handles certain things (plasma cannons, for one). Arm has no krogoth-like unit, and in general things are as they were. I'm hoping this will help AA reach a broader appeal...
If anyone has a suggestion for other AA "mutators", PM or email me... if they're good, and not a hella lot of work, I'll include them in a future version.
Posted: 15 Dec 2005, 19:34
by Dwarden
hehe so maybe one day we get -X (eXtended) version with even more units and structures :) for these who like variety :)))
{me hides to evade incoming projectiles}
Maverick
Posted: 15 Dec 2005, 20:21
by Drexion
Please do not take the following as me claiming that mavericks are not good, I built them so they had to be good for something...
I have to challenge the validity of Forboding's test (which I assume played a role in Caydr's decision to make the damage do 92% of old damage and cost 6.25% more metal). The one thing his test did which was not fair was that he did not take resources into question at all. I mean, I could build 1.6 cans for every maverick in version 1.25(in terms of metal/energy/time)...and yet his test was 5 cans against 5 mavericks. For a decent test, that would have to be 5 mavericks versus 8 cans. I doubt the outcome would be the same. Same for his morty test, he had 50 mavs versus 90 mortys... I'm not sure of the exact cost ratio here but i'm sure 90 mortys cost a heck of a lot less than 50 mavs.
Frankly, given the current cost versus usefulness of mavericks in 1.3, I have started moving away from the unit(it tended to be a part of my force mixture before). Led to some interesting new tactics actually, so I don't care...But I, for one, do not think the maverick was overpowered enough that it deserved BOTH a 6.25% cost increase as well as a 8% damage reduction. *maybe* one of the two depending on how a test as I proposed above works out, but definitely not both nerfs in my opinion.
Thats my thought on the issue anyhow.
-Drexion
p.s. I'll speak to Forboding and try some tests with version 1.30 on mavs versus others....
Posted: 15 Dec 2005, 20:44
by Min3mat
so Caydr AA-B is OTA with VERY slight changes and some visual enhancements? if so W00T! not only would it be great to play it would ahve a good player base (at the beginning at the least) off ppl who think it is a variant of AA ^-^