Spring RTS Engine

Drexion wrote: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....

Well, the problem is that the Mav should be dead-easy for Cans to kill. The Cans shouldn't even be having a fair fight - they should be crushing the Mavs into paste. Why? Because very little else can harm a Mav. Mavericks are too fast for mortars to hit, and kick ass close-range thanks to their high-power guns which outreach flame units. In other words, the only units that can harm a Mav are laser units. A tough, sluggish unit of a very specific class shouldn't just "beat" the Mav - it should demolish it. Consider how they stomped the Pyros in his test, where Pyros fill the same niche as Maverics.

A Can is a horribly liable unit - too slow to mount a quick offensive, too slow to avoid mortar fire, and it's direct-fire weapon means that if it gets stuck behind cover it can't even shoot back. If a Can's in a fight it can't win, it dies. If a Mav's in a fight it can't win, it can run.

Consider the midfield case - since otherwise you've got defenses throwing this out of balance - even if Cans were ungodly more powerful than mavs, the maverics could be micro'd into winning the fight by picking off the cans on the edge since they outrange the Cans.

Combine all this together and you get a horribly overpowered unit. I didn't realise how bad it was until a considered the stats.

Notice - mavs are faster, tougher, longer-ranged, and with a faster projectile than almost every close combat unit the Core has. Consider that the Mav can attack almost anything - its fast projectiles mean that it can hit both slow and fast-moving units. Consider that it's fast, so it can avoid fights with slow-moving units. Consider that it has tons of armour and does tons of damage. Consider that it outranges almost every fast-moving projectile.

Lets say you had a fleet of Mavericks roaming the mountain ranges harassing miscellaneous units - if you can't chase it down with sluggish and minimally effective Cans, how do you harm it?

Does AAI start building hordes of Mavericks after a number of games under AA? That would certainly be a sign of disproportionality

A Can is a horribly liable unit - too slow to mount a quick offensive, too slow to avoid mortar fire, and it's direct-fire weapon means that if it gets stuck behind cover it can't even shoot back. If a Can's in a fight it can't win, it dies. If a Mav's in a fight it can't win, it can run.
Cans are to help break stalemates. they take a beating whilst ur artillery and missile units fire from behind or simply to mass to take a beating whilst u flank ur enemy or to mix in with units to take the damage. they arent supposed to counter mavs so why are they being compared to them?

Min3mat wrote:A Can is a horribly liable unit - too slow to mount a quick offensive, too slow to avoid mortar fire, and it's direct-fire weapon means that if it gets stuck behind cover it can't even shoot back. If a Can's in a fight it can't win, it dies. If a Mav's in a fight it can't win, it can run.
Cans are to help break stalemates. they take a beating whilst ur artillery and missile units fire from behind or simply to mass to take a beating whilst u flank ur enemy or to mix in with units to take the damage. they arent supposed to counter mavs so why are they being compared to them?

Because nothing else counters mavs either. Consider the requirements:
1) must be k-bot.
2) must have fast-moving projectile.
3) must have substantial range (Pyros got owned).

Name the best Core unit that fits that description? Your stuck with either Cans or Storms.

its a skirmish unit u really cannot counter it unless u use planes. they are mostly defensive tho coz defenses can own them.

Firstly, I think it is OK for arm to have some advantage in l2 kbots. Core certainly has the advantage in L2 vehicles.

Secondly, pure numbers (ie, 5v5) don't mean anything. What matters is the resources expended.

Using the Pyro as an example:
And here are Mav's accompanying stats:
So, in terms of metal, you can have 3.65 pyros for every mav produced. In terms of energy - granted, it's much easier to get than metal - you can get 4.38 pyros for every mav produced. Finally, in terms of buildtime, which can be considered one of the most important factors, you can have 3.65 pyros for every mav that is completed. Furthermore, pyros are 20% faster on the ground than mavericks, making it possible to not only avoid mavericks if desired, but also to use them for more than one purpose, whereas a maverick is really only good for assault.

Also, the very slight reduction to firepower that mavericks were given now means that instead of killing pyros in two shots, it will take three... for whatever that's worth.

Since it can be determined by the above statistics that approximately 3.75 pyros might be constructed for every maverick, I'll do a series of playtests.

Test 1:


The mavericks were utterly destroyed, with the pyros taking only about a dozen losses

Test 2:


In a simple 3v1, the pyros win without a single loss.

Test 3:


This one's much closer - only two heavily damaged pyros survive the encounter.

Test 4:


Another close one. 4 pyros survive a 10 vs 37

In conclusion, the Maverick is not overpowered, and it's not underpowered. All of the above tests were done with them AI-controlled and largely just sitting still. A competent human opponent would likely have them moving away from the group of pyros, thereby giving the mavs the crucial extra couple seconds of unimpeded firing time and reducing the numbers of the pyros enough to come out with no more than half the group lost in the end. Balance is perfect, and the changes I made in 1.3 to mavs' construction costs were likely unnecessary, though the small reduction to its firepower was a good thing.

Now I'm wondering how the result "20 pyros vs 5 mavs - 3 mavs survive" result described before happened.

1.3-F is borked.... screaming about some missing cob file and exiting.

Good, more reason not to play F version. Other than it sucking.

I tried 5 mavericks vs cost-in-pyros actually controlling the mavs... result? Pyro total destruction...Heh...I think I lost 1 mav.

I tried 5 mavericks versus cost-in-morty...Result? lost all mavs, killed like 2-3 morty. Woot =p go mavericks!

In fact, Mavericks did terrible against quite a few kbot units in my test with BigSteve (both arm and core). In point of fact, given the testing results I got, I may never again build a maverick...lol.

By the way, do you know the most efficient kbot unit per cost out? the sumo. Pick 5 sumo...pick any other ARM unit type...Find out how many the resource-cost of 5 sumos can build. Have them go at it. The sumos will totally destroy the opposing army. I did not try sumo vs morty, the morty has a huge range so I think it should be able to stay out of range and spank the sumo...but not before the sumo walked into your base and destroyed everything...Try it if you want...Regardless, I could not find one arm unit that can spank the sumo...Where is the ARM sumo counter? and no, leaving sharpshooters out of range doesn't count because 1) everything kills sharpshooters =p, 2) sharpshooter will take SO long to kill sumo, its worthless.

Frankly, I think the sumo needs to have its range reduced and its cost increased.

Don't let me even get INTO level 2 vehicles between core and arm. Make 10 gollys...Make the cost in bulldogs...Go at it...You may lose like 2-3 golly before all the bulldogs are dead...

The next person who complains to me about core being weaker than arm, i'm going to personally spank =).

-Drexion

caydr, why did you change the storage units?

Very bad change imo


now you have to build fields of them to have any decent stored.

I think mavs were nerfed a bit too much.

I Wish you would just use the ota specs for the l2 units. THey were good specs

I can't understand why you want the mav to be such a heavy units. It's original design was big ass gun, poorly armored chassis.

Me and drex did some more testing tonight and the imbalances are so blatant between arm and core its rediculous.

Arm emp spiders own everything core has

arm has trouble vs sumos which brings me to another point.

WHY a fucking why does the penetrator and the sharpshooter not have the anni laser anymore??? Both of those units blow ass chunks as it is now. The main purpose of the penetrator was to stop big units like sumos and gollies. Same yet slightly different for the sharpshooter.

3 most overpowered units: Sumo, Goliath, EMP spider without a question.

-Drexion

Alright, I'll humor you. What's wrong with Sumo, Goliath, and EMP spider? Sumo has always been designed as a slow-moving one-man-army. And that's what it is. Some guy just a few posts back said that they were utterly OWNED by mavericks - and a tiny damage reduction won't change that unless that guy was just making up garbage to support his opinion (which I admit is probably what he was doing)... I might reduce their movement speed a little closer to the OTA:AA statistics, but aside from that they're quite well balanced IMO. Their range, I suppose might also come down slightly. I've killed my fair share of sumos in AA:Spring though, and I didn't find them to be unbalanced in any way.

Goliath, according to OTA, is a "Very Heavy Assault Tank". Ok. So it's a Very Heavy Assault Tank. Not a peewee. It's expensive as an entire L1 army and is highly vulnerable to artillery, fast units, and so forth. If you think AA's goliaths are too powerful, try XTA. Bloody things shoot bertha shells and have 20,000 armor.

As for EMP spiders, when they're massed, they're quite powerful. Except for one crucial flaw: They haven't even got even an AK's health. They don't seem overpowered to me personally, but I can see how they might be abused. I'll further reduce their HP by 100 in the next version.

Storage units are only small compared to XTA's outrageously large ones. Compared to ANY mod for OTA they are quite large. And yes, you better well build a whole field of them if you want massive storage. It gives your opponent something extra to aim for, and gives you one more thing to defend. It makes the game better.

Mavs were BARELY TOUCHED. From 315 damage to 290 damage PER SHOT? Oh NOES!!! This is utterly, utterly insignificant. Your alarmist point of view makes everything new seem bad. I bet if I hadn't even altered the mav stats, but said I did, there would be the same bellyaching about how they're TOTALLY WEAK now. It's called a placebo effect, and I've been known to use it in a few cases - and it always works. Suddenly units are UTTERLY UTTERLY USELESS which were this person's MAINSTAY before! They're losing all these battles because this unit sucks now! I'm flooded with emails and PMs about what a bad idea it was, and how they won't play AA anymore A 40 unit increase to its metal cost? Are you kdding me? This, too, is almost nothing. That's the cost of a peewee

I Wish you would just use the ota specs for the l2 units. THey were good specs

The entire rest of your post is now discredited. Don't like my changes? Play another mod. PLEASE. Or at least present some kind of argument for your cause, not just the generic "x sucks" or "y is overpowered".

WHY a fucking why does the penetrator and the sharpshooter not have the anni laser anymore??? Both of those units blow ass chunks as it is now. The main purpose of the penetrator was to stop big units like sumos and gollies. Same yet slightly different for the sharpshooter.

Penetator NEVER had an annihilator laser. Believe it or not, the fact that a laser is blue does not make it an annihilator. I can make almost anything blue, in fact. In no version of any mod that I know of has the Penetrator had a full annihilator laser, either in terms of range or firepower. And for crap sake man, use something other than your eyes for a change, maybe your brain: sharpshooters' weapon is now more powerful than it has EVER been, and not only that but it's an invisible shot so YOU CAN'T TELL WHERE A SHOT IS COMING FROM. Gosh, what a DUMB idea. Moron. If you know the precise location of a sniper the moment he shoots, it KIND OF DEFEATS THE PURPOSE, HUH?????

Until you get a clue what you're talking about, I don't give a crap what you (forboding) say about AA. Play something else or stop the nonsensical bellyaching. And stop swearing in your posts, I tend to ignore posts with swearing.

Look I think we better just start with the current AA and fork off.

Caydr doesn't care about anyone but Caydr, and is most unpleasant about it. Why put up with him?

Get out, "mother". Their arguments hold no water and if you'd ever played AA you'd know it. The reason AA is what it is today is because I listen to legible feedback, not this flipflopping alarmist crap. Ever read here? http://www.planetannihilation.com/aa/forum.htm <<< Yeah, that's where the serious debates take place. People make real arguments based on experimentation and fact, not gut feelings based on a game they lost. A lot about any of those forum members know more about AA than the entire Spring communit combined right now.

He does have a point. Those balance changes were minor. You cant really complain about them that much. And if a unit is changed from OTA to AA, who cares? Its a different mod! Just cause it looks the same does not mean it has to work exactly the same.

Maelstrom wrote:He does have a point. Those balance changes were minor. You cant really complain about them that much. And if a unit is changed from OTA to AA, who cares? Its a different mod! Just cause it looks the same does not mean it has to work exactly the same.

If you're referring to the sharpshooter, it never had a blue laser in AA:OTA either. In fact, in no version of AA to date, for either game, has it ever had a blue laser or any laser >_>

[edit]
"Caydr"
[/edit],

You have a bad tendency of being really unpleasant.

I think we could make a new game of armchair-psychoanalysis just based on your README files

Frankly I think it may be a benefit to fork the mod... You can be the brutal dictator that you get off being, and stupid weenies can ruin the mod however they see fit.

I was actually refering to the mav, where is apparently was a weak uber gun unit, where in AA it is apparently a strong uber gun unit. Totally different role.

mother wrote:Caydr,

You have a bad tendency of being really unpleasant.

I think we could make a new game of armchair-psychoanalysis just based on your README files

Frankly I think it may be a benefit to fork the mod... You can be the brutal dictator that you get off being, and stupid weenies can ruin the mod however they see fit.

Just get out, I'm not going to waste my time on you. If I show a tendancy to be unpleasant, it's because I'm constantly harassed by people who couldn't tell their ass from a hole in the ground. People like the above, who said that the Sharpshooter is now useless because, in his world, the fact that you can't see a bullet means that it's not that, regardless of whether it impacts its target with massive force.