Spring RTS Engine

It can be fixed with a simple .cob script. The point where units are stored are hidden under the ground, and when the transport dies, run the line under death to move where units are stored, move it back to the point it belongs.

Noruas wrote:It can be fixed with a simple .cob script. The point where units are stored are hidden under the ground, and when the transport dies, run the line under death to move where units are stored, move it back to the point it belongs.

plz make it, and give =)

6452 / kloot 0 minutes fix Mantis #1052 (units being teleported when their transporter dies)




Thanks Kloot!!!

BA should have some super AA units, for technical reasons, not gameplay reasons. A good AA setup involves dozens of flak cannons and hundreds of fighters on patrol. These consume a significant amount of your unit limit and also cause serious performance problems. I can think of several possible ways to deal with this:

- Make an AA building sort of like a doomsday. It would have several flak cannons and maybe missiles.

-Make a "super fighter" that is roughly equivalent in price and effectiveness to four or five ordinary fighters.

-Make a "super AA" unit, such as a big zepplin with multiple AA weapons.

BeefofAges wrote: -Make a "super AA" unit, such as a big zepplin with multiple AA weapons.

You had me at "zepplin". I am in favor of anything involving zepplins. The best part would be that a big slow gunship movement unit shouldn't lag the game at all. I'd also suggest something at the T3 factory similar to the Fatboy from Supreme Commander, only more AA oriented. Put a few flak launchers on it, a landing pad, a big radar, maybe antinuke and you'll have a nice "mobile base" unit.

Beef you actually hit your unit limit in most games O_o what the qq

Otherside wrote:Beef you actually hit your unit limit in most games O_o what the qq

No, but the fact is if you have more than 20 or 30 fighters on patrol the game is going to lag incredibly bad. It isn't that hard to get that many units if you've had a long stalemate with you economy growing pretty well.

Im mainly an air player ...

I think T1 ground AA is effective against T1 air. However the gap between T1 and T2 air is big, and T1 ground AA is useless against most of it. Also, I dont find much difference between popup and bomb resistant AA.

T2 ground AA : The stinger ... only real use I cant think of to block a nearby aircraft factory. Even if you have loads of them, they will all target the same plane and others planes incoming will be safe until the reload is done. Flakker : very good to stop brawlers, but needs too many to stop bombers since they have to be placed far ahead the target.

The best way to stop T2 bombers is still the air fighter wall, and causes performance problems. I would suggest lowering T2 bombers health a little bit, and improving T2 fighters speed, so you dont need as many to cover a whole line. Also, reduced T2 bomber health would make ground AA a little more effective against them.

Additionally, assuming the T2 fighters have a speed boost and the T2 bomber health is lighlty reduced, the T2 fighter cost could be incresead and/or their energy consumption boosted, preventing players from making to many of them.

A note about unit limit : When players quit the game and someone else take their units, their unit limit should be raised. In a big game suddendly I had my allies getting timeouts and end up with managing all the bases ... but I got 'frozen' by a sudden unit limit and couldnt do anything (but sacrifice stuff to try to build other stuff).

T2 fighters are far too effective IMO, they need a slight nerf on damage.

YHCIR wrote:T2 fighters are far too effective IMO, they need a slight nerf on damage.

Dealing with an opponent's fighter screen really isn't that hard. On a small map, just set up LRML in range of him. On a larger map, build your own swarm of fighters, and send them in ahead of your bombers. I think T2 fighters are pretty balanced as far as gameplay goes.

To answer an earlier question, yes, I do occasionally hit the standard 500 unit cap. I make big economies.

about air:

1. i would suggest to boost air nanopower. They still wont be massed baceuse of chain explode bit that would make aircons even better.

2. Would be possbile for water to get nuke? MAybe similar unit to carrier but with nuke option?

Maybe a tac nuke launcher, but please no mobile icbm.

ginekolog wrote:2. Would be possbile for water to get nuke? MAybe similar unit to carrier but with nuke option?

rofl, now spoil sea with the same tech 2 nuke strat that land has?

Carriers ftw..

Now for a serious suggestion, would it be worth it to add short range sonar to the skeeters, they are scouts, and it would help in spotting those nasty subs.

The basic sonar buoy could also use a slightly larger true LOS range, just for it to clearly spot for a torpedo launcher ect to take out subs, you have to built it right on top of the torp launchers for it to see anything atm (because radar sway sucks).

MR.D wrote:Carriers ftw..

Now for a serious suggestion, would it be worth it to add short range sonar to the skeeters, they are scouts, and it would help in spotting those nasty subs.

The basic sonar buoy could also use a slightly larger true LOS range, just for it to clearly spot for a torpedo launcher ect to take out subs, you have to built it right on top of the torp launchers for it to see anything atm (because radar sway sucks).

QFT, and not to mention torpedo launchers should have some basic sonar / improved underwater LOS.

But if we're going to talk about subs, torpedoes could get a buff in agility/guidance capability and have a larger firing angle.

Now that .77B2 is out can we make metal extractors use a square instead of a circular area? All it requires is adding the new extractSquare unitdef tag to the mexes, and I assume configuring the parameters for it properly. It'd really help on maps like Small Divide, Castles, Death Valley, and a few other maps with metal areas instead of metal spots.

All gadgets are currently fucked to hell, this needs immediate attention.

el_matarife wrote:Now that .77B2 is out can we make metal extractors use a square instead of a circular area? All it requires is adding the new extractSquare unitdef tag to the mexes, and I assume configuring the parameters for it properly. It'd really help on maps like Small Divide, Castles, Death Valley, and a few other maps with metal areas instead of metal spots.

This would be fantastic.

I thought that was a map option...

So I'm curious - in 0.77b2 the "fixed" mex replacer gadget still doesn't work for me (i.e. the buttons are missing). Does it work for everyone else?