Old sea

[pintle]

TBFH its XTA, simplifying/stripping out dynamism of gameplay with the aim of appealing to noobs who are not willing/able to learn mixed force composition and good skirmish micro became a lost cause circa 2005

What I really like about current sea, is the necessity to synergise units, the rich meta game (strongly pronounced RPS subs/surface/air, but still not quite hard countering) and the necessity to think seriously about your economic developement.

I have been very frustrated by 'kaze rush before, and it is defintely a brutal way of punishing newbies, but I dont think they are necessarily OP, especially with the higher rof on torp launchers now.

I do think it is kinda funny how people with no real idea of how XTA sea currently plays feel the need to "contribute" to this conversation

[TheMightyOne]

the old sea was probably not complete shit and our current is for sure not perfect. though i'm one of the guys who thinks that current sea is better i'm not saying that this is the balance i want to keep at all cost. reverting the sea completely is too drastic imo so i think we should balance out what we've got now. one thing i definitely agree on with mong is that current subs are not of much use... maybe even that skeeters are a bit too weak. so of course there is room for improvement but lets deal with it step by step. saying that "everything used to be better back in the days" never really brings ppl anywhere. believe it or not but some germans want the "berlin wall" back.

[mongus]

Cmon tmo, that berlin wall comment is out of place.
Noway you can relate the two topics.
So dont make me look as if i wanted/be in favor of the repressive structures (literally in this case).

Im in favor of good/well thought balance. (which is what i believe we had).


The ship babbles asks for (surface to surface ship) is the role t1 destroyer used to fill.(among other roles).
Yes, i mean, in mid late game, you use 4-8 of them as ramming frigates(manouvering to maximize depth charge damage), that way you kill higher cost/more strategical t2 ships. WITH A RISK, which is leaving too much metal in enemy side.

Around 40 games would give you the feeling of it babbles, 10 is too little.

Oh and skeeter vs air damage, I thought we proved this? When you tried to kill my skeeters with gunships and failed horrificly

What you managed to prove, is 1 skeeter can defeat a gunships in 1v1.
We proved that you can micro a skeeter to avoid gunship fire in 1v1.
Given the skeeter speed, and your focused micro.
Which is horrifyingly atrocious.

You will NEVER EVER EVER have the time/micro to spend in 5v5 skeeter vs gunships.

Call me a bad loser, but its how i see it. Micro demanding operations/units are not to be used in mass effectively.

Anty air defense must not and should never be a micro intensive task.
AA ships shall be scattered around/between your other ships, and do their job when a plane happens to pass, without you having to micro it to be effective.

So at most, you proved something incredible, but that does not define how AA ships must work.

I dont have the time rigth now to make comparative tests between old and new xta skeeters vs air stats.

But iirc, you needed just several of them (5-8) to be well defended against 6 gunships. This is bc the HP skeeters had, and the damage of their missile vs air targets. Both have changed in new balance.

And im not sure of the odds in the new balance, but i have the impression skeeters are too weak atm.

What I really like about current sea, is the necessity to synergise units, the rich meta game (strongly pronounced RPS subs/surface/air, but still not quite hard countering) and the necessity to think seriously about your economic developement.

Same can be said of old sea. O_o maybe im too stupid to get what you mean, an example maybe? thx

Noruas.... yes! to fix unbalance, lets just make it more complicated, thats it!

And to continue with the issues, dont let me say "Patr...."...

[babbles]

you're right mong, to fix the unbalance you talk about let's just make it so there's a small ship, a bigger ship and something inbetween the two and that floats underwater. yey!

You don't need to micro 5 skeeters individually vs 5 gunships, it's not hard, you just drag them around the water and they'll easily dispense of any gunships. you make it sound as if even the best micro player couldn't do it as they would have to micro 5 scout boats individually but you wouldn't, just group them together, 5 shots and no more gunships with limited skeeter losses due to moving them out of the way, not hard...

and I'd play as many games as possible vs you to show you but I know you would remain as stubborn as ever

and is the destroyer, or atleast was, a surface to surface/underwater ship? and seeing as it is also used a tech 1 bombardment ship (otherwise ships are pretty useless against land). the destroyer is everything I described, a long rang vessel like artillery, otherwise why give it so much range?

surface to surface, imo, should be close range ships fighting with artillery ships backing them up, the destroyers are the latter

[scifi]

imo i agree with pintle spring mods have changed a lot to apeal to noobs and beguiners

one of those examples is CA

and BA is going that way imo

most of the new people that played xta were like interesting mod but to hard to understand/play but intereesting and fun

they just dont know that after the learning it gets even better

BA was good imo i may sound too mutch like basic when he said that smal fixes and balancing completely change a mod core gameplay............................but i have to agree hes rigth...

things have changed......regarding every mod in spring (the ones that are played), but just remenber keep the old hard core fealing of the mod XD, dont make it to easy, or with a flat gameplay.

but for me the only two mods that give me a playability that its worth playing, that its hard , experienced based is xta and nota

Nota sea i agree with babbles its still prety mutch one ship race, but i must confess that its way easyer to conter with subs, costals(defs), air torpedo planes e.t.c its way more balanced now, hovers are average to use as well

CA sea blah its a mess to be honest it doesnt give any sentation of fun but this shows how a bad decision of making all, ships more dinamic more cheaper more spamable makes. (overall unconcensus)

now XTA sea for me current sea is good not without flaws, i remenber teh old sea, frozen air spam old sub pen balance e.t.c....
sugestions:
- make underwater tidals the only tidal to be made by subs(expensivier energy output,but safer)
- decrease cruisers line of sigth need to make scouts..first......
- vanguards give it a smal sonar?(or it has one already i dunno havent played xta properly in 3 months i guess)
- increase a bit the reload time of torpedo seaplanes their a bit imba
dunno about costs and all (as i said havent played in a while)

btw i have played xta more without this acount than actualy with it so im older than you think =). i still remnebr lots of the old players
ugla stumpy spams errors air e.t.c.....

but im as nooby as a carrot =p

[babbles]

ugla stumpy spams errors air e.t.c.....

you mean ugla putting a vehicle lab on repeat and going afk 10mins only to return and sweep through the map?

[scifi]

yes babbles i wouldnt have puted better my self =D

btw havent seen you around on the lobby...........

[babbles]

broken pc

[mongus]

yes



no.



Hm, been lazy to answer.

you're right mong, to fix the unbalance you talk about let's just make it so there's a small ship, a bigger ship and something inbetween the two and that floats underwater. yey!

Well thats the way it used to work, at T1.

Something like a peewee/crasher/flash/samson(skeeter), a rocko(no veh equivalent)(sub), a hammer/stumpy(T1 destroyer), ... we are missing the zipper, the mineclearer, and the transport.

I mean, all t1 is supposedly to be simple. Those 3 working units for t1 in sea are good enough. Vehicles have 4 plus minelayer... (air has 3 plus scout and const).

And pintle has forgoten this (that t1 used to be simple), when he says xta sacrifices simplicity/stripping out/noob friendliness vs game comlexity ("mixed force composition and good skirmish micro").

Well, T1 has always been simple. Its just a handfull of units/types (or used to, even in 2005 (spring saw light in 2004?)). Im not saying you dont need micro/good force composittion/micro skill in t1. Im just saying its way simpler than T2, and is how it should be. (not sure is still like that in all areas).

At T2 the things change. (altough... it shouldnt be that hard to grasp either...... ...... . jammer, stronger units, artillery/long range/blod... and bigger eco... im missing something?). Yes, xta IS very simple it WAS SUPPOSED to be, its just ota rebalanced plus energy structures.

You don't need to micro 5 skeeters individually vs 5 gunships, it's not hard, you just drag them around the water and they'll easily dispense of any gunships. you make it sound as if even the best micro player couldn't do it as they would have to micro 5 scout boats individually but you wouldn't, just group them together, 5 shots and no more gunships with limited skeeter losses due to moving them out of the way, not hard...

You are not being realistic.

You build 5 skeeters. you dont put them in a group.
You cover your fleet with this 5 units.
You "suddenly unexpectedly" get attacked by some gunships.

Will you select skeeters, put them in a group and then, proceed to manouver them (using formation widgets? using control?), to avoid loses?.

The thing is, till you realize you are being attacked, 5 secs will pass, till you make a group, 2 seconds pass, till you start manouvering 2 seconds more pass. 9 or 10 seconds have passed.

from 5 skeeters, attacked by 5 tornados, we only have 2 of them after 9 seconds of attack.(actually tested) all skeeters are dead after 12/15 secs, we still have 3 tornados. Yes this is BS. (just one test run), plus its stupid.

(LOOL, new tests show, that in old xta sea, after 15 secs we have 3-4 skeeters, and 0 gunships (now i realize why i have some stupid idea of how to cover t1 sea against air in new sea balance, how vanalized skeeters are!!! ).

In a real game, you will have other stuff to take charge of other than microing skeeters, please.

and I'd play as many games as possible vs you to show you but I know you would remain as stubborn as ever

Will see factiblity of this. And what is it this you want me to change my mind about?

and is the destroyer, or atleast was, a surface to surface/underwater ship? and seeing as it is also used a tech 1 bombardment ship (otherwise ships are pretty useless against land). the destroyer is everything I described, a long rang vessel like artillery, otherwise why give it so much range?

Didnt get this, you mean old destroyer ifits with something you described in earlier post about some other ship, but, then conclude what?

Destroyer was good against water, underwater and land. Good hp made up for its cost, and gave water units a "made in a different manner" feel (read made stronger, as for sea hardenning).

surface to surface, imo, should be close range ships fighting

As for range, it had a .... not so long range. Which seem to make up for the "ramming" ive talked about.

with artillery ships backing them up, the destroyers are the latter

This artillery ships are t2 destroyers, and milleniums (omg).


Scifi, dont be so humble, you are a pro.

And seems you have had experience with new sea only . shame.



Ive been mixing topics, this thread is NOT to talk about new sea balance. Altough we could try to appreciate its pro/cons COMPARED to the old sea, would be cool.

So mainly this is to talk about the old sea, how fun it was, how it played and if you have other things to say about it, or for who wants to learn about how it played.

[1v0ry_k1ng]

ffs mong, THE OLD SEA WAS TERRIBLE

you know why there is a new sea?
the answer is, because the old sea was unbearable.

I played more than enough hours of v7 sea to
a) be pretty damn good
b) to find it cripplingly wank

T2 was redundant, except sub killers + AA ships which owned the shit out of everything.

T1 was spam skeet while rushing destroyer. first destroyer out usually won, if not, then first player to lose a destroyer lost. skeeter missles were strangely buggy, sometimes not firing and often breaking and not firing again. subs were REDUNDANT, being short range and less cost effective than destroyers. AA ships owned every other surface vessel.

I mean, I could go on, but I think you get the gist.

New sea isn't alot better, but its better in a number of crucial areas:

t2 is useful + balanced now
skeeter missle works properly
subs are useful now
floating llts vs skeet rush
more unit variety
less expensive destroyers
etc

old sea is like old land balance. you think its great because you had a kickass time playing it back in the day, but then you crack it out today and you realise its worse.

[mongus]

No IK, you are wrong.

t2 Anti air ships are still the same, so wtf. Even, some flag ships have gotten worst in new balance, so how could aa ship not be OP still.

T2 was redundant, except sub killers + AA ships which owned the shit out of everything.

What do you mean? elaborate.
There were 5 units in t2, which of them were redundant and why.

T1 was spam skeet while rushing destroyer. first destroyer out usually won, if not, then first player to lose a destroyer lost. skeeter missles were strangely buggy, sometimes not firing and often breaking and not firing again. subs were REDUNDANT, being short range and less cost effective than destroyers. AA ships owned every other surface vessel.

Ive shown this is not true, using only skeeters ive got 2 destroyers at bay. And didnt want to use destroyers/subs just not to get my oponent to cry (bc i know how to use them better then him).
A bug is a bug. you cant talk shit about the balance bc of this, until it gets fixed and you can test it again.

Subs were very usefull of course knowing how to use them, in which im not a pro, but the use goes like this, Use the extra range and the nice LOS in them to hit and run. Use the subs mixed with other units, so the subs are covered and can take down strategical targets.
A ship you cant hit from the surface should be less cost effective than a ship you can. Also it wins destroyer range by a little bit and has little more range in sonar AND LOS. You need to play more with subs, more.

I mean, I could go on, but I think you get the gist.

The gist is you are just talking shit about old sea, i can see you couldnt appreciate it, nor the beauty of its T2. And yeah myth sucks too. heretics.

I played more than enough hours of v7 sea to
a) be pretty damn good
b) to find it cripplingly wank

And how come new sea isnt as wanky?

At least t1, has same units, (with less balance/good role)

So what it can be? the topedo boat alone?


Sea game was not as ground game.
It was slower, and had some complexities as knowing when to use which units. You could hardly control the hole game with just one unit type.

Sea game has the complexity that you must "manouver". to win.
This manouver necessity has been lowered in new balance, as how the ships work now. I find it more interesting to have to manouver.

t2 is useful
+ balanced now

eh, huh? you didn say why it wasnt, and i have my discrepancies with that statement, but thats for another thread.

skeeter missle works properly

that is just a bug. you cant bash balance bc of that.

subs are useful now

idem.

floating llts vs skeet rush

this is nice.. altough... a llt against water units... is too weak/short ranged, but its better than nothing.

more unit variety

This is ok.. altough too many units confuse the noobs. Rite now sea has something of this... hm... obscurity... which makes you win if you dont know all the variety of units and their use and how to use them and what are the units best specifically for.... (well same can be said about old balance...) but in new sea case, the "specifics" of it, make a huge difference for the new user. (and even for exp ones.)
Too much BA like..

less expensive destroyers

i would happily pay more for the old one for several reasons, hp and accuracy being the first 2.


As i see it, the reason there is a new sea, is you coulndt appreciate the good balance in the old one, nor did know how it played. (i have been describing it here).

And by looking at the new sea, it obvious you didnt get the balance of it.



I wont keep answering the same stupid arguments, which i have already pointed out/proved worng or weak.

Yes the same arguments have been raised like 3 times each already, and im tired of explainig you.

Checking the thread, i see ive repeated my explanations at least 2 times, and some points are very well explained already (the ones that you repeat most). Altough there are some others that need more exposure.


Also you will never learn what im talking about if you dont play it.
and you wont.

Xta is almost dead.

Spring i have the feeling is in low season ( ... )

And sea popularity has always been low, yielding a poor playerbase in it.

In sinthesis, there is no playerbase for the old sea balance.


and ffs IK,

NEW MILLENUM IS TERRIBLE

[TheMightyOne]

New sea needs a lot of balancing I totally agree.

But without beeing aware of it you brought up the two main reasons why we actually remade whole sea almost from scratch.

1)

Sea game was not as ground game.
It was slower

2)

As i see it, the reason there is a new sea, is you coulndt appreciate the good balance in the old one, nor did know how it played.

I guess the second point is more important. You're probably right, we couldn't appreciate the good balance, we couldn't see it's benefits that's why we tried to transfer the gameplay on the ground to sea so that we can relate to it more easily.

I'll repeat what I've told you earlier. Don't say "it's shit", coz that's what IK is doing right now. Help us make it better. But a complete revert is not an option, and the reason for it is that it's just too late for that. We have to work with what we've got and maybe by making small steps we'll finally get to the old sea balance realized that you were right (i'm not making fun here), but we have to do it gradually, you can't push it down our throat.

[Gota]

Gah will someone be brave enough and remove the auto radar targetting?It Would fit XTA so well.

[babbles]

I usually keep track of my ships in a game and usually have my skeeters together moving, I mean, it's sea..

along with my playstyle which (in this respect, I presume is like most pros) will always be focused on my troops, along with the fact sea eco is get u/w mex + tidal, the mex will be built with my fleet so with aa cover. It means I always have control of my AA except for brief periods of time so I'll be able to kill air pretty easily

[Tribulex]

Gah will someone be brave enough and remove the auto radar targetting?It Would fit XTA so well.

omfg please stop spamming all the xta threads. Your thread is here:

viewtopic.php?f=23&t=21040

Please? Thanks.

Babbles what do you mean about control except for brief periods? I dont quite understand.

[babbles]

I mean, when I'm playing sea I nearly always have control of my scout ships except for when I'm building stuff in lab/eco

[Tribulex]

i sea.....




Just something interesting..... Skeeters are interesting because they have long range missile plus a short range lazer. However, because of their low health, they are primarily useful against units such as destroyers, since destroyers take a while to turn, and get overwhelmed by spam.