Spring RTS Engine

I believe the point of high-trajectory weapons is only as offensive guns. I've tried it, and they've all sucked without fail as defensive weapons

so why does the punisher have a high trajectory again?

The punisher is an offensive weapon.

coulda fooled me.

The punisher is an offensive weapon.

lol...now its kind of anti swarm...

FF anti swarm maybe

Punisher is about control. While it won't stop any but the slowest units (but is devestating if the terrain is too rough for them to move quickly), it can maintain control of the region very well. No structures will be built in it's reach. No slow-moving artillery will move in. It doesn't stop midspeed units from travelling, but it does create a no-man's land for any kind of entrenchment.

It's high trajectory or low trajectory. No in-between. If they were low-trajectory, I'd have to severely nerf them or remove them entirely because they're so incredibly strong versus *everything*.

If you remember back to OTA, the problem of friendly fire was just as bad if not worse - in Spring, I'm able to tell them not to fire at all at aircraft. In OTA, if you had a jeffy running through your base or something, you were liable to lose half a dozen buildings before your punisher would score a hit and kill it.

High trajectory isn't the big bad wolf people make it out to be. The only thing it does is make artillery worthless at close range (good thing), eliminate artillery being used as a main battle tank (good thing), and allow artillery to fire over high terrain easily (good thing, try plains and passes).

If artillery bothers you a lot, try setting them to hold fire. Then when you spot a group of enemies or a good target or something, fire a massive controlled barrage at it. If it's a group of anything but the heaviest units, you'll have a very realistic fireworks show as the entire area turns into a crater full of charred wreckage

Pxtl wrote:Punisher is about control. While it won't stop any but the slowest units (but is devestating if the terrain is too rough for them to move quickly), it can maintain control of the region very well. No structures will be built in it's reach. No slow-moving artillery will move in. It doesn't stop midspeed units from travelling, but it does create a no-man's land for any kind of entrenchment.

Not entirely true. If there's a large group of enemies moving through, a punisher or two will inevitably rack up quite a few kills as their shots targetting the units in the lead (which they "see" first) hit the units in the mid-to-rear of of the group. But yes, they're also very good for area control.

well IMO it looks UGLY!

I have no real opinion on this one. Caydr I understand completely why you made the change. Pun creep sucked lol.

You cant use a low grav map to showcase this sort of thing.....

Well it looks odd on all maps really.... the plasma all come to the camera sometimes they even go higher...

War ain't pretty


Anyway.... there's no way around it.

Caydr, can't you just make it LESS high trajectory, in other words, have the cannon point more in the direction of the enemy? I mean, imo, it looks so stupid when its cannons are all facing up.

Oh, and I agree, HLT's S_U_C_K. More damage, period.

Also, I haven't been able to find a good shore defence weapon that is cost-effective against ships, apart from the Annihilator, which I also find pretty underpowered. HLT's don't do the damage nor have the range, guardians never hit, air strikes can be refuted with a single Archer (which is good imo, but it leaves with no alternative than meeting them with an equal number of ships) Also, if I build underwater units they are often too slow to attack with, like on Shore to Shore.

No.

Ask SYs for medium-trajectory or something. Right now it's all or nothing, and either extreme there are tradeoffs.

To reiterate: Increasing the weapon velocity will make the shots go HIGHER, making the problem worse. Decreasing the velocity will decrease the effective range of the weapon, and it is already at the bare minimum now. Setting the weapon to low-trajectory will cause them to become unit-eating-machines, capable of killing anything that comes near them with ease, and there is no way around this.

Do you want them to be inneffective at firing over hills? Because they already have trouble with medium-sized hills, Dooweaver. They also have trouble reaching their max range when placed on top of a hill. Well, actually they outright can't reach their max range when placed on a hill.

Caydr wrote:No.

Ask SYs for medium-trajectory or something. Right now it's all or nothing, and either extreme there are tradeoffs.

[I PROMISE I'm not trying to be a jerk]

There is no such thing as 'medium-trajectory.' I don't just mean in Spring... You either fire directly at something (accounting for gravity, etc.) or you take a ballistic shot.

Subs are meant to be slow cuz they are extremely powerful. Subs eat up battleships and flagships really fast, just keep ur subs at a distance or their own torps will hit themselves.

dont bring physics into this.. mother youll get hurt.. you can reduce the arc that the shell makes by reducing weapon velocity, however i think punishers and such are already slow enough as it is so making them move slower would be bad.. they work fine the way they are.. IMO..

Umm fang, I think you just hurt yourself because punishers are not mobile units. DId you mean rotation perchance?


Also, I believe that in spring lowering the velocity does not change the trajectory, wierd but ok.

Isn't the arc adjustable? If it was you could just lower the arc and it would still lob, just a bit faster than now.