Spring RTS Engine

I don't really think it is slipping. It doesn't seem to be progressing, but you have to give the maintainers time to fidget with T2, particularly as it is of little import to them.

Speaking of T2, I'm working on the balance in that regard in my spare time, starting with the excellent T2 Core Vehicles.

smoth wrote:btw guys, last I checked the lobby, your flagship mod was dieing. Hence why I was suggesting things which sleska so virulently rejected.

blarg im ded.

smoth wrote: I am most confident that the things I suggested have not been suggested before and frankly yes I could probably bother making a ba mutator/fork but I would remove all of the rediculous conspam that caydr added and many other things to a point that it couldn't be called BA.

so then call it . . . Smoth annihilation! or Balanced smoth annihilation or something like that.

again: your mod is slipping maybe something IS needed.

Wrong. It isnt slipping. its just not developing.

And by the gods is this a red flag to every other mod developer ~_~

It's a red flag to you sleska, cut the crap, take a vacation, and don't come back till you lose the attitude.

Getting the thread back on topic, planes take too long to build.

If BA looked decent I wouldn't mind playing it so much TBH. However, I get in a game, the play is decent, and the graphics are horrible. It is simply not visually appealing at all to look at.

Why the hell do I want to play a game I can't even stand to look at.

And IF BA is springs flagship, then we're fucked, Because BA looks like shit. Do you really think that people bought Supcom for it's omgwtfawesome gameplay? Don't kid yourself.

The even sadder part is we cam make supcoms effects look like the work of a 5 yr old in spring, but the "Flagship" looks like shit and tbh it's impossible to draw new people because that's the main thing getting played in the lobby.

And still, even those of us that don't even like BA, offer the stuff we have done on a silver platter, yet you swat our generosity as though we handed you a bag full of shit.

Maybe you'll grow up one day.

BTW PONG has great gameplay, but I don't see tons of people playing it because of that. The same principle (even though on a much broader scale) applies.

r\zsdfgdfgdfgdfsdsaweq545

when some idiot made a thread saying "hey guys ba graphics should be nicked from other mods" everybody had a heart attack

ba isn't spring's flagship

i can't stand to play funta because not being able to assist factories is incredibly jarring and the lasers are ugly as hell

the makers of ba don't need to do anything. it's their mod they can do what they like.

i think the main reason people play spring is for the gameplay cos every1 knows its so much better than supreme com. If we made an omg supreme com remake of the sorts im sure few people wud play it apart from newbies if the gameplay was shit.

Most people come to spring cos they liked TA hence there not expecting amazing graphics

and Spring even with old ta models like BA uses still looks 100000 times better than old TA. Sure the models need work cos there 10 years :} that would help but gaemplay wise its solid and offers much better gameplay than most commercialy succesful rts's out there

i do agree a ba revamp in models is needed and stuff but as a flagship i think BA is pretty godo at offering good gameplay to most people (spring isnt as cpu demanding as say supreme com or world in conflict (nor does it look as nice) and still looks and plays better than OTA

BA is a flagship for a reason XTA is wats ported wit hthe game yet people will download BA and not play XTA cos BA is more popular

i agree BA needs model work as i said but not enuff to say it looks horrible cos it looks good not just omg uber amazing in todays standards and also it runs on most people's pc which is a great thing!!!

Want to see bad graphics? Play Warzone 2100, 18 polygon tanks for the win.

my red flag is anyone who i dont know as a good player making posts in here regarding balance or any other matter, especially when they are mostly just voiced opinions backed up with no facts

FOR EXAMPLE

Getting the thread back on topic, planes take too long to build.

what the hell do you think people can make up from this statement?

1) yes i agree i shall halve all the plane buildtimes

2) lol ur a noob gb2speedmetal rofllolllll

3) ????


pick one

pick the realistic choice

pick what i picked

If BA looked decent I wouldn't mind playing it so much TBH. However, I get in a game, the play is decent, and the graphics are horrible. It is simply not visually appealing at all to look at.

Well as i am not an expert on the graphic/effects department i cannot give an expert's opinion on this matter;

BUT i shall give an opinion anyway like the dick i am

The effects are way better currently than adding up CA's effects that look like they've been taken from a marvel comic. if i wanted those i'd buy comic books.

what comes to the models, noize already said that there are no ba arm/core remodelled sets that are consistent.

there are models here and models there, but no real set. If you want to see them changed, create a consistent set of ba units for arm and core, while keeping them in the same size and look as they currently are. And maybe someone somewhere will put them into ba possibly

And IF BA is springs flagship, then we're fucked, Because BA looks like shit. Do you really think that people bought Supcom for it's omgwtfawesome gameplay? Don't kid yourself.

i bought supcom for the gameplay, i play it with the lowest possible settings so the land is basically painted with one colour :[

Ba most certainly does not look like shit sir. As you will be spending 99% of the time in the ta view pretty much zoomed out there is no real reason to quadruple the polygons of the units and create cooler death-animations and whatnot. Also someone said that it might cause lag, and ba already is quite consuming in team-games



What comes to the flagship stuff, if ba is the current "flagship" and ba is "Slipping" and "dying" then let it die and make your Funta the new flagship \:D/

its a win/win situation

you get the dickslap me

you get your mod into the "flagship" status

Go Go Go!

Well first of all, this discussion isn't about Funta.

One thing to note though is that funta's development has ended. It is done. I am working on my new all original content mod.

I could give a fat shit if ppl play funta or not. I really don't care, however the people that do play it really like it and that does make me happy.

I never suggested making Funta a "Flagship", that seems kinda pointless to me. If anything we should be moving away from TA based mods for "Flagship" stuff. TBH the best candidates would be Gundam, EE, SWS (assuming they ever release), 1944, or maybe the mod I am working on (it is going to be release as public domain so that budding modmakers can make their own games without being even remotely worried about legal issues - However, there will be plenty of time till it's finished to judge it's status).

Planes take too long to build?

My thought process would be: Compared to what? I'll assume tanks here, so in that case, I would try reducing BT by 1/3 (no cost reduction) and see how that works out, 1/2 would be the next step to check if 1/3rd was favorable. Another thing to wathc is econ drain. No sense making it so that simple aircraft production tanks your econ.

In funta I had some liberty with planes because of the way my AA was set up. In funta the lv1 AA towers were most effective when planes were put in a crossfire, and least effective when built in solid lines.

CA's effects are good, however they are cartoony, which was the point, so I don't see it as a demerit.

Ba most certainly does not look like shit sir. As you will be spending 99% of the time in the ta view pretty much zoomed out there is no real reason to quadruple the polygons of the units and create cooler death-animations and whatnot. Also someone said that it might cause lag, and ba already is quite consuming in team-games

Yes it does. THis statement shows that you are 100% unaware of anything concerning effects. BTW one of the reasons that BA is demanding as it is is because your explosions in BA waste particles. The bigger the explosion, the bigger the waste.

Don't kid yourself. Someone makes a 1 sentence post saying "planes take too long to build" you disregard that post. You certainly don't go and drop the BT to 2/3rd just because someone said so. At best, it reminds you and you check it yourself but it doesnt automatically mean you change something.

Doing things that way creates a shambles of a mod. Same with every other game - if you listen to random comments with no weight behind them or listen to noobs things go downhill.

Look what happened to C&C 3. EA caved under the pressure of the masses (noobs) and the approach to balance was changed. The end result is fail.

Planes are support units. They have large build times and large e costs specifically so you cant use them viably as a starting fac (generally) or entirely on their own. Thats part of the basic design of the mod and i doubt its going to be changed.

Note that in mid game, the e costs and bp costs of running air are greatly reduced with a mature economy. Mid t1, once there are a few wrecks out there, an air reclaim economy is made of utter super awesome win. Your metal will go through the roof running an air reclaim economy. By mid-to-late t2, once you get over the 'lines are drawn, everyone techs' stage of late t1 and early t2 and get some more wrecks, you can get utterly insane amounts of metal from reclaiming after a battle between t2 units. So, air has its economic advantages, but again, in a support role.

What you might be doing wrong is starting air and spamming air cons to assist. Dont do this. Its good to spam air cons, but only for the above mentioned reclaim econ, mid t1 game. Use nanotowers if you want to assist your air fac.

Don't you think that you would test it yourself first? That's was implied.

Many people can attest to the fact that in funta, for a long time the planes built much too slowly. I don't use planes a lot but I checked it out and people were right, they did take much to long to build, so 2/3 then 1/2 is actually how it ended up panning out.

I have no idea the BT of planes in BA. Sleksa, was referring to funta when he made that remark.

Of course you don't take comments at face value, you use common sense and if you have any doubt, test it yourself.

Jesus, use common sense.

As an added note, air cons in funta build slowly and are limited to 10 for a reason (I never changed the BT on the air cons).

You guys missed the point in my post completely.

How did we get on this subject anyway?

I have no idea the BT of planes in BA. Sleksa, was referring to funta when he made that remark.

no i was referring to rcdraco's post with the quote

Getting the thread back on topic, planes take too long to build.

in which i replied with

what the hell do you think people can make up from this statement?

1) yes i agree i shall halve all the plane buildtimes

2) lol ur a noob gb2speedmetal rofllolllll

3) ????


pick one

pick the realistic choice

pick what i picked

in which you replied with

Planes take too long to build?

How did we get on this subject anyway?

Misdemeanor 4, Tombom.

Actually this thread has been quite entertaining to me. Would be a shame if it were locked.

tombom wrote:

Forboding Angel wrote:How did we get on this subject anyway?

Because you can't read.

If you idiots [Sleska] aren't going to stop this pointless derail, this thread may as well be locked.

Fixed.

And yea, might as well close and lock it, you guys at BA can get a nice forum at freeforums.org .

And yea, might as well close and lock it, you guys at BA can get a nice forum at freeforums.org .

Felony 1, Sleksa.

You're trolling, you derailed a thread for a great mod, and yes I'm serious, to get away from retards [AKA Sleska] you can move to a forum where you only allow serious people to leave serious comments regarding, currently, the most played Spring mod.