Spring RTS Engine

I've had a look at the Krow script and I think I've fixed the "I flip up my wings even when flying" issue:

thanks!

Even heroes in Warcraft 3 can be rebuilt in your base immediately upon their death.

proof of noob

EMP Mutator: http://www.unknown-files.net/spring/359 ... lation_58/ Now this I like. It retains the comm's anti-rush concept and prevents all those other issues I dislike.

most retarded idea ever seen, surpasses even those TBFITW geniouses ideas

Dgun is here to stay, wheter you like it or not.

but I think upgradable coms are a necessary feature of a well thought out commander system.. CA is on its way in that aspect.

i also think that a lot of people should think twice before pushing the submit post button

commander upgrades are not necessary features, OTA didnt have them, AA didnt have them, BA does not have them.

What CA and supcom do is not in any way related to what BA does.

And did I mention that they're dirt cheap, and disctact the enemy and make heavier units waste shots while you move your real units up to fight with? k, just checking.

Each have their own perks, but I'll stick to fleas k thx.

yes, it is zenka's trademark to spam fleas and to rush a anni in metalheck ~~.

Flea/Jeffy/Weasel spam is great, dont get me wrong. Its all kinds of wonderful for so many things. But both spies and fleas are valid to use as spotters.

Spies are more reliable though- you'll never have to rely on radar again.

yes , but you forgot that the building that makes spies costs 4k metal, whereas the building that makes fleas costs 0.7k metal.

If you want to have the com get stronger in late game give him +1k HP for every lab the player possesses. That'd be enough if the regular HP really are too low for lategame (maybe a mod option?).

Sleksa wrote: i also think that a lot of people should think twice before pushing the submit post button

that's a post that should belong in CA topic

NOiZE wrote:Well i dont see how that would actually help, as mines are stealth and cloaked, so not even minelayers will see them.

It's just for the situation that your enemy is E-stalling and so his mines uncloak for a moment...

Nothing serious of course - just a minor detail as otherwise most players won't know about minelayers having that minesweeper weapon as they most certainly won't come to give attack orders by themselves when they never have seen the sweeper in action but just that no damage Bogus_Missile...

[Krogoth86] wrote:

NOiZE wrote:Well i dont see how that would actually help, as mines are stealth and cloaked, so not even minelayers will see them.

It's just for the situation that your enemy is E-stalling and so his mines uncloak for a moment...

Nothing serious of course - just a minor detail as otherwise most players won't know about minelayers having that minesweeper weapon as they most certainly won't come to give attack orders by themselves when they never have seen the sweeper in action but just that no damage Bogus_Missile...

But then it will fire all the time even when other enemy units are near, so that kinda sucks.

NOiZE wrote:But then it will fire all the time even when other enemy units are near, so that kinda sucks.

Well just put this in the FBI and voilà:
OnlyTargetCategory1=MINE;

NOiZE wrote:But then it will fire all the time even when other enemy units are near, so that kinda sucks.

Can't they be made to fire only at mines, like AA firing only at air?

Sleksa wrote:

Sleksa wrote: i also think that a lot of people should think twice before pushing the submit post button

that's a post that should belong in CA topic

Or you should apply it to yourself. Sleksa, stop trashing every person who enters this thread. It is rude, and it violates policy.

neddiedrow wrote:

Sleksa wrote:

Sleksa wrote: i also think that a lot of people should think twice before pushing the submit post button

that's a post that should belong in CA topic

Or you should apply it to yourself. Sleksa, stop trashing every person who enters this thread. It is rude, and it violates policy.

+1 Yes please

Sleska, im sorry for giving my opinions. If you dont like them, dont dl my mod. But must I really take back EVERYTHING i ever say for everyone to be happy? I understand how that fact that there are no B's in "CA" and "Supreme Commander" make them statanic and blasphemous game designs. However, my opinion is that they are on the right track in some ways. Please forgive me most high and authoritive Sleska.


The thing about spybots is that they can get into even the most heavily fortified and protected base. They are the ultimate scouts. Even 500 fleas will eventually die in a well-fortified base. 500 *.7k metal < 4k metal. However, with motions sensors (BA has this right? Dont remember ever using them except in CA), this is a moot point, and you should ultraspam fleas.

Btw, if a spybot is airdropped, and the transport is in enemy los or radar, is the spybot still hidden when its flying? When it lands?


Another question: I was told that Beavers were cheaper, had better slope tolerance, and better armor than the regular conbot. Is this true? If so, why build conbots when beavers are better? I havent had time to investigate this yet.

kiki wrote:Btw, if a spybot is airdropped, and the transport is in enemy los or radar, is the spybot still hidden when its flying? When it lands?


Another question: I was told that Beavers were cheaper, had better slope tolerance, and better armor than the regular conbot. Is this true? If so, why build conbots when beavers are better? I havent had time to investigate this yet.

Well as things that are transported are paralyzed the Spybot would be visibile while being attached. When being unloaded it should cloak immediately though...

Beavers are more expensive and have less HP than a normal Construction Vehicle. It's amphibic though and thus has a higher maxslope as the land->water borders sometimes have a high slope and they wouldn't get in / out of the water otherwise...

Concerning the "armor" there shouldn't be a difference although the Beaver is in the Amphibious class there (but non Anti-Sub weapons shouldn't have different damage values for the two constructors here)...

EDIT:
BTW - Beavers have a little less workertime too...

Sleksa wrote:

Sleksa wrote: i also think that a lot of people should think twice before pushing the submit post button

that's a post that should belong in CA topic

1) THINK BEFORE YOU POST.

1A) IS MY POST GOING TO PROPOSE COOL NEW CHANGES?
1B) IS MY POST GOING TO TELL FLASH IS IMBA/KBOTS SUCK?
1C) IS MY POST GOING TO ASK SOMEONE TO CHANGE BA FROM WHAT IT IS?

IF YOU CAN TICK ANY OF THOSE SAID ABOVE, DO NOT FUCKING POST

THEY HAVE NEVER BEEN LISTENED TO, AND YOUR COOLER THAN COOLER NEW IDEA WILL MOST CERTAINLY WONT BE LISTENED TO EITHER.

2)

2A) IS MY POST ABOUT FOUND BUGS/GLITCHES
2B) IS MY POST ABOUT HOW WONDERFUL BA IS
2C) IS MY POST ABOUT FIXING BUGS/GLITCHES

IF YOU CAN TICK ANY OF THOSE, PLEASE POST

Or you should apply it to yourself. Sleksa, stop trashing every person who enters this thread. It is rude, and it violates policy.

i will stop thrashing every person who stops making posts from category 1

i dont run in CA threads posting them what to do, i dont run in s44 threads telling them what to do.

these fucking parasites post what noize should do and expect him to do what they want. it is wrong and i want it to stop.

Sleska, im sorry for giving my opinions.

as you goddamn should be

I understand how that fact that there are no B's in "CA" and "Supreme Commander" make them statanic and blasphemous game designs. However, my opinion is that they are on the right track in some ways. Please forgive me most high and authoritive Sleska.

the first sentence is wrong. you dont understand that BA is not CA.

BA is not taking suggestions, it doesnt want them.

CA likes suggestions, it wants them. it wants surfboats and eggs and forges and upgradeable commanders.

BUT BA DOES NOT.

henceforth, take your suggestions to CA thread.

my opinion is that they are on the right track

your opinion is worth jack shit in this thread, since you dont even know what youre talking about;

Another question: I was told that Beavers were cheaper, had better slope tolerance, and better armor than the regular conbot. Is this true? If so, why build conbots when beavers are better? I havent had time to investigate this yet.

I can always count on the BA thread for my daily luls.

In order to come back to the original BA discussion:
The Arm Dragonfly unit description still says "Stealthy Armed Transport" although it isn't. You also might consider calling the Advanced Construction Vehicles Tech 2 instead of Tech 3...

[Krogoth86] wrote:In order to come back to the original BA discussion:
The Arm Dragonfly unit description still says "Stealthy Armed Transport" although it isn't.

yeah it was taken out a long while ago when people used it to nap comms in endgame situations ~~

Wow, sleska, what a way you have with women.

1A) IS MY POST GOING TO PROPOSE COOL NEW CHANGES?

Yes they did, cool com upgrades

BA is not taking suggestions, it doesnt want them.

Okay, contradiction. Nice logical argument.

Contradictions? Where?

kiki wrote:

1A) IS MY POST GOING TO PROPOSE COOL NEW CHANGES?

Yes they did, cool com upgrades

henceforth you should follow the appointed guide

DO NOT FUCKING POST

Proposing a cool new change is making a suggestion. Therefore, if you follow sleska's rules, he will flame you.

kiki wrote:Proposing a cool new change is making a suggestion. Therefore, if you follow sleska's rules, he will flame you.

Well maybe you misunderstand Sleksa's posting:
As BA focuses on just balancing out the "current" basis it has, there are no suggestions wanted which would break that basis. You now know what happens if you try in spite of this...

BTW - I have a question at this point:
Why does the Karganeth have All-Terrain capabilities while the Razorback does not? Both Mechs are somewhat similar to each other. Imo even when not considering the movement classes the Razorback is a bit inferior imo. Its costs are a bit more than twice as much than those of a Karganeth. It has more dps than two Kargs but that's due to the shorter range. With 6500 HP less than two Kargs that's a disadvantage though and if you now also look at the All-Terrain capabilty the Razorback is a bit overpriced or just inferior without outstanding reason. Why is that?