Balanced Annihilation V5.8
Moderator: Moderators
-
Mr.Frumious
- Posts: 139
- Joined: 06 Jul 2006, 17:47
I think the problem with the Juno is the transformation it's undergone. Originally, it was an alternative to the full nuke - iirc, the first versions were even stopped by antis. Over time, it's gradually turning into another cruise-missile-style weapon, but it's kind of lost in the balancing sea right now.
That happened a like a couple of times, months ago. It's by no means the standard procedure. We've since cleared out the balance process and appointed a lead. Also, we are on the same frequency, as far as balance goes. We mostly disagree on tweaks. CA has problems, but the one you describe is not one of them.SwiftSpear wrote: The problem with CA is that you have 5 or so people all independently allowed to make balance changes without agreeing on the changes first.
(...)
The problem with CA is one person will make a change, and with no discussion someone else will revert it, and then make another totally different change also with no discussion. There is no continuity, and thus balance will ultimately always fail. What needs to be avoided is developers balancing while on entirely different pages of thought, if a balance change is worth making it's worth convincing who ever is in charge that it's the right change for the right reasons.
This forum Quantum is about people who troll to make people angry, and other modders to bash others, with BA fanboys who have been brainwashed, to listen to them with no facts or supporting evidence whatsoever. Same with the rumor that XTA has worse effects than BA, so lets make a epic video on that.
???Noruas wrote:This forum Quantum is about people who troll to make people angry, and other modders to bash others, with BA fanboys who have been brainwashed, to listen to them with no facts or supporting evidence whatsoever. Same with the rumor that XTA has worse effects than BA, so lets make a epic video on that.
ooo
Show same gameplay from one of my cruddy mods too!
BA just steals from every good mod, and the modders always have to make it to satisfy "that one guy" who can't take losing one game as Core or Arm.
In my opinion, there are too many mods based on this lost old game, which in it's day was amazing, and Spring has yet to recreate that game for me.
BA just steals from every good mod, and the modders always have to make it to satisfy "that one guy" who can't take losing one game as Core or Arm.
In my opinion, there are too many mods based on this lost old game, which in it's day was amazing, and Spring has yet to recreate that game for me.
You should know that quantum is impervious to trolls, unlike everyone else here...Noruas wrote:This forum Quantum is about people who troll to make people angry, and other modders to bash others, with BA fanboys who have been brainwashed, to listen to them with no facts or supporting evidence whatsoever. Same with the rumor that XTA has worse effects than BA, so lets make a epic video on that.
-
KingRaptor
- Zero-K Developer
- Posts: 838
- Joined: 14 Mar 2007, 03:44
Re: ooo
kk post your new ubar clevar idea for bee-ay and we'll see how well it goesrcdraco wrote:and the modders always have to make it to satisfy "that one guy" who can't take losing one game as Core or Arm.
-
SwiftSpear
- Classic Community Lead
- Posts: 7287
- Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 09:29
Screw you quantum, you suck at everything!quantum wrote:That happened a like a couple of times, months ago. It's by no means the standard procedure. We've since cleared out the balance process and appointed a lead. Also, we are on the same frequency, as far as balance goes. We mostly disagree on tweaks. CA has problems, but the one you describe is not one of them.SwiftSpear wrote: The problem with CA is that you have 5 or so people all independently allowed to make balance changes without agreeing on the changes first.
(...)
The problem with CA is one person will make a change, and with no discussion someone else will revert it, and then make another totally different change also with no discussion. There is no continuity, and thus balance will ultimately always fail. What needs to be avoided is developers balancing while on entirely different pages of thought, if a balance change is worth making it's worth convincing who ever is in charge that it's the right change for the right reasons.
In all seriousness, I didn't mean it offensively, I have not problem admitting it was old information, I haven't been following CA much since the old balance drama I heard about way back when in the day. However, this being said, at least we can agree that approaching a project without a single parser for balancing is a recipe for disaster.
Panther is still horribly inefficient for cost vs damage/armor compared to Flash (flash still does more and is 4x cheaper), and the Triton is in need of some work too, maybe a size scaledown or something would help 
.
With Bertha as accurate as it is, shields are very deficient now and provide next to no protection, all you have to do is know where the generator is and you can strike it time and time again as though it wasn't even there.
With the upped Bertha accuracy (not necessarily a bad thing), this also makes the value of a Catalyst Cruise missile much less especially when you're pumping Metal into stocking missiles, as Bertha shots are nearly free.
Pitbulls and Vipers also seem unnecessarily strong for their costs.
Anti-swarm batteries also are not good at knocking down an actual swarm of anything, even peepers..
Snipers and cloaked units' blips for the Seismic detectors are way too large, I thought I was going to have a seizure when 6 snipers and a spy came nearby one that I built, I couldn't even tell where they were as my screen was saturated with red flashing strobes.
Oh, and Pelicans and Zippers still suck, please remove useless units ^^.
.With Bertha as accurate as it is, shields are very deficient now and provide next to no protection, all you have to do is know where the generator is and you can strike it time and time again as though it wasn't even there.
With the upped Bertha accuracy (not necessarily a bad thing), this also makes the value of a Catalyst Cruise missile much less especially when you're pumping Metal into stocking missiles, as Bertha shots are nearly free.
Pitbulls and Vipers also seem unnecessarily strong for their costs.
Anti-swarm batteries also are not good at knocking down an actual swarm of anything, even peepers..
Snipers and cloaked units' blips for the Seismic detectors are way too large, I thought I was going to have a seizure when 6 snipers and a spy came nearby one that I built, I couldn't even tell where they were as my screen was saturated with red flashing strobes.
Oh, and Pelicans and Zippers still suck, please remove useless units ^^.
Its certainly true that the shield is too expensive, meaning you cant pre-empt a bertha. The cost of a shield is 4900, a bertha is 5100. Thats a big problem, if the bertha is going to be as effective as it is.DemO wrote:Whats wrong with Shields???
When firing directly into the shield, you can kill a shield with a bertha. Previously, the chances of getting the exact right angle were very low (If you are even a bit off, the shot is easily deflected). Being much more accurate, the chances of getting the right angle are now quite good. In my tests around a half to a third of the shots do damage. It takes 3 shots to kill a shield, though the first two direct shots take it down to 2% (about 40) HP, so even if you only just catch it within the AoE, it shouldnt take more than 3-4. It used to be that a nanoturret behind the shield healing it would easily be able to outpace the rare shot that strikes the shield now and then, but this is no longer the case.
The cost is the major thing though, IMO. Shields dont have to be invulnerable to berthas as long as they can buy you some time and respite, but for almost the same cost (and considering you usually need several to cover your whole team) its a losing proposition.