Absolute Annihilation 2.11
Moderator: Moderators
I never said arty needed a buff. Imho, the balance is fine - possibly too cheap even. I just wanted the option to switch arty into OTA-style low-traj firing (with Caydr's usual low-traj nerfage) so that they would be more versatile.Min3mat wrote:yeah artillery are SO useless now >.> seen the freaking cost? nice and spammable ffs none of this idiotic-ness Caydr >.> i'm watching you
Why do they need to be versatile? The whole point of them is that they're cheap and limited role.Pxtl wrote:I never said arty needed a buff. Imho, the balance is fine - possibly too cheap even. I just wanted the option to switch arty into OTA-style low-traj firing (with Caydr's usual low-traj nerfage) so that they would be more versatile.
no point in trying to change Caydr's mind as NOiZE said >.>
T1 sea...
skeeter- rusher, light + cheap AA, beaten by its cost in enforcers, scout, good LoS
corvette- faster moving counter to the enforcer, able to dodge its main cannon and skirmish around its laser. about 2/3 of a enforcers range, beaten by its cost in skeeters, poor LoS (needs to be mixed in and microed)
enforcer- general purpose assault unit. outranges all T1 sea, short range depth charge coupled with its high speed allows it to counter subs in its assault capacity. moderate LoS (to fire at max range needs other units though)
subs- good vs other subs, larger range than enforcer allows it to perform well vs them in packs. Moderate LoS as it is generally used in a stand alone defense or assault category, unable to do much damage to corvettes and skeeters as it has a non tracking torpedo, however can tear up a undefended base and if sat by your SY will stop a rush from killing you in one
Torpedoes- anti sub only. shorter range than subs. Stops a lone sub beating on your base but not as effective at killing them as enforcers as they are immobile and don't have too big a range and can be killed by enforcers from range if scouted. subs are unable to fire at them from afar due to retarded force fire behaviour (GOOD)
Floating HLT- Beats its cost in Skeeters and Corvettes, owned by subs
This is how i envision it. costs should be balanced to be somewhat similar to land units, with
torpedo launchers 150 M
Subs 120 M
corvettes 100 M
floating HLT 300 M
enforcers 250M
with Build time costs balanced to make the enforcers and subs more effective late game than skeeters and defenses (more dynamic)
energy costs balanced to make the main actions with corvettes and skeeters with torpedo launchers, subs, enforcers and floating HLT coming out midgame, or earlier to counter anything you saw with your skeeters
Seaplanes nerfed to T1 units but with a cheaper factory and slightly cheaper units (5-10%) which has more buildpower (as sea cons are too expensive to spam and help) (roughly +2 T1 Kbot cons buildpower), Only T2 seaplane being the sonar planes and torpedo planes which cost a good chunk of buildtime to make other seaplanes used more.
T1 sea...
skeeter- rusher, light + cheap AA, beaten by its cost in enforcers, scout, good LoS
corvette- faster moving counter to the enforcer, able to dodge its main cannon and skirmish around its laser. about 2/3 of a enforcers range, beaten by its cost in skeeters, poor LoS (needs to be mixed in and microed)
enforcer- general purpose assault unit. outranges all T1 sea, short range depth charge coupled with its high speed allows it to counter subs in its assault capacity. moderate LoS (to fire at max range needs other units though)
subs- good vs other subs, larger range than enforcer allows it to perform well vs them in packs. Moderate LoS as it is generally used in a stand alone defense or assault category, unable to do much damage to corvettes and skeeters as it has a non tracking torpedo, however can tear up a undefended base and if sat by your SY will stop a rush from killing you in one
Torpedoes- anti sub only. shorter range than subs. Stops a lone sub beating on your base but not as effective at killing them as enforcers as they are immobile and don't have too big a range and can be killed by enforcers from range if scouted. subs are unable to fire at them from afar due to retarded force fire behaviour (GOOD)
Floating HLT- Beats its cost in Skeeters and Corvettes, owned by subs
This is how i envision it. costs should be balanced to be somewhat similar to land units, with
torpedo launchers 150 M
Subs 120 M
corvettes 100 M
floating HLT 300 M
enforcers 250M
with Build time costs balanced to make the enforcers and subs more effective late game than skeeters and defenses (more dynamic)
energy costs balanced to make the main actions with corvettes and skeeters with torpedo launchers, subs, enforcers and floating HLT coming out midgame, or earlier to counter anything you saw with your skeeters
Seaplanes nerfed to T1 units but with a cheaper factory and slightly cheaper units (5-10%) which has more buildpower (as sea cons are too expensive to spam and help) (roughly +2 T1 Kbot cons buildpower), Only T2 seaplane being the sonar planes and torpedo planes which cost a good chunk of buildtime to make other seaplanes used more.
I like that layout. Imho the seaplanes are out of place as L2 units - really, they belong in the same L1.5 purgatory as the hovers. It would make sense to put them in similar buildlists - that is, buildable by all L1 naval construction units except commander. I think the only reason they were put in L2 by Cavedog was because the L2 sub's build list looked too damn short - and because their factory was submerged, meaning that L2 units were capable of creating a fully submerged base. Also, because the seaplane factory is submerged that should contribute to it's price. I'd make the seaplane factory about 1300-1400 metal - a bit more than the hovercraft. The only problem is that puts it in the same league as the (underpriced) amphib complex, and the amphib complex builds a lot of L2-L3 units.
Imho my only complaint is that the L1 torp launcher _should_ outrange L1 subs so that an attacker must rely on destroyers to take out the torp launcher.
The only problem is that one must be wary of making the destroyers too strong against subs (or vice versa). After all, subs are pretty much the only defense against a concerted attack of L1 boats, and subs aren't viable on the offensive because of torp launchers. It's too easy to turn sea combat into all-rush.
Imho my only complaint is that the L1 torp launcher _should_ outrange L1 subs so that an attacker must rely on destroyers to take out the torp launcher.
The only problem is that one must be wary of making the destroyers too strong against subs (or vice versa). After all, subs are pretty much the only defense against a concerted attack of L1 boats, and subs aren't viable on the offensive because of torp launchers. It's too easy to turn sea combat into all-rush.
Last edited by Pxtl on 07 Jul 2006, 17:45, edited 3 times in total.
-
Drone_Fragger
- Posts: 1341
- Joined: 04 Dec 2005, 15:49
I'm thinking he wasn't being literal with the numbers, rather was suggesting those as comparative values - after all, cutting the cost of enforcers down by 2/3 is extremely silly.Drone_Fragger wrote:300 metal?
They do about 2 times the damge of a normal HLT, 1.5 times the range and they float. 300 metal means to just spam them to win on maps with sea. :O
My vision on L1 Sea
Keep the costs as they are.
- Corvettes should leave a wreck
- Depthchargeslaunchers should fire with an Arc.
- Depthchargeslaunchers should be buildable by the Commander
- The range of the Destroyer depthcharge should 50 % less (So submarines outrange them, but destroyers got more speed so they can still get them.)
- The Destroyer does not need it's laser
- The Anit-Air missle from the skeeter needs to be fixed, it often refuses to fire on important moments!
- Maybe reduce the destoyers speed a bit.
my 2 cents
Keep the costs as they are.
- Corvettes should leave a wreck
- Depthchargeslaunchers should fire with an Arc.
- Depthchargeslaunchers should be buildable by the Commander
- The range of the Destroyer depthcharge should 50 % less (So submarines outrange them, but destroyers got more speed so they can still get them.)
- The Destroyer does not need it's laser
- The Anit-Air missle from the skeeter needs to be fixed, it often refuses to fire on important moments!
- Maybe reduce the destoyers speed a bit.
my 2 cents
IIRC, this was added in the Uberhack because OTA's stupid Unit AI kept rushing destroyers up to point-blank range, where their slow-tracking plasma cannon was about as effective as a spitball launcher. It made them not totally lame at those ranges. If Spring's unit AI has fixed this, then it can probably be safely dropped. This might encourage Corvette escorts for Destroyers to keep them from being done in at close range.NOiZE wrote:- The Destroyer does not need it's laser
FixedNOiZE wrote: - And you really have to reduce the destoyers speed and maybe turnrate a bit... currently they can turn when they spot corvettes and start going the other way before the corvettes even get to shot at them... and with it speed it keeps being outranged by the Enforcer. Then they die.
When was the last time you used them and they where usefull? (and i mean before the whole "boost the Arty" stuff)Min3mat wrote:
yeah artillery are SO useless now >.> seen the freaking cost? nice and spammable ffs none of this idiotic-ness Caydr >.> i'm watching you
Replay?
and a few PAGES ago (spammers ) i said they require a lot of micro. besides i'm having a hard time as ARM at the moment, the AK is just such a niche unit. As CORE i just go AKs->storms(maybe)->T2 with air at some point possibly or vehicles (T1 arty are pretty kewl now)
replay? ffs kixxe remember that 2v2 vs XHC???
) i said they require a lot of micro. besides i'm having a hard time as ARM at the moment, the AK is just such a niche unit. As CORE i just go AKs->storms(maybe)->T2 with air at some point possibly or vehicles (T1 arty are pretty kewl now)replay? ffs kixxe remember that 2v2 vs XHC???
Woud it be to strong if they could only be attacked by torpedos and deepchargelaunchers, or at least take greatly reduced damage from surfaceweapons? Maybe dmg reduced to 20%. This way you have to use subs or closecombat with destroyers and support ships to destroy them. At least this woud force players to mix their forces.Min3mat wrote: Torpedoes- anti sub only. shorter range than subs. Stops a lone sub beating on your base but not as effective at killing them as enforcers as they are immobile and don't have too big a range and can be killed by enforcers from range if scouted. subs are unable to fire at them from afar due to retarded force fire behaviour (GOOD)
WTF, you want torpedo launchers to be plasma-resistant? Are you nuts? That's the whole point - torp-launchers eat subs for breakfast, but you can use boats to take them out.chlue wrote: Woud it be to strong if they could only be attacked by torpedos and deepchargelaunchers, or at least take greatly reduced damage from surfaceweapons? Maybe dmg reduced to 20%. This way you have to use subs or closecombat with destroyers and support ships to destroy them. At least this woud force players to mix their forces.
Imho, torp-launchers should fire on boats, but lose against them. Since subs deal reduced damage to torpedo launchers, that effect is already in place - the boats can blow up the torp launchers while the subs cannot.
Hm at current they are deadly to subs. Once you get in range, your sub is dead, even if you try to run away, but if you have a destroyer or something bigger, you don't have to bother with them and simply sniper them down. I like to rely on them a bit more, and there primary systems are under water, so why can you hit them as easy as a floating tower?Pxtl wrote: Imho, torp-launchers should fire on boats, but lose against them. Since subs deal reduced damage to torpedo launchers, that effect is already in place - the boats can blow up the torp launchers while the subs cannot.
I am aware, that in that case they had to nerfed a bit against subs, and I agree with you, that they don't need to do a lot of damage against normal ships. But maybee I am simply nuts
Want that, use L2 torp launchers - they're submerged.chlue wrote:Hm at current they are deadly to subs. Once you get in range, your sub is dead, even if you try to run away, but if you have a destroyer or something bigger, you don't have to bother with them and simply sniper them down. I like to rely on them a bit more, and there primary systems are under water, so why can you hit them as easy as a floating tower?Pxtl wrote: Imho, torp-launchers should fire on boats, but lose against them. Since subs deal reduced damage to torpedo launchers, that effect is already in place - the boats can blow up the torp launchers while the subs cannot.
I am aware, that in that case they had to nerfed a bit against subs, and I agree with you, that they don't need to do a lot of damage against normal ships. But maybee I am simply nuts
A Bob-up floating Plasma turret would be nice, not for artillery use, but something that has good range and deals enough firepower to be usefull against at least the lower level lvl2 and lvl1 boats.
Floating Annihilators.(overkill?). would be a practical addition for a Floating lvl2 defence unit, it would have to be quite costly in comparison to the land based one to keep things fair, and they'd still be suceptible to sub attack.
A water based Nanoturret could also be a blessing to aid Naval Combat.
Floating Annihilators.(overkill?). would be a practical addition for a Floating lvl2 defence unit, it would have to be quite costly in comparison to the land based one to keep things fair, and they'd still be suceptible to sub attack.
A water based Nanoturret could also be a blessing to aid Naval Combat.