Game version 3741: Sneak peaks

2

Don't forget a cost of cruiser vs cost of TMD. Cruiser is 2k mass, TMD but a 280, and MML being 200 mass. And while everyone seems to be focusing on the navy I would love to see some kind of tests regarding MML considering they already often felt quite underwhelming to use.

Imo MML needs a defo buff. Especially Seraphim one which is just pathetic to use, the second one that struggles is surprisingly Flapjack with Aeon somehow getting by with higher HP pool so they actually are more reliable in getting through. And viper is just viper, they don't care about TMD.

Still the fact that same mass in TMD can now(or maybe it could do the same before) totally shutdown same mass in MML is imo inexcusable as those are the units that are supposed to be used for breaking down enemy FOB's while they are doing piss poor job at that.

0

Yesterday i had 3 cruiser (sera) shooting at a firebase, the ennemy was able to build 3/4 tmd faster than i was bale to destroy it.
I also have completely lost faith in mml for a while and resigned myself to spam T1 arty instead. That being said tml range allowing it to take out mex/factories from extremely far is still a bane for me

0

@ftxcommando said in Game version 3741: Sneak peaks:

20% would make it a 1 in 25 chance of 2 TMD missing and letting a tml hit your ACU for a snipe. Thatโ€™s card game RNG mechanics in a macro RTS, itโ€™s just bad.

Yeah i also think a ROF nerf would be the best way to specifically nerf static(spammable) TMD. Just thought a bit of randomness might do the trick of making it look cooler. But yeah for single missile snipes this is quite bad.

@jip said in Game version 3741: Sneak peaks:

Nerfing rate of fire may be interesting from a balance aspect, but it also makes the game feel a lot more dull. I'd veto that as game lead - the game is supposed to feel reactive and fun. Not dull.

Not sure how bad it would actually look, as they already do shoot quite slowly.
So getting them from 1.8 sec/shot to like 2 sec/shot (sera cruiser ROF) would be a good start and i don't think you'd notice the visual difference.

If they fire to slowly for you, i guess you could double all missile hp and all TMD fire rates.๐Ÿ˜†

@e33144211332424 said in Game version 3741: Sneak peaks:

Still the fact that same mass in TMD can now(or maybe it could do the same before) totally shutdown same mass in MML is imo inexcusable as those are the units that are supposed to be used for breaking down enemy FOB's while they are doing piss poor job at that.

The TMD does not shut down the MML as you can just shoot at stuff, that's not under TMD. Also their TMD does 0 damage to your MMLs, so once you get ahead you just snowball their TMDs to death.
I just tested some MML against a TMD. A Buzzkill only gets one shot out if you shoot at it with multiple MML (Other facs get 2 shots out, so Buzzkills kinda weak). So having two MMLs will kill the Buzzkill and your opponent will have spend 56 mass (20% of a TMD because reclaim) for nothing, while you still have 2 full hp MMLs that can now shoot at other stuff.

0

If they fire to slowly for you, i guess you could double all missile hp and all TMD fire rates

The thought did cross my mind ๐Ÿ˜„

A work of art is never finished, merely abandoned

0

I'd also like to remind people that this is not a balance discussion thread - this isn't even a balance patch. I'm fixing things that feel underwhelming because the underlying mechanic is broken. if you disagree with the resulting balance - make a topic in the balance section of the forums and discuss it there.

A work of art is never finished, merely abandoned

1

@jip said in Game version 3741: Sneak peaks:

@jcvjcvjcvjcv said in Game version 3741: Sneak peaks:

On the other hand, doesn't this open a can of worms? What about AA overkilling their targets? (Draining all SAMs on a few spyplanes and letting the bombers behind pass, etc.)

The 'can of worms' argument is also considered the 'slippery slope fallacy' - just because we fix one issue and similar issues exist, it doesn't mean that we shouldn't fix this one issue.

As Nex describes - the reason this works is because the amount of damage that TMDs do is uniform. That doesn't apply to other weaponry. Hence even if we'd want to fix this, we couldn't reliably put a 'count' on it. Let alone that it is a property of projectiles that we're using here, not a property of a weapon or unit.

I see my wording of it was poor.

But not letting 15 SAMS fire at a spyplane kinda makes sense too ๐Ÿ™‚

0

@jcvjcvjcvjcv Yes the problem is there, but it is there for all units in the game (not just sams) and is basically impossible to fix, as the unit would need perfect knowledge of what is already shooting at its target and what's going to hit etc.
So you basically calculate the game 10 ticks into the future just to see if firing this SAM is necessary. And then you do that for every unit in the game.

1

And the next sneak peak is available - all about doing damage!

A work of art is never finished, merely abandoned

0

And another sneak peak is available - all about range rings and more frames per second (fps)!

A work of art is never finished, merely abandoned

0

Updated a sneak peak - more performance (in terms of fps) of not just range rings, but also plain vision!

A work of art is never finished, merely abandoned