Xd i just noticed
Posts made by TheWheelie
I found them all but i want to give others an opportunity
My laptop from 2014 had 180 score as well. Score is not always properly shown especially with laptops.
Not that it matters i wasnt playing anyway just wanted to make a very very funny joke
@t_r_u_putin said in Team FFA 4v4v4 Tourney:
СPU of the players should be lower than 180 score.
Its so over
@jip said in Control Group Zoom mod:
This has been integrated a while back:
If possible it would be nice if the standard zoom level could be made higher. I always used the old control group zoom mod (with some changes) while it still worked, but the new options just don't really give me something usefull to the point that i never use the double tap feature anymore.
The main issue is that you tend to want to use this to hotkey specific units you're using to raid but because the zoom level is so far in you cannot see anything after double tapping so you have to zoom out anyway (which at that point is just as fast as just zooming in manually).
this is the standard zoom level after i just double tapped and there can easily be a t1 pd shooting at me while i can't even see it.
Imo a zoom level like this is way more usefull for whatever you want to accomplish.
Hi i want my ladder maps in 1 style only please (the style i like) thanks in advance
I think you misunderstood. You're supposed to delete all your maps before leaving
I could not find any coop related tabs/topics on the forum or discord so i'm putting this here. No clue if it just doesn't exist or if i'm just blind.
This is a list of both client and co-op mission improvements i could think of. I've written this in a bit of a forcefull way since i was too lazy to add "imo" or "i think" everywhere, so just keep in mind that it's just my opinion
Client improvements:
Most important of all is that the leaderbord needs to be reset. Right now there are still top scores that had cheating enabled. It doesn't matter for more casual players who just want to play the missions together, but for anyone who likes to compete (speedrunning is a pretty big thing afterall) the entire leaderbord and by extent playing co-op to set good scores is essentially irrelevant which is a big shame.
Some less important improvement is adding a map preview when you host. You can see the map preview in the lobby regardless so it's not spoiling anything, but not seeing a map preview in the client makes it not only hard to select the right missions (usually you remember missions by how the map looks) but it also makes the co-op tab feel really empty.
I also have no idea what the impact of secondary objectives are. I know you don't need them to get placed on the leaderbord, but why should i do them then? Do i get a time bonus? The importance isn't that i know the answer, but that the answer gets communicated towards the player in the co-op tab.
There is also pretty poor communication of what is and isn't allowed as game options. If i host a co-op game i can turn adjustable gamespeed or cheating on. Which of these enabled/disabled will disable the ability to get on the leaderboards? I know adjustable game speed doesn't (or atleast it didn't use to) and that one, although less than cheating, still has a huge impact on the efficiency of playing the game. So either it should somehow be communicated in the host or players simply shouldn't be allowed to pick those options to level the playing field.
Missions improvements:
This section is mostly meant for people who make (or want to make) co-op missions (if there are still any left). Basically there is one big problem with the way current co-op missions are designed and that is that they all play the same boring way. It generally goes like this:
- Spawn into a half dead base with some remaining structures/units
- big first wave that's hard to defend
- you survive the wave, the map expands and there are some bases that send you units slowly increasing in scale
- you turtle until you can efficiently kill the base
- repeat the last 2 stept 2 times.
- the end
The problem with this is that the answer is almost always turtling. The most efficient way to end almost any co-op as uef is to spam novaxes and just go down the list of targets. Aeon does the same but makes a para first into arties, sera probably just makes 2 yolo's and who knows what cybran does, beetles i guess.
So co-op's need to be made less static for them to be more fun. To solve this in the most basic way possible is to disable game enders + novax to force people to actually fight with units instead of sitting in their base after walls of pd's. To solve this in a more interesting way is to force the player to not just stick to their main base (especially not early on). I have made a great co-op example including a beautifull map design
- You can spawn in a corner of the map, fight of the first wave. Map expands and you see you're in a valley. There's an 8 min timer before a gc + accompanying army comes to kill you, so you're forced to kill the enemy defenses on the cliffs take over the positions ans set up your new base there where the gc can't come.
- After the gc showed up and killed your valley base the map expands and it shows an allied base, it will start evaccing civilians to a gateway thats controlled by the enemy, so you have to protect it (make it get attacked by bombers or some shit as well, but don't make it too retarded like u lose the mission if u lose 3/20 or something) and secure the gateway.
- After they have evacced next map expand that shows you the huge scary enemy base with lots of shit. It sends a new big wave including air attacks from the cliff side. Now you just have to defend and kill the enemy commander(s)/base(s).
So now the player has spend a lot of time actually doing co-op missions instead of just sitting at home and turtling up. He has more incentive to keep using actual units to break the bases since he already has a better setup for it (since he had to make units to escort the civilians). You can furthermore incentivize him more by having the allied base be an actual ai base that sends units to push the enemy so you're encouraged to accompany his troops.
This is just one example how to make an interactive mission and far from the only way of doing it, but i feel the main difference is that this makes it an actual mission instead of it just being survival 2.0.
Now that i think about it adding timers to clearing out enemy bases could potentially also work to force the player to attack it instead of turtling (but it could potentially be obnoxious as well).
@mazornoob said in Satellite overperforming.:
4k for lazer + 15k for tele leaves 6k for pgens. Making tele on 5k energy income will take a while.
Making novax on 0 e income also takes a while wonder why you didn't mention that 4head
9/10 times when someone makes telemazer (or novax) it's late enough in the game for a team to have 50k+ e income in total and on average people tend to overflow e in that stage in the game (since e stalls become way more impactfull), so you generally almost never need to make more than 2 t3 pgens and some storage
And Novax is immune to PDs and air. Different units, different counters.
Sure? Different units, different uses. Novax can freely target anything risk-free, mazor has to pay itself off because it's usually a one-wat trip. Complaining that you can't snipe a shielded anti with Novax is like complaining that teleporting somewhere to kill 2 T3 mexes is not worth it and a suicide half the time. It's not like 2-3 properly overlapping shields don't protect against tele anyway, especially with how it just refuses to fire if you tele too close.
You are in no position to say "different units different uses different counters" since you are the one who started making the novax/telemazer comparison. If you think they cannot be compared you shouldn't have started the comparison to begin with.
Aside from that you're completely missing the point. Mazer needs to pay itself of yes, but it does that by simply existing since making it already indirectly pays for itself, while for a novax this is completely not the case considering there is a huge opportunity cost added to it.
Also i've seen paragons protected by 15 shields die to well positioned telemazers.
You probably already protect anything that's 30k+ worth of mass in a concentrated spot, and anything else can be sacrificed and countered by having 15 or so fighter-bombers ready to respond.
Protect from what? You have shields and sams yes, but like i said shields are way less usefull against tele so u need pd's instead. If you have fb's instead of pd's you can still buy way more time by dodging and the entire air grid will be dead by the time you kill the acu. An important difference is that shielding against a novax usually benefits you in another way later on, like protection against air or arty's/game enders, but defending against telemazer doesn't benefit you in any other way.
Can't Novax target wrecks? If they can, then it's something like 100 mass/second damage when attacking a T3 mex until everyone makes a Novax's worth of mass in shields. Either way as long as the enemy doesn't expend this much mass in shields you'd still be ahead, wouldn't you?
In a perfect world with correct play you would only need to protect 1 mex at a time from a novax. Since it can't 1 shot mexes you will just follow it around with like 2 boys in a transport to insta make a shield after the volley is over protecting every single mex. Now ofc this is quite far from reality but you can go halfway there easily.
EVEN if you don't protect any of your mexes, as long as you instantly rebuild the first dead mex after the novax moves away it's still barely any damage the novax is doing.
2 cycles to kill a t3 mex = 40 sec / mex
to rebuild the mex its 2300 mass(since u start at 50%, if the novax groundfires it its lowered but that also requires more novax cycles so i figured it evens out) / 40 = 57,5 mass/s the novax is costing you if you don't build shields on your mexes and just rebuild.
Now there's 2 scenario's. The first is when the game is a static eco game and someone makes a novax. the 36k investment in the novax is more than enough to get 60 mass/s extra eco for the other players (5 ras boys which is the same cost almost gets that, and they are the most inefficient). Ofc these games usually tend to lead to arty wars which is the main thing the novax is usefull at, but until they are build you can basically negate the novax.
The second scenario is when it is an active game (late game ofc) and 99/100 times a novax is straight up a terrible move because it's a big investment with an incredibly long pay off time.
a novax cost 36k mass for 250 dps
mazer cost 25k mass for 3000 dps
once the mazer is done you can teleport anywhere in 25 seconds
once the novax is done you have to move it across the map to location (usually made on 15km+ maps) which takes longer plus it shows your enemy its presence so they can respond to it if needed
since you SEE where the novax is going you know who he's going to target so generally speaking only 1/2 players have to worry about it until it moves somewhere else unlike tele which is a concern for everybody at the same time instantly after it's finished
mazer can also tele under shields rendering them useless unless you have multiple overlapping shields
The moment a telemazer acu finished the entire enemy team better has 60k mass in defenses ready at that exact moment, but the moment a novax finishes the enemy team needs nothing in particular, especially since by that time you have some random shields around your base to protect important buildings against air (which are irrelevant vs mazer since they just tele under the shields). Even if you don't have time to build shields it doesn't really matter if you lose a few mexes since you can just instantly rebuild them after dropping some t3 engies there. The main damage is apm drain, but then again the novax player is microing his novax as well.