Wobble kill and hover killing in 1.3

[Avatar]

He does not lie, he experiments.  I've found Nathan to be straightforward WHEN he shares information.  The Beta is not necessarily a sharing experience, and anyone who doesn't accept the fact that Nathan is in the drivers seat should go away until 1.3 is done.

It's just that way...

-Av-

[DarkFox]

you're getting nowhere with this balance crap. It ended at: much more ppl than Nathan can do it so why on Earth steal his time?

Then everyone will have their own idea of what balance is, and you'll end up with a different recycler variant for each server. This is why having a very-well balanced default setting, via a collaborative effort, is an important thing to do for 1.3.

[Red Devil]

[yawn] Just woke up from another nap and just read the tail end of this thread...

I recently made a GT that is unwobbleable (is that a word?), so that's do-able.

I believe everything should have the opportunity to have the ever-lovin' crap blasted out of it.

Avatar, nice work there with the Cthonians.  And hey, bite me.    (I actually have a hat that has that embroidered on the front.)  [pops another beer]

[DarkFox]

I recently made a GT that is unwobbleable (is that a word?), so that's do-able.

Read the start-end of the thread. Both ZST and FE feature towers that are unwobbleable... The balance is in which ranges and which vehicles can wobble them.

[Huscar]

I'm not talking about what ppl want I'm talking about what makes sense, I know many of these things are crap.

DF, you can balance it out in one bigger mod, I don't think ppl have such different ideas of balance. And it stays a waste of time bugging Nathan about it.

So everyone made a point in laser turrets being useless, reread my post and discover I had that same idea myself.

The big problem of moddable games is that ppl think it's the game that should fit their gameplay instead of the other way around.


Oh yeah, MowerMan, I'm talking about shooting straight up in 1.3 here, no flying-> no reason to shoot straight up (that's what anti-air defense is for)

[Zero Angel]

You know, it may be possible via AI params to make guntowers stop overcompensating their aim when being wobbled. That gives me an idea

[Jwk the Hemp Monkey]

yeah its simple

You just ad another '' target lead position'' on top of the current one, it means they aim better in *all* situations.

[Zero Angel]

What are you talking about JWK? Is it an ODF setting or something?

[Red Devil]

Sorry, just kinda landed there in the middle last night. By that, do you mean it would be acceptable to have units which can wobble-kill?  

I recently made a GT that is unwobbleable (is that a word?), so that's do-able.

Read the start-end of the thread. Both ZST and FE feature towers that are unwobbleable... The balance is in which ranges and which vehicles can wobble them.

[Zero Angel]

Some people feel that the ISDF have a weakness where their guntowers shots are avoidable. Given that guntowers only cost 50 scrap (25 recoverable?), it makes sense tha the ISDF has this weakness.

Scions have no such weakness, which is just another reason to pick them instead of ISDF.

The ISDF weakness (wobbleable GTs) can be covered by a turret, or a rocket tank.

Thus it all balances out, sorta

(1.2 stock guntowers are way too easy to wobble, but absolutely unwobblable GTs would negate an ISDF weakness that SHOULD be there.)

[Red Devil]

Boy, ain't that the truth.  You guys only see the very tip of the iceberg of work involved.  If he were to share everything he does, he wouldn't have time to sleep.  And he barely gets that.  Sifting through 500,000 lines of code (that's about 1,000 screens to you and me) is no picnic.  Connecting the dots/code is another matter altogether.  Adding/altering code which does not impact the rest of the code makes my brain hurt just thinking of it.  Most times it's dead on, which blows my mind.

There's programmers at work who don't know *what* the heck they are doing and bring down entire systems with tens of thousands of users with their dinking around.  That's why I'm always impressed when Nathan puts out a new build and the darn thing works so well.  Sure, there's some glitches once in awhile, but, hey, you try it guys and we'll see what happens.  Not trying to put Nathan on a pedestal here.  Just trying to make everyone appreciative of what they have.  Most just don't have any experience/understanding/point of reference of what's really involved in making patches/coding.  Especially BZ.

Be thankful guys.  Be very thankful.

He does not lie, he experiments.  I've found Nathan to be straightforward WHEN he shares information.  The Beta is not necessarily a sharing experience, and anyone who doesn't accept the fact that Nathan is in the drivers seat should go away until 1.3 is done.

It's just that way...

-Av-

[Red Devil]

Thanks for that ZA. You guys are always thinking. I agree that every tactic should have a counter tactic.  It's just human nature to find a way around things.  What makes BZ so special is in the use of multiple tactics/counter tactics.  When a tactic is discovered that doesn't have a counter tactic, then that tactic must either be eliminated or not employed.  I love this game.

Some people feel that the ISDF have a weakness where their guntowers shots are avoidable. Given that guntowers only cost 50 scrap (25 recoverable?), it makes sense tha the ISDF has this weakness.

Scions have no such weakness, which is just another reason to pick them instead of ISDF.

The ISDF weakness (wobbleable GTs) can be covered by a turret, or a rocket tank.

Thus it all balances out

[Jwk the Hemp Monkey]

No one ever said he was a bad programmer. He is infact an amazing kick arse programmer. But part of the mentailty that makes one strong at programing makes one very weak when dealing with people, and certaintly makes one weak when dealing with the fluidic nature of war and combat.

Battlezone II is a game about war and combat. He *does not* understand how lalot of it works and what makes the game more fun and what does not. A few examples are things like '' turrets shouldnt fly up! '' and that *classic LAUGHABLE statement* about how FE attributes copy-pasted to 1.3 would make make it unbalenced because '' fe has a 3rd race ''.

If GSH wants 1.3 to be good. He *has* to take advice from people. GSH is not the *driver*. He is the mechanic. And a bloody good one when it comes to making the game run fine, not nessearily good at where the car should go.

[Red Devil]

He *does* take advice/input from us.  Gosh, the guy is just amazing in that regard.  He *wants* our input.  Good, objective input.  He just doesn't, and rightfully so, appreciate negative, personal output is all.  None of us do and it's only natural to respond in kind after you're fed up.  I do it, you do it, everyone does it.

There are limitations to what the engine was designed to do and what Nathan is physically/chronologically able to do though.  Massive rewrites to accomodate something on the wishlist just aren't going to happen.  

Any good race driver will always first give credit to his mechanics. Same with a running back giving credit to his offensive line in football.  Bad mouth them though and he's just dead.   Without them, he doesn't go anywhere, not the other way around.

For example, join TV's group and badmouth him or Zeeder and see how far it gets you. It just doesn't work that way guys.

Be *appreciative* of what you have and what is given to you, free of charge, no matter who gives it to you.

[PhoeniX-FlamE]

ill take your example RD

lets say TV's and Z group... they badmouth about the community - how far will it get them?

ive looked in the archives and it seems nathan was always an ass, or maybe i didnt look 2 far