I was just posting here to mention and discuss the recent change in turret price for scions. Scion turrets have now come down in price, from the previous 45 scrap, to 40 scrap, in line with ISDF turrets.
The justification behind this was that scions could build turrets more quickly for their much-needed base defense.
I'm not sure how much study was done before this change was brought about, but I believe that the fact that a scion player starts with 2 guardians as opposed to ISDF starting with 2 turrets is already more than good enough, without the price decrease.
For those that don't know, iongun2, the default weapon in a guardian, does very close to *twice* the damage that a turret's minigun does, and has the same range. The iongun 2 only falls to the minigun against heavy armour, and even then a good commander can use hold position, it's not like the things will *ever* run out of ammo. Furthermore, a scion guardian has 2750 health, as opposed to 2500 of a turret, which comes in very useful when solar flares are employed.
I believe that scion guardians should have their price increased to the previous 45 scrap. Please discuss...
And let me just add that iongun2 deals 500 damage/sec while assualt chain (the ones in the turrets) deal 300 damage/sec to scouts.
Then add iongun's high spread and you have a super-turret. Even in 1.2, scion turrets are greatly superior than isdf turrets simply because of their spread.
Scion turrets should be 45.
i do believe the change in price resides in the fact That 2 pools you never go into green, meaning its more than easy under the same circumstances
isdf can mass produce turrets
the very fallacy of bz2s resource system, favoured so much by u noobs :D
In what way/patch/mod/timescale has a guardian gone
down in price to 40 scrap??
The public 1.3 beta has 45scrap guardians.
Are you saying 'recent change in turret price' in relation to
a soon-to-be-released patch to the 1.3 beta??
Screenshot from 1.3 multiplayer game...
(http://www.uscm.fsnet.co.uk/1.jpg)
3 audio channels? That's harsh :) I use 63 and check my FPS, its always topped in the charts at like 150. And notice how he uses 640x480, for those who are talking about the icon sizes and F11 and F12.
Seems to me I saw that somewhere, but can't remember where. Was it the Recy variant?
I can't find any mention of it in the changelog but the darn thing's huge...
-Av-
IMO, it's a good thing, that Scions are now able to build sentry turrets without a pool, for otherwise, they often wouldn't have a chance to turn the game around again when they need def and have loads of loose lying next to base but have no pools left.
My recommendation would be simple:
I think, it would be fair, if the turrets the rec is configured to build at startup remain costing 40 scrap each, but are equipped with a weaker version of their weapon, but can be reconfigured to IonII without any tech-tree requirements, then costing 45 scrap again - shouldn't be too much work to apply those changes ...
What do you think about that?
Quote from: Speedy3 audio channels? That's harsh :) I use 63 and check my FPS, its always topped in the charts at like 150. And notice how he uses 640x480, for those who are talking about the icon sizes and F11 and F12.
UGugugahahg PLZL p!?+ <personal overflow>
I used to use 3 channels in 1.2, but now in 1.3 I've tried it out with 6 and it's pretty playable still. Can't say I can get such a bit framerate that DF gets though, but then again I'm using 800x600 :)
Quote---- 1.21 beta 11 released
Reduced scrap cost of the Scion Guardian from 45 to 40, allowing it
to be built without any Extractors. This may be a mistake. [Ken]
Looks like this happened WAAAAAAAY back. Just for pulic reference, the Public Beta 1 is equivalent to a private build 1.3 b62.
Oh my oh my, I forgot it wasn't changed back to 45 during my
time in testing. Doh.
Good to mention it now, maybe get something done about it.
I have yet to see a game where turrets last any langth of time unless coverd by at least one other turret and a gun tower. Infinit hover my be gone but arcing turrets is still %99 or more as effective as it was in 1.2.
You see whart happened in there?...Changes got made, many were not even discussed, then when we did discuss them....ahhh....nevermind, that ship has sailed...
as far as the price change, this is precisely the kind of thing experienced Scion players should be commenting on, and I never play Scion, I opt to keep my mouth shut this (one) time.
@ SilverBird: And I think that's exactly the way it's supposed to be ^^
Anyway, no comments about my proposal?
Quote from: BZZERKERQuote---- 1.21 beta 11 released
Reduced scrap cost of the Scion Guardian from 45 to 40, allowing it
to be built without any Extractors. This may be a mistake. [Ken]
Looks like this happened WAAAAAAAY back. Just for pulic reference, the Public Beta 1 is equivalent to a private build 1.3 b62.
[/size]Hehe, see that? Even Ken was reluctant of the change.
i totaly agree with DF
i also dont find how few gurdiends will help you if u have no pools... if the enemy got u to zero pools and ur def is weak i dont find why a 1 should build a rat.. never saw a game where the cmdr have full scrap with no pools and building rattler...
gurdiens are better and should cost more...
hmm...
As a scion fan I love the change, but as ISDF loyalist I think it kind of unbalances... mini-rat is alot weaker than ion-guardian, so I think it should cost more..
Yes, zero pools = lost game! It seems that the original rationale was correct on the pricing, as corroborated in this thread.
On one hand the guardians are more powerful, on the other hand if you start with no pool (which is sort of rare I think) you have no meens to build one (and with only 1 pool, ISDF can get GT up, while Scion cannot get GS so its a good thing for guardians to be better).
What would be the impact of:
- having the Matriarch's own max reserve (slugish green bar) be 45? (how big an advantage would that be? would it be a uber advantage thoughout the game?)
{as it is now with 45 is not too bad because theres not many maps where you cant get one single pool}
those are some great ideas, although i think it'll be best to just put the gurdiens back to 45 :p
i mean.. does it disturb any1 that it cost 45? the a idea sounds realy good... but i dont know how will it affect the game... and it doesnt sound like it metters to much... only to allow you build a gurdien?
with one pool ull still wont be able to build a spire :roll:
Ice Wendigo has come up with a testable and perhaps
brilliant proposal.
Increase Matriarch green-scrap zone to 45 from normal 40,
enough for a guardian at 45.
This presupposes the guardian price is restored to 45 from
the insufficiently discussed current 40.
With one pool scions still can't get a spire (20+45=65) which
is as it should be.
A possible problem is in the odf/code, I don't know if the
matriarch scrap storage can be modified on its own.
Anyone know??
This is TESTABLE..
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't 65 the ugraded warrior's cost?
And thats a bad idea. Giving scions 5 extra scrap is giving them 2 scavs and 2 pods. ISDF doesn't get that pod advantage.
...if the Matriarch starts a strat with 45 that'd be a bad idea,
but why should it??
I thought that the starting scrap was 40, no matter what storage has avail. Thus, increasing storage wouldn't give them 2 scavs and 2 pools right off. It would, instead, give them 5 scrap storage space right away that wasn't filled.
Right?
That is correct, the dll would only fill it with 40 unless a certain ivar was changed.
Straight from strategy02.cpp (stock) found in the 1.3 DLL pack, line 280:
SetScrap(Team,40);
That means they will be filled up with 40, no matter what.
EDIT: I don't see any ivar variable that changes the default scrap in the DLL. However, I noticed that ivar7 is disabled. That means a future BZNES could not have the starting vehicle features as its disabled by the 2 turret thing. That is unless a new strategy DLL is made for it...
I could have sworn an ivar could adjust the starting scrap... mabye its for mpi...
the best will be start with 40 while having stoarge for 45... cause if they will start with 5 bouns scrap it can change the whole start... mastering scav mangment and 1 being better then other is just metter of seconds..
10 secs can make a big difrence
starting scrap should be 40 while the storage itself 45
how does that sound? hmm
now that i think about it - with what speedy brought up...
good point speedy... scions get an advantge for building warior.. and warior costing 70 is kinda ridicilous i think...
I would suggest more games before we try and fix a fix for a fix.
Silver is right, thats how some of these problems got started.
I'm more of the ISDF faction than the Scion but I do play as Scion now & then 4 a break & I think cheeper turrets not such a bad idea. The reason being is that it takes the deploying on & holding of two pools 2 build Scion heavy defences which can put Scion at a serious disadvantage.
I agree testing is the first priority {both ISDF and Scion}. (it was just a idea thrown around for later just in case, it has not been thought of at all [raw dough, not even half-baked ;)]
I'm in the scion camp very strongly, and I think 40-scrap guardians are a badd idea.
Just in case the 'camp' we're in makes any difference, which it shouldn't. :)
to be honest i think that given the scions 40 scrap turrets (which are far *far* more powerful than ISDF equivelant, at any equal-tech stage of the game) is a mistake that screams of people not really understanding the advaned stratergies that go on in BZII, 1.2 or 1.3 reguardless. In the rev.c development the idea of reducing the cost of a scion turret to 40 was not even considered, it was such an , excuse the lack of a better term, obviously bad idea that it became something everyone agreed with silently. At which point we went on to more important things.
I say scion turrets should stay as they *were* and some vet isdf fight some expert scion players for quite a few games.
I also reiterate the concept of cut-pasteing all the modifications made in FE as well. many of the damage and properties of the weapons was tested in such a way that the abilty of the ships to move should not nessesarily make such a difference.
I would suggest leaving the bulk of FE changes in FE.
I played a game last night as scion and tried building lots of turrets and as soon as the isdf made it past basic scout in the tech tree all my turrets droped like flys even groups of turrets. I would have needed two upgraded pools and building turrets exclusivly to replace them fast enough.
One thing I will say though is before they made it past basic scouts the turrets where actually able to hold their own when in groups. which is a vast inprovment over 1.2
I thought the point of scion turrets was just to protect your base while you race to get a base spire up before upgrading and spamming scavs to collect all that loose you get from teaming up on those expensive tanks.
Indeed, and thus it is revield that those who are 'testing' the scions are not actually as experienced with them as lets say they are with the ISDF. Thus giveing an unbalenced opinion on how to modify them.
Inculding FE stuff will save you alot of time, and will fix alot of problems that you may not even know about. Its not a mirical cure, but its a damned good start IMOH.
I am looking forward to see how you fair up against dark fox once he has gotten used to 1.3 fully (assuming he has not already).
Don't forget many of us were in the beta hemp. I've been used to 1.3 all along the dev cycle. I don't really think serious matches at this stage would be fair until everyone had gotten used to it.
I think its fair for the Scions turrets to be 40. The ion gun may be more powerful on non-armor units but it isn't very effective on armored units plus it has a large miss ration. Aka the bullets spay out unlike mini. Upgrading to Guas also doesn't prove that effective due to the high reload time and it does less damage than chain per second assuming it hits at all.
But I agree we should give it alot more testing before we try anything on it.
Another factor that should be in the minds of the testers is that the scions are ment to be weak early game. The turrets should not be 'equal'.
it's rare that turrets are firing at heavy armoured units, so the lack of heavy armour damage of iongun doesn't come into things too much. Furthermore the gauss gun may be less powerful than chain, but chain in a turret has a range of only 120m, which is easy to outrange with something as simple as a chaingun, quill etc. Gauss, OTOH, has a range of 190m, which is huge for a turret, meaning it usually does at least as much damage as chain against an approaching scav/tank, and cannot be outranged, even by AI mbikes or tag.
To put the icing on the cake the guardian has more health.
You sure about those values? Or are those changes in 1.3 I didn't notice yet (didn't have time to play it for more than a few hours though) ?
I thought it was 160m for assault chain and 170 or 175 for assault gauss... ?!
Oh, and @ Phoenix-Flame etc. : What the hell 'when you have no pools left, the game is lost' ??? - That's one more thing about vets of nowadays: their games never reach a state of game where a base on it's own can endure for a few minutes.... Guess that's another reason why many don't like 1.3 . I've often had that situation, that I had lost all pools but lots of scavs roaming around, collecting TONS of loose left from half a base and enemy assault forces and occasionally also the need to set turrets (ISDF, I mean, of course) back to mini in order to be able to pump some out.
The best example for how a game can be won once on zero pools is a game I played vs Fired-Up more than a year ago that I won't forget so soon: 1on1; It lasted for more than 220 minutes (!) and I was rather topsides for more than the first 190 minutes, and had him on 0-2 pools most of the time. But I just didn't manage to get his base smashed, and once, about minute 195, when I wasn't watching for a few seconds (preparing the next big attack), he increased his pools count from 1 to 5 within less than a minute (rush on the pools with mainly turrets) . After another 25 minutes, my base was crushed and I finally lost a game I had assumed to win within the next few minutes for about three hours ^^
*sigh*
I think I am in love with this game.
LOL Speedy, Its a wonder DF ever gets a chance to sit down with your lips on his ass 24/7.
Every post I read of yours has something wonderful to say about him...
NP, just amusing.
:P
Firstly, im not speedy, secondly, he rocks. This is not 'kissing arse', its stating a fact. It is something i have learned though experience and observation of him tear though even hardened vets with relative ease.
As far as im concerned, his opinions on scions have more weight than anyone else encountered. In the same way as far as im concerned, the world is round, not flat. Am i kissing christopher columbus's arse by saying that the world is round? no.
Interesting, I guess you do learn something every day. I always thought Chain Assault was 150m or so. But it IS 120m. Rather interesting there. But hey maybe the Scions do deserve a break and have better turret technology for the same cost due to their lack in the defence department.
As for the more health issue, if testing reveals 40scrap gaurdians to be an issue, we can always try reducing the health with other tweaks.
I'd rather bring it back to 45 scrap and then go from there if it really needs any more fudging.
And, if anyone feels like it, if going back to 45 makes it more weak, then I suggest speeding up Ion II shot velocity just a tad. That would compensate a little bit for this gun's spreadfire. Of course this would affect all other units with assault gun.
''lack of defensive capabiltiy?''
Gun spires are a *far* more affective defensive building than the ISDF GT's. The only thing that beats them IMO is Hadean Defenders.
on 1v1s ya, u can survive from 0 pools since its not big deal cause when u attack pools ur base is not attacked same time..
get on 2v2 minimum while they have blast and try to recover from 0 pools, u cant get tanks - u can barly get a scout with chains
if they go around with chains then ya - you have a chance but if they are dumb enough to get you to 0 pools and not to be on the way to blast tanks...
if the other team is advanced on technolgy then ya, he have a chance to recover
i've recovered from 0 pools many times, but they were hit by bomber and my thugs were in blast tanks... and when i had 0 pools a poor turret wasnt what saved my ass
a turret / gurdien wont save your ass if u have 0 pools
i maybe put it wrong by saying u'll lose from 0 pools
anyways my point is a rat is not what will save you if u have no pools
you mean you've never outranged a chain turret with a chaingun sonic? tsk tsk... I myself stick to miniguns because of the appauling range of chain, I always thought rocket tanks with salvo were a better mauler defense anyway. :)
Now that it's at 40 we could try it this way and and see, maybe it's not as bad as some people think.
About GSpires, I agree GS are effective. But ISDF can raise GT with one pool, Scions can not (maybe that's a factor when some people mention defensive capability?). Even with 2 pools, in some situations (little or no free scrap nearby) the last 35 of the 75 can take a long time to raise (better not loose that second pool cause your back to square one and cant build that GS).
Turrets, if, if everyone agrees the 40 cost is too low, another possibility (out of many) is to keep Guardian's combat effectiveness as is and its 40 scrap cost, but alter how fast it can be deployed compared to the ratler; it's 'build time' could be raised, or the rattler's travelling speed could be increased a tiny little bit (presuming they are of equal speed right now, which I am not sure about).
(in fact, I wanted to compare the speed of both turrets while traveling[undeployed] to see if they're the same, but I forgot to, it can make a difference between being blown away in transit [caugh with pants down syndrome] or being already deployed and kicking when the enemy arrives at the destination)
Nope, I usually always used a Shadower or was in a tank by the time I saw Chain Turrets. Like I said you learn something every day.
Jack, you are a tool.
But I was typing previously about speedy. :)
Now's not the time for random ideas Icewendigo. It's also not a time to 'try' a new idea which even when made Ken admitted was possibly a mistake. It's my opinion that there was *no* need whatsoever to put them down in price, and the way we should be tackling this issue is by having them what they've *always* been, 45, and only further discussing things if there's a problem.
Who's jack.
i guess its you :P
i totaly agree with DF
and as for isdf need 1 pool for GT
well they need relay
better not lose the con while getting that relay up eh?
scions needs more scrap.. scions can get an UPG much safer after the 1st GS
the 1st task for scions (at least in 1.2) was to get the spire up.. that was probably one of the hardest part in 4v4 while ur base is getting alot of presure... after that - no more attacks till they have tanks...
have u seen some1 quit attacking ISDF base just because he have a gun tower?
u can even strafe kill a gt
and rainbow a gt (Although u can hover [1.2]GS need TONS of air skills though)
GS is much more eficent then a GT at defending...
to get a gt u need power + relay + gt
what happends if ur power is getting attacked while u only have relay? or as i said before.. the con building the relay getting attacked?
thats the worries isdf have when trying to get a gun tower up while scions warry about their pools and constructor
no need to bring the GS vs GT conversion here
back to topic...
gurdiens are better and as darkfox said even ken said it might be a mistake
i think another thing that differs scions from isdf is the cost... (like gt vs gs)
ion is more efficent in early stages then mini and gauss is more efficent then chain
while the GS is more efficent then GT
both GS and gurdians should cost more then the ISDF rats and gts