Apparently you can still wobble kill and hover kill turrets in 1.3. The turrets do not have a higher arc or will not use the higher arc. The gun towers will not shoot at enemy ships until the person has wobble killed it or hover killed it.
The scav issue that I had posted about before is a major problem in games.
Some please respond about the scav issue and let me know that a dev is on it.
Check the arcs again, this guy I was playing against was hovering above the turret and the turret was looking at the ground, I told the turret to hold and it did nothing.
arcs havent changed nubbin..
Quote from: MichaelThe scav issue that I had posted about before is a major problem in games.
Some please respond about the scav issue and let me know that a dev is on it.
What scav issue? Please point me to that post or you can re-elaborate here.
technoid, here is the link to the scav post I made.
http://bzuniverse.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=20741&highlight=#20741
Let me know what you think.
That's a strange one alright. Seems to be based off lag. If it can be reproduced, then there's a chance of it getting figured out, if not already.
Actually technoid it has been reproduced. I was in a game on the moon shroud, and AV got into a scav and tried to deploy it at the base pool. Same thing happend to him that happend to me on the big moon map. So it definatly does happen a lot.
Good. Hold on to all the details then for the devs to look at. Does the log say anything peculiar as well?
I am not sure how to read the log, but if you tell me I will be sure to save it.
However, who are the devs, who should I be telling? Because I have found some other stuff too, like an pathing AV . . .
Several of us have run into the pathing AV. Just posting the AV won't help solve the problem. The devs need to know how to cause the AV so they can see what is going wrong quickly.
I know what hover killing is...but what is wobble killling??
quickly jostling left and right to avoid guntower shots.
OK....now i got something to call that strat :-P thanks a lot
Quote from: DarkFoxquickly jostling left and right to avoid guntower shots.
When did things like this become bugs? IMO its just something someone skilled at the game is able to do..
skilled? clicking A and D does not require skills
Thats like saying pressing down the mouse button to win a dogfight doesnt require skill.
lost ya...
Anyone in the know know if gun towers became anti wobbable again in the latest incarnation of the 1.3 beta? And if they have not then at least tell me turrets will shoot straight up.
Might not require skill but it doesn't look like a bug, sure GT could use something against these repeated things, but hey, their just automatic defenses themselves!
I never ever considered the wobbling a bug. Here is some back-up to the reasons WHY I think wobble-killing should be allowed:
Gunspire:
Cost: 75
Health: 6500
Build: Anywhere
Damage to scouts: 500 / second
Damage to tanks: 250 / second
Damage to heavy: 125 / second
Guntower:
Cost: 50 + 10 (power)
Health: 5000
Build: Bunker
Damage to scouts: 714 / second
Damage to tanks: 542 / second
Damage to heavy: 214 / second
The extra health on a gunspire is nice, but it certainly doesn't make up for the *huge* damage of the guntower. Likewise building anywhere is a *very* nice bonus, but by recycling the commbunker it's possible to get a guntower build at a pool for only 50+30 scrap, which with the bz2 scrap system usualy ends up cheaper than a spire. As base defenses, the guntower is much cheaper and much more powerful.
So I sit back and ask myself... WHY is the guntower so much better than the spire? Then I remember, the spire shots don't travel through the air... that must be it.
All wobblekilling does is exploit the weakness of a guntower. I personally believe what FE did was perfect - making wobblekilling possible only at about 160m+, so that chains can't be used to wobble a tower, but removing wobbling completely is removing the biggest weakness of the tower. In that case it's price would be too low for the devastating guntower you're getting.
And if you're having trouble with people wobbling your towers - just build a rocket tank by them. Not only will it go a huge way to defend against heavy armour like maulers, it will also stop your tower from being wobblekilled. Added bonus: It functions as anti-air to stop your base being hovered.
It perplexes me that when people see something that's beating them, they come and call them 'bugs' on the board rather than give a little thought to some game strategy and come up with a counter.
Quote from: Aegeis...And if they have not then at least tell me turrets will shoot straight up.
Wobbling gun towers *not* a cheap ass tactic? The main reason I got involved with FE 3 years ago is to fix that ridiculous bug. Comparing towers to spires is a specious argument that has no bearing on the matter at all.
A giant heavy armor gun tower hurling globs of deadly plasma at a *scout class* no-armor unit should not succumb while the scout gets away with 10% damage. That's the most blatant imbalance in the entire freakin game.
.
u can hover kill a gs as well :D
Boobs, stop syaing that cuz u dind't do it that game, u landed on the globe and killed that thing LOL! :lol:
As I stated, I don't think wobble should be removed completely, but I *do* think that the fixes you did for FE were the perfect solution... Still allowing missile scouts and scion arc scouts to wobble a tower to death, albeit with a fair bit of damage, and removing the ability for low-tech units like empty chainscouts to do so.
Thing is, as I said, a single rocket tank fixes things.
In starcraft when a zerg player builds only sunken colonies, you can destroy them with 1 cheap air unit without taking a hit. - They need a spore colony to help the sunken.
In starcraft a cloaked unit can entirely destroy a commbunker. You need a missile turret to detect cloaked units for you.
In command and conquer you can destroy an obelisk with 1 walker, or a sam site with one grenadier. You need the two to back each other up.
In Total annihilation you can destroy an intimidator with a single gunship... They need defenders for anti-air.
My point: In every strategy game there are examples of defenses needing backup from other units. There will be no strategy LEFT in BZ2 if everything that isn't a stand-up dogfight or outranging base defense gets regarded as lame, but that's the way we're headed here.
The fault isn't in a unit having 1 or many major weaknesses (that's strategy). The fault is with how unavailable the rocket tank is at that stage of the game, and how easily the turret that backs up a tower can be dispatched. The fix you offered, TV, making guntowers unwobbleable below about 160m range, was perfect, since it stopped chains, SP, quill... The weapons that are available early and do horrific damage to heavy armour.
My annoyance isn't with those that oppose wobble-killing, it's with those that don't realise that you actually need some unit strategy to defend against certain tactics. It's as if 90% of battlezone2 players don't know what unit strategy is at all.
Oh, and in-closing:
QuoteA giant heavy armor gun tower hurling globs of deadly plasma at a *scout class* no-armor unit should not succumb while the scout gets away with 10% damage.
I'm of the opinion that the biggest disadvantage of being slow and heavy and firing big heavy globs of deadly plasma, is having a fast, nimble unit dodge your big globs with his agility, and gun you down while doing it. Just a thought...
QuoteBoobs, stop syaing that cuz u dind't do it that game, u landed on the globe and killed that thing LOL!
that was probably rob... he does that alot from what i heard... you can hover (yes hover! - from side to side) and the spire will miss... i can do it perfact in 180m but then my chains wont hit... but if i got full i can shad it from 180 m in air... u can also do it 160 or something like that so ur chains will hit (i know chains is not 160... but its the edge kill thingy :P) but its quite harder
I agree with Dark fox entirely (and was about to make esentially the same post). This is another case where the fixes in FE are needed to be returned to 1.3.
FE was a leap in the right direction.
I guess I should clear that up. When I first heard about FE, the first post I ever made on their board was to request that wobble killing be addressed. Then I joined the beta team when they replied postively. Pastell designed/implemented the fix I believe, by doubling the shot speed. This does work fine, but in my opinion it's overkill and altered mcurtain strategies too greatly. Also it is nearly impossible to wobble them, and I dont think it should be impossible, just not *free* or a mere 10% health loss.
So in ZST I think we got it just right, only 20% faster shotspeed so mcurtains not affected badly, and bigger ground splash damage vs scouts. This still allows skillful wobblers the chance to beat up GTs, but makes it cost a fair price it so it's no longer "cheap" (low or no cost for results).
I understand about all the teqchiques of multiple units defending, but the point is it ruins the game if the only winning strategy is to race for chains with a lighlty defended base and rape the gts and builders with $20 chain empties.
True balance is if a commander chooses GTs before a fac and arm and still has a roughly equivalent chance of winning if teams are even.
...In FE a chain rush really is not the best option. Esp vs hadeans. And that is with the current rev.c.
EDIT : I think that the current 'double fire' solution works perfectly. Your suggestion seems to be a little bit over kill. Not much mind. Also, just like in real war, offenciveness should be *slightly* more rewarded than being defencive. Again, current FE solution seems best.
OT:
Quote$20 chain empties
u can buy em in USA?! WHERE?!
back to topic:
well, i go for tank rush, and --> chain rush on the way =P
i either tank rush or walker rush :D
id have to say i prefer ZST soultion rather then FE one... cant point out the reasons... the faster gt also helps against pummel rushs... while in FE u can have the rec def for that... more to add the faster gts are way better at killing pesky hovers while in FE u can hover almost with np...
there are few ways u can wobble kill a gt in ZST though... but not with a empty chain scout
Quoteid have to say i prefer ZST soultion rather then FE one... cant point out the reasons... the faster gt also helps against pummel rushs... while in FE u can have the rec def for that... more to add the faster gts are way better at killing pesky hovers while in FE u can hover almost with np...
You're getting mixed up phoenix - the FE guntower shots travel at 2.0 times the normal speed... the ZST tower shots fire at 1.2 times the normal speed.
It's the fe towers that make flying hard.
hehe i mean the fire rate... if you hover a ZST gt it shoots faster (40% right?) and the skies are full with plasma... making it look faster :P
its harder to hover ZST gts compared to FE gts, because its enough for 1 sudden move that the gt will miss while in ZST its just full of plasma... or at least what it looks like.. also - because it shoots faster u die alot faster :P
1.2 Guntower:
Fire rate: 2 shots per second
Travel speed: 100m/s
Hit damage: 250 / 190 / 75
Ground explosion damage: 100 / 70 / 40
Size of ground explosion: 20
FE guntower:
Fire rate: 1.43 shots per second
Travel speed: 200m/s
Hit damage: 250 / 190 / 75
Ground explosion damage: 100 / 70 / 40
Size of ground explosion: 20
ZST Guntower:
Fire rate: 2 shots per second
Travel speed: 130m/s
Hit damage: 250 / 190 / 75
Ground explosion damage: 250 / 70 / 40
Size of ground explosion: 19
ZST turrets are the biggest deterrant to hovering. In FE, the big hover deterrant is recdefense.
ZST towers put out more damage/second, and seriously hurt scouts that try to wobble them. FE towers bulltets travel faster, but do the least damage of all guntower versions per second.
My favourite towers would be a version of the ZST towers that did a bit less hit damage, because I think guntowers do too much damage. ZST wasn't supposed to be a racial balance device though, so it's beyond the purpose of ZST, which was designed to tone down hovering and wobbling, not balance the 2 races.
If you really wanted the races to have a unique feel, one would give the guntower shots a 'mortar' class and tweak it so that they seemed more liked they 'threw' heavy globs of plasma at the enemy.
The twin linked fire looks and feels much better imo, and it also makes it harder to wobble kill.
Perhaps a toned down damage, give it a mortar class (new 1.3 AI can aim with it properly) and a slightly larger splash damage that specifically harms the scouts a bit more (not as much as ZST mind).
That would be an interesting solution...
are u sure the ZST gts doesnt shoot 40% faster?
Check out the figures I just posted - it shoots faster than the FE tower, and it's bullet fly quicker than the 1.2 plasma... so sort-of, yeah.
Jesus! All I want to know is if the current 1.3 turrets shot up vertically. Dayum @ this odf lesson :evil:
i thought the fire rate was 40% faster hmm :s
Aeg - I left the 1.3 beta team, so I'm not sure.
Flying is still a bug and perversion. The designers (who were on BZ2 from day 1) thought that nothing could fly. Turrets can't aim up because "nothing can get there." That's empirical proof that flying wasn't supposed to be in the game.
All you flying-addicts are refusing to face reality.
-- GSH
lol
did u even read it? or u just though "oh defense killing they gotta be talking about hovering"
Aegeis is hijacking this thread, not me. And, I responded as to why turrets (still) don't aim up-- FLYING IS A BUG AND A PERVERSION.
Deal with it.
-- GSH
Nice one GSH. You showed us about 'reality' ey? :lol:
Quote from: GSHAegeis is hijacking this thread, not me. -- GSH
:?
How am I hijacking this thread? The thread is *about* hover killing and wobble killing.
Quote from: GSHThe designers (who were on BZ2 from day 1) thought that nothing could fly. Turrets can't aim up because "nothing can get there."
No actually that just makes me realize that no one tried putting a turret against a cliff or hill to hide it from passersby and figured that maybe the turret should aim up to defend itself if someone were to try and use said cliff to take pot shots at the turret. It also makes me realize that no one even tried to make a flying jump off of a cliff and thought that they may use that as a strategy to kill the turret cuz it can't aim up that high.
Look Aegis, i think you just have to accept that any logic that does not come from GSH's mouth is automatically incorrect. He is the master of logic and knows all.
He is also very observent between the difference between 'WOBBLE' and 'HOVER'.
But hey, why let little details like that get in the way when you are a self proclaimed '' Battlezone II god '' :lol:
I'm not trying to get into an arguement with him. GSH is a genious at doing all he can for this patch. I know he really feels hes helping and he is, I really believe it. Its just how hot all these issues have become that's got everyone rattled and aggravated. I got over it.
All I'm saying is its justified for a turret to aim vertical for those things I just mentioned irregardless if ships can hover or not. This game lets ships take flying leaps off of cliffs and hills, it makes sense for a turret to be able to track and aim 180 degrees to keep up.
I agree Ageis, turrets should point up for reasons that have absolutly nothing to do with hovering/flying/that bug.
If GSH actually listened he might of realised by now that i have always disliked hovering.
Well, now that that is sorted we can go back to the orginal topic before GSH started using caps and told us how wrong we were.
And that orignal topic is *wobble* killing GT's and how to balence them out so they are not too powerful, are vunerable to wobble killing...but only at certain ranges...etc.
I brought up the whole "a Scout shouldn't be able to kill a GT" bit long ago and was soundly thrashed for doing so. There are two opposed mind-sets playing this game and neither will accept the other side's view easily.
The DMers think any ship/weapon combo should be able to defeat any other ship/weapon combo, including Base Buildings, when operated by a skilled player. This comes from an "only SKILL matters" point of view and is correct for an FPS.
The Straters think that each ship/weapon combo has a niche, possibly even a single specific use, fitting into a gameplay that revolves around countering specific strategies. They don't mind illogical restrictions such as "can only shoot AIR units" or "can't be harmed by energy, only ballistics". They LIKE tech trees and research. This is how RTS games are, so once again they have the correct mind-set for their chosen play style.
Unfortunately BZ/BZ2 is a HYBRID game, combining parts of both. I personally feel that every time DM/Strat comes head to head the Strat loses to the louder DMers, but that's MY hang up. :p
-Av-
I believe I made a similar statement about GTs a year ago, so I agree with DF :) I would've gave the GTs a shotspeed of 140 to counter wobbling, tho.
Yeah, and GSH, that is OT. If you want to talk about flying, please start another thread. Thank you :)
Gosh its re-assuring to realize that you can drift away from BZ 2 games for a couple weeks, or the boards for a couple months and when you come back....players are still Biaotching things they both do and don't know about(myself included).
It's been said many times that there were always "reasoned" ways to achieve better balance in BZ 2, and many of those approaches were tried in FE(and in some ways successful) and further tweaked in ZST and there(i personally believe) a better "balance" of gameplay and vehicle physics and weapons strengths was found.
but 1.3 took very little of the "reasoned" appraoches...in spite of many well intentioned efforts.
"All you flying-addicts are refusing to face reality. "
Nathan...Give it up! we aren't bitching about hovering, or your mania too prevent it...we're talking about unit balance(ooooh there's that Dirty word!) and some of the many factors that can effect it....BZ 2 life is not soley confined to hovering, or the lack there of.
Hilarious. We're not talking flying here GSH. Feel free to ignore all balance topics, or stick a 'flying=bad GSH=Good' post on every single one of them. 1.3, in turn, will be rubbish.
You *need* players that enjoy strategy and DM giving you feedback, your attempts to squash them all in favour of adding the many tweaks you do will not help 1.3. The 'balance' issue is the single most important thing affecting the popularity of 1.3 now that you've firmly told everyone flying is removed. Please don't remove balance as you did flying, with that pathetic 'I know I just don't care' attitude that (which reminds me of playground mentality after losing all reason in an argument you clearly can't back-up your own stance in).
Avatar's post is *spot on*. The solution is to create a game where any weapon ship/comb can kill any other unit /ship etc....but!
It becomes extremely diffult, or more importantly *time consuming* to use a non-optimised weapon.
For exmaple a very skilled scout piolet should be rewarded for pushing the doging weapon abilty of it to its extreme. A reward is a kill.
However, this must be held in check by the fact that it is easier/faster to use another higher tech weapon/ship. For exmaple, someone can kill a turret with a chain scout at point blanc, even if it is covered by other tanks. HOWEVER , it is much easier just to shoot them down with mdm. But mdm is harder to aquire...two pools, etc etc.
FE has bascially done this as much as possiable in 1.2. *every* weapon is useful, *no* ship is over looked....but the rewards of stratergy are only unlocked via skill.
I think 1.3 should adopt as much from FE as possiable, so much effort went into balencing it that it would be a waste not to do it. And in FE flying really is not an affective thing to do (esp with the new rec def) that with 1.3 disableing flying...well...its perfect.
The overall balance of FE was rejected for this reason: FE has 3 races. BZ2 does not. Things fixed for the third race may have huge imbalances.
People who talk "balance" (this means you, WD) rarely get off their ass to *DO* anything. Thus, there's zero respect. 1.3 has a perfectly functional way of selecting alternate recyclers, why have people done jack with that? If they wanted things to maybe get picked up, submitting completed work might be a start. Right now, their "I talk, you do the work" (once again, this means you, WD) attitude gets zero respect.
And read the changelog for some specific balance issues WD *CAUSED* during 1.3's development (revoked before release). [E.g. moving the mauler up the build tree] Despite his public protestations, the issues where he was listened to were a freaking disaster. He keeps claiming he gets no respect. Well, when he talks more than he does, and his suggestions are dead wrong, he's earned a trip to my "useless" list.
-- GSH
Well, we all have our strengths.
WD's is playing and analysis, not modding. Then again a lot of Modders have their own ideas about what's fun, not always shared by *experienced* players... (I'm trying here, TV, I'm trying... ) :)
What I've suggested in the past is that WD and a few like-minded straters team up with modders like Greenheart and tweak their own set of ODF's up.
-Av-
I think GreenHeart is a little busy with his 20th Century mod at the moment.
I remember one thing people were upset about, during 1.3 beta testing, was the fact that the Rocket Tank automatically targets the bomber, unlike it did in 1.2. They said that the commander had to tell the Rocket Tank to attack the Bomber, and from that point on, that Rocket Tank would automatically target incoming bombers. I personally like the change, I don't know about the majority of players though.
There was also the MDM mortars bouncing off of spires and gun towers, which was fixed. A toggle for that would have been cool, so mod makers had the ability to make MDMs bounce off of specific defenses and not others.
There may have been more complaints. The Service Trucks have been address with the Recycler Selection screen. That was the source of a lot of conflict during the beta. It is nice that both sides can have their way now.
I'm sure DarkFox, TimeVius, Aegeis, Wardog, and the rest of the vets could point out the blatant inbalances that come up in human vs. human strats.
Quote1.3 has a perfectly functional way of selecting alternate recyclers, why have people done jack with that?
I'll tell you why I *personally* haven't played with this: I'm waiting for the 1.3 public release...
If I change something you don't like, I run the risk of silly fixes like the air-damage making it into the final release. If I don't tell you what I'm going to do with it until 1.3 is released, then you don't have any power to decide whether what I want to make is allowed or not.
I'm not sure about the other players though, some of them are indeed 'all talk', and some of the 'all-talkers', if listened to, can make a profound contribution to a balancing procedure. Hemp and WD are both 'all talk', and are both invaluable assets to any beta team. I hope to god they join the beta team and talk lots when I start tweaking FE strat balance for 1.3.
Its called ZTV and it preserves midair maneuverability. Although thats not to say that the future 1.3 patch will allow for more maneuverabilty then the PB1 patch. PB1 physics are not horrible, but I can see myself going back to 1.2 in the future simply for a break from 1.3 PB1s slightly overbearing (at times) physics code.
I tried to comprehend the physics logics of 1.2 and 1.3 and while it took me about 30 minutes to hypothesize whether 'gravity' was a function of a fixed downwards *acceleration* or a fixed downwards *top speed* and just exactly what limited downwards gravity, and where raw values were used vs. a percentage of maximum total. Whether individual thrusters accel is lowered, or whether gravity worked against them instead.
Seems like the 1.2 engine asserts a maximum downward speed of gravity that works counter to your thrusters, where the gravity acceleration kicks in to about 25 m/s and the percentage of remaining thrust is allowed for upwards acceleration. What it probably shouldve done was continue to increase grav acceleration after it hits its 25m/s threshold and say add 10% every 5 seconds and compounding on to that. Thus making your ship heavier and heavier but not cutting out your thrusters (allowing you to also control your rate of descent to some degree)
1.3PB1 physics were impossible for me to 'figure out', since that a lot of work went into rewriting a physics engine that could eliminate infinite flying while preserving maneuverability (though not entirely successful), it seems that the code was made a little more difficult to comprehend in the process.
Of course, i'm just talking and being useless, but I wanted to say that anyways.
Que : drum roll... This is a classic!
QuoteThe overall balance of FE was rejected for this reason: FE has 3 races. BZ2 does not. Things fixed for the third race may have huge imbalances.
*badum- CHING!*
:lol:
You really have revelaed your lack of knowladge about stratergy in this one GSH. If you had any idea of how FE was balenced you would know it was balenced like this
First the Scions vs EDF was fixed.... (changes made to EDF)
Then Edf vs Hadean....(changes made to Hadean)
Then Hadean vs Scion (changes made to scion)
Then all the way back to the orginal loop again. This is because the stratergy games were Team 1 vs Team 2. This method resulted (after a great deal of work, e.g. *doing*) in all of the races being very balenced
Simultaneously.
As in...one race vs another. To say that Scions and ISDF are not balenced better in FE than they are in 1.2, let alone 1.3 is
Laughable. Infact i burst out laughing when i read your post!
Hell, we are not even asking you to DO work, we are asking you to let US do the work FOR you. Affectivly if you want your 1.3 patch to be anything more than a '' nice game, shame the balence is so screwd its pointless/boring/repetitious '' your going to have to ask for '' a black check in time '' from US, people like WarDog and I.
So much for 'useless'. Look GSH, your a logistics master, not someone who comprehends the subtle and fluidic nature of stratergy/tactics etc.
In the real world they tried to run a war though logistics, and they ended up with World War I. A big huge long ditch with idiotic generals who thought they could win because '' never mind all that rubbish about subtlety and a lack of absolutes, we have 1.3445% more bullets than they do! Charge! ''.
Adding the massive improvements FE made to 1.2 and inculding them in 1.3 is a *very* good idea.
Deal with it.
Darkfox, there is no air damage. It was an experiment. I personally agree with you about it being a bad thing, and I'm sure a lot, if not most people, agree with you on that. Personally I liked 1.3 Public Beta's physics, the option for modders to reintroduce hovering was there. The only problem was that the stock mortar bike was still able to hover. If no stock units were able to hover, and at the same time, if there was the option to make custom units that could hover, that would be great. That way, pro hoverers could create their own recycler for their games, while those opposed to hovering would have their own recycler without any hovering units. Just to be clear, when I said hovering, I meant static hovering. I did not mean I wanted all units to be treaded or walking :). I just wanted to make sure that was clear.
"People who talk "balance" (this means you, WD) rarely get off their ass to *DO* anything. Thus, there's zero respect.
If you recall dimwit, YOU chose to boot me from beta testing because I tried to at least keep the idea that "balance is a critical issue" in any game/mod/patch alive...instead of your Chicken Little "The Balance is falling! The Balance is falling! Phobia.
But admittedly, by that stage any enthusiasm or desire I had to help in your "Thou Shalt Not Hover Dictum Above All Other Aspects Of Gameplay!" had long since burned me out. That Burnout I'm sure is shared by virtually all of the MP Strat players who had to deal with you in the closed beta. I commend those who stuck it out, they have my sympathies.
Another reason I chose to take no part in any continuing work on 1.3 is because of the rumored obsessive efforts you will go through to prevent future 1.3 Modders to tweak physics to a fashion that we like...You yelled from the highest moutain since the day 1.3 glimmered in the back of your mind "1.3 will be highly Moddable to give players the options to play the way they like!"..Well what is the one thing you insanely, and obsessively work to prevent?..The abilities of the modders to tweak vehicle physics. If you'd just drop that I would sit patiently and let you finish whatever else you feel needs work on 1.3 and when you were done, I'd feel comfortable working with whatever modder is out there to create Mod 1.3 to a degree that it will be popular, because I tell you point blank, in my judgement 1.3 will never become the MAIN version of BZ 2...Soley because of your vehicle physics (yes I know Ken did them, But YOU Directed the "THOU SHALT NOT HOVER!" edict).
The only hope 1.3 has is in the hands of the modders.
And Just for fun, Who the Hell are you to comment about the balance of FE? or its' degree of success?...You've never even played a MP strat game vs real players. Last time I checked..(about 10 minutes ago, there's still 3 or 4 FE games running eachnite...1.3?..lucky if you find 1..and if you do, it's most likely a MPI because for many (like me) 1.3 MP strat is virtually unplayable(but even if it was playable for me..I wouldn't play it)And we told you all along, in 1.3 you've created a mpi players dream, but killed the dream for many BZ 2 humanstrat players.
"1.3 has a perfectly functional way of selecting alternate recyclers, why have people done jack with that? If they wanted things to maybe get picked up, submitting completed work might be a start. Right now, their "I talk, you do the work" (once again, this means you, WD) attitude gets zero respect."
Once again Nathan...we asked, we pleaded we cajoled we suggested.It got us nowhere.
Ask Me to do the work Nathan?...Yeah...thats brilliant, I do my work in a Courtroom...not on a laptop...I wouldn't last 30 seconds in your vocation same as you wouldn't last 30 seconds in mine. expectations of players like me of sending you "finished" work is just foolishness.
I've seen some of the work of BZ 2's best Modders, and It was a pleasure. I've found a great joy in playing some of the SP mods out there recently, and toying around with MP game with my 10 year old son Someday, if I ever feel the desire to get involved with 1.3 it will be through their projects and it will be done in a spirit of collaborative discussion.
And don't forget Nate, I still got that Link to Amazon anytime you need it.
Bashing GSH gets you nowhere, don't feed the trolls guys.
This topic has given me some thoughts on where to go with the next FE guntowers (somewhere in-between FE and ZST), and for that I thank you.
hehe, but being bashed by nathan is cool, df?
GSH is great at programming, but absolutly hoote at dealing with people. Esp when it comes to creating organised structures where the strengths and weaknesses of people can be combined to create an overall achivement
That was a nice way of putting it.
So, now....the distraction caused by GSH on this thread is *over*
BACK To wobbeling guntowers!
Quote from: GSHFlying is still a bug and perversion. The designers (who were on BZ2 from day 1) thought that nothing could fly. Turrets can't aim up because "nothing can get there." That's empirical proof that flying wasn't supposed to be in the game.
All you flying-addicts are refusing to face reality.
-- GSH
Aircraft class, apc class, bomber class, pilot hover packs, archers are all clearly intended to be at an altitude above ground level. Empirical evidence?
A scout in 1.3 can hover a turret or just sit on top of it indefinitely. So how does 1.3 change anything at all?
This main thrust of this thread is about wobble killing GTs, a cheaper bug than flying is, yet apparently *entirely* ignored by the developers. So I am supposed to take this as empirical evidence that wobbling is approved of?
Now now, there's been enough bashing around these boards to last a lifetime.
Can't we all just pop a beer and get along???
(http://home.comcast.net/~bz-avatar/beer2.jpg)
-Av-
QuoteCan't we all just pop a beer and get along???
Unfortunately I'm sure a good portion of the community can't do the first legally, myself included. Getting along sounds good. The boards have been relatively peaceful for a while, hopefully they continue to stay that way. If not, us mods will have some work on our hands :).
You know..I changed my Nick to "FeebleEffort" because I just got sick of trying to hard to make others see the points and understand what virtue can come from years of playing this game from myself and many others. I just don't feel like trying that hard anymore.
It reached the point where every post was a arguement, and every element of what made BZ 2 1.2 such a fun game was getting changed without rhyme, reason (and god knows explanation). So Avatar, yes things have been peaceful lately...I'll recess into my new self directed prozac-like message board personna and sit back and watch. And let the peacefull-ness multiply. My Beers have long since been popped.
But in the end, I still see the ultimate issue of GT balance will be in the hands of the Modders.
I think it would be best to leave balance to modders that part of the testing process. Modders like DarkFox and TimeVirus seem to be the best at balance since they have plenty of experience with Rev. C and other balance projects. I'm if more that participated in FE would help out, a lot could get accomplished. Even if 1.3 wasn't the same as 1.2, there would be a chance of reaching a balance that vets could accept.
If it's as much fun as fe and 1.2 to play then i imagine getting people to help with balance wont be a problem. :D
QuoteModders like DarkFox and TimeVirus seem to be the best at balance since they have plenty of experience with Rev. C and other balance projects.
DarkFox was the one that controled the beta process for FE rev.c and he is the one who is by far the most likly to control rev.d.
Time Virus left the rev.c project before it was completed.
I know Hemp. I participated in the beta process. I didn't put in as much time as you did due to testing 1.3 at the same time. I'm the one who sent the nadir fix files to Timevirus so it was basically playable in deathmatch. I think I sent in some inf files before you sent in yours too. I can't remember.
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?
To me it seems logic turrets can't shoot up for the simple reason they would have to make one part of the turret be inside another part, meaning they use the same space (not ammount, location). Witch is impossible. (Shortly, some parts prevent them from shooting straight up).
They seem like anti-ground defense, we've got archers and roket tanks for air defense, so I don't get the point.
Wobble kill. Av said it, but Scout fits in both descriptions. The scout is the gun-tower killer. For a better defense combine with laser turrets (Ok I don't know the range, maybe that's a fixme) or rocket whatever (because it isn't important what to use, as long as it has long-range, tracking rockets).
That post did not make much sense at all, gramatically or stratergically, imo.
And the 'reason' for turrets not pointing upwards? they are *turrets*. As in *turreted defence units*. its ridiculas to think they should not be able to at least point *upwards*. Not nessesarily straight up, but still.
huscar, it happend in ZST and no1 cares about the gfx or what so ever... people like it
because once we do something in the current version (like df said) it might be taken off because nathan doesnt agree with that...
e.g, we made a rec that make flying scouts --> nathan threatened to take that away and the air dmg got in for awhile (or was gonna get in)
hehe, laser turrets are uselss, 110 range ur best guess will be mini cause of the range (148)
rckt tank is even more uselss then laser turrets, get VIR
and for both units - u can just stand the other side of the gt so the turret / rocket tank / whatever u have there will be blocked by the gt
Turrets should point straight up. There is no sane reason for them to not (execpt if you have a specific agenda).
Flying is neither a bug or a perversion.
ZST turrets are excellent.
Huscar sounds like a fool in the 'turrets shouldnt point straight up' rubbish.
Why post that nonsense?? Play some strats Huscar in order to understand
the issues of wobblekilling here.
A minigun rattler works, a laser one does not. Its the range.
Rocket tanks are a valid anti-wobble defence, in that if placed near a GT
they dissuade empties and by using VIR the fullscouts are not always
able to kill the GT before they run out of ammo, or may find something
more worthwhile to do. It is partly psychological.
Vets made a recycler option for this first 1.3 public beta which
produced flyable scouts with extra agaility over the wierdly
sluggish 1.3 stock scouts.
Nathan immediately planned to ruin that mod for his next release.
Do not trust what he says, he lies.
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-
Quoteyou'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.
[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]
QuoteI 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.
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)
You know, it may be possible via AI params to make guntowers stop overcompensating their aim when being wobbled. That gives me an idea :)
yeah its simple
You just ad another '' target lead position'' on top of the current one, it means they aim better in *all* situations.
What are you talking about JWK? Is it an ODF setting or something?
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?
Quote from: DarkFoxQuoteI 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.
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.)
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.
Quote from: AvatarHe 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-
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.
Quote from: Zero AngelSome 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 :)
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.
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.
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
QuoteI do it, you do it, everyone does it.
And this is where you are wrong.
Also, how come you demand that people are polite to GSH when he is not to them? GSH is the cause of most of the flaming. His harsh blunt 'manner' is bad, but its indirect/direct insults and total disreguard for people who disagree with him that causes the flaming. us 'vets' do not WANT flaming.
The idea that we are all ment to bow down and take his word on anything at all whilst he quite litterally spits on us is totally hypocyritical and unacceptable.
And, incase you *still * have not gathered, i dont like flying.
Quote from: Zero Angel
Scions have no such weakness, which is just another reason to pick them instead of ISDF.
I dont think thats entirely true because you can hide under the lung of a spire and not get hit which is a weakness. But its the same as ISDF a turret fixes the problem right away.
All that kind of stuff has been adressed in FE.
Spires certainly don't have the weakness as much as ISDF towers do, even when wobble is addressed. The best balance approach is fix towers so that they are not useless (make them filter out a good few enemy units), but keep their weakness since they are only 50 scrap to replace, rather than 75, and do far more damage than spires.
or just use the ZST gurdiens :D
In combination with 1.3 physics? that would just be far far to harsh. One would end up with pure turret wars.
:D
I don't demand anything. I can't. It's just advice from someone who cares about BZ and his friends is all. What you choose to do is your choice.
You really just don't know the guy. I see offense being taken by some from what he says sometimes where I - and a lot of others - do not see any intended whatsoever. It's just a case of being overly sensitive from what I can see. So, your feelings got hurt because you interpreted what he said as rude/being insensitive? Tough. Want to *really* see how bad you've got it? Take a trip to the local cancer ward and see the little kids there. Or the ones with no legs or parents due to a drunk driver. There's so much whining going on from people who have no right whatsoever.
Cripes, the guy works horrendus, mind-numbing hours on pressure-fillled projects and then goes home and works for free for our benefit, so even if he does get a little impatient or short-tempered, couldn't you understand that? Even just a little? If not, try doing what he does sometime and then we'll talk.
To tell you the truth, if it were me instead of Nathan, people would beg to have Nathan back after I got done with them. I wouldn't be *nearly* half as nice as Nathan has been. Me or Tigger. We'd just tell anyone who gave us crap to sod off - and like it.
Guys, we're all going to *die*. Maybe today, maybe tomorrow, maybe 50 years from now. Why spend it bewailing perceived emotional injuries which are only superficial and virtual at worst?
Nobody really cares about your feelings or my feelings. Time to accept it and get used to it.
Quote from: Jwk the Hemp MonkeyQuoteI do it, you do it, everyone does it.
And this is where you are wrong.
Also, how come you demand that people are polite to GSH when he is not to them? GSH is the cause of most of the flaming. His harsh blunt 'manner' is bad, but its indirect/direct insults and total disreguard for people who disagree with him that causes the flaming. us 'vets' do not WANT flaming.
The idea that we are all ment to bow down and take his word on anything at all whilst he quite litterally spits on us is totally hypocyritical and unacceptable.
And, incase you *still * have not gathered, i dont like flying.
DF, I gotta hand it to you: You really know the tools you work with and know how to use them. I also understand where you're coming from about the necessity of having the defaults balanced. There's gotta be a level playing field to start with.
To me, there should be two steps to the patch: One to fix the bugs in the code and one to balance and tweak the units. Once the bugs are declared gone, you guys go to work on the balance issues. That way, Nathan and Ken don't get dragged into balance/physics issues and you are free to perform your balancing magic. Just a random thought I had, but thought I'd put it out there anyways.
Quote from: DarkFoxSpires certainly don't have the weakness as much as ISDF towers do, even when wobble is addressed. The best balance approach is fix towers so that they are not useless (make them filter out a good few enemy units), but keep their weakness since they are only 50 scrap to replace, rather than 75, and do far more damage than spires.
Oh that does it Red Devil. Your self-righteous
QuoteI see offense being taken by some from what he says sometimes where I - and a lot of others - do not see any intended whatsoever.
Thats because you are biased and quite frankly bigoted towards supporting GSH's 'right' to be insulting. It is totally unacceptable.
QuoteSo, your feelings got hurt because you interpreted what he said as rude/being insensitive? Tough.
Tough?! Bloody
Tough?! Who the hell do you think you are? Its not 'tough' that we have to deal with his rudeness and wordgames and little snide remarks. Its Totally unacceptable. You dont seem to understand this concept.
Que: Total bullhoot. This one REALLY pissed me off.
QuoteTake a trip to the local cancer ward and see the little kids there. Or the ones with no legs or parents due to a drunk driver. There's so much whining going on from people who have no right whatsoever.
Oh you complete PRICK. I
WORK in an
N.H.S. Hospital. How DARE you use exmaples of those brave people to somehow mean that a community in a *game* is ment to take some insults from some random *programmer*. Your self righteous bigoted nature... oh GOd i cannot evne TYPE how ANGRY i am at..ARGH!!!!!
You ... SMall Minded narrow CHILD. My dad is in hospital for a disease that has been making him very ill for seven years. And he has not ever be rude to ANYONE in his entire Life!
QuoteCripes, the guy works horrendus, mind-numbing hours on pressure-fillled projects and then goes home and works for free for our benefit, so even if he does get a little impatient or short-tempered, couldn't you understand that? Even just a little? If not, try doing what he does sometime and then we'll talk.
Big deal, he works hard. doesnt give him the right to insult other people. Directly or indirectly or WHATEVER.
QuoteTo tell you the truth, if it were me instead of Nathan, people would beg to have Nathan back after I got done with them. I wouldn't be *nearly* half as nice as Nathan has been. Me or Tigger. We'd just tell anyone who gave us crap to sod off - and like it.
Quite obviously you are not me.
QuoteNobody really cares about your feelings or my feelings. Time to accept it and get used to it.
Pah, weakling.
QuoteTo me, there should be two steps to the patch: One to fix the bugs in the code and one to balance and tweak the units. Once the bugs are declared gone, you guys go to work on the balance issues.
Oh right, but when we ask him to inculde the abilty to mod and rebalence and such, we are told that we should ask for 'blank checks of his time'.
Utter Hypocracy.
Edit: you should be banned from the fourms for two weeks for that comment about ill people. You.....you...Thats it. I am going away to calm down. Narrow minded Prick.
relax jwk, ur flamming more then me now =)
If you would still be a moderator and sb. else would have posted it, how would you have edited it? I think that it would be the first time you'd delete an entire message.
QuoteMy dad is in hospital for a disease that has been making him very ill for seven years. And he has not ever be rude to ANYONE in his entire Life!
Before posting make sure sb else reads what he wrote, because you are saying exactly the same!
Your dad isn't rude while all those guys around here ARE ever though they have much less probs, some ridiculous "I want it!" things. Get the point?
If I may point out something here:
Quote from: Jwk the Hemp MonkeyOh that does it Red Devil. Your self-righteous
Que: Total bullhoot. This one REALLY pissed me off.
Oh you complete PRICK.
Your self righteous bigoted nature... oh GOd i cannot evne TYPE how ANGRY i am at..ARGH!!!!!
You ... SMall Minded narrow CHILD.
Pah, weakling.
You.....you...Thats it. I am going away to calm down. Narrow minded Prick.
Obviously you became very upset with RD's comments, JWK. I've never seen you so emotional or so upset.
I do believe RD should apologize for the cancer comparison, it seems like comparing a firecracker to a nuclear bomb, but I think I see what he was saying and why he used such a hugely unfair comparison. He was trying to hammer home the point that it's silly to take such offense with Nathan compared with all the other ills in the world. While I share that feeling I think it could have been expressed better.
Still.... to continue my editing rampage:
Quote from: Red DevilCripes, the guy works horrendus, mind-numbing hours on pressure-fillled projects and then goes home and works for free for our benefit, so even if he does get a little impatient or short-tempered, couldn't you understand that? Even just a little? If not, try doing what he does sometime and then we'll talk.
Quote from: Jwk the Hemp MonkeyBig deal, he works hard. doesnt give him the right to insult other people. Directly or indirectly or WHATEVER.
Apparently, though, strong feelings gives you the right to insult RD. Tit for tat? Eye for an eye? Do unto others? Seems it's ok to be rude and insulting given good cause.
This is my point. We all have our triggers. We all have something that sets us off, especially given how vague the Internet and forumtalk can be and the lack of emotional context in most messages.
It's hard to get our meaning across sometimes, in the right way, or to find the right words to spell out our feelings. Text is just too bland for that... That's why these little guys :) were invented...
Anyway, I too seem biased towards accepting what Nathan says as 'not rude' because I don't try to read emotions into his messages. In fact, I get the feeling he's pretty cold when he's typing. I've seen only a few messages of his that struck me as being done under strong emotions. He's usually blunt and to the point, more like a cold, computer system error message than an impassioned, emotional message from an upset person.
I seriously think Nathan's been overly tolerant of this forum, and I do know that if I'd received the same crap he has after donating so much time and effort that I'd have been long gone, and to hell with this game and this group. I think it's amazing that he's still around, actually.
Anyway, none of this is intended to flame anyone, just to point out that we all have our weaknesses and that tolerance is always better than getting all worked up over such little things. Then again, we all have our own definitions of 'little things' as well.
-Av-
If the world ever unites under one nation Avatar should rule that nation.
nathan being cold - strightforward and stomping people on the way...
and thats being rude and some of you people let him walk on you as if he was your king...
lets say i was nathan (lol) i wouldnt have got so much crap complains... i would've listen to people and explain, not just tell em "i know how you feel but i dont care" and like everything in life, i might not like but ill do some stuff anyways (e.g... lets say i hate hover, but it seems the majority (if want not all) wants a hover switch - i would've made it even if i hate the fact that players will still hover)
Quote from: HuscarIf the world ever unites under one nation Avatar should rule that nation.
Lol, well, I've been accused of being pretty cold and unemotional myself. I find it hard to take anything personal online, given that the posters are scattered across the globe and will likely never actually get to know each other. It's unfair to judge people soley by their ability to express themselves in posts.
Quote from: PhoeniX-FlamElets say i was nathan (lol) i wouldnt have got so much crap complains... i would've listen to people and explain, not just tell em "i know how you feel but i dont care" and like everything in life, i might not like but ill do some stuff anyways (e.g... lets say i hate hover, but it seems the majority (if want not all) wants a hover switch - i would've made it even if i hate the fact that players will still hover)
You'd never be able to program one line if you did that. That's almost as bad as anything being done "by Committee".
At some point you'd be so full of having to explain every little thing or from having to constantly justify and defend your decisions that you'd lose it. Then it's all downhill to the rubber room... :)
-Av-
sure can, if nathan could've open his eyes, and accutly listen - we would've have a physics possiablty by now...
and thats just a small e.g
I am back, i have calmed down.
So, lets analyse something that makes me different from GSH. Yes, i get angry. Its true. But i see that previous post as a tempory thing which was bad. I accept that what avatar has said is correct. Even if my insults and comments were *fully* justified. Its not the point.
I will stil leave the post up, but only so that others can read it and understand the situation.
Now, With me i got angry and flamed. I then accept that it is bad and ajust to critism even though i was right.
On the other hand red devil and a few others consitantly and repeatedly defend GSH's apparent 'right' to being insulting/rude/etc etc etc. They also defend his right to 'decide' what needs to be done to the BZII game play above and beyoned mearly the programming and AV's etc etc. From ''being blunt'' to '' its nesseary '' to whatever other stuff has been said.
When he was critised what happened/happens is that his select few 'loyal followers' defend him even though he is blatently in the wrong.
Not to mention people were banned from the fourm for nothing more than polite critism.
Its unnessearily biased, its hypocyritcal and undesirable.
'' Deal with it. ''.
Its all good and well GSH making desicions, but acting like some kind of always-correct-100%-god is utterly simple rubbish imo.
He has no respect for other people, and THATS why i got angry in turn.
What did GSH expect the public beta to be? Everyone praising him and going on about how great his work is? Its good, sure. But it has also got a fair few problems as well. The reason we have a public beta is to address those problems.
Saying that it should be done '' bugs first '' and '' balencing second '' is flawed because the 'bugs' affect the balencing and all of the factors are interconnected.
This thread is a classic example of how GSH is utterly crap at managing the beta. The disscussion was going fine, he comes in...throws his weight around, causes a 3 page long flame war and then to make matters worse....red devil comes along and defends him for stuffing the process up.
I do not intend to tell GSH how to to programming, so why the hell should i expect him to tell me how to play the game and what factors need work and effort in them balencing wise?
GSH should be grateful i still come here after the crap i have recived.
Hmm... let me try this.
PF starts building a boat. It's going to be a sleek, fast little one-man boat.
Avatar comes up and says "Put two seats in it, that way we can both ride."
PF says "No, that'll slow it down and besides, the frame is already set up for one person."
Avatar says "But it'll be so much cooler if we can both ride."
So PF relents and with a little more work cobbles up two seats.
Then DF comes along and says "Put a bigger motor in so it can pull me water-skiing."
PF says "No, it can't hold that much gas and it's not meant for pulling."
DF says "C'mon, it's statistically more probable to pick up hot chicks when you're towing a water-skier."
This gets PF thinking, and he manages to add more fuel tanks and a bigger motor. (he thinks he can dump Avatar when a hot chick shows up. :) )
THEN, RD shows up and points out that the hot sun's going to fry Av's bald head and a canopy will be needed. "NO WAY" says PF, that's ridiculous for a speedboat." Av joins in with RD in insisting that a shade canopy be installed, and after four days and nights of whining PF finally gives in.
"OKOKOK, I'll add a canopy! Just let me get some sleep!!" :)
See what a nightmare that sort of development process is?
:lol:
-Av-
So the solution? make a boat that is moddable so DF can get his chicks, the couple can have a romatic evening and one guy doesnt get burnt...as long as DF buys the engine, the couple make the extra seat and one guy buys a canopy.
I am not asking GSH to do all the work for me, i an asking him to not have such a tight grip on the door that he forms BZII into only something that '' he sees fit ''. I am asking him the open the door so that *I* can do the work.
GSH has shown every indication of been a control freak. THATS the problem. It probably makes him a damned good programmer. but it has serious weaknesses in other arears.
@Avatar
LOL :D :P Thats
one way to put it :)
Quote from: Red DevilWant to *really* see how bad you've got it? Take a trip to the local cancer ward and see the little kids there. Or the ones with no legs or parents due to a drunk driver. There's so much whining going on from people who have no right whatsoever.
That is
low,
unjustified and
quite of an overstatement.
Quote from: PhoeniX-FlamEsure can, if nathan could've open his eyes, and accutly listen - we would've have a physics possiablty by now...
and thats just a small e.g
PF, I got news for you. GSH tried to put the 1.2 physics into the 1.3 code after the beta came out and guess what............They didn't work. It's not as simple as one may think.
Quote from: Jwk the Hemp MonkeyNot to mention people were banned from the fourm for nothing more than polite critism.
Hemp, Please show me 1 example of "polite critism" that resulted in that person being banned.
I'm probably going to get labeled GSH's biggest supporter for this but here goes anyway. I actually LMFAO at a good 75% of his responses to ppl, 10% of which I almost fall of my chair. I laugh not because I think it's "laughable rubbish" but because I genuinely find it funny.
i would do all that stuff if i could :D
and besides as jwk said, i would tell them if they want - they can do add themself as long as its capable to do it (e.g from bz2 -- hmmm making the buildings float)
hmm how come aegis and appel managed to do that with few simple odf twicks? + if GSH wants the 1.2 physics he wouldnt have kicked / banned (or whatever) appel from the chat and he wouldnt have said time to move to plan B air dmg bla bla bla
i got banned once - but i aint that polite :D
I see I need to clairify "physics".
I meant the "agility" part of the code, not h'ing. Appel was "excluded" from the IRC chanel because of refusing to shut up about h'ing being put back in thanks to the vet recy option.
Why are we doing this again?
Thread locked.
Just one thing to those critizicing GSHs competence in running a beta:
I work in product development. All your concern are irrelevant, even ridiculous.
I can tell that neither Jwk, nor Flamey have *ever* produced something in a professional context that has been bought by customers (yes, thats a loose definition of 'product'). I dont ask you to not talk about things you have no idea, but I ask you to stop accusing/critizicing people who have experience in doing what they're doing as opposed to you guys.
So, nobody puts up 'Flamey sucks' threads, so stop these 'GSH sucks' threads ok?
If you dont like something in the public beta, tell everybody what you dont like and move on. Your opinion is one of many.