|
I've counted a scout raider, a sub raider, an antisub raider, a heavy riot raider, and a heavy riot assault with an artillery sidearm. That's four raiders of all sorts, two mixed riots, and no pure assaults! I guess i much prefer this to having four types of artillery though.
+0 / -0
|
It was nice to see sea being dominated by (shotgun) Typhoons instead of subs.
+0 / -0
|
I really like that it shatters the "ships should be slow" paradigm.
+0 / -0
|
If you're interested in giving the branch a go, you can clone it from here into your \Zero-K\Games folder, then set !game zk:dev in a custom room. I would like to get some more opinions. [Spoiler]More 1v1 and small teams feedback is valuable, as is feedback from larger teams games where sea is one of multiple fronts (it's not been practical for me to test the latter thus far, but it is something that needs seeing.) The main wiki page of the fork has an overview of the changes. (It mostly doesn't have specific numbers yet since those are still in flux.) The tl;dr of what you need to know is: * Sonar range = vision range of mobile sea units and Urchin, jamming range of Vulture * Ships are reworked significantly enough to be difficult to tl;dr, Hover and Amph are largely unchanged to date * Underwater combat is still relevant but less dominant If you don't know what the word "clone" means: [Spoiler](1) download and install tortoisegit: https://tortoisegit.org/ (I will guess anybody using a non-Windows OS is sufficiently competent to find their own git interface) (2) open \zero-k\games in a file browser, right-click and press Git Clone (3) put https://github.com/Aquanim/Zero-K.git in the URL field and press OK (4) To pull future changes right-click the Zero-K.sdd folder and press TortoiseGit > Pull. Just pressing 'OK' might work here, or you might need to configure a thing or two. I'm not sure. or ask most anybody who's contributed to ZK in the past, they probably know more about Git than I do. Side notes: [Spoiler] Serpent is removed, probably permanently. Reef and Leviathan are disabled but may be re-worked and re-added. Sonar Station is owled into non-existence, it will be properly removed at some point. The Siren destroyer does not correspond to any previously existing unit, and I have neonstormed up a light carrier for if and when drone technology supports it.
I don't remember changing the stats of Mariner or Surfboard (yet) beyond giving them sonar, but all of the other ships have had at least one significant numbers tweak I think. Skeeter (-> Cutter), Snake (-> Seawolf), Crusader (-> Ronin) and Warlord (-> Shogun) are the ships which conform most closely to their old roles.
Many ships are renamed because (1) many were TA names (2) some no longer fit after rework and (3) to maintain consistency with other new names. I will live with the inevitable "bawwww" on this account. Hunter retains its name... it probably fits better after being made a raider.
+5 / -0
|
I love most of the changes, especially vision changes, cost and size/speed change. But I think that 800-ish metal cost sea artilery should have more visual punch. Compare it with Pillager, he has big size of plasma blob, cool sound. Crusader makes "pew". Maybe it could still make pew, but more often with less dmg per shot. It's not like it'll become riot if u increase its rate of fire :P
+1 / -0
|
I assume that balance is the primary concern for now, and the details about what things looks like come later.
+0 / -0
|
quote: I assume that balance is the primary concern for now, and the details about what things looks like come later. |
Mostly this. Some of the units probably want a full remodel in the long run (remodelling Hunter has been a meme for years), but I don't think there's a great deal of point in doing that until the overall unit design and balance has solidified. Making a new model, only for it to be not needed, sounds very frusturating. 3d art and effects are not my area of expertise so some of this stuff is likely to require other contributors. That being said, making the Cruiser projectile a bit more imposing is a comparatively much easier proposition. Its area of effect is I believe presently a little bit larger than that of the 550-metal Crusader; it's possible that could go up a little more as well but that is a number I am inclined to be very cautious about.
+0 / -0
|
I don't really like anything about that. Changing sea does not mean changing boats, and if anything boatfac needs changes far less than the other two seafacs. Shotgun boats also look stupid, as if we need more than one shotgun unit for sea. The reason nobody uses surface ships isn't necessarily that they suck, just that every other seafac sucks against subs more. If anything, fix amphs and hovers so that they at least have a skirmish/arty that can hit subs. If anything, fix commanders because currently they're completely defenseless when underwater. If anything make sonar cheaper, because a basic radar should not cost more than a vulture.
+0 / -0
|
I am going to suggest that people give it a try before offering sweeping design/balance opinions. [Spoiler]quote: Changing sea does not mean changing boats, and if anything boatfac needs changes far less than the other two seafacs. |
I disagree with this. Playing ship factory in the past has always felt thoroughly unfun to me. Hover and amph might want some changes, but they have to be carefully considered in the light of ground battles as well; they don't feel too bad on land and land-with-puddles kind of maps at the moment IMO. quote: Shotgun boats also look stupid, as if we need more than one shotgun unit for sea. |
They could be remodelled if that's the problem. Scallop does not use its shotgun while it is at sea. I have so far found it to be a more interesting unit than Typhoon. quote: The reason nobody uses surface ships isn't necessarily that they suck, just that every other seafac sucks against subs more. |
I am not really sure what this is saying. quote: If anything, fix amphs and hovers so that they at least have a skirmish/arty that can hit subs. |
At this point nothing has skirmish/arty that can hit subs. The idea is to make ships good enough against sub/amph that the surface battle is more important than the underwater one. Hovercraft may need more help against subs in the future but I am yet to settle on a reasonable thing to do to Claymore. quote: If anything, fix commanders because currently they're completely defenseless when underwater. |
I'm not inherently against this. quote: If anything make sonar cheaper, because a basic radar should not cost more than a vulture. |
Making sonar more like radar is a possible direction which sea design could take, and not one which I have discarded; if this does not work out I will revisit it. For now I've gone in the direction of making sonar even less like radar.
+1 / -0
|
[Spoiler]quote: At this point nothing has skirmish/arty that can hit subs. The idea is to make ships good enough against sub/amph that the surface battle is more important than the underwater one. |
In current sea serpent is an arty that can hit subs, and hunters are fairly skirmishy compared to any anti-sub weapon that amphs or hovers have. Such a change would just make amphs unplayable, since half the fac is pure subs and all of their units submerge when moving underwater. Commanders are also obligatory subs. FTR I don't think the surface/sub distinction is necessarily bad. It does add complexity, but at the same time the current biggest problem is a lack of diversity (from which solely shipfac is exempt). quote: Hovercraft may need more help against subs in the future but I am yet to settle on a reasonable thing to do to Claymore. |
The simplest thing to do is obviously to give scalpel torpedoes. Scalpel already has a missile type weapon and it would hardly change the scalpel's behavior vs surface craft and not at all vs land. Claymore is fine as it is, as a riot. If cloaky couldn't build anything besides warriors nobody would like playing cloaky either. All you'd have to do is build rogues or recluses and GG. Really only amphs need a new unit, because unlike hovers they don't have ANY arty and their skirmisher is an awkward abomination. Amphs also have less unit diversity than any other factory, which directly contributes to sea being unfun. quote: Making sonar more like radar is a possible direction which sea design could take, and not one which I have discarded; if this does not work out I will revisit it. For now I've gone in the direction of making sonar even less like radar. |
Since swifts lost their stealth there are no longer any land/air units that have stealth, so that alone would make sea different from land even if sonar was otherwise the same as an underwater radar. I don't know what you're trying to do with it now, though, so I can't really say whether it's good or bad. Not having something equivalent to basic radar at an equivalent cost would make sea worse than land by default though.
+0 / -0
|
[Spoiler]quote: In current sea serpent is an arty that can hit subs, and hunters are fairly skirmishy compared to any anti-sub weapon that amphs or hovers have. Such a change would just make amphs unplayable, since half the fac is pure subs and all of their units submerge when moving underwater. Commanders are also obligatory subs. |
By "at this point" I meant "in the fork", in which I've removed Serpent entirely and Hunter is a raider with short range. Siren outranges Duck and Scallop with its sonic gun but it's very slow and is mediocre at best against Buoy. Archer sucks at sea but I don't see how to change that outside a complete rework. An impulse-based weapon on perfectly flat terrain is inherently bad. Amph is not necessarily competitive against Ship in a direct fight any more but I don't think it needs to be. All of its units are radar stealthed by virtue of being underwater, it can attack land, and it can attack from land. Swarming your opponent with Duck when you have an eco advantage is still valid as well. Fork-sea does have a basic radar; it's basic radar. It just can't see stuff which is underwater, but all of your units can when they get into visual range. quote: but at the same time the current biggest problem is a lack of diversity (from which solely shipfac is exempt). |
IMO shipfac in main does not have diversity at the moment, at least not in practice. You have a few units which can hit sub/amph, which are the relevant units, and then a bunch of units which can't and are hence nonviable in most situations. Just because there are a lot of units in the factory doesn't mean there is variety in how it plays. The fork also changes the context in which hover and amph are played, even if their units have not changed directly, which can indirectly add variety. Mace was near-unbuildable on water before IMO, but it seems to have a role now as a reasonable answer to Corsair.
+1 / -0
|
Underwater units being only detectable via LOS sounds like a good way of retaining their stealth capability in a non-frustrating way.
+0 / -0
|
Wow this is a really cool design imo at least from I have seen from GF's video. A couple of questions: 1. How is it supposed to interact with ground combat? I think it was one of the biggest issues with ships overall since the only 2 factories that could really hurt anything in-land were Warlord and Reef. 2. Where do hovers and amphs fall into the new sea design. 3. What is the role of subs if any ship unit has sonar?
+0 / -0
|
quote: 1. How is it supposed to interact with ground combat? I think it was one of the biggest issues with ships overall since the only 2 factories that could really hurt anything in-land were Warlord and Reef. |
* Skeeter has enough range to kill any mex which Mariner can build * The Mistral missile frigate has a LOT of range for a skirmisher (it currently outranges Defender and Stinger!) * The Crusader equivalent has a bit more range than it used to * The Siren has an Impaler sidearm; it only has 700 range but should be able to destroy Urchins on high cliffs overlooking the water, as is found in maps like Sail Away and Folsom Dam * When drone technology permits it I have some nebulous plans for a light carrier in Shipfac which deploys drone-bombers quote: 2. Where do hovers and amphs fall into the new sea design. |
I mostly haven't changed them at this point, besides giving them all sonar as well. The ships were designed with hover/amph in mind, so even though the hover/amph units themselves haven't changed the context in which they are used has. My feeling for the state of the hover/amph units at the moment is: [Spoiler] Amph: Duck is perhaps a little worse than before but still entirely viable as a transition from ships, especially as a finishing blow when you have the eco advantage. Archer's still inherently bad because impulse weapons are bad on flat water surface. Nothing much I can do about that. Scallop sees a lot less use because Siren (the sonic-gun destroyer) beats it pretty handily. They might still be good to escort your ships against Ducks, and if there's land on the map they are still perfectly good at controlling that. Buoy appears to be Amph's answer to Siren. Grizzly is a late-game option which probably gets better if land is available.
Hover: I think Dagger is a bit outclassed by Cutter (scout) and Hunter (torpedo raider) on the water but if there's land to abuse the situation changes. I am not sure about Scalpel. It's possible it's too outclassed by Mistral in terms of range to be good on water, although it does have about double the DPS and much higher alpha. I suspect the viability of Scalpel will depend on what (if any) land battle is adjacent. Mace seems better than before as a sea unit; as long as it stays near maximum range it is effective against Corsair. Claymore is still ok at what it does on sea, and still a joke unit on land. Penetrator and Halberd are still very, VERY good.
I can't predict with any accuracy how things will work out in the context of a larger team game, where factories and number of players are asymmetric (e.g. one team may choose to prioritise water more than the other). I'm cautiously optimistic but the problem is too complex for me to come to a firm conclusion. At some point I'd like to see testing of this. My immediate goal was to make the ship mirror plus switches feel fun to play, since I think that is a necessary prerequisite for making a sea which involves ships fun to play. quote: 3. What is the role of subs if any ship unit has sonar? |
Submarines are quite fast and are effectively immune to radar; they're still good for raiding and picking off isolated stuff. Eco buildings do not have sonar so it can be difficult to find subs which slip away from your army. Duck fulfills a similar role, with less "picking stuff off" and more "overwhelming enemy anti-sub defences over a broad front". Even though every ship can see underwater, they can't all shoot underwater. There is a balance to be maintained between building the units which can shoot underwater (like Siren and Hunter) and building the units which can't, but are better against surface targets (Corsair, Mistral, Ronin, Shogun). In a while this will hopefully be more accessible than "get it yourself from Github", but besides any balance/design stuff that needs doing I will also need to clean up the code before that happens. I was not at all familiar with Spring when I started so there was a fair bit of trial and error.
+3 / -0
|
One more thing that I could notice from GF's video is the big ship clusterfuck blob that was created due to high density of metal. I understand that the goal is to make ships lighter but not having anything that has medium to high weight (demistrider essentially) will result in creating these blobs of lighter units. problem with blobs is that: - they are hard to control - its hard to distinguish their composition - they are not pleasant to look at - they take more processing power (mostly due to pathfinding) - THEY ARE SUPER HARD TO CONTROL (even with ZK's line move it looks like the most efficient way of controling these ship mobs would be just right clicking or move attacking one point instead of flanking, kiting, skirmishing etc.)
+0 / -0
|
In principle the tight-knit shipblob is countered by Battleship. It worked well for me in a previous game but I didn't really have the eco or AA support to make one in this game. Battleship could conceivably be lower-cost and lower-weight. It's not obvious to me how much (if any) movement in that direction is appropriate, however. EDIT: I also suspect that unsophisticated micro from both of us is a product of unfamiliarity with the units. EDIT 2: Potentially the Strider Hub could also gain more combat-oriented ships to help with this. I don't currently have a thought-out plan for something like that, though. They would probably require new models (the only unused one I know of is Vanquisher, which is basically two Typhoons welded together.)
+0 / -0
|
Ok, AQUAnim, you really seem to live up to your name. Great work! I especially like the Mistral. It also seems to prevent Urchin spam. On the whole, the biggest improvement is probably that there is not only the submarine -> corvette -> torpedo frigate -> submarine counter relation, but also the raider -> skirmisher -> riot -> raider relation as on land. Imo, the extended counter structure is the main advantage rather than making most ships lighter. Actually I'd prefer most ships being rather slow and heavy. The counter structure requires a viable raider, though, and having at least one or another fast ship is a good thing. Probably I would increase the redisigned ships' weights by 50%. Skeeter's disarm is rather useless. What it needs is more direct damage instead. (same applies to main) quote: Future Plans sea-to-land capability for the missing slot in Shipyard |
Siren seems to be very cool. I don't really see it's role, though. Countering everything but Mistral? Siren could pop up some legs to walk on land. #MakeSeaGreatAgain
+0 / -0
|
quote: The counter structure requires a viable raider, though, and having at least one or another fast ship is a good thing. Probably I would increase the redisigned ships' weights by 50%. |
Siren is already pretty high weight at 600, and the artillery ship has gone up to 850. There's an argument to be made for increasing the weight of Corsair in particular, and possibly other ships as well. quote: Siren seems to be very cool. I don't really see it's role, though. Countering everything but Mistral? Siren could pop up some legs to walk on land. |
Siren has an area-of-effect direct-fire anti-surface and anti-sub weapon and high HP; it's good for sitting at the front, tanking damage, and screening your army against subs/amphs/torpedo boats. The Impaler sidearm lets it (slowly) deal with Urchins too. It doesn't have the DPS to be effective against Corsair, and it's slow so does poorly against artillery and skirmishers. quote: Skeeter's disarm is rather useless. What it needs is more direct damage instead. (same applies to main) |
The scoutboat is not amazing as a combat unit but at worst it's Dart-like. It does provide high line-of-sight, which is especially relevant against underwater stuff now. In a small-scale engagement the disarm may be better than it appears at first sight. The raider Hunter fulfills at least some of the roles which a non-disarming Skeeter would.
+0 / -0
|
I don't really like the raiding hunter. It's too small and dinky. Note that not all raiders are cheap, eg banshee, pyro, kodachi, etc, and ships seem a good candidate to have one of those since neither hovers nor amphs do and ships are arguably the water heavyfac.
+0 / -0
|