Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Post edit history

Zero-K v1.9.12.0 - Bolas Tweaks

To display differences between versions, select one or more edits in the list using checkboxes and click "diff selected"
Post edit history
Date Editor Before After
12/9/2021 2:03:16 PMPLrankZenfur before revert after revert
12/9/2021 1:58:14 PMPLrankZenfur before revert after revert
12/9/2021 1:54:15 PMPLrankZenfur before revert after revert
12/9/2021 1:53:55 PMPLrankZenfur before revert after revert
12/9/2021 1:53:43 PMPLrankZenfur before revert after revert
12/9/2021 1:51:10 PMPLrankZenfur before revert after revert
Before After
1 [quote] 1 [quote]
2 Of course, if Super Weapons are designed to end the game, while a Detriment is just designed to be the tip of the spear to do loads of damage and be hard to kill, then Super Weapons will just be superior most of the time as long as you can get away with the bigger price tag. 2 Of course, if Super Weapons are designed to end the game, while a Detriment is just designed to be the tip of the spear to do loads of damage and be hard to kill, then Super Weapons will just be superior most of the time as long as you can get away with the bigger price tag.
3 [/quote] 3 [/quote]
4 \n 4 \n
5 Hence my numerous attempts at raising discussion about increasing superweapons price tag (I suggested at least 50k price point) 5 Hence my numerous attempts at raising discussion about increasing superweapons price tag (I suggested at least 50k price point)
6 \n 6 \n
7 Actually other than that I'd prefer superweapons to have matching super requirements, like instead of increasing price, increase its upkeep to use in Singus to operate (I suggested ~16000k price increase - so make it expend 800 energy to operate). Also to avoid frustration make them have built-in pylon range for grid connection. That wouldn't necessarily increase the game length, since the price point didn't change and at that point teams already usually have that energy capacity, but it would result in some key changes: 7 Actually other than that I'd prefer superweapons to have matching super requirements, like instead of increasing price, increase its upkeep to use in Singus to operate (I suggested ~16000k price increase - so make it expend 800 energy to operate). Also to avoid frustration make them have built-in pylon range for grid connection. That wouldn't necessarily increase the game length, since the price point didn't change and at that point teams already usually have that energy capacity, but it would result in some key changes:
8 - superweapons having more weaknesses due to more points to attack - grid/Singus 8 - superweapons having more weaknesses due to more points to attack - grid/Singus
9 - less cheese due to making superweapon only without infrastructure or trying to win while holding most of the map 9 - less cheese due to making superweapon only without infrastructure or trying to win while holding most of the map
10 - superweapons having more counter play and more win conditions than simply building them and porcing one point, dominating everything else from that point onwards 10 - superweapons having more counter play and more win conditions than simply building them and porcing one point, dominating everything else from that point onwards
11 - building superweapon would make it need more commitment, as it would strain your economy heavily - so do or die scenario, 11 - building superweapon would make it need more commitment, as it would strain your economy heavily - so do or die scenario,
12 - unlikely to support more than 1 super in FFAs 12 - unlikely to support more than 1 super in FFAs
13 \n 13 \n
14 I'd argue that all of the above are good, healthy things for superweapons gameplay. 14 I'd argue that all of the above are good, healthy things for superweapons gameplay.
15 \n 15 \n
16 In addition to that, they could have one more balancing factor (to make the above suggestion less punishing/smoother) - scaling with energy available - minimum 200 to operate and then scaling linearly with extra energy starting at 10% efficiency to 100% efficiency at 1000 energy provided. For DRP - rate of fire scales, for Zenith - rate of meteor accumulation scales, for Starlight - range of operation scales (and/or dps). 16 In addition to that, they could have one more balancing factor (to make the above suggestion less punishing/smoother) - scaling with energy available - minimum 200 to operate and then scaling linearly with extra energy starting at 10% efficiency to 100% efficiency at 1000 energy provided. For DRP - rate of fire scales, for Zenith - rate of meteor accumulation scales, for Starlight - range of operation scales (and/or dps).
17 \n 17 \n
18 [spoiler] 18 [spoiler]
19 I think Bertha could use the same treatment, bring back the price to 5k, add 50 E/s reloading cost instead. 19 I think Bertha could use the same treatment, bring back the price to 5k, add grid requirement and 50 E/s reloading cost instead.
20 [/spoiler] 20 [/spoiler]