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

The reef

20 posts, 1497 views
Filter:    Player:  
sort
12 years ago
I think the Reef (carrier) scripts should be improved. Ppl use it without air wing attached. It allow bombers to land, but not using them on attack order, and landed bombers are subject to aa fire. So i propose few improvements:
1. Bombers, based on carrier are attached to it, and attack when carrier is ordered to attack something, and defend it from attackers automatically.
2. Bombers should return to same carrier which they started of, if possible.
3. Fighters based on carrier should automatically attack any air target in carrier range.
4. AA should not fire to bombers or fighters while they are on carrier.
5. Carrier have to get increased nano power to repair its airwing.
6. Maybe even banshees should land on carrier.
This will make carrier - air pair much more interesting.
+0 / -0

12 years ago
This is what carrier drones are for, planes need independent control, auto attacking would be terrible.

AA firing at landed bombers may be a problem, because you cannot control whether your bombers return to (someone elses) carrier.
+0 / -0


12 years ago
"you cannot control whether your bombers return to (someone elses) carrier"

Yes you can.
+0 / -0

12 years ago
how then? lol
I had also problems with that cause it takes ages to repair a heavily damaged bomber on that ship
+0 / -0
12 years ago
more nano would be nice.

If carrier is within static AA or 150% of mobile AA, bombers should not land on it.
+0 / -0

12 years ago
By moving them away from the carrier every time they come near? That's a tad too finnicky. The point is that once they land on that carrier, you have no control over them. I suppose thats true of any landing pad that is poorly placed or finds itself suddenly on the front line...
+0 / -0


12 years ago
Would be nice to have a switch so air doesn't land on allied airpads / carriers only on yours.
Right now you may not notice that someone else built airpad and your damaged air will go there and then rot there for several minutes because airpads have so slow repair speed that you normally doesn't use one without nanos nearby.
+0 / -0
You can specify a pad for bombers to land on by right-clicking on the pad.

(but it only works once without repeat)
+0 / -0
12 years ago
AA firing at landed bombers/figthers is shit. No matter on pad or on carrier. Because it is not different of the ground unit, so why AA should fire?
If the plane takes off then it is targeted by aa radars and attacked, but not on land.
+0 / -0
12 years ago
sgree with that a landed airplane should be considered a ground unit. Doesnt make sense if AA still fire on it when its landed.
+0 / -0


12 years ago
It is engine issue and can't be fixed easily. Each unit has one category and plane is plane no matter where it is.
+0 / -0


12 years ago
Which is what you get for trying to keep "special" weapon types in game.

Maybe AA should only be able to attack units that are a certain height above ground. Yes, this will make jumpers take losses at some times due to hacksaws sniping airborne pyros. SO what.
+0 / -0
12 years ago
What about hills? I think it can be very op (aa vs land units on a hill).
+0 / -0


12 years ago
I meant that as distance from unit to ground directly beneath it, not to ground beneath the aa gun. So buildings and other units at higher elevation than the aa emplacement would be safe, as long as they do not lift off.
+0 / -0
As long as we have AA maybe we should have a riot with a weapon that can only fire at raiders.

Thoughts??
+0 / -0
USrankAnthem:
How do you define "raider"?

Is Venom a raider, because the fac does not have any other raider and venom does a lot of (even if only EMP) damage?

More outlaw style weapons would be nice.
We have no AOE+EMP mix!
We have no Slow+AOE mix which are not centered around the riot unit (outlaw)
I would like a gluten cannon!

@Rafal> It is engine issue and can't be fixed easily. Each unit has one category and plane is plane no matter where it is.

That is right and wrong.
* It is an engine issue
* But it can be fixed very easy

You can let AA units only fire at "HIGH_ALTITUDE | HEAT_EMITTING" and spawn and kill any "HIGH_ALTITUDE" or "HEAT_EMITTING" unit inside any unit - jumpers, gunships, drones, planes - on demand.
The very same works with any amphibious unit and torpedoes with "TORPEDO_TARGET".

This unit can have - collide=false, velocity=INSANE, turnRate=INSTANTLY, order=GUARD/FOLLOW.

Planes could have drop-able heat bombs which move the "HEAT_EMITTING"-unit out of the plane to distract some missiles.

Missiles could be units which have fuel (and crash if their fuel tank is empty) and target the closest "HEAT_EMITTING" target. They are only fired if the tower sees "HEAT_EMITTING" targets.

The re-targeting if one possible target dies make the AA-micro widget of jseah obsolet in most cases.

___________
Back to topic:

Consider how often your drones die and if you want your bombers to be dead KZZ.
+0 / -0


12 years ago
quote:
Planes could have drop-able heat bombs which move the "HEAT_EMITTING"-unit out of the plane to distract some missiles.

Actually, there are hardwired flares right in the engine.

quote:
You can let AA units only fire at "HIGH_ALTITUDE | HEAT_EMITTING" and spawn and kill any "HIGH_ALTITUDE" or "HEAT_EMITTING" unit inside any unit

Sounds about as clumsy as my solution towards mobile freemason, but for each and every air unit. How about just some allow-target gadget on aa guns checking if target is at least x above ground?
+0 / -0

12 years ago
actually, a plane on a reef is higher above water than when landed on ground/pad/fac... this is everything messed up.

a workaround would be to (morph?) instantly the plane-unit(flying) to another plane-unit(landed), which has land-unit type? but that sounds terrible...
+0 / -0
12 years ago
>Consider how often your drones die and if you want your bombers to be dead KZZ.
Bombers will not be dead - they are covered by drones.
Its a pity that we cant make aa not to fire at landed planes. But there is an idea - cloak the bombers on carrier deck. Maybe not very beatiful but will be working i hope.
+0 / -0

12 years ago
The proper approach would be to have a the engine expose more information about whether an (air) unit is landed or not (I mean, they're folded up and immobile, it's not like the engine doesn't know) and likewise when a land unit is airborne (they're flipping around and can no longer move along the ground, it knows) and use that field.

But either way, since this requires multiple engine changes to be performant, I doubt it's ever going to happen.
+0 / -0