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

Idea: Give Tick a small cloakfield when burrowed

23 posts, 1301 views
Post comment
Filter:    Player:  
Page of 2 (23 records)
sort

10 years ago
Yes, it's a silly Neonstorm thread. Insert "leveler sidearm" joke here.

Basically, there are a few smallish problems I'm looking at here:

1) Cloakfields are completely unheard of in the early-game and uncommon in the mid. This is kind of sad in for the "cloakbots" (where rockos, glaives, and warriors will never ever cloak). We have many shielded units but functionally only one cloakfield.

2) Ticks are rarely seen except as desperation defense, but the Tick nerf happened for good reasons.

3) It would be nice to be able to remove the Conjuror's confusing and non-obvious jammer without losing the cloakybots' ability to stealthily build. A tick guarding a Con would be more expensive, but would still allow this.

You can imagine some interesting uses - for example, autohealing units could use this as a hiding spot to retreat into. A player could deploy a forward one out early similar to Spider's initial rush of spotting-fleas to establish a forward cloakfield. A place to build up an assault force before attacking so the enemy would not see the built-up mob of Zeuses or Warriors.

Of course, the downside is that it might interfere with the Tick's decloak/attack tuning - that could be a challenge in implementing such a thing if it were desired.

Small, low-cost, static deployable cloakfields could be fun, and the Tick would be a good place to put them.
+3 / -0
10 years ago
Just buff some of its old range back, it's impossible to stun anything now
+9 / -0
Skasi
ESrankElTorero, or instead reduce decloak range / increase (un)burrow speed to buff it as a mine and keep the nerf to the "mobile version".

CArankPxtl, did you intentionally create a second Tick thread just for the Neonstorming? (first thread)
+2 / -0
Skasi

I figured it would be threadjacking to post it in a thread where people were mostly discussing whether the tick was useful or not.
+0 / -0

10 years ago
small static cloak fields sounds pretty interesting

can imagine hiding a dante or a gang of roaches ontop of a tick just outside enemy vision then enemy army walks by and gets rekt

could also be used to hide certain radar blobs from enemy artillery at your front line

ticks are mostly seen in cloaky 1v1 glaive wars, could be fun to hide pockets of glaive/tick combos around map to defend against incoming forces
+1 / -0

10 years ago
It would be cool if area cloaker was cheaper and had the cloak field at say 1/3 the radius but full radius of area jammer (and was upgradable to full vesion).

* better than giving areacloak to buried Tick because that would cause stupid things like leapfrogging
* lowered initial weight makes it able to see play earlier
* full jammer allows you to buy only jammer without paying more for areacloak (currently you can use jammer-only mode but that is not useful since you always get the cloak too so might as well use that)
+1 / -0


10 years ago
Only issue i have with significantly reducing weight and radius of mobile area cloaker is that the crossgrade cycle between Eraser and Sneaky Pate' would start eating significant amounts of metal.
+0 / -0


10 years ago
quote:
Just buff some of its old range back, it's impossible to stun anything now
+0 / -0

10 years ago
self-cluster-empwnage is most annoying thing. i demand tick being immune to itself.
+1 / -0
Skasi
quote:
Just buff some of its old range back, it's impossible to stun anything now

Zomg, or how about a value between the old (384) and current (352) version? Or really, since AoE, EMP damage and stun time were already changed a few times, how about [url=#135278]something different[/url]?

Here's a list of changes.

quote:
26 Dec 2011 (suuuper old and probably not relevant)
Small Tick damage nerf:
  • Param time 30s -> 25s
  • Damage 4k -> 3.5k

7 May 2012 (super old and probably not relevant)
Tick:
  • Stun time 25s -> 16s
  • EMP damage 3500 -> 3000

Jan 26, 2013
Tick:
  • Cost 100 -> 120

Jan 30, 2014
Experimental Tick nerf (to see what happens).
  • AoE 384 -> 320
  • EMP damage 3000 -> 2000
It should still be decent against raiders but less so at stunning larger things. Remember, it has edge effectiveness 0 so its damage falls off linearly from the centre of the explosion.

4 Mar 2014
Tick AoE 320 -> 352.
Sources:
History for Zero-K/weapons/armtick_death.tdf
History for Zero-K/units/armtick.lua
+0 / -0
10 years ago
when was its cost nerfed?
+0 / -0
Skasi
Oh right that seems to be the only non-explosion related Tick-specific change that happened in the last few years. Unless I missed something else. Added it to the list above.

Other changes are just things that affected multiple units, mostly bugfixes, pathing things, etc. Also Tick and other suicidals got a wreckage, but I wouldn't really call that a balance change.
+0 / -0
the biggest nerf is not listed - the introduction of a short uncloaked delay before movement when a cloaked tick is told to move.

quote:
Jan 30, 2014
Experimental Tick nerf (to see what happens).
[...]
It should still be decent against raiders but less so at stunning larger things. Remember, it has edge effectiveness 0 so its damage falls off linearly from the centre of the explosion.


and this is why it seems less useful now
+0 / -0
ticks were nerfed after AUrankAdminGoogleFrog lost a couple of 1v1 to them and decided they were too OP even though nobody else thought so
+0 / -0
Skasi
10 years ago
quote:
ticks were nerfed after GBrankPRO_rANDY lost a couple of 1v1 to them and decided they were too OP even though nobody else thought so

ftfy, from what I remember it was rANDY who made GF nurf them
+0 / -0


10 years ago
The problem is that they now compare very poorly to roaches. They were overnerfed - cost increase, ability to move out of cloak removed AND edge effectiveness 0 implemented in short order.
+0 / -0
Formerly (before damage nerf) one Tick was enough to lolpwn a commander, which compared way too favorably to more expensive Roach, of which you needed at least two.

I wouldn't mind a bigger range with the new lower damage making them no longer antiheavy. Death-stunning commanders should be Infiltrator's thing.
+0 / -0
Skasi
quote:
The problem is that they now compare very poorly to roaches.

Roaches are not allterrain and can not be placed safely inside your base though.

quote:
They were overnerfed - cost increase, ability to move out of cloak removed AND edge effectiveness 0 implemented in short order.

Wrong, they always were edgeeffectiveness=0. Since at least 6 Oct 2010 (CA+1F merge). You might have misread "it has edge effectiveness 0" as "it now has edge effectiveness 0".


But hey, a completely different idea: How about increasing Ticks 160 sight distance to Roaches 240? That could make using them feel slightly more enjoyable. Plus cloakies are supposed to be all about vision, speed and ninja, while shields are all "BAM, IN YO FACE!".
+0 / -0
10 years ago
Just give them twice range but half of DMG... IT will still lolwpn bandits, glaveis fleas and so on easly..
+0 / -0

10 years ago
I get the feeling that if this game had higher skill level then tick wouldn't be considered too underpowered. I'm sure I've seen games since nerf where ticks have worked and I can remember making them work a few times myself in 1v1 tournament.

They are like burrowed banelings, you have to position them well and wait till enemy forces walk over them. This takes a tiny bit of skill so it makes the unit unviable for 90% of the playerbase. They are no longer the unit which you just derp straight into enemy army for easy win.

I wouldn't be opposed to a very small buff though.
+3 / -0
Page of 2 (23 records)