GT in GoDII?

Discussion / Announcement area for Good Old Days II Core development.
Dengaroth
Posts: 3329
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2004 7:00 am
Location: Bratislava, Slovakia
Contact:

Post by Dengaroth »

Again, if you're going to give something "Extra", that other factions don't have, at least compensate for it by removing something "Standard", that everyone else has (probe-less faction, anyone? laugh.gif).

But I, just like para, think that your efforts would be put to better use focused on making dreg feel less out of place than implementing GT.

(Actually, I think you should just nuke Dreg and be done with it, but I know you love Dreg, so it's not an option... damn shame mrgreen.gif)
Image
Image
RT: The number of typical responses decreases exponentially as the number of joke options increases.
Image
Spunkmeyer
Posts: 2013
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2003 7:00 am
Location: Contact me regarding: CC, Slayer and AllegWiki.

Post by Spunkmeyer »

Please do not add GT to G.O.D. if you are going to neuter it.

Orion did one hell of a mistake in letting Noir use GT in DN while I was gone, and it got FUBARed so bad, people's perception of GT as a faction is *way* off, such as Para's ( wub.gif ) claim that it's the most unbalanced faction ever. (I have three words for that - Dreg, TF and Phoenix)

GT is a complex faction. Notice it took me *several* iterations of Plus each with significant changes to get GT into a good shape, and as of the latest release, I believe it's in fantastic shape as far as A+ is concerned. You have about zero chance of balancing it by an a la carte approach, and even if you do you'd be introducing yet a third variety of GT, which is highly undesirable from my POV. GT without special tech is a very, very @#(!ty faction.

Regarding A+ development:

1-I'm here. I'll fix any bugs, make slight improvements. No, I won't take any substantial development effort until the community expresses more interest, which I don't see happening in the near term.

2- I see a need for a well-balanced core as the devs improve the Alleg code, and I don't think it exists anywhere outside A+.. there is also some lingering interest in the community, so I'll be maintaining it for quite a while.

So given the two, please do as you see fit.


Want bigger games? Log on to play at the official game time: 9pmET/8pmCT/7pmMT/6pmPT every day of the week. Also Saturdays 8pm UTC.

Paradigm2
Posts: 1594
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2003 7:00 am
Location: College Station, TX

Post by Paradigm2 »

GT is still imbalanced on A+ because the miners still insta-dock... until they set up further from the base and the base entrances are fixed, they will have an extreme (and un-intended) advantage.

Also, there is no good reason for GT scouts to have built in nans.
-Paradigm2
Spunkmeyer
Posts: 2013
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2003 7:00 am
Location: Contact me regarding: CC, Slayer and AllegWiki.

Post by Spunkmeyer »

There is some disagreement about the effectiveness of GT econ. Part of the reason for having nans on the scouts is help keep miners alive until the econ gets rolling, because the GT econ is meant to be slow initially.

If

QUOTE
GT is still imbalanced on A+ because the miners still insta-dock... until they set up further from the base and the base entrances are fixed, they will have an extreme (and un-intended) advantage.[/quote]

is true, it definitely will need adjustment. However this was not my recollection with the old models (before Orion's and then Terra's "fix"). Is this something that happened during one of these model changes?


Want bigger games? Log on to play at the official game time: 9pmET/8pmCT/7pmMT/6pmPT every day of the week. Also Saturdays 8pm UTC.

Paradigm2
Posts: 1594
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2003 7:00 am
Location: College Station, TX

Post by Paradigm2 »

If you are going to argue that GT's economy is poorer than others (presumably because no refs) which I think is ludicrous... but if you're going to argue that it is weaker because of it, then giving scouts a build in nan is the wrong "perk" to make up for it.

Consider: GT miners are almost ALWAYS mining in a sector with a dockable base... this automatically gives them an advantage as far as ease of defense. With other factions, if your miner is attacked in a ref sector, you have to dock, change your scout to have a nan (wasting valuable time in a game of seconds), launch, then fly to the ref sector. With GT, you must merely launch in the sector the miner is being attacked in... which means that scouts that are flying around in the sector randomly that had absolutely no intention of bringing a nan with them, are suddenly equiped to save the miner that is probably less than 5k from them. Even if there is no one flying in the sector, the commander or whoever is there to defend can just click launch on the scout and the miner will already probably half-way back to the base. This is why you never see a GT miner die on Aarm's team... he'll always be there in time to stop you. However, he might not make it if he's Dreg or rix.

Now add to that the fact that the miners insta-dock and that GT has increased hull (I think?) and you easily have the most DEFENDABLE economy in the game... which means there is absolutely no reason for scouts to have built in nans. If none of your miners are dying, your economy will be very effective, and this is one of the reasons the GT economy thrives

Now I would argue that it also thrives because of their discounted tech vs. miner yield, but that is obviously core specific whereas my above argument is not.
-Paradigm2
Spunkmeyer
Posts: 2013
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2003 7:00 am
Location: Contact me regarding: CC, Slayer and AllegWiki.

Post by Spunkmeyer »

Para, I will absolutely fly all my test games with GT under A+ when opportunity permist to evaluate the econ, but regardless of that, your argument here is faulty: you claim lack of refs is a plus, not a minus. You sure you want to say that?

If that was the case, all other factions had to do would be NOT to build refs, but build ops!!!

But of course, we don't do that, because refs make a lot of sense because:

1) cheaper cost
2) lack of dock time
3) twice as fast expansion since they can be built simultaneously with ops

I can see how having #2 fubared would make a lot of difference, but this was not the case with the original GT models.


Want bigger games? Log on to play at the official game time: 9pmET/8pmCT/7pmMT/6pmPT every day of the week. Also Saturdays 8pm UTC.

Greator_SST
Posts: 277
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 7:00 am

Post by Greator_SST »

Spunkmeyer wrote:
QUOTE (Spunkmeyer @ Oct 19 2006, 08:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I won't take any substantial development effort until the community expresses more interest, which I don't see happening in the near term.

...maybe with some of the changes around here and possible 'absences', A+ will deservedly get some more play.
...yea
Spunkmeyer
Posts: 2013
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2003 7:00 am
Location: Contact me regarding: CC, Slayer and AllegWiki.

Post by Spunkmeyer »

I'll get the server up ASAP just in case. I would very much love to finalize R17 and perhaps sneak in a GT econ tonedown if necessary.


Want bigger games? Log on to play at the official game time: 9pmET/8pmCT/7pmMT/6pmPT every day of the week. Also Saturdays 8pm UTC.

Paradigm2
Posts: 1594
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2003 7:00 am
Location: College Station, TX

Post by Paradigm2 »

I am not saying that no refs is a "plus". I'm saying that as far as Scouts having a NAN, it is the WRONG perk to give them. See my above argument for why they have no need for a built in nan.

However, another fallacy in your argument is that other factions cannot offload at techbases.

With GT, you get your initial op, then a pala, another op, and a tech base sector usually all connected. All are pretty vital and all serve a different purpose... That is four sectors for GT to offload with without being hurt by not having refs. Then you have 4 full sectors plus home quite easily to get you nice adv tech.

Compare to other factions if they don't build refs... they'll have 2 sectors with their two ops, and the other two bases will not be able to offload, forcing the miners to drive multiple sectors. "But wait, they can build refs!" you say? Yes, but they have a much more difficult time defending their miners since they cannot launch from refs and miners can not repair (certainly not insta-dock) at refs.

GT will easily have those 4 bases out, and the fact that they can build a pala/op simultaneously also helps them expand faster with USEFUL bases; there is an inherent advantage to having a base where people can launch/dock from rather than a ref.
-Paradigm2
pkk
Posts: 5417
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2003 7:00 am
Location: Germany, Munich

Post by pkk »

Paradigm2 wrote:
QUOTE (Paradigm2 @ Oct 20 2006, 03:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Consider: GT miners are almost ALWAYS mining in a sector with a dockable base... this automatically gives them an advantage as far as ease of defense.

All other factions miners do that, too. With giga it's even more easier than with GT, to build outpost in every sector.
What does that mean? GIGA MORE CHEESIER THAN GT!

Paradigm2 wrote:
QUOTE (Paradigm2 @ Oct 20 2006, 03:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
With other factions, if your miner is attacked in a ref sector, you have to dock, change your scout to have a nan (wasting valuable time in a game of seconds), launch, then fly to the ref sector.

You leave base in a scout without nan?!

Paradigm2 wrote:
QUOTE (Paradigm2 @ Oct 20 2006, 03:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
With GT, you must merely launch in the sector the miner is being attacked in... which means that scouts that are flying around in the sector randomly that had absolutely no intention of bringing a nan with them, are suddenly equiped to save the miner that is probably less than 5k from them. Even if there is no one flying in the sector, the commander or whoever is there to defend can just click launch on the scout and the miner will already probably half-way back to the base. This is why you never see a GT miner die on Aarm's team... he'll always be there in time to stop you. However, he might not make it if he's Dreg or rix.

Another myth... wink.gif
The Escapist (Justin Emerson) @ Dec 21 2010, 02:33 PM:
The history of open-source Allegiance is paved with the bodies of dead code branches, forum flame wars, and personal vendettas. But a community remains because people still love the game.
Post Reply