| 1 |
Quant's
rule
is
reasonable,
and
yes
the
"makes
sense"
rule
is
violated
by
most
rts
games
in
one
way
or
another.
The
questions
are.
.
.
by
how
much?
And
Why?
Games
that
violate
the
"makes
sense"
rule
too
often
for
unnecessary
reasons
become
worse
because
of
that,
in
my
opinion.
|
1 |
Quant's
rule
is
reasonable,
and
yes
the
"makes
sense"
rule
is
violated
by
most
rts
games
in
one
way
or
another.
The
questions
are
:
by
how
much?
And
Why?
Games
that
violate
the
"makes
sense"
rule
too
often
for
unnecessary
reasons
become
worse
because
of
that,
in
my
opinion.
|
| 2 |
\n
|
2 |
\n
|
| 3 |
There are usually many degrees of freedom to balance things out. My advice is : pick the ones that make sense.
|
3 |
There are usually many degrees of freedom to balance things out. My advice is : pick the ones that make sense.
|
| 4 |
\n
|
4 |
\n
|
| 5 |
Why make an armed air transport with a 100 range weapon? You could have removed the weapons and updated the description, or made it better but more expensive.
|
5 |
Why make an armed air transport with a 100 range weapon? You could have removed the weapons and updated the description, or made it better but more expensive.
|
| 6 |
\n
|
6 |
\n
|
| 7 |
Why make raven dive and slow down near the target? You could have:
|
7 |
Why make raven dive and slow down near the target? You could have:
|
| 8 |
- buffed AA (although that would affect other units)
|
8 |
- buffed AA (although that would affect other units)
|
| 9 |
- nerfed raven cost
|
9 |
- nerfed raven cost
|
| 10 |
- added a toggleable bomb type, for example : 1200 dmg unguided anti-building or 600 dmg homing anti-unit
|
10 |
- added a toggleable bomb type, for example : 1200 dmg unguided anti-building or 600 dmg homing anti-unit
|
| 11 |
\n
|
11 |
\n
|
| 12 |
maybe if you were too eager not to nerf its cost effectiveness against badly defended targets there were other balance issues being checked by the "raven" thread (like some heavy units or buildings), maybe they could be checked by more effective anti heavy units instead of planes that are fast enough to cover the map quickly and hit wherever.
|
12 |
maybe if you were too eager not to nerf its cost effectiveness against badly defended targets there were other balance issues being checked by the "raven" thread (like some heavy units or buildings), maybe they could be checked by more effective anti heavy units instead of planes that are fast enough to cover the map quickly and hit wherever.
|
| 13 |
\n
|
13 |
\n
|
| 14 |
I've been following these forums and see threads about balance but their focus is usually too narrow. ZK could use some broad changes. There are many cases. In the last few days I've been looking more closely at the unit's stats and found some interesting things...Look at vulture : it jams, it has huge sight range, it's almost as fast as a swift, it's relatively tough for cost....it's OP :)
|
14 |
I've been following these forums and see threads about balance but their focus is usually too narrow. ZK could use some broad changes. There are many cases. In the last few days I've been looking more closely at the unit's stats and found some interesting things...Look at vulture : it jams, it has huge sight range, it's almost as fast as a swift, it's relatively tough for cost....it's OP :)
|
| 15 |
\n
|
15 |
\n
|
| 16 |
\n
|
16 |
\n
|
suggestions (mainly balance changes)