DDDX wrote:
wait, it had even more total dmg output? Daaaaamn...

Look, there's a reason why all FAF experimentals do roughly the same dmg. Some may do 50% more, some like Czar 100% more, but none of them do 1000% more.
This similar logis is followed by Blackops:Unleashed - a bit more damage output but nothing drastic.
Then comes Total mayhem. Far greater damages.
Then comes your mod and quadruples that already broken and unbalamced damager from TMayhem.

...see where I'm going with this?
Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of an OP unit storming my base...I just feel like if such units exist and spawn, there should not be such a large difference between what attacked you just prior to the op unit, and that op unit.

It's like making a survival in which you are attacked by tier 1 tanks followed by Monkeylords. I mean...more t2 first, t3, then t4...right?
Just put more strong spawns of t4 before the op units come, and problem solved. Plus, harder gameplay

DDDX wrote:
Someone once told me this, regarding my survival:

"Could a team of skilled players, not knowing what awaits them, handle what your map/mod throws at them? If yes - it is a balanced, well made map/mod, if no, then the map/mod needs more work."

I truly believe it's possible to make a challenge without making the player know by heart what awaits him and prepare for that challenge 5 minutes beforehand.
Or at least give some heads-up that OP units are gonna come - by first sending less Op units of that same type as a warning.

You say air can handle a Dream ripper. Ok. Gap of Rohan - you see the Ripper far too late-by the time you spot it it's very near the middle, eaning it will hit the base 20 seconds after that. How do you counter it, other than not having a ton of gunships already prepared? You cannot.
So, the weakness is not really a weakness in small maps, is it?

Why is it a problem to nerf the damage to non-insane levels, and instead boost hp for example?

DDDX wrote:
ok, played a couple of games of this and while it was very fun and hard, there were a couple of things i HATED to the core.

The surprise visits of OP units. So you have a couple t1 air exps attack, then a couple of t2, then some t3/t4 air...and then a freakin 30 000 hp (no big real) helicopter tha kills ANYTHING in 1 shot. GC? 1 shot. Advanced shield? 1 shot. 5 SAMs cluster? 1 shot.
Either you have enough initial firepower to take it out before it starts to shoot, or you lose your entire base and there is absolutely nothing you can do about it.

Dream ripper? Same thing. 1shoots anything. Basically either you have the firepower to kill it before it comes into range, or it will just walk through anything.
200 000 hp Avalanche beetlebot? 1 shot.

you would have expected to get a swarm of like 5 Megaliths attacking together, then 4 Snakebites, then the Ripper...
Either you get people prepared for those attacks, or nerf the dmg on those units. Cause this...is impossible for anyone to counter unless they know exactly what they are dealing with.
But if you advance to it gradually (for example, sending 5 Mayhem IVs prior to the Ripper), you send a message to the defenders that more hardcore things are coming and that they need to be prepared.

Also, why not spawn bigger waves of units like Bricks or Percivals or other t3 bots - in large numbers they are a challenge to the defending team, and would have provided good "survival-like" experience.

All that being said - good job man, I enjoyed playing it. Wish the AI knew how to make Advanced shields, though...and boost them with build power. So that if we get 3 arties we don't wreck any base the aix has. Hell, sometimes even 2 will do.

armacham01 wrote:
Also, I don't want to derail things, but I was thinking about a modification that might make playing against the AI more interesting.

Let's call it a "diversion" -- the AI commits to spend X% of its resources on whatever "diversion" is active at the time. And the diversion would change after a certain amount of time, so in a 30-minute game it might change 3 times.

The diversion could be "build just a ridiculous amount of t1 bombers and then swarm with them" or "make a t2 artillery base somewhere on the map" or "make an experimental" or whatever. So the AI would just do something that is probably sub-optimal. Setting the diversion to a high percentage would generally reduce the effectiveness of the AI.

It would give the players more reason to scout the AI because it would not just be completely predictable. It would reduce the AI's difficulty unless it randomly picked a very strong strategy (which for some people, would help them, and others might increase the AIx multiplier to make up for it). It could end up making the experience of playing against an AI more dynamic because anything could happen.

This is a little bit like the "agents" of DeepMind (which are really separate AIs, each with its own obsession/focus that lasts for the duration of the entire game) but definitely not the same thing. I have no idea how difficult it would be to give the AI modified priorities, that change over the course of a game.

Eventually if there was a way to make the AI make smarter choices, this system could even be used to increase the strength of the AI.

Rowey wrote:
cant you add the Diffrent unit as a toggle in the options ?

armacham01 wrote:
Are the "additional features" optional? To be blunt I'm interested in playing with AIs sometimes but only with vanilla units/values.