beast focus for defense bug-explanation

[AntaresSITH]

after a close look to the shp files i got the explanation, why beast focus for defense cuts firepower by half. this is an extraction of the bmothership.shp file:

GUN 7
{
Type GUN_HiddenGimble
GunSize GUNSIZE_LARGE
StartUpgradeLevel WEAPON_PROJECTILE
EndUpgradeLevel WEAPON_ENERGY
DamageMult 1.0
BulletLength 18
BulletRange 6000
BulletSpeed 6000
BulletMass 0.05
FireTime 0.25
...
}

have a close look to the damage multiplier
standard is 1.0 means 40 per rail-gun BUT the true value in game is 80. now switching on EPA for defense it is cut by half...
why that? is the question.
the only explanation is the programmers twisted the effects which means the guns of a beast-ms are ALWAYS running in EPA-mode. turning on EPA just set the values back to normal

lol
cool bug :-)

[Targeter]

Not cool bug :(

I always thought there was something fishy about the beast CS being able to beat the taaw CS, especially when I remember it being the other way around before the 1.01 patch.

ono for the CS rush and SALUTE HAIL the BGB (beast gun bug) ;p

[AntaresSITH]

errrrr

without this "BUG" beast wouldn't be half the thread it is today. there are a lot more "BUGS" on taaw-side than on beast-side. just think about LRS (or even Crystal Swarming), Hyper Siege, Crystal Cloaking.

[dzurlord]

I r stfu.

[Targeter]

Without the BBB "bug" the beast isn't half the threat it was when people were using it, so what's your point? It's a bug, it should be fixed (though everyone knows it wont be). Just because they do it doesn't mean you have to. ONO lets everyone find ways to cheat more than the other guy is cheating so I can beat him! Srries, I don't buy that line.

[AntaresSITH]

u got the point targeter
thís bug will never ever be fixed and also none of the other bugs. just imagine another patch is released fixing this but NO other change for beast units. everyone is complaining that beast got too weak after the frist one. i dont think the hvy corv would be changed to its old stats :-((

btw
thtis bgb like u call it isnt that significant. otherwise someone would have recognized it earlier. no one EVER caomplained about the firepower of beast. it was accepted all around. it was explained with the fact, that taaw got energy guns later to compensate this "disadvantage" and beast with energyguns SUCK ALL AROUND u all know that. i would call the fact that a beast mothership destroyes itself with energy guns more a bug than BGB. the couverage with energyguns of a beast MS is more than ridicules.

the only bad thing about is, that u cannot avoid this bug. crystal swarming can be done or hyper siege but this one cannot be willingly avoided :-((((

dont flame me for my opinion, but u have to accept this bug.

@dzulord
WHAT?

[Targeter]

No, you don't have to accept it. How? Minimize the impact whenever possible. Don't CS rush.

Noone ever complained about the BBB before it was found either (except complaining that beast was stronger, which *wasn't* true). It took three months to find the BBB, so "people have already been using it, so why not continue to use it" just doesnt work.

btw, the taw CS shoots itself with energy guns too. I dont know what the stats on the beast CS are, but for taw three of its five guns shoot the CS when you upgrade to energy cannon.

[dzurlord]

With energy cannons all of the beast CS's guns shoot the CS=[[[[[

Antares, I had mentioned something else, but changed my mind, hence "I r stfu".

[AntaresSITH]

u REALLY want to tell me i shouldnt CS rush?
of course i wont, but then no taaw may use missos cause they are WAY to strong and should be changed too.


it was a mistake to post this. i realize this now :-/
no CS rush -> ULTRA-LOL. well what should i do if a taaw rushes me in your opinion? should i flee just to avoid the bug. should i always hit "~" key to stop fireing?

sorry NO !!! WAY !!!

u didnt get my 2nd post and i dont get yours.

like dzulord said quite ALL guns with energy hit the beast MS. the couverage of a taaw CS i much better. beast got with this "bug" just another early advantage that can be compensated with later taaw tech.




Noone ever complained about the BBB before it was found either (except complaining that beast was stronger, which *wasn't* true). It took three months to find the BBB, so "people have already been using it, so why not continue to use it" just doesnt work.



EVERYONE complained about it. i remember all those games, where i ONLY used EPA research and my opponent just left the game when he saw a carrier after 8:30 min with the comment "BBB". a lot of suckers annoyed me those days like this. u couldnt win as beast without being accused of BBB. but this was an avoidable bug. just dont do solved the prob.

[Rent-a-Zilla]

This is so weird.

The CS rush is one of the few aces up the Beast's sleeve, and it doesn't always work - if the Taaw manages to get a carrier out, or an armor upgrade, or mimic any support ships (dfgs especially) then its a pretty close thing. Beast also has to abandon its resource op too; the Taaw can sneak 'round the back' and destroy it if you don't leave any fighters behind to protect your workers.

I've always assumed that the Beast CS won because it could fix 4 guns on the Taaw CS whereas the Taaw CS can only return fire with 3. Add the extra 10000 hit points and self-healing capacity (I always rush with a full-health CS [turn off EPA at 100000 HP]) and the Beast CS usually wins. You often need dfgs, fighters, and IAFs too.

I've never heard any Taaw complain about this - the Taaw CS can outrun the Beast CS and upgrade itself with all sorts of goodies anyway (an armor 3 CS with repair bots is a real pig). If it is a bug, then I don't think it unbalances the game like BBB did. I don't complain when some Taaw gets their ally to wipe out my CS in one go with a mass missolyte attack...

I can't imagine Cata without the Beast CS rush, no-one would ever play Beast if they weren't allowed to attempt it.

[F.A.]

Actually taaw CS can fire 5 guns simultaneously when at a right angle.

[Eiden]

HW:C has so many bugs I've been going back to playing HW from time to time lately. Compared to HW:C, HW is rock-solid stable :/ .

Thx to Sierra refocusing BD to other projects and axeing support for HW:C, the game's going to remain in it's pre-beta state. Last night I got desktopped in a game for no reason that I can discern. I was just frigate swarming some guy, and as soon as my rammers made first contact with the CS, the game exits. IMO, the occurence of a game crash like that is a show-stopper.

Doesn't give me a whole lot of confidence in the stability of HW2 - and even less in the post-release support. I hope relic has wrested more control from Sierra regarding HW2, because I think relic (and BD) would have liked to support the games more. Perhaps ORB and Project Earth will be better supported.

[Alpha_1]

You say it is a bug but I do not see anywhere in your post that BD agrees with YOUR acessment of the information. Did you even TRY to find out from them if you are correct? If not you have NO place saying it is an oversight or bug. Sure it may infact be one but until you get the info from BD don't say it IS one with 100% certainty. Lets get their take on it THEN decide what can be done.

[Eiden]

Mmmmmkay. But...

I'm extremely sure that expending CS health/EPA time to actually reduce your defensive capability was NOT intended by BD. I'd bet my firstborn on it :p .

BTW Alpha, you've opened dialogue with BD before, do you think it would be good if everyone emailed them, or if we gave our questions to a representative who would compile an email and fire it off?

Guess who I nominate as the rep ;) ...

[Alpha_1]

Lol,

Start a new thread with questions to ask BD and I'll fire em off. I've been having a bit of good luck in getting replies from them so I have no problem being the go-fer (or is it goofer?) here.

[Eiden]

mmkay coo. I have 2 questions to ask right away (one mine, one TP1's).

BTW, Kushan said he posted on the SLS boards he wants you to read and reply to.

[AntaresSITH]

well perhaps i was moving a little too fast. ok got that BUT:
1.i dunno BD and how to contact them
2.BD forums are down i read
3.this "bug" is the is only explanation for the facts

letz see what BD says

[Eiden]

Alpha has email contact with them. If we can give him a list of "outstanding" bugs, BD probably won't mind answering.