Fallout Studios Forums

These balance suggestions have been proposed by the team, but are open for discussion:

- Nerf the Twinblades missiles a little. Currently they are extremely powerful.

- Buff the FutureTank's main guns a little and/or lower its cost. $3000 is a lot to lose for what you get.....

Com-Link said:

I support. Edit: I didn't do enough testing, it seems. Hmm, yea, the rockets are now very nicely positioned, but damage is too high.

Com-Link said:

Vigorously agree. I think the cost could be lowered (say, $2700?). After all, in late game, if you do get a future tank, money wouldn't be as big an issue as build time.

Additionally, is it really impossible to apply the apocalypse tank's twin barrel logic to the future tank so that it can attack like in Uprising: one scrambler at a time instead of two?

To balance the future tank (if the damage is increased to reflect its position as tier 3.5), perhaps one could use a 'remote controlled car' logic to limit it? Meaning, that a mobile structure or unit has to be in the vicinity to control the future tank; should the future tank stray out of the range, or if the controlling unit is destroyed, perhaps the Future tank can be switched to self-defense mode, meaning it cannot be controlled by the player, but will attack when enemy units near it.

Oh, and lastly, the current future tank neuron scrambler fx is kinda lazy. It's not really powerful. Possible opportunity for improvement?
Edited by vader333, 27 December 2010 - 08:56.

Bibber himself said it's impossible to make a "shots per barrel" coding to the future tank.

I tried it myself. All that happened was only one orb, while the animation shows two.

You could also remove that thing and add a better unit of your own. After all, its an abomination to look at anyway.

Shirou, on 27 Dec 2010, 11:50, said:

Future Tank is the only real competitor of Apoc and King Oni. Otherwise Allies have nothing big enough. And is really NICE.

I think that Future Tank should be equal to these two, in firepower, cost, armour. Not in the same Tier as Giga Fortress.
Edited by V.Metalic, 27 December 2010 - 12:46.

A correctly balanced and nicely varied game does not require every faction to have a counter unit for the enemies units. In Generals they did this right, where only China has a big tank with the overlord but that thing does not make the other stuff unbalanced.

With RA3 EA got lazy and made factions that look like each other just way too much. Generals shows you dont need a big tank to stop a big tank.

Anyway, that has little to do with my point. My point is that the Future tank is just a badly designed unit as a whole and would do better to be replaced. I mean come on, it can't even fire properly or it would create bugs.
Edited by Shirou, 27 December 2010 - 18:22.

Shirou said:

Well said. If I could like you, I would.

vader333, on 28 Dec 2010, 3:02, said:

The FutureTank is staying, end of discussion. Howerver, we are looking at buffing it a bit to make up for the Upheavel bug.

I also suggest giving it a different model, the half mech looking thing just doesn't fit the allies.

What does than? You want something like PzKpfw VIII Maus? Or AT-AT? This fits the best, showing the great advancements of FutureTech regarding AI, and it is proved that humanoid appearence is best for robots, but the tracks makes it capable of crossing rough terrains, and because Allies are not so advanced regarding robotic legs mechanics. And it reminds me Number/Johny 5 robot from Short Circuit series, which was American production.

Not in the slightest, a WW2 era tank and a star wars mech don;t fit in the slightest.

I suggested replacing the half mech with a proper high tech tank design.

Slye_Fox, on 29 Dec 2010, 0:50, said:

If you havent noticed, it is high-tech tank design. Tank design of the future. Look at Terminator series...

Just because that's a possible future, doesn't mean it fits in with the design scheme.

Maybe we could look to Tiberium Twilight for inspiration on hi-techy. I particularly like the TCN Node. I dunno, I might just take up modeling the future-future tank now that I'm done with the disgusting Desert Eagle Model.
Edited by vader333, 30 December 2010 - 08:38.

vader333, on 30 Dec 2010, 2:37, said:

No! We will not be looking at TT for "high-tech" models. In case anyone noticed, we still don't have a modeler or a skinner; so we can't just start remodeling the original RA3 units......
Edited by NRedAlert, 30 December 2010 - 14:46.

NRedAlert, on 30 Dec 2010, 15:44, said:

Unless someone from the guys suggesting this should want to join the team to remodel it themselves, when they have probably better imagination of it, and in Slye_Fox's case, is a modeller, so he should make it himself.

I might, although right now I only have one model in my portfolio =P, and it's from a tutorial: the IMI Desert Eagle. Took me a hell of a long time as the Tutorial had so many gaps in it (that sob assumed everyone following his tut could model as well as him, so he left the entire gun grip out!).

But I think I want to work on this instead:
Edited by vader333, 31 December 2010 - 12:56.