The Old Beasts Rumble On Again! - Garry's Mod

GCX and pewpew can run on the same server. They're interchangeable. So it is settled. Pewpew/GCX. We're using Karbines weapons, because they're far more balanced than other weapons. Scripted ammo will be reinstated, and limits on the amounts of weapons per class are (obviously) going to be there. [editline]12th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=kp3;27370604]I will enter this competition and win with my ever so spectacular gcx cannon spam[/QUOTE] cannonspam is not allowed, weapons per class will be dictated. [editline]12th January 2011[/editline] [quote] [B]COMBAT[/B] [B]VEHICLES[/B] All vehicles should be parented. Nocollide-All will be used on the entire vehicle, except its wheels and optionally unparented parts of the hull. Tanks are tanks. Hovertanks and Omnitanks are allowed; if they are used, you must sacrifice 20% of your weight for the enhanced mobility. [B]Type Weight Gun Max Speed [/B] Light 20t 37mm 50mph Medium 40t 75mm 35mph Heavy 60t 120mm 15mph Self-propelled gun/tank destroyers are similar to tanks, but turretless. As a result, they cannot fire on the run as well, and work better in a defensive position, but can have heavier armor. They can be used interchangably with tanks--meaning a medium STUG can go against a medium tank. Much like in World War II, self-propelled guns are a "class up" from the equal weight tank--a light tank can have a medium's armament, etc. [B] Type Weight Gun Max Speed [/B] Light 20t 75mm 50mph Medium 40t 120mm 35mph Heavy 60t 203mm 15mph [/quote] [editline]12th January 2011[/editline] here's an example of e2 scripted ammo, what I mean: [url]http://www.garrysmod.org/downloads/?a=view&id=77422[/url]

I don't like this any more.

I simplified it, now what's wrong?

So a heavy self propelled gun can have a nuclear cannon or other super heavy armament brb winning [editline]12th January 2011[/editline] But in all seriousness I like the weight classes

I'm bailing out, this is becoming surrealistic and incredibly derpy. It's obvious bluereaper is an trol and tries to piss me off with derpy derp rules. It is what you make it, jesus christ. If I want to mount a 120mm cannon on a light tank I fucking will; it still won't exceed the tank weight limit. Why? It exists in real life so I don't see the real world objecting to your derpy rules. [B]Don't restrict the guns, man.[/B] :I

[QUOTE=Satyria;27386263]I'm bailing out, this is becoming surrealistic and incredibly derpy. It's obvious bluereaper is an trol and tries to piss me off with derpy derp rules. It is what you make it, jesus christ. If I want to mount a 120mm cannon on a light tank I fucking will; it still won't exceed the tank weight limit. Why? It exists in real life so I don't see the real world objecting to your derpy rules. Don't restrict the guns, man. :I[/QUOTE] Thanks, I was trying to sum up my feelings as to why I don't like the rules. Fits perfectly :hf: Example of derpy firepower: KV-2

[QUOTE=Satyria;27386263]I'm bailing out, this is becoming surrealistic and incredibly derpy. It's obvious bluereaper is an trol and tries to piss me off with derpy derp rules. [B]WUT[/B] It is what you make it, jesus christ. If I want to mount a 120mm cannon on a light tank I fucking will; it still won't exceed the tank weight limit. [B]NO, but a PT76 doesn't mount a 120mm, so why should yours?[/B] Why? It exists in real life so I don't see the real world objecting to your derpy rules. [B]Don't restrict the guns, man.[/B] :I[/QUOTE] very balanced. GCXspam and "20 tank guns on a light tank" sort of crap is what I was trying to avoid. Would you like it if you had a single-gun tank, and someone just mounted a shitload of weapons on their and blew you away, no challenge? The original RTC had the same restrictions, so did Karbine's. I can't access the original thread anymore else I'd post it. But yea, there's a reason for the restrictions--BALANCE. [quote=Karbine]classes Light tank 5-10 tonnes / 37mm or 40mm / 50mph / 2 man crew Medium tank 10-20 tonnes / 75mm / 35mph / 2 man crew Heavy tank (MBT) 20-40 tonnes / 120mm / 45mph / 3 man crew (driver, commander, gunner) Superheavy tank 40-unlimited tonnes / 230mm / 20mph / 3 man crew (driver, commander, gunner)[/quote] [quote=Me] Light 20t 37mm 50mph Medium 40t 75mm 35mph Heavy 60t 120mm 15mph[/quote] I think my classes favor armor a bit more, I'm going off of roughly WW2 weights, but still. [editline]13th January 2011[/editline] when the hell was the last time you had a gcombat duel?

[QUOTE=RedReaper;27394046]very balanced. GCXspam and "20 tank guns on a light tank" sort of crap is what I was trying to avoid. Would you like it if you had a single-gun tank, and someone just mounted a shitload of weapons on their and blew you away, no challenge? The original RTC had the same restrictions, so did Karbine's. I can't access the original thread anymore else I'd post it. But yea, there's a reason for the restrictions--BALANCE. I think my classes favor armor a bit more, I'm going off of roughly WW2 weights, but still. [editline]13th January 2011[/editline] when the hell was the last time you had a gcombat duel?[/QUOTE] I'm sorry, I should have mentioned that I don't use GCX. Your reply was for nothing and I can't even agree on your references since I don't even want to remember GCX.

[QUOTE=Satyria;27396530]I'm sorry, I should have mentioned that I don't use GCX. Your reply was for nothing and I can't even agree on your references since I don't even want to remember GCX.[/QUOTE] Why would it matter if I had a set weight class anyway? ACF uses the same damn thing, put a 120 on a light tank and ppl will rage you.

[QUOTE=RedReaper;27397069]Why would it matter if I had a set weight class anyway? ACF uses the same damn thing, put a 120 on a light tank and ppl will rage you.[/QUOTE] Not really, no. Everyone knows what you sacrifice by doing it. I would love to battle a light tank with a 120mm cannon, because I'd win.

you bastards want balance, use acf.

[QUOTE=Satyria;27397249]Not really, no. Everyone knows what you sacrifice by doing it. I would love to battle a light tank with a 120mm cannon, because I'd win.[/QUOTE] Take giant gun. Sit hulldown. Fire gun. Pieces everywhere. ...you're missing the point aren't you...

Sure the light tank has a 120, but it's also a light tank. If we want this to have any kind of 'fairness', maybe judge based on firepower instead of resilience. I'd suggest a function of firepower, effective armour and mobility but that would be nowhere near simple. Shame because I liked the weight classes but what can I do v:v:v

[QUOTE=Amplar;27398703]you bastards want balance, use acf.[/QUOTE] I'm inclined to, but I'm still seeing what everyone wants. [editline]13th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Splambob;27398715]Sure the light tank has a 120, but it's also a light tank. If we want this to have any kind of 'fairness', maybe judge based on firepower instead of resilience. I'd suggest a function of firepower, effective armour and mobility but that would be nowhere near simple. Shame because I liked the weight classes but what can I do v:v:v[/QUOTE] weight classes in acf are a mix of armor, firepower, etc, anyway, but not everyone uses or knows acf (it's kind of uselessly complicated in some areas). Besides, it's annoying that you can't build something offline and then use it online, it has to be built online.

[QUOTE=RedReaper;27398704]Take giant gun. Sit hulldown. Fire gun. Pieces everywhere. ...you're missing the point aren't you...[/QUOTE] That's called a fucking tank destroyer. Learn the fuck up. If you want to put a 120mm cannon on a light tank then in order to keep it as a light tank you'd have to get rid of almost all your armor since the gun WEIGHS AS MUCH AS A GOD DAMNED 120MM CANNON!

[QUOTE=Amplar;27398703]you bastards want balance, use acf.[/QUOTE] [editline]14th January 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=RedReaper;27398704]Take giant gun. Sit hulldown. Fire gun. Pieces everywhere. ...you're missing the point aren't you...[/QUOTE] It's clear we don't share the same experience when it comes to ACF. If you mount a 120 mm gun on a light tank, that is, a tank that will have its maximum weight at 20 tons, you get an incredibly imbalanced tank. You get a tank that wouldn't be well armored at all, and a gun that fires incredibly slowly, where the same factor applies to every gun on wether or not you hit the target at all: the human factor. There is no one-shot gun in ACF, it doesn't work like that. I'm not saying this to piss you off. If there were rules for both systems, I won't vote for a gun restriction for ACF.

chill bros how about we make up some kind of standard weight sacrifice for each gun, that way you guys can still duct tape laser satellites to your tanks or have a 120 pointing every 15 degrees in a circle without breaking the rules

Prime contraption forum drama! [img]http://img264.imageshack.us/img264/6382/ohthedramaup0.jpg[/img] [QUOTE=Splambob;27400225]chill bros [B]AGREED[/B] how about we make up some kind of standard weight sacrifice for each gun, that way you guys can still duct tape laser satellites to your tanks or have a 120 pointing every 15 degrees in a circle without breaking the rules[/QUOTE] Duct taping laser satellites to tanks is why weight classes were first introduced in the original RTC: realism and fairness. Way back in the day, people would do that, but it isn't realistic or fair--the winner will always be whoever has more guns. Besides, a 50-ton tank shouldn't have a 380mm gun on it, it'd be unrealistic (or a sturmtiger). It seems no matter what I do someone will disagree vehemently and raise a stink about it.

(or a sturmtiger) is the reason why the drama is around, tanks with op guns do exist. Seeing as restricting the guns is going to make the contest unpopular, let the guns be paid for in armour strength. You can still classify the tanks according to weight bands, if we get some good gun weight penalties in place then there shouldn't be a problem

I don't see why the ACFers complain about weight classes. if you go unrealistic with ACF anyway, you're gonna get raged, so why on earth complain now?

Dunno, weren't we going with gcx/pewpew anyway? Just saying that if we still use weight classes then the pro of having a fucking huge gun can come at the cost of paper armour, it'll balance out.

[QUOTE=RedReaper;27400652]I don't see why the ACFers complain about weight classes. if you go unrealistic with ACF anyway, you're gonna get raged, so why on earth complain now?[/QUOTE] Yeah let's just drop it. It seems like we're walking in circles anyway. :V

To be quite honest more factors effect balance than just "weight" and "weapons" and at the end of the day, it almost always comes down to the builder. No set of rules, without being needlessly complex and limiting will stop this.

in acf weight classes make balance very simple, you have to keep all of your ammo, guns, and armor in the target weight so that you don't have a 500mm thick box with a 140mm cannon. the only thing the weight classes can't cover is agility, but Kaf's already nearly finished ACF engines

snip

the engines are great, all you do is adv bs your wheels to the engine's output, and it does the steering and shit. they have power curves, gears, everything. that way tanks will work like tanks. A heavy tank will struggle. The engines have weight based on their power- so it fills the gap of mobility in the weight class. [editline]14th January 2011[/editline] and the source engine has nothing to do with ACF; the engine doesn't hinder acf's realism.

ACF is the overall best option. It takes into account sloping (thus adding another dimension to construction planning) and helps balance out the firepower:weight ratios.

yes. ACF requires a lot more out of an individual to make an efficient vehicle however. you basically have to [i]engineer[/i] a vehicle for it, which is what makes it so much fun. [editline]15th January 2011[/editline] I put many hours, sometimes days and weeks into single tanks, dozens of iterations, variants, and models. And I watch them steadily fail. ):

It seems acf just isn't for you. Perhaps you should go toddle with gcx or something?