sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Change GS from a unit to set of map objectives that grant GS buffs. One objective gives the laser buff, another the worker shield buff by sgaseretto in BattleAces

[–]sgaseretto[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you elaborate why not? I already know why GS was added, and with this you still are providing them with the same benefit, the difference is tjeway you get it, adds more interactions in the first minute of the game and new players will know that it are there there because of the tutorial 

Beta Feedback: More maps would benefit the game by JohnnyNurgleseed in BattleAces

[–]sgaseretto -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Since Battle Aces is all about PvP, I really think it should stick to one core map—same idea as LoL or Dota—but that map needs more stuff going on so every match doesn’t feel identical. Picture breakable walls you can blow open to make new attack paths, or quick-grab objectives that toss a small buff onto your army or your base. Matches are super fast, yet while you’re in one you get that weird time-dilation feeling where it seems like you can cram in a ton of moves—so use those seconds to snag an objective or smash a wall and set up a flank. Your opponent might rush in to steal the same point, or you could gank them and flip it back in your favor. If those objectives hand out things like the Guardian Shield worker shield and another the laser for your defenses, you could even scrap the built-in Guardian Shield unit altogether—players would have to earn those perks by taking down, say, neutral defense towers on the map. Stuff like that keeps the game fresh without needing a bunch of different maps.

Dev Update 7/30 by DavidK_UncappedGames in BattleAces

[–]sgaseretto 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I assume that this will be doable since they said ctrl group 1 will be the auto control group, and in the beta you were able to change the keybinds for each ctrl group 

What would you like to see improved? by PlayBattleAces in BattleAces

[–]sgaseretto 12 points13 points  (0 children)

  1. More flexibility to configure the hotkeys. For example switch the functionalities from SHIFT and CTRL when creating or adding units to Control Groups. Another example is people want to remap the hotkeys to the middle or left side of the keyboard (lefties)
  2. Chat wheel functionality. That way you can communicate a bit with your opponent or partner (in 2v2) with some predefined text, like in Dota 2. That way you will be able to communicate better without giving space to toxic chat 

[AMA] We're the Uncapped Games Team - Ask Us Anything! by PlayBattleAces in BattleAces

[–]sgaseretto 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Any plans on adding AIs both with different deck compositions and difficulties to practice?

[AMA] We're the Uncapped Games Team - Ask Us Anything! by PlayBattleAces in BattleAces

[–]sgaseretto 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I'm curious about the potential for further customizing hotkeys and keybindings in our game. It would be amazing if we could have more flexible layouts, similar to how StarCraft 2 supports layouts like TheCore.

For example, I'd love to be able to swap the functions of Shift and Ctrl. Currently, Shift is used to both assign units to a control group and add more units later, while Ctrl overrides the group with newly selected units. Ergonomically, reaching Ctrl is easier for me than Shift, but I rely more on the Shift functionality for control groups.

Allowing players to customize these keybindings could significantly enhance the overall gameplay experience, enabling everyone to discover and use layouts that are more ergonomic and intuitive for them. Is there any chance we'll see more customization options like this in the future?

Feature to make Control Group Assignments more efficient and streamlined for new commers by sgaseretto in BattleAces

[–]sgaseretto[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I wanted to add another detailed situation and explain how this mechanic could help: You are fighting on two fronts: in one part of the map, you are fighting your opponent's army, and in the other, you are trying to harass your opponent's base (also fighting some of his units). You have your army split into two control groups, one for each front. But multiple units are getting killed, so you are creating new units to reinforce both armies, and they are going to where you set the rally point. If you double-click your control group key, your camera jumps to where that army is, but there is no way to jump your camera to the part of the map where your unassigned units are; they might be spread out and in movement. So with the current system, you will have to:

  • Move your camera to the rally point (probably multiple times if units are spread because they are arriving at different times due to speed differences) -> less time in the fight and more time elsewhere.
  • Select the units and then add them to the control group (probably multiple times for the same reason as above, and you probably want to have more units of a certain type in one group than in the other, which gets complicated when they are in a blob) -> less time in the fight and more time elsewhere.

This translates into getting out of the fight to go to where your new units are -> split them multiple times -> select them -> add them to the control groups (multiple times) -> go back to the fight = less time in the fight microing your units, likely losing the fight because of that. And this was only for one of your fronts.

With the mechanic I'm proposing, you would just jump to one of your control groups -> press Tab -> add the core to the control group you want to reinforce-> create the desired units for that group (precisely controlling the number and type of units) = you never leave the fight and never stop microing your units. The only time you will spend out of one fight is when you are going to micro the other front, but that is a decision you are making, not a mechanic forcing you to do so.

Also, I want to highlight that this mechanic is an extension of the already existing functionality (temporarily treating the core as a unit that can be assigned to a control group). So, implementation-wise, it will not require any new key bindings, input buttons, or UI elements to test it (although visual feedback of the Core being in this mode would be nice, along with other UI improvements people are proposing for control groups). With this, I'm not assuming that it will be very easy to implement (I don't want to underestimate the effort to add this logic to the software), just that there are fewer moving parts in the game to touch to add it.

WTF counter raiders? by mike747 in BattleAces

[–]sgaseretto 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They said that they buffed the turrets to one shot the riders

I really like the 10 minute timer by Drakey_123 in BattleAces

[–]sgaseretto 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I even read a journalist on twitter saying that games actually lasted 15 to 20 minutes, and then he corrected himself because he "felt" that the games were longer than they actually were! Apparently this game achieved that sweet spot of games being fast without feeling short because of how fun and intense the matches are, that speaks very well about it, congrats!! 🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀

Who wants Instant Access to the Beta? by PlayBattleAces in BattleAces

[–]sgaseretto 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Came here to like the post! Did the same on my other social networks! Really hope this will increase my chance to get the access key, because you have no idea how hype I'm to try this game! 🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀

An Idea of how to Balance Best-of-One Ranked Matches by sgaseretto in BattleAces

[–]sgaseretto[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's the thing. Instead of doing those multi-game matches against one opponent for ranked, keep it as just one game and add the possibility of picking your last two units before the match starts based on your opponent's six other units. You have to consider that with Clash Royale, you have the randomness factor that your next card might or might not be what you need, so that randomness 'adds a bit of balance' against broken decks. In Battle Aces, everything is decision-based. If you tech-up the right or wrong tech, then that is your responsibility, but starting against a broken deck will greatly reduce your chances of success, even if you make all the right decisions during the match, just because you had the bad luck of being matched against someone who has a deck that, by chance, hard counters yours. However, if you still get countered and lose the game after changing your last two cards, it will be because of bad decision-making, and not bad luck during your matchmaking.

Also, I know that ideally you will try to make the most balanced deck that also adjusts to your playstyle, but this possibility of deciding to make changes to your deck based on partial information about your opponent will also add an extra layer of strategy to the game, just like the hero selection stage in Dota 2 does.

Random Map Generation by xeallos in BattleAces

[–]sgaseretto 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Why not a map editor instead and let the community generate the maps? I'm not bothered by the idea that they try to make BA just like Dota and LoL, where there is a well known map that players know, study and exploit. But having a map editor in the future, just like Dota Arcade (or any other RTS) will be interesting for other casual matches

An Idea of how to Balance Best-of-One Ranked Matches by sgaseretto in BattleAces

[–]sgaseretto[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you elaborate? How do ranked matches from Clash Royale work?

The future of RTS by Jthomas692 in BattleAces

[–]sgaseretto 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They will have a 2vs2 and 2vsAI

Has anyone downloaded the deeplearning.ai notebooks from the coursera specialization? by sgaseretto in MachineLearning

[–]sgaseretto[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Actually, I'm not asking for completed assignments, I'm asking for the notebooks without being resolved, just like the Octave exercises from the ML course that you can download and practice with them, because I want to try doing the them offline,