5129 replies to this topic

[OfficialLolicon]

I need to question this : Why would defenses have one of the best armor quality when their 1x1 size already made them far tougher than most other structures anyways? Because you know, Westwood AoE logic and all that

 

Huh, maybe for holding out long enough as a defense?

Defenses are suppose to be tough to defend bases after all.  

 

 

( now i'll probably get told off since i have to listen to OfficialLolicon since that persons had a hard time reading the small text :L and people also get hasty when i gotta type something this long. )

IMO, the long replies are fine.

The small texts just really hurt my eyes since I don't have good eye sight, lmao. My apologies if I sounded rude, I just wanted to point it out. (If it does matter, I'm fine with any text color tho)

 

 

Oh right, gyrocopters. Those are the second one, pretty decent against structures but holy crap do they do suck against 1*1 buildings.

 

Gyros are very very horrible against 1x1 structures, since they're more design to hit big structures (like barracks)

Basing from other topics, is the Irkalla always being supported by Salamanders? Salamanders are really hard to counter because of confusion rays and a-bit tough armor.

I once countered them with 15 Teratorns with a deployed SODAR nearby, but a couple of them got shred. Without a reprocessor, that would be economy breakdown.

Maybe Giantsbane are good too? not sure...

 

Not related but, anyone else notice Uragaan outranges Irkalla?

Edited by OfficialLolicon, 24 October 2018 - 03:11 PM.

[Divine]

I've noticed that the Jaguar Tank's driver is now named "Bomb Pilot". I recall it used to be called "Desperate Driver", IMHO that was a better name for it.

[Handepsilon]

Arandomperson, do you even know what Warhead means in RA2?

It's damage modifier stats, not Scud launcher rockets and the likes. What Alstar was saying is that units need to damage towers more than they are now.

[CrimsonRaider]

Maybe Giantsbane are good too? not sure...

3-4 giantsbane is enough to kill Irkalla.

 

Not related but, anyone else notice Uragaan outranges Irkalla?

Yes, but it doesn't have a chance

 

[Attenpeter]

So sorry for the long delay for an answer.

 

 

um. what? aircraft or actual AA units...? i'm having a bit of trouble understanding this :L

I talk in the entire post about defence what does makes your think that that I switch the subject in the middle of my post? Of course I mean anti air buildings.

 

um. what do you mean by shadow... chimera cores are fine, it gives epsilon the upper hand by being able to take a more sneaky approach, i also don't want to see people just using hazequads and simply ignoring chimera cores.

I mean Gap Generator in my native language its was literally translated into Shadow Generator, my bad.

Hazequads are HQ only so I don’t think it’s a problem also the bigger effect radius of the chimera core alone should prevent players not ignore then entirely.

 

the mcv is fine. if it was adjusted like that. people could more than easily destroy an mcv and it would be way too punishing early game.

If you lose an MCV early game you should say gg, because of the amount of hp they have its not really that easy to destroy then most rushes mostly focus on killing miners, wf and getting map control anyway. So I don’t see here an argument against against increasing the price to prevent base crawl here.

 

thats you you have sodar arrays. just activate the deploy ability on them after sending them somewhat near to a shrike nest. it will boost their damage. they do have good range so it doesn't have to be perfectly near shrike nests. also make sure you make some terratrons i think they are called. they are extremely effective for taking out air units.

I do not understand why do you have to build an Sodar array to boost to get the strike nest and have still worse results against  flying infantry, I just proposed a small modification of the infantry amour damage coefficient. Of course now know of Terratrons, but it’s just a bad argument, if unit A is bad at his job why not simply use Unit B and ignore the problem with unit A entirely why not fixing unit A instead?

 

“nah. they are fine :L most foehn players dont base crawl as much these days so i can't see it being much of an issue”

“sonic emitters weren't that grand last patch”

 “find that quite opposite dude. barely anyone uses defenses these days”

Just wondering how many pvp battles have you played since the last patch 10-15? Just wondering? You don’t seem to share any of the opinions of people I have played with.

in fact, the antreas battery i think its spelt could do with more hp. like. really... its too squishy in my opinion. but thats just my opinion.

WTF REEE just why they take already to long to kill?!? Just for your info all the t3 defence buildings have 1650 hp and the same amour class.

 

i'd also appreciate some proof of the excessive basecrawling. and not just videos. some basic statistics/charts would be nice. nothing overboard but at least a basic tally on how many players you verse who basecrawl ya.

WHAT THE FUK?!? You really want to see charts/ statistics, what’s wrong with you? Do you even think anybody here is documenting in how many games somebody does base crawls? Pretty sure not even Westwood made something like that when they made redalert2 mp. The maximum would I consider realistic is maybe which Fraction has what win/lose ratio but even that seem unlikely with 12 subfraktions with the amount of players MO has or do you think the game sends tons of data after every game to the mod makers?!?

 

warhead buff? no thanks. defenses can only engage em when they are around 45% on their way to their destination. easily leaving shrike nests and gattling cannons exceptionally vulnerable to warheads already. also note that the 2 best artillery units in game are submarines. with warheads.

Pretty sure you don’t know what the term “warhead” in RA2 engine, Its just mean damage modifier for example why dosen't do a tank round much dmg to infantry or why mirage tanks  dosen't well against buildings.

 

. but having issues with structures seems awkward... 1 person "had" complained about it here ( as far as i have seen so far ) so i was expecting the problem to breeze over and then you come along and bloat it out even longer, forcing me to create this overlong post.

One guy have to been the first to start an discussion about some problems that’s why I bring it up if everybody here doesn’t agree with my opinion fine but it’s the point of forums to discuss controversial issues.

hence why terratrons are an awesome AA counter. geez. you are making me look good with your... well... incompetence. sorry for being rude. but wow... i'd except you to know that AND take it into relevance. :O

Its strange how do give you call one of the longest playing and experienced players of MO players basic tips and call him incompetent.

 

If you ever want to play with me just say it I am really interested just how good you are, I play 2v2 or 3v3 most of the time player myself but I would not mind in this case. Pretty sure even Alstar would not too after you called him incompetent

[Polaris Starnor]

While you’re all talking about defence balance (which I agree, need to be destroyed more quickly), I have some complaints about the discrepancy in power in naval warfare (specifically the naval units in general, although there are potential support units to assist navies.) . I feel in the naval department Epsilon and Foehn (surprise surprise) are are too far ahead of the Allies and Soviets for the most part, especially the former, for their price destroyers are able to do their job, but against the masses of piranhas and squids from Epsilon, and the Foehn Swordfishes, they can’t keep up, to my experience typhoons are still better options than destroyers, and although the Allies can get battleships, their T3 naval devastator, they’re still just “shark bait” to the nautiluses and swordfish mobs. Soviets are still able to keep up to some extent, typhoons are quite decent due to their submersion and are generally able to compete with Epsilon and Foehn navies to some extent. While it’s nice to see the Allies and Soviets relatively close to their vanilla selves in terms of their navy, they need some better options when going up against Epsilon and Foehn. On the contrary, Epsilon, and especially Foehn could be knocked down afew pegs, Epsilon less so, despite all units being submerged besides the mandjet, they generally need a diverse naval force to go head to head with other navies, but some minor debuffs might still do them well in terms of balance. Foehn however, is ridiculous, Swordfishes are generally able to mow down naval foes to the point where angelsharks are generally a side thought, and Leviathans are just pain, in some naval duels with my friend, they just pass for an improvized warship of death, not even Epsilon’s submersion can keep up when poking out of sea for even a little while is enough for leviathans to crush a small platoon of piranhas and squids due to the projectile’s homing capabilities, while aircraft carriers could do the same, to my experience the explosive splash damage of a leviathan trumps out the focused fire of hornets, not to mention the nanohealing available to them, making leviathans the most durable and deadly naval siege units to my experience . I feel that the Foehn navy could use maybe 1-2 new units along with numerous debuffs to the Swordfish and Leviathan, the Swordfish is far to flexible and leviathans should not have such a large spot in a naval skirmish, at least remove the homing if it’s possible, the nanohealing for last bastion is a game changer in of itself though.

Edited by Polaris Starnor, 27 October 2018 - 06:26 AM.

[Solais]

In general naval warfare should be expanded on all fronts. :V

[Polaris Starnor]

That to, I just like the feel of naval warfare abit more than just regular land, but that’s just me.

[OfficialLolicon]

The entire naval expansion for gameplay is a thing that was talked about a few times now.

I think it's just too much work I believe, although I do agree that naval improvement should be a thing.

 

Speaking of naval warfare, the Naval Mine support power isn't really a mine in how it's use. Mine's are suppose to be stationary traps, but this one just pops out in the middle of enemy fleets.

I suggest hooking a range to this support power so that it can only be deployed around the Naval Yard in a limited, not everywhere in the battlefield.

I know it won't resolve the issue of making it appear in the middle of an enemy fleet when they got into range, but at least it will prevent players from just popping it next to an enemy naval yard/fleet that are miles away.

[Polaris Starnor]

Or just toss a timer on the naval mine like for other mines, I figured about the naval expansion though, so I’d be happy with abit of balancing it out

[PACER]

Actually, considering the fact that a bunch of ships can detect stealth, and those without detection hardly ever go alone in the hand of an able commander. Naval mine will be severely crippled by having limited range.

 

Or just make it a defensive structure like other mines, with or without build limit.

Edited by PACER, 28 October 2018 - 04:35 PM.

[CLAlstar]

Regarding naval warfare, i agree - tho Allies can manage just fine, if they reach tier 3. Soviets have most of issues in that aspect. Typhoon Torpedos tend to miss on moving targets and their only vs ship alternative are Seawolves. Personally i wouldnt mind expanding naval a bit by doing something similar to what RA3 done in that aspect - Making amphibious units a bit better in naval fights, but then again, some of those are already specialized in something. Units that could help with ground battles but overall being more efficient in water would be a nice addition.

[Damfoos]

and their only vs ship alternative are Seawolves

 

Not sure if it can be called a "vs ship" at all though, it takes a lot of them to start doing some visible damage to other ships. It's like a water version of a halftrack with a machine gun that's slightly better vs structures.

[Divine]

Soviets have a repair drone with the ability to cross water, also Crazy Ivans, surely those are good for something?

[Tathmesh]

It would be nice to have a few naval defensive structures.

 

These can just be the normal defenses, but in addition, every faction should have a defense that detects submerged units. This is mostly to nerf Reshephs (and Akulas).

 

 

After that, it would be nice if non-amphibious factions got faction-specific defenses to improve their naval power. If they get units, it would probably have to be naval-only to prevent the units from upsetting balance on land. 

Edited by Tathmesh, 29 October 2018 - 08:42 PM.

[Solais]

Maybe a submarine/ship combo unit using the new ares features, for Soviet. By default it's a submarine, but it can't actually attack at all (maybe it could be faster than the Typhoon). For it to attack, it's needed to be deployed, which causes it to emerge from the water and use its anti-ship cannons, however, while in this mode, it can't move. Sorta like a reverse-Sweeper in water.

Edited by Solais, 29 October 2018 - 11:21 PM.

[Polaris Starnor]

That doesn’t really fit the Soviet mantra though although they should get some kind of naval devastator so it’s not just the typhoons doing the anti ship and occasionally Seawolves.

[Divine]

Just give them a Tesla ship, maybe with some depth charges against submarines. (I rly want to see depth charges in this game)

[Solais]

Well, isn't Soviet using submarines in general would be against their mantra? Being stealthy and all. It almost doesn't fit them at all. Epsilon got the most submarines as they are a stealthy faction, Allies got the most diverse and specialized, "easy to understand", just like the Allies. And Foehn got the most generic "feels like an afterthought" navy. While Soviet is just... kinda weird, like a bit of everything.

Edited by Solais, 30 October 2018 - 12:19 AM.

[Tathmesh]

Well, isn't Soviet using submarines in general would be against their mantra? Being stealthy and all. It almost doesn't fit them at all. Epsilon got the most submarines as they are a stealthy faction, Allies got the most diverse and specialized, "easy to understand", just like the Allies. And Foehn got the most generic "feels like an afterthought" navy. While Soviet is just... kinda weird, like a bit of everything.

 

I don't think it's a huge deal. Seawolves already feel like a "powerhouse"-type unit since it can deal with air, has reasonable armor, and has an anti-ship weapon. 

 

Foehn isn't so bad, but they feel overdesigned compared to the other navies. Almost all the ships have spinboost, Whipray has SODAR boost, there's confusion for both land and air, and Leviathan has nanocharge. It's like all of the technologies of Foehn were crammed into the four units of Foehn navy.

 

If the other navies were designed like Foehn, then Allies boats would all be chronoshifting, all Dreadnought can be boosted using Overcharge to create Tesla missiles, and Epsilon can mind control naval and air units.