5129 replies to this topic

[Tyhednus]

Add a seal in there and we got ourselves a carpool. I'd imagine the bloatick would be driving because I don't trust either the Ivan nor the SEAL.

At least Ivan knows when your birthday is and the seal knows who is your daddy.

[Wayward Winds]

Not to mention the bloatick just asked how the heck it's supposed to see the road from down by the peddles.

[Tyhednus]

Someone else thinks Magnetrons should stop Drillers, Tyrants and Wormqueens from burrowing when being hit?

[Flandre]

Someone else thinks Magnetrons should stop Drillers, Tyrants and Wormqueens from burrowing when being hit?

Ah yes, their magnetic beam should work

[Handepsilon]

I'm thinking more of Hammer, Yunru's Earthbreaker and Wallbuster being able to force the drilling tanks out, or at least damage them. But then we'll have balance issue

Edited by Handepsilon, 17 February 2017 - 03:26 AM.

[GuardianGI]

I'm not sure if this is the right place for it, but here's a question that I've been wondering the whole time (since I started RA2)...
Why can't we build structures on top of ruins? (Especially when some campaign maps starts off with a structure on top of ruins, like the soviet mission "The Raven")

[Wayward Winds]

That brings to mind something Ares is apparently capable of.  Long ago, this video (https://www.youtube....h?v=PKVALt8yZGw) popped up showing some of the possible applications.

One of the features later on in the video was "enhanced rubble", where destroyed buildings would leave behind a foundation, and you could use an engineer to resurrect them.  I'm wondering if the destroyed building rubble in MO is there because it was originally planned to implement this feature, but later cancelled for whatever reason and the remaining foundations were never removed.

...Incidentally, the concrete bunker tech building left a foundation behind when you destroyed it in MO3.0, but doesn't now we've moved to MO3.3.  Hmm...

 

There was a second video as well (https://www.youtube....h?v=PNsK3-Putz0).  It's quite interesting going back through them and seeing which features made it into MO and which ones didn't...

[Divine]

It kinda occured to me that Ares also allows improvements to building garrisoning. Perhaps it would be a good idea to make building garrisons a more versatile, but also more of a makeshift solution? By allowing more types of infantry to enter buildings, but also making them more vulnerable inside, by making normal weapons damage infantry a bit inside buildings and also by adding more weapons that could clear out garrisons. For example, Epsilon Stinger's toxin spray, Soviet flamethrower weapons, snipers of all sorts etc.... In other words, C&C Generals type garrisoning, with some additional weakness of the garrisoned infantry even against normal weapons. 

[CLAlstar]

That brings to mind something Ares is apparently capable of.  Long ago, this video (https://www.youtube....h?v=PKVALt8yZGw) popped up showing some of the possible applications.

One of the features later on in the video was "enhanced rubble", where destroyed buildings would leave behind a foundation, and you could use an engineer to resurrect them.  I'm wondering if the destroyed building rubble in MO is there because it was originally planned to implement this feature, but later cancelled for whatever reason and the remaining foundations were never removed.

...Incidentally, the concrete bunker tech building left a foundation behind when you destroyed it in MO3.0, but doesn't now we've moved to MO3.3.  Hmm...

 

There was a second video as well (https://www.youtube....h?v=PNsK3-Putz0).  It's quite interesting going back through them and seeing which features made it into MO and which ones didn't...

That would require making rubbles for several buildings which do not have those. So i think its out of question.

[SukaHati]

From what I can infer, mind controlled cars are treated differently from engineered cars?

Yes, they treated differently. I think the game treated any mind controlled units as hostile while engineered cars has a tag that caused hostile faction not auto-acquired them.

[Bernadiroe]

I'm not sure if this is the right place for it, but here's a question that I've been wondering the whole time (since I started RA2)...
Why can't we build structures on top of ruins? (Especially when some campaign maps starts off with a structure on top of ruins, like the soviet mission "The Raven")

Oh gosh I've been wanting for this rubble that blocks off building structures on it to go away a long time ago...

 

Unless I'm using Allies that I can delete the building entirely with C.Legionnaire, and thus allowing me to build on it (or just for the sake of making the map look clean), I have to deal with the leftover unremoveable rubbles...

If we won't get those function which engineer can reconstruct a destroyed building, can we have those destroyed building  rubbles removed in 3.3.1...?

[Handepsilon]

Or at least make us able to construct on the rubbles.

 

I mean all other RTS do that, most of the time

[triatmoic]

i think the Seitaad Ballista needs a nerf.

 

-Disables units and tanks and buildings.

-Deals dmg to stuff above.

-Has a AOE splash

-Range 12 which out ranges T3 defences

-if massed with other units its basically a win game button.

Edited by triatmoic, 17 February 2017 - 11:27 PM.

[X1Destroy]

All stolen techs should be OP, if it's not a win button there's no point in getting it with spies.

Iron Dragon, Quickshifter, Apoc, Future tanks, Phantasm....spam are the same.

If anything, the weaker ones like Lionheart and Achelon need buffs to make them actually a threat.

[CLAlstar]

Thats where you are wrong. Those are supposed to give you an edge over the enemy, not be a game winning unit. Also,T3 defense range is 14, outranging seitaads.

[Flandre]

Thats where you are wrong. Those are supposed to give you an edge over the enemy, not be a game winning unit. Also,T3 defense range is 14, outranging seitaads.

Except for the Syckle, it's just plain what.

[DarkEmblem]

So I am going on a limb here and say that the plague splatters need to be buffed. So I've been testing a some scenerios with them in a single player game and a few times without AI to see their capabilities.

However, I need to say that they are severely lacking in my opinion.

So a short description of the unit:

 

-Once they hit, they reduce the enemy (or ally) it's armor by 10% 

-Very low accuracy - Shots aren't a guarenteed hit, can miss even while the enemy is standing still.

-Squishy

-Leaves toxic gas where projectile lands, does damage over time to units standing within.

 

Now, my problem with this unit is that it literally never hits when enemy units are moving, making them hardly useful in micro-active battles.
It's a siege unit, but it actually does pretty low damage against defences, prism towers for example.

Their armor debuff has no AoE. I put a bunch of my own tanks in a group and made a plaguesplatter hit the one in the middle. Not only did it miss the one in the middle but hit the one to the right of it, which was the only one who got the armor debuff.

It doesn't even kill t1 infantry in one hit if it actually hits, so it's not a great damage dealer either. It only does okay-damage if the opponent is stupid enough to keep standing in the middle of the toxic clouds in leaves behind.

Now, the armor debuff is probably stackable. (Only 10%) But the chances it's ever going to hit the same unit again are quite slim.

 

So to actually make this unit more useful, I'd simply recommend making the AoE armor debuff larger (if the AoE even exists), which is in my opinion maybe the only buff that's needed to make this unit more useful. 
I know the plaguesplatters are becoming a tiny bit cheaper in the next patch, but that still hardly makes up for what they do in my opinion.

Inb4 someone tries to convice me they are actually very useful; No.

[CLAlstar]

Unlike other siege units, it's still cheap and decent in big numbers. SC all about spamming, eh?

 

But i agree, they are underused. Even by me, whosometimes just for lolz mass splatters and rage them into enemy forces. I think they have single cell AoE but im not certainly sure. Buff is not stackable afaik.

[DarkEmblem]

I actually thought you'd disagree, hence my last sentence xD

[Damfoos]

I'm not playing SC in PvP so can't judge their true usefullness from personal experience, but I wouldn't build them because of very low accuracy and mediocre damage against even their intended targets anyway. In PvE I don't use them because of that, they just feel weak and boring to use. While the armor debuff is nice, it is hardly useful if you'll never manage to hit the target you need to debuff, and unlike with the other artillery you can't rely on this unit to counter infantry or vehicles either because of low firepower and low accuracy (sure SCUDs aren't really useful vs moving units, but their range and damage against structures makes up for that, and Magnetrons affect one of the key parameters of units - their mobility). It is somewhat reliable against buildings and maybe deployed GIs/GGIs if you can come close, but that's IF you are lucky enough to hit them. So why would one actively use a unit which is effective only against one kind of targets, and even this efficiency is mediocre? That's why they aren't appealing to use. I would suggest to either give their shots bigger AoE/more poison clouds per explosion, or do one more thing: make them spawn not poison clouds but some sort of acid clouds (of grey, pink, yellow or any other distinct color), and make those clouds deal more damage to vehicles and structures than poison does. If that's not enough,make these clouds apply the armor debuff to any vehicle they touch (so it won't matter if you hit the vehicle with the initial shot or not, the clouds will do the job).

Edited by Damfoos, 18 February 2017 - 01:27 PM.