853 replies to this topic

[Petya]

Rush tactics will still be possible, although makes the rusher even more vulnerable.

 

Furthermore Wolfhounds won't receive serious nerf, due to the fact that reaching T3 will be hard.

[Seth]

 

I agree too, it should be slower to go trough tiers because at some point if you want to rush you will relay on T2 and T3 units, T1 becoming obsolete(not in case of Con and SC)

In any game that I played I never saw someone actually attacking with T1.

Eg: most go for Borillos with Ivans and Pyros as soviets ,Wolfhounds, and Nuwa + Sentinel + Centurion (and the Dragonfly for support).

If the opponent attacks with T3 units, that's not supposed to be called a rush then.

 

 

Yeah, early constant attacks are called rush.

The massed units is actually called steamrolling.

[Abood]

This reminds me (and I'm really hoping for a response):

It's really, really annoying when I'm moving air units around, to find them clumping together into the same "cell" and getting damaged all at once by a stray rocket. Guardian GIs, patriot missiles, IFVs, and Catastrophes (not sure about archers) all have missiles that do otherwise negligible splash damage, but are really annoying because of this bug. To mitigate this, you could:

 

A) Remove the splash damage from the aforementioned units (which doesn't affect them in any other way).

 

B) Stop aerial units from clumping into one like that. This is obviously the best way to go, since the clumping can also be exploited to sneak a horde of 20 wolfhounds/thors/basilisks past air defenses or make them appear to be much fewer in number.

 

If you can't do B, then at least consider A, or perhaps another solution you see fit.

 

I really hope you're going to do something about this, as such a tiny effect has a significant impact on gameplay.

Edited by Abood, 20 January 2014 - 07:03 PM.

[Speeder]

B can't be done, the engine handles jumpjets in that way.

[Dutchygamer]

How exactly will you make teching harder? Making Tech Centers more expensive? Or applying a buildtime multiplier on them (same as on walls, but slower)?

Anyway, it sounds good to let teching be harder. Currently, some people tech so fast other players barely have their radar up when the enemy comes in with the first Commando/T3 units (don't ask, I've seen this happening). Especially with very hard-hitting units like Nuwas and Volkov this can be a pain. Makes it also more fun to fight with just T1/T2 units instead of having to worry your enemy hasn't out-teched you.

[Seth]

How exactly will you make teching harder? Making Tech Centers more expensive? Or applying a buildtime multiplier on them (same as on walls, but slower)?

Anyway, it sounds good to let teching be harder. Currently, some people tech so fast other players barely have their radar up when the enemy comes in with the first Commando/T3 units (don't ask, I've seen this happening). Especially with very hard-hitting units like Nuwas and Volkov this can be a pain. Makes it also more fun to fight with just T1/T2 units instead of having to worry your enemy hasn't out-teched you.

Yeah I tend to go for T3 reeeealy fast. Usually as China hehe.

Played a 2vs2, me as China, my ally as HQ and enemies LC and some allied subfaction. Thing is that when I had the Tech Center at ~33% that LC guy just deployed his WF.

Ofc I beat them  even if Nuwas + Centurion are sloooow I managed to tech up fast. Making Battle Labs cost 3500 and slow the build time would be great and will give a chance for the rush type factions(US, LC and SC) time to make a sizeable army.

 

And about Nuwas, lol I remember a game where I had to go afk for 2 minutes in game and had like 5 Nuwas in my base(in middle) and a SC guy rushed me. He just got pwned but I lost my CY so was GG.

[Toveena]

How exactly will you make teching harder? Making Tech Centers more expensive? Or applying a buildtime multiplier on them (same as on walls, but slower)?

Anyway, it sounds good to let teching be harder. Currently, some people tech so fast other players barely have their radar up when the enemy comes in with the first Commando/T3 units (don't ask, I've seen this happening). Especially with very hard-hitting units like Nuwas and Volkov this can be a pain. Makes it also more fun to fight with just T1/T2 units instead of having to worry your enemy hasn't out-teched you.

Increasing cost / Buildtime / Powerrequirement.. these are conventional and straight-forward approaches to nerf tech-rush.

    Unconventional methods IMO are : 1. Increasing Refinery/Miner cost (Like in Kane's Wrath)  2.Reducing miners' durability 3. Not 

    necessarily increasing  labs' powerrequirement, instead Increasing powerrequirement for all type of factories (Like in Ra3, u need

    almost 1 pp for 1 factory)

Edited by Toveena, 21 January 2014 - 02:29 AM.

[UprisingJC]

 

How exactly will you make teching harder? Making Tech Centers more expensive? Or applying a buildtime multiplier on them (same as on walls, but slower)?

Anyway, it sounds good to let teching be harder. Currently, some people tech so fast other players barely have their radar up when the enemy comes in with the first Commando/T3 units (don't ask, I've seen this happening). Especially with very hard-hitting units like Nuwas and Volkov this can be a pain. Makes it also more fun to fight with just T1/T2 units instead of having to worry your enemy hasn't out-teched you.

Increasing cost / Buildtime / Powerrequirement.. these are conventional and straight-forward approaches to nerf tech-rush.

    Unconventional methods IMO are : 1. Increasing Refinery/Miner cost (Like in Kane's Wrath)  2.Reducing miners' durability 3. Not 

    necessarily increasing  labs' powerrequirement, instead Increasing powerrequirement for all type of factories (Like in Ra3, u need

    almost 1 pp for 1 factory)

 

IMO, miners are costly enough(1400 for one), so it's not necessary to enhance their price.

However, reducing miners' durability sounds good, but maybe just a little bit as 4 aircrafts(Stormchildren) currently can almost take out 1 miner.

[lovalmidas]

For now, the method is to increase power requirement of War Factories, Radar and Tech Lab.

I can foresee the effects to:
- Nerf Turtling strategies, since tech buildings compete for power with base defences.
- Slow down Tech Rushes by ~a minute (but will not slow down reteching if the lab is taken out but the power plants remain standing)
- Increase the value of taking out power plants.
- Slow down Steamrollers since more War Factories = more Power consumption.

All in all, this will promote Early Rushers. Scorpion Cell and the United States might benefit quite a lot from this.

Miners and refineries are unchanged. Feel free to discuss them anyway.

[Abood]

B can't be done, the engine handles jumpjets in that way.

So, are you considering another solution?

 

'A' is easily done, as a few rockets already have no splash damage (Norio and Wolfhound, I believe).

[Zaker]

Miners and refineries are unchanged. Feel free to discuss them anyway.

well I think setting the miners cost a little bit down to,say 1200 or 1100 would enough though I'm ok with them staying at 1400

speaking of cost reductions I think the Barracuda deserves a bit of reduction (1700 for example) so it would a little bit more cost effective to build.

[Dutchygamer]

For now, the method is to increase power requirement of War Factories, Radar and Tech Lab.

I can foresee the effects to:
- Nerf Turtling strategies, since tech buildings compete for power with base defences.
- Slow down Tech Rushes by ~a minute (but will not slow down reteching if the lab is taken out but the power plants remain standing)
- Increase the value of taking out power plants.
- Slow down Steamrollers since more War Factories = more Power consumption.

All in all, this will promote Early Rushers. Scorpion Cell and the United States might benefit quite a lot from this.

Miners and refineries are unchanged. Feel free to discuss them anyway.

Keep the Refineries/Miners as they are. I always hated the fact that KW made them so goddamn expensive, combined with the extremely low sell value. Loosing a Miner (or even worse, Refinery) in that game was pretty much gg.
If you are going to increase power requirements, I may suggest applying it only to Radar and Tech Center, and not War Factory. Soviets can just run a Barracks, Refinery and WF on 1 Tesla Reactor + CY. Something extra (beside secondary Barracks) puts them in low power afaik. If you'd make it so that you need a second Tesla Reactor for Radar, but are then again close to low power (requiring a third Tesla Reactor, or take the low power), then it would be balanced for the Sovs as well. Allies and especially Epsilon would suffer less from this as their PP produce more power.

Besides the extra power requirements, I'd still suggest adding a slight buildtime multiplier to Tech Centers.

[Toveena]

Snipers...Some of my thoughts

 

    Sniper kills balance if added in skirmish games as everyone's saying, then why is sniper not imba in CnC3 / KW?

    Let's take a glance at cnc3's sniper.

    Basically It takes 3 shots for one sniper team to eliminate a rifle squad, but they are able to take out high priority targets like commados

    in one shot.

    While they are also cloaked and can fire out of APC, no one complains sniper teams in cnc3 being OP.

 

Adding sniper back in MO3 is possible with changes like cnc3:

    1.The lower tier of the infantry is the lesser damage it takes from sniper. For example, sniper needs 4 shots to take out a GI, but only 3 

    shots to take out  a  tesla trooper, and 2 shot to kill stalker.

    2.Slightly reduces sniper's weapon range(Compared to YR, and definitely cant outrange Morales ) and movement speed(sniper IFV

    ftw!).

    3.Raise it's prerequisite. IMO T3 is too high, T2 + Strat center then it is fine.

 

Btw some suggest sniper as USA only, if that is the case then we dont have to worry about Sniper-Fortress combo.

Edited by Toveena, 24 January 2014 - 07:00 AM.

[Martinoz]

" Sniper kills balance if added in skirmish games as everyone's saying, then why is sniper not imba in CnC3 / KW?

    Let's take a glance at cnc3's sniper."

Because sniper kills a one guy from a squad, not a whole squad with one shot.

[Tyhednus]

I have got a feeling that flak weapons do not enough damage to aircraft in comparison to other anti-aircraft weaponry. It takes a lot of shots to take down a airplane with flak.

[Martinoz]

Flak damage is about dealing splash damage to blobs of rocketeers or Warhawks. It isn't and rather won't be effective against single targets, still every Soviet side has got Sentinel/Wolfhound/Catas.

[Protozoan]

 

Miners and refineries are unchanged. Feel free to discuss them anyway.

well I think setting the miners cost a little bit down to,say 1200 or 1100 would enough though I'm ok with them staying at 1400

speaking of cost reductions I think the Barracuda deserves a bit of reduction (1700 for example) so it would a little bit more cost effective to build.

 

 

I agree with the Barracuda price reduction, but I don't know about the Miners.

 

EDIT: God damn I wish Jets could use waypoints T.T

 

And what's the deal with the Jets circling a target and acting like a moron, or when they circle the Airfield? It's really annoying and they could usually end up being killed.

Edited by Protozoan, 24 January 2014 - 01:06 PM.

[mevitar]

1.The lower tier of the infantry is the lesser damage it takes from sniper. For example, sniper needs 4 shots to take out a GI, but only 3 shots to take out a tesla trooper, and 2 shot to kill stalker.

Why should they take more shots to kill the lower the tier? It should be the other way around: the higher the tier, the more shots needs to fired at it to kill them. High tier infantry often wears heavy armor, why would heavy headwar protect less than no armor at all? Why wear a heavy armor in the first place if it makes you even more vulnerable to snipers (and how does that work anyway)?

BTW, this is exactly why Snipers were removed: because they made high-tier ground infantry useless. We're definitely not going to bring snipers in that form, because it would make T3 infantry worthless again (including most heroes).

[Solais]

What if Snipers would do low damage, but they would cause some sort of debuff to infantry, like Bleeding (losing life for a few seconds, can be healed instantly with a medic) or reducing some stats, like speed or firepower.

[Protozoan]

What if Snipers would do low damage, but they would cause some sort of debuff to infantry, like Bleeding (losing life for a few seconds, can be healed instantly with a medic) or reducing some stats, like speed or firepower.

 

fuk dat