2870 replies to this topic

[doctormedic]

How about giving USA unique paratrooper infantry units? Same role but better stats, different names and weapons.

That way they won't be redundant, because they won't be buildable.

you mean something like vanila red alert 2 USA?

[X1Destroy]

 

How about giving USA unique paratrooper infantry units? Same role but better stats, different names and weapons.

That way they won't be redundant, because they won't be buildable.

you mean something like vanila red alert 2 USA?

 

No. I meant replacing the GIs, GGIs that come with the paradrop support power.
And I do know that this is entirely possible.

Edited by X1Destroy, 18 June 2014 - 11:56 AM.

[Black/Brunez]

 

 

I don´t think this is the case.

 

Cryo Commando replacing the Legio for PF? Seriously, there are already 2 units which would be covering the Cryo Commando role (Blizzard Tank and Hailstorm). And than what? Battle Fortress Cryo combo? Meh.

 

And wtf is this whinning about bringing Chrono Commandoes back? It´s just a fucking SEAL with a chrono backpack. Boring. Just a Chrono Ivan armed with a weapon. And not even close do do the Legionnarie role.

 

I´m in favor of making Allied infantry more unique, but the Legionarrie replacements propoused is a NOPE. These changes are like proposing to give for one of the Soviets factions a replacement for the Desolator, armed only with an AA launcher.

Edited by Black/Brunez, 18 June 2014 - 12:35 PM.

[Bernadiroe]

I don't know if I get it right but, PF is common with cyro tech, USA is common with precision strike, EA is common with defensive or chrono tech.

 

Is it good to make suggestions based on this to make unique infantries for Allied?

If not, what should we used as a base to make the suggestions so it won't seem as ridiculous?

[Hecthor Doomhammer]

 

How about giving USA unique paratrooper infantry units? Same role but better stats, different names and weapons.

That way they won't be redundant, because they won't be buildable.

Infantry who can use laser weapon that replace in siege cadre.

 

 

Tanya?

[mevitar]

And laser troopers would be what exactly? Short range, so they're outclassed by GIs + Guardian GIs combo?
Laser Troopers + Seals = Who Needs Tanya Anymore?
 

I don't know if I get it right but, PF is common with cyro tech, USA is common with precision strike, EA is common with defensive or chrono tech.

Is it good to make suggestions based on this to make unique infantries for Allied?

If not, what should we used as a base to make the suggestions so it won't seem as ridiculous?

Units that have overlapping roles with already existing stuff won't get added.
Like what was mentioned by Brunez: Cryo Commando + Battle Fortress = Who Needs Blizzard Tanks Anymore?

Edited by mevitar, 18 June 2014 - 03:38 PM.

[Petya]

Some infantries/units are kept as stolen tech stuff for purpose, because they are too powerful to be normal infantries/units.

[fff]

Not only that, lore-wise it wouldn't make any sense considering that the laser rifle Tanya is using is a prototype miniaturized laser rifle that is currently experimental. Common infantry would not be using those when its project is in alpha stage...

[X1Destroy]

Why would it be armed with experimental weapons to begin with?

SEAL with traditional assault rifle and rocket launcher as an anti-everything infantry sounds better.

[doctormedic]

Why would it be armed with experimental weapons to begin with?

SEAL with traditional assault rifle and rocket launcher as an anti-everything infantry sounds better.

basicaly a ground variation of the wolfhound

[X1Destroy]

 

Why would it be armed with experimental weapons to begin with?

SEAL with traditional assault rifle and rocket launcher as an anti-everything infantry sounds better.

basicaly a ground variation of the wolfhound

 

So?

[doctormedic]

 

 

Why would it be armed with experimental weapons to begin with?

SEAL with traditional assault rifle and rocket launcher as an anti-everything infantry sounds better.

basicaly a ground variation of the wolfhound

 

So?

 

doesnt it sound a bit stale?

[Divine]

Why would it be armed with experimental weapons to begin with?

SEAL with traditional assault rifle and rocket launcher as an anti-everything infantry sounds better.

I think would stick to realism just a little bit. SEALS irl are special forces, "commandoes", as they are in the game currently. Adding a big-ass rocket launcher would not fit their profile well. Also, have you ever tried to swim with a AT rocket launcher and ammo on your back?

[Petya]

Hailfox will be a little different in BR2.

[Meyerm]

It's a Chinese jet, right? EMP missiles!

[Petya]

Not EMP missiles.

[X1Destroy]

 

 

 

Why would it be armed with experimental weapons to begin with?

SEAL with traditional assault rifle and rocket launcher as an anti-everything infantry sounds better.

basicaly a ground variation of the wolfhound

 

So?

 

doesnt it sound a bit stale?

 

Not really. I suggest it as a replacement for the basic infantry units used by the US paradrop support power. It's not buildable so it won't be like the cheesy Wolfhound spam.

 

 

Why would it be armed with experimental weapons to begin with?

SEAL with traditional assault rifle and rocket launcher as an anti-everything infantry sounds better.

I think would stick to realism just a little bit. SEALS irl are special forces, "commandoes", as they are in the game currently. Adding a big-ass rocket launcher would not fit their profile well. Also, have you ever tried to swim with a AT rocket launcher and ammo on your back?

 

I meant it will be a different unit that is good against infantry like SEAL but can also fight tanks, not a real SEAL.

He doesn't have to swim either.

[DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr]

Well, dogs are gonna need to leave their post anyways to do their job,

 

yes, BUT! Sometimes they do not return to their original position. Yes, they need to close in for the melee attack. It is the wandering around problem. YOU FUCKING IDIOTS! Hold your position. XD

[Meyerm]

Isn't that what guard stance is supposed to do? I don't really use it at all. Not sure.

[DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr]

same here. I think guard stance makes your units wander forward and attacks enemies out of it's weapon's range.

 

Certain targeting mechanics (ground anti air units like flak troops and trucks versus fly by aircraft targets)(attack dogs, terror drones) - your unit follows an enemy unit.

 

Me and the guy who mentioned this first want something that makes your unit return to it's original position ALL THE TIME. If guard mode can do that then holy fuck, I should use guard mode from now on. I don't think guard mode does this.