new test version with gun turrets shooting over walls etc.
http://resource.openra.net/maps/9461
played a bit cnc95 with nod today and realised how weak the original gun turret is vs inf.
openras normal gun turret is even better. lol
the % miss mechanic is interesting in cnc95..
TD balance thread
-
AoAGeneral1
- Posts: 597
- Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2015 6:11 pm
The following is now in the playtest (Copy pasted from notes page https://github.com/OpenRA/OpenRA/wiki/C ... ded5013de4 )
Increased reload speed of MSAM from 100 to 45. [#10552]
Increased APC damage vs light targets from 100 to 105. [#10552]
Increased MLRS attack speed from 140 to 100. [#10552]
Increased Rocket infantry damage from 30 to 35. [#10552]
Increased MCV cost from 2000 to 4000. [#10552]
Increased MCV build time from 0:48 to 1:36. [#10552]
Increased MCV HP from 750 to 950. [#10552]
Changed MCV's armor type from Light to Heavy. [#10552]
MCV now requires both Command Center and Repair Pad to produce. [#10552]
Increased Construction yard HP from 1400 to 2000. [#10552]
Increased Repair pad HP from 400 to 600. [#10552]
Increased AGT's power usage from 40 to 50. [#10552]
Decreased MSAM trajectory from 341 to 300. [#10553]
Increased Grenadier damage versus light armor from 75 to 80. [#10770]
Increased APC HP from 200 to 210. [#10770]
Increased SAM damage from 30 to 35. [#10770]
Increased Light Tank cost from 600 to 700 (Build time increase from 15 to 17 seconds). [#10770]
Decreased Guard Tower damage versus heavy armor from 35 to 30. [#10770]
Decreased Light Tank movement speed from 113 to 110. [#10770]
Decreased Light Tank HP from 350 to 340. [#10770]
Decreased Rocket Infantry damage versus no armor from 50 to 30. [#10770]
Increased reload speed of MSAM from 100 to 45. [#10552]
Increased APC damage vs light targets from 100 to 105. [#10552]
Increased MLRS attack speed from 140 to 100. [#10552]
Increased Rocket infantry damage from 30 to 35. [#10552]
Increased MCV cost from 2000 to 4000. [#10552]
Increased MCV build time from 0:48 to 1:36. [#10552]
Increased MCV HP from 750 to 950. [#10552]
Changed MCV's armor type from Light to Heavy. [#10552]
MCV now requires both Command Center and Repair Pad to produce. [#10552]
Increased Construction yard HP from 1400 to 2000. [#10552]
Increased Repair pad HP from 400 to 600. [#10552]
Increased AGT's power usage from 40 to 50. [#10552]
Decreased MSAM trajectory from 341 to 300. [#10553]
Increased Grenadier damage versus light armor from 75 to 80. [#10770]
Increased APC HP from 200 to 210. [#10770]
Increased SAM damage from 30 to 35. [#10770]
Increased Light Tank cost from 600 to 700 (Build time increase from 15 to 17 seconds). [#10770]
Decreased Guard Tower damage versus heavy armor from 35 to 30. [#10770]
Decreased Light Tank movement speed from 113 to 110. [#10770]
Decreased Light Tank HP from 350 to 340. [#10770]
Decreased Rocket Infantry damage versus no armor from 50 to 30. [#10770]
-
AoAGeneral1
- Posts: 597
- Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2015 6:11 pm
then i suggest fiddling around with it because at its current regeneration rate it requires players to needlessly micro their harvester on the blue field as quite often it stops mining because there is no available ore to mine
like i said in the RA thread, i would like to see the mechanic that slows light tanks and APCs down the speed for a 0.5-1 second upon running over an infantry. It adds more meaning to having infantry in TD. Ill admit though the slow for TD should be lower than RA because APCS are weaker in TD, the light tank already got a nerf because of this (which i dont think it particularly fixed) and also because the light tank is Nods primary armour unit.
like i said in the RA thread, i would like to see the mechanic that slows light tanks and APCs down the speed for a 0.5-1 second upon running over an infantry. It adds more meaning to having infantry in TD. Ill admit though the slow for TD should be lower than RA because APCS are weaker in TD, the light tank already got a nerf because of this (which i dont think it particularly fixed) and also because the light tank is Nods primary armour unit.
-
AoAGeneral1
- Posts: 597
- Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2015 6:11 pm
-
AoAGeneral1
- Posts: 597
- Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2015 6:11 pm
Last I checked they seemed to be fine over all but I will have another look at it.
The best idea would be to test them out in matches as ive done ways to stop light tank massing with the current nerf they have. (Of course this is me talking about GDI not Nod vs Nod)
That being said, I think the slow down mechanic can be a good idea on Stealth Tanks. As they are a unit capable of doing crushes and infantry tend to have some trouble dealing with this. (With the exception of E3 and Chems/Flamers). Having the Stealth Tank risk a slow down mechanic can be a strategy choice to make.
The best idea would be to test them out in matches as ive done ways to stop light tank massing with the current nerf they have. (Of course this is me talking about GDI not Nod vs Nod)
That being said, I think the slow down mechanic can be a good idea on Stealth Tanks. As they are a unit capable of doing crushes and infantry tend to have some trouble dealing with this. (With the exception of E3 and Chems/Flamers). Having the Stealth Tank risk a slow down mechanic can be a strategy choice to make.
-
AoAGeneral1
- Posts: 597
- Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2015 6:11 pm
New changes are now live in the release version.
Freeze is lifted. Present new ideas in this thread for balance ideas.
The following are ideas only:
Increase Oil Derrick HP. (Prevent A10s destroying it)
Allow destroyed neutral buildings to be captured. (Hospitals, Bio labs, Oil Derricks)
APC Anti Air gun projectile speed increase.
Note on APC:
Currently right now the APC Anti Air gun is a strong and effective counter to the air units. It fires quickly and does massive damage in quick sessions. However, when the aircraft is on the move they can escape roughly 70% of the damage due to the projectile speed before it lands on the target. This enables units such as Orcas to snipe off the APCs if they are busy with other targets. With the movement speed of the air units it can be very daunting to focus fire. (Specially moving through fog of war and losing turret sight)
The idea is to increase the projectile speed to land a firmer mark and deal more damage over all. This requires testing before it can even be thought of doing.
Repair pad HP increase to 650-700 from 600.
Note on Repair Pad:
Right now the A10s can bring down the repair pad down to 15-20%. Increasing the HP on this structure will allow the pad to survive a little more rather then a small drop of minigunners to finish it off. This can lead to frustrating scenarios as the A10s recharge at nearly half the speed of a building MCV. (Up for ideas and discussion.)
TD Artys have regained their explosion chance again (Not sure whom might have added it) but it at least doesnt cause a chain reaction as it used to do. Posting this here incase anyone might be frustrated with the use of these again with this mechanic. I prefer them not to have such an explosion as it is already a rare unit to be used in the game. It does not need another nerf.
Freeze is lifted. Present new ideas in this thread for balance ideas.
The following are ideas only:
Increase Oil Derrick HP. (Prevent A10s destroying it)
Allow destroyed neutral buildings to be captured. (Hospitals, Bio labs, Oil Derricks)
APC Anti Air gun projectile speed increase.
Note on APC:
Currently right now the APC Anti Air gun is a strong and effective counter to the air units. It fires quickly and does massive damage in quick sessions. However, when the aircraft is on the move they can escape roughly 70% of the damage due to the projectile speed before it lands on the target. This enables units such as Orcas to snipe off the APCs if they are busy with other targets. With the movement speed of the air units it can be very daunting to focus fire. (Specially moving through fog of war and losing turret sight)
The idea is to increase the projectile speed to land a firmer mark and deal more damage over all. This requires testing before it can even be thought of doing.
Repair pad HP increase to 650-700 from 600.
Note on Repair Pad:
Right now the A10s can bring down the repair pad down to 15-20%. Increasing the HP on this structure will allow the pad to survive a little more rather then a small drop of minigunners to finish it off. This can lead to frustrating scenarios as the A10s recharge at nearly half the speed of a building MCV. (Up for ideas and discussion.)
TD Artys have regained their explosion chance again (Not sure whom might have added it) but it at least doesnt cause a chain reaction as it used to do. Posting this here incase anyone might be frustrated with the use of these again with this mechanic. I prefer them not to have such an explosion as it is already a rare unit to be used in the game. It does not need another nerf.
-
CampinJeff
- Posts: 38
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2015 6:01 am
I've been saying this for fucking ages. Obelisks are incredibly underused. An obelisk is very effective versing Nod (because it one hits every single Nod units) however the Obelisk is shit against GDI. 4 medium tanks can take out an obelisk (1500) and only lose 1 of the tanks (800). 4 medium tanks can take out an AGT with only 1 tank being in the red. AKA. the DPS on the AGT is relatively equal to the Obelisk (versing medium tanks at least)
I wouldn't suggest increasing the range (it already has the most i think). But possibly increase its damage vsing GDI targets. As i said, it is great versing Nod because every single vehicle unit dies. With GDI the medium tank and mammoth (as it should) survive
The counter argument to that is it will make the obelisk much better than the AGT.
Sure it will, why the fuck not? That argument is a fallacy.
PRICES: AGT $1000 - Obelisk $1500
POWER: AGT 50 - Obelisk - 150
The AGT also has the ability to be effective against Air and Infantry, the Obelisk does not have this chance at all.
Right now the AGT and Obelisk are quite similiar in damage output and have the same health making the AGT twice as good as the Obelisk.
My suggestions?
Either make it shoot faster, make it a much more reasonable price and power usage, buff the HP (it has the same HP as an AGT) or give it a damage buff to kill a medium tank per shot. Might make Obelisks and Mammoths more effective
I wouldn't suggest increasing the range (it already has the most i think). But possibly increase its damage vsing GDI targets. As i said, it is great versing Nod because every single vehicle unit dies. With GDI the medium tank and mammoth (as it should) survive
The counter argument to that is it will make the obelisk much better than the AGT.
Sure it will, why the fuck not? That argument is a fallacy.
PRICES: AGT $1000 - Obelisk $1500
POWER: AGT 50 - Obelisk - 150
The AGT also has the ability to be effective against Air and Infantry, the Obelisk does not have this chance at all.
Right now the AGT and Obelisk are quite similiar in damage output and have the same health making the AGT twice as good as the Obelisk.
My suggestions?
Either make it shoot faster, make it a much more reasonable price and power usage, buff the HP (it has the same HP as an AGT) or give it a damage buff to kill a medium tank per shot. Might make Obelisks and Mammoths more effective
-
AoAGeneral1
- Posts: 597
- Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2015 6:11 pm
Its actually opposite. Obelisks are garbage vs Nod playstyles because of their cheaper units (Besides the light tanks and Stealth Tanks). The Obelisks in those plays aren't widely used.
Its also a rare use for the Obelisk since a lot of players do a large tech build based around medium tanks and infantry so getting to higher tech is always a risk factor to keep from being rushed.
However, once it has been obtained and placed two Obelisks is enough to do immense damage to a medium/Mammoth army. The trick is never leave the towers by themselves. Have them backed with a small army such as Chem troopers or light tanks. Maybe even bikes too. The towers will then make quick work of the mammoths/mediums.
Mammoth costing at 1500 and able to take three shots from an obelisk (Two if another unit is attacking) Is actually a lot of damage.
While the AGT is a cheaper structure and allows to be built early does not have the effectiveness as an Obelisk does. It is not built due to mobile units in its place instead. Perhaps when more expansion plays are put into effect players will use the towers a bit more. But personally when I have used them in a game they wiped the floor with Mammoths.
You may also want to consider using walls around an obelisk.
Pro:
Destroys high value vehicle targets.
One shots a large selection of vehicles and infantry.
Cons:
Dies to infantry masses.
Light vehicle compositions (Bikes) Destroy towers.
Unable to attack air units.
Last tech tree build.
Extremely long build time.
Power consumption.
Out of the cons selection I do consider tinkering with the power slightly. My time in using the Obelisks it is rather annoying in the amount of power required for these to be built.
The build time is another possible but only very slightly adjusted.
Everything else requires immense testing. As these towers can easily be OP beyond belief if not correctly done so. One test I would like to have a look at is Obelisks able to fire at air units.
Its also a rare use for the Obelisk since a lot of players do a large tech build based around medium tanks and infantry so getting to higher tech is always a risk factor to keep from being rushed.
However, once it has been obtained and placed two Obelisks is enough to do immense damage to a medium/Mammoth army. The trick is never leave the towers by themselves. Have them backed with a small army such as Chem troopers or light tanks. Maybe even bikes too. The towers will then make quick work of the mammoths/mediums.
Mammoth costing at 1500 and able to take three shots from an obelisk (Two if another unit is attacking) Is actually a lot of damage.
While the AGT is a cheaper structure and allows to be built early does not have the effectiveness as an Obelisk does. It is not built due to mobile units in its place instead. Perhaps when more expansion plays are put into effect players will use the towers a bit more. But personally when I have used them in a game they wiped the floor with Mammoths.
You may also want to consider using walls around an obelisk.
Pro:
Destroys high value vehicle targets.
One shots a large selection of vehicles and infantry.
Cons:
Dies to infantry masses.
Light vehicle compositions (Bikes) Destroy towers.
Unable to attack air units.
Last tech tree build.
Extremely long build time.
Power consumption.
Out of the cons selection I do consider tinkering with the power slightly. My time in using the Obelisks it is rather annoying in the amount of power required for these to be built.
The build time is another possible but only very slightly adjusted.
Everything else requires immense testing. As these towers can easily be OP beyond belief if not correctly done so. One test I would like to have a look at is Obelisks able to fire at air units.
When a game gets high tech Nod vs Nod, players rarely make early game units.
And saying to leave units there is a fallacy. I could have units to deal with those units or I could use infantry to tank the Obelisk. It's all irrelevant of the structure. It's like me suggesting you put rocket troopers in your apc if you want to deal with air units better.
2 Obelisks will destroy a Nod light tank and stealth tank army much quicker than 2 Obelisks on a medium tank army. Especially after these balances to the unit.
The concerns regarding the mammoth are very true though, however it has been agreed by most players that transitioning to mammoths from medium is not a good idea in an intense match up because medium tanks can out do the DPS. So maybe this could coincide with a mammoth buff?
A damage buff to the obelisk and a possible HP increase to the mammoth would work well to promote the use of this unit and structure.
I am not against nerfing other properties of the obelisk like less HP (airstrikeable) or 1 more second on the delay to match its initial delay timer
And saying to leave units there is a fallacy. I could have units to deal with those units or I could use infantry to tank the Obelisk. It's all irrelevant of the structure. It's like me suggesting you put rocket troopers in your apc if you want to deal with air units better.
2 Obelisks will destroy a Nod light tank and stealth tank army much quicker than 2 Obelisks on a medium tank army. Especially after these balances to the unit.
The concerns regarding the mammoth are very true though, however it has been agreed by most players that transitioning to mammoths from medium is not a good idea in an intense match up because medium tanks can out do the DPS. So maybe this could coincide with a mammoth buff?
A damage buff to the obelisk and a possible HP increase to the mammoth would work well to promote the use of this unit and structure.
I am not against nerfing other properties of the obelisk like less HP (airstrikeable) or 1 more second on the delay to match its initial delay timer
-
AoAGeneral1
- Posts: 597
- Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2015 6:11 pm
Mediums are higher priced units/build timers so losing them to obelisks is risky business. Leaving units at a defensive location is not fallacy. I did this vs mammoths actually and using E3 inside your APC is something I do when doing scouting runs vs other APCs. It forces them to run.
The buff HP for Mammoth tanks is debatable. It was already nerfed once in the past due to it taking and soaking waaay to much damage vs other units. (This actually included Stealth Tanks as well).
Damage wise though the Mammoth tanks outputs a lot more then a medium tank due to the tusk missiles. Its the sheer numbers that brings it to the table. If you do a slow transition of mediums mixed with Mammoths until you have enough Mammoths to do a pure only build you will destroy the Mediums. Both the Mammoths and Mediums have the same rate of fire. Only difference is Mammoths are double cannons and fire missiles.
Im still not entirely sold on a damage buff for Obelisks. This would require intense testing. HP is a possible look as well as the power. I have Tuesday off so I will see if I can contact you soon for testing.
The buff HP for Mammoth tanks is debatable. It was already nerfed once in the past due to it taking and soaking waaay to much damage vs other units. (This actually included Stealth Tanks as well).
Damage wise though the Mammoth tanks outputs a lot more then a medium tank due to the tusk missiles. Its the sheer numbers that brings it to the table. If you do a slow transition of mediums mixed with Mammoths until you have enough Mammoths to do a pure only build you will destroy the Mediums. Both the Mammoths and Mediums have the same rate of fire. Only difference is Mammoths are double cannons and fire missiles.
Im still not entirely sold on a damage buff for Obelisks. This would require intense testing. HP is a possible look as well as the power. I have Tuesday off so I will see if I can contact you soon for testing.
I think I saw in Ra if you place a unit on hold the next type in the queue will start building, could this be changed so that is is like RA?
Would it be possible to make shift+right clicking cancel all queued units instead of the 5?
And lastly could the apache/orca refill all at once rather than the 2 ticks first? The loading time would be increased slightly so that nothing changes other than not interrupting the reload timer. As it stands now, if you don't have them on hold fire, or divert your attention away for a split second they will fire their first 2 salvos and reset the reload timer rather than wait til all 5 are loaded.
Would it be possible to make shift+right clicking cancel all queued units instead of the 5?
And lastly could the apache/orca refill all at once rather than the 2 ticks first? The loading time would be increased slightly so that nothing changes other than not interrupting the reload timer. As it stands now, if you don't have them on hold fire, or divert your attention away for a split second they will fire their first 2 salvos and reset the reload timer rather than wait til all 5 are loaded.