OpenRA

Beans wrote: ↑I've noticed many games with the balance changes have become really tower spammy, specifically AGT all over the damn place accompanied with base pushing. Mesacer uses this tactic heavily. Unfortunately its so effective it will catch on and become the norm, tower defence is not RTS.

Ok, I think the problem has come from a few areas but mostly way too much eco on most maps, both oil & tiberium. BUT! People love high eco and we need players so we cant take that away from them! So we need to balance the game for high eco maps, since thats the norm.

Suggested solution, increase build time of AGT signifcantly? I think this is worth testing.

Mesacer wrote: ↑

Beans wrote: ↑I've noticed many games with the balance changes have become really tower spammy, specifically AGT all over the damn place accompanied with base pushing. Mesacer uses this tactic heavily. Unfortunately its so effective it will catch on and become the norm, tower defence is not RTS.

Ok, I think the problem has come from a few areas but mostly way too much eco on most maps, both oil & tiberium. BUT! People love high eco and we need players so we cant take that away from them! So we need to balance the game for high eco maps, since thats the norm.

Suggested solution, increase build time of AGT signifcantly? I think this is worth testing.

I was gdave that's started it!

I knew he would be involved in this conspiracy against us!

But on a more serious note I agree that team games in the high Eco maps have turned to a tower defense game. It's something we need to have a look on!

eskimo wrote: ↑Aren't the TD maps small and/or chokey which helps make static play more probable?

maceman wrote: ↑I think it's more that the Advanced Guard Tower, and defences in TD are generally overpowered. Which works out OK because you can use the (also overpowered imo) airstrike to deal with them. But yea killing defences with units, especially the AGT is never cost effective from what I've seen. Which is wierd for a 'unit-based' game.

maceman wrote: ↑I think it's more that the Advanced Guard Tower, and defences in TD are generally overpowered. Which works out OK because you can use the (also overpowered imo) airstrike to deal with them. But yea killing defences with units, especially the AGT is never cost effective from what I've seen. Which is wierd for a 'unit-based' game.

Beans wrote: ↑ Not sure about it being overpowered in general, its quite easy to take one down with a minigunner and a couple of tanks. and best with Arty /MRLS. The problem lies in there being so many they swamp the map, and with chokey maps they can cripple most strategy and turn games into tower defence brut force. I think the only nerf it needs is build time to counter this. My other worry is that the MCV being cheaper will just double AGT spamming. I know a lot of these concerns are small or chokey map issues, but people play those the most so we must take that into account for game balance.

ZxGanon wrote: ↑The AGT is pretty op in terms of usage and cost effectiveness.

Also the build time is just not dynamic at all. You just basically wait your 48 seconds to deploy it. 1000$ in 48 seconds is nothing and increasing the buildtime will just make it a no brainer que for more defense.

Increasing the cost would help a lot since its also way more usefule than an Obelisk of Light.

You could also change its attack to be like in original TD where it had a 2 burst and longer reloaddelay. Could make cause air units to get one bursted but you can also splitt the anti ground and anti air weapon easily.

Infinite possibilities and so many changes possible but you gotta choose one.

Beans wrote: ↑
Surely a longer build time will make less AGT on the map? I wouldn't want it nerfed in damage as they're easy to kill in ones or two's. It's when there's 5 or 6 supported with mrls/tanks they become impossible and immune to powers due to numbers.

maceman wrote: ↑

Beans wrote: ↑
Surely a longer build time will make less AGT on the map? I wouldn't want it nerfed in damage as they're easy to kill in ones or two's. It's when there's 5 or 6 supported with mrls/tanks they become impossible and immune to powers due to numbers.

I would have thought increasing build time would mean that you just queue them constantly because they are the best defence and still more than worth their value.

Whereas if you increase their cost to what they should be worth, it means people have to think do they want to shell out on the kill-everything defence, or would a cheaper turret / tower do, or just get 2 tanks instead of a tower, which you can move around.

Right now from what i can tell people just queue AGT as soon as they can until the game ends because they are so cost effective.

I strongly contest them being too strong, I just killed one with 2 minigunners and a medium tank as the enemy didn't have time to micro it to the tank. Often is the case there is not time to micro them and they attack the least effective unit. its only when they are in groups of 3+ I have an issue with the extra splash damage they become stacked, and even then MRLS/Artillery get slaughtered and easily flanked. Increasing the build time is an adequate nerf for testing purposes. The price is fine and it already had a 10% hp nerf. We need to remember that every time changes are made, more unforeseen things happen, so upmost caution is required. The MCV becoming too cheap may cause a lot of issues like this on reflection. Personally I think we should take more time and be more careful with changes over long drawn out deliberation. Months of fruitful work