General Discussion / Simple Questions, Simple Answers

Put all your ideas, questions, and suggestions in here

Discussion about the game and its default mods.
User avatar
WhoCares
Posts: 287
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 11:28 pm

Post by WhoCares » Thu Apr 13, 2017 6:16 pm

camundahl wrote:
If your games are sim-city like then you aren't playing good players......

Try playing Murto, Omnom, Lorrydriver or FiveAces..... this game is quick, hardly "sim-city"
That's exactly my point i'm a crappy turtle player player and i considere all the master players like newbies, thx for your intervention.
Smitty wrote: My initial reaction is to agree with Blackened, especially with the GPS. That said, no I don't believe it has been tested (recently) without timers, and I wouldn't mind seeing it tested.
I'd like to see it tested too to see if it can shakes the current game dynamic. In the same topic, Tanya's laught ? Really ?? we are talking about an infiltartor-commando ! Does she have to laught that loud that all ennemy forces can hear it ? again impossible to have a ninja tanya to surprise (and btw it alreeady has been sold by the gps timer, if there is a tech center, tanya is not that far away).

In those few month, if i understood, Omnom introduced the exagerate (and overabused since) base-push-crawling-spam-mcv-barrack-defenses. Now that it has been proven efficient and devastating as a nuke, it would be good to have a timer over mcv construction to be warned (that was sarcastic).

edit : I still would like to have a feedback, examples and good arguments about why is the nuke(&gps [&Tanya laught] ) public timer are justified.

OMnom
Posts: 255
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 4:04 am

Post by OMnom » Thu Apr 13, 2017 6:31 pm

Pretty sure the nuke timer and GPS timer were implemented to make the game feel more like the original RA. It might be more fair to have the timer appear halfway through rather than instantaneously, i.e, build a nuke, 10:00m timer starts for only you, but at the 5m mark, your opponent also gets to see the timer.

As far as tanya goes, i wouldn't mind that global laugh being slightly quieter
Last edited by OMnom on Thu Apr 13, 2017 10:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

klaas
Posts: 208
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2013 9:38 am

Post by klaas » Thu Apr 13, 2017 7:37 pm

For me the timers and the global laugh are part of Red Alert. I think there is no point in discussing whether they are good or bad, they are just part of the game. Changing them will make Red Alert a little more generic, which is not a good thing IMO.

That being said, should fake buildings of France also trigger the timer? Probably hard to implement without bugs or possible exploits, but would be fun as added psygological warfare.

User avatar
Doomsday
Posts: 199
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2016 11:45 am
Location: Helsinki

Post by Doomsday » Thu Apr 13, 2017 10:23 pm

Fake buildings triggering the timer sounds very cool. Yes please!
The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.
-Sun Tzu

OMnom
Posts: 255
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 4:04 am

Post by OMnom » Fri Apr 14, 2017 12:05 am

It could totally be done. Limit one of each, create 2 different timers...fuck it why not?

User avatar
ZxGanon
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:40 pm

Post by ZxGanon » Sat Apr 15, 2017 2:08 pm

Btw. I know there is currently some ranting around the SAM Site : Flak Gun balance.
Why do you guys wanna balance it instead of reworking both.

In Ra1 I can remember the Flak Gun being short ranged but insta hit with extreme damage while SAM Site having high range but not always hitting.

I mean the guys who had the idea of giving a Tower high range that already inherits the instant hit mechanic was clearly at fault in this game. Im sorry but gj you are on my list.

Just let both towers cost 800$ and 50 energy I mean its allies and soviets they both are rich factions with advanced technologies.

It should only differ in mechanics because both factions following different doctrines:
The Flak Gun Tower overall is pretty fine but might use an attackrange nerf while the SAM Site needs to have at least 3 cells more attack range to differ but than its attackspeed could be nerfed so its not shooting a quintillion of rockets on one target.

That would be my 2 cents as an high level Starcraft 2 player.

OMnom
Posts: 255
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 4:04 am

Post by OMnom » Sat Apr 15, 2017 4:00 pm

If I had my way, I'd just give the AA gun some inaccuracy to simulate what a real AA gun should actually be (har har har).

On a serious note, I changed the SAM site to be the same range as the AA gun in a mod, and I also drastically reduced its attack speed while allowing 1 missile to knock out a hind. I'm hoping the devs will allow some version of this SAM site with the next (not the upcoming) release.

And on a separate note, I dislike the idea that the Flak Truck should be the reason why the SAM site has 3c less range than the AA gun. Making one option crappier just forces players to only go for the better option. This is completely different from the Arty + static defense...the former is competitive, the latter is synergistic. You shouldn't apply the same method of balancing to two different situations.

User avatar
ZxGanon
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:40 pm

Post by ZxGanon » Sat Apr 15, 2017 8:43 pm

I got the slight feeling that ora devs seem to have no idea what RTS games are on about.

OMnom
Posts: 255
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 4:04 am

Post by OMnom » Sat Apr 15, 2017 11:44 pm

I think they've done a good job thus far, but the player base can make it better. So long as there is a general consensus and people testing changes out, RA can be better.

User avatar
anjew
Posts: 521
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2014 4:16 am

Post by anjew » Sun Apr 16, 2017 10:09 am

ZxGanon wrote: I got the slight feeling that ora devs seem to have no idea what RTS games are on about.
since most balance changes arent done by devs, they just make the game, id say that the state of the game can be blamed on the players (if you really want to blame someone)
Image

User avatar
JuiceBox
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2016 12:10 pm
Location: Liverpool

Post by JuiceBox » Sun Apr 16, 2017 1:38 pm

ZxGanon wrote: I got the slight feeling that ora devs seem to have no idea what RTS games are on about.
Hi welcome to open Ra .......
"I love the smell of JuiceBoxes in the morning"
LT. COL. Bill Kilgore
Apocalypse Now

User avatar
WhoCares
Posts: 287
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 11:28 pm

Post by WhoCares » Mon Apr 17, 2017 7:18 pm

********************* We are sorry for this interuption with a total out of subject suggestion *********************

Base pushing can be a bit less powerfull and the gameplay a bit more flexible by having a unit stance *don't attack (passive) building" allowing a "A-move" more intrusive in bases.

********************* Let's get back on bounty and all the fuzz *********************

OMnom
Posts: 255
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 4:04 am

Post by OMnom » Mon Apr 17, 2017 7:45 pm

WhoCares wrote: ********************* We are sorry for this interuption with a total out of subject suggestion *********************

Base pushing can be a bit less powerfull and the gameplay a bit more flexible by having a unit stance *don't attack (passive) building" allowing a "A-move" more intrusive in bases.

********************* Let's get back on bounty and all the fuzz *********************
The closest thing there is to this is the "return fire" stance, but it doesn't work too well for obvious reasons.

I do agree that something like this should be implemented, but I wonder if this would make the game too easy. All you would have to do is switch on "don't hit buildings without weapons" and A-move.

Also, from all my hours of playtesting, I've noticed that there's a hidden balance between artillery standoffs and basepushing. If you nerf one, the other gets indirectly buffed, and vice versa. It makes sense because artillery is the supposed answer to basepushing, and making either one stronger/weaker is going to change that dynamic. But I don't know if this "super" A-move would have that same effect...my coding skills are also too rudimentary to try and code for this.

As far as bounties goes, lets just wait and see what playtesting reveals.

fernoe
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2005 10:21 pm

Post by fernoe » Tue Apr 18, 2017 3:02 pm

Is it possible to give payers the radar view at the start of the game, even without any structures being built?

User avatar
ZxGanon
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:40 pm

Post by ZxGanon » Tue Apr 18, 2017 3:56 pm

fernoe wrote: Is it possible to give payers the radar view at the start of the game, even without any structures being built?
Yes it can be coded so that an unpacked mcv does provide radar view.

Post Reply