winftw wrote: ↑
- Base defenses: increase price about 2x
i like the concept and it would prevent base walking but perhaps have a rethink on the multiplier, more like 1.5x
Until the first flamerush.
APC + 5 flamers cost $2350.
10 riflemen + a medic cost $1200. You could still afford an expensive $800 pillbox on top of that.
Defending a flamerush is totally possible without pillboxes. Proof attached.
winftw wrote: ↑
- Base defenses: increase price about 2x
i like the concept and it would prevent base walking but perhaps have a rethink on the multiplier, more like 1.5x
Until the first flamerush.
APC + 5 flamers cost $2350.
10 riflemen + a medic cost $1200. You could still afford an expensive $800 pillbox on top of that.
Defending a flamerush is totally possible without pillboxes. Proof attached.
Bad soviet player
Only an idiot lets out his flame troops next to infantry. He should have moved along and chose another target
PersianImmortal wrote: ↑Only an idiot lets out his flame troops next to infantry. He should have moved along and chose another target
To be fair you can't see the soviet players LoS in that gif.
He was getting shot at before he let the flamers out though.
You can tell he's a bad soviet player by two things here
Firstly: He goes for the MCV, everyone knows you can just move it and so if you go for it it usually ends up in failure unless the opposing player is pretty bad
Secondly: he goes for a flamer rush, its not a very good tactic anymore with the amount of buffs allied defenses have had. Even a simple wall around your mcv will block flamers for long enough for you to get units over there. Its a nice gimmick to pull off when you know your opponent cant handle it well but if its the opposite its more likely to economically hinder you than put you ahead.
PersianImmortal is right ... every decent player would first crush the infantry with apc or snipe em with the mg mounted ... problem solved ... unload apc ... -> barbecue-mcv
zakedodead wrote: ↑Limit artillery / v2 rockets to like 5 out at a time?
Then the medium tank needs a serious buff and cost reduction, otherwise Soviets will simply steamroll Allies with their heavy tanks and mammoths.
Or do you want to limit those to 2 units at a time?
zakedodead wrote: ↑Limit artillery / v2 rockets to like 5 out at a time?
Then the medium tank needs a serious buff and cost reduction, otherwise Soviets will simply steamroll Allies with their heavy tanks and mammoths.
Or do you want to limit those to 2 units at a time?
That's not really a concern; heavy tanks take a fair amount of time to get built and they are less maneuverable than medium tanks, perhaps the range of a medium tank should be 1 or 2 tiles further than heavy tanks but i disagree to a price decrease of buff otherwise for medium tanks as they are good as they are - just under used. Also, if you are concerned about heavy tanks then use rocket troops
I completely disagree to any unit limitations though.
In debugging I have found that the medium tanks are pretty much on par with heavys. 4 mediums compete evenly in a fight with 3 heavys, they are on par because it costs the same to build 4 mediums as it does 3 heavys and the build time is also the same for 4 mediums as it is for 3 heavy tanks. So economically and they are equal. I wouldn't say they need a buff as they are quite strong and more maneuverable than heavys.
The idea for minimum firing range for the artillery sounds like a fair change, and it makes sense realistically. Having a limit on a unit type is a bad idea imo. Changes for art/v2 could be: either the minimum firing range, or artillery getting a slightly slower firing rate; v2: faster projectile speed so the projectile is in the air for a shorter time. This is if a change is necessary, I think these units are quite fine currently
The issue that always comes up with the allies is a lack of alternative firepower.
newwe wrote: ↑
- Base defenses: increase price about 2x
Not sure why this is necessary, this would hurt noobies a lot as well as they looove base def.
Tanks cost about the same as turrets but static defense destroys tanks like they were made of paper. Static defense can even be repaired. And the low speed of tanks isn't enough to do any runbys or suprise attacks.
About hurting noobies: This should be fixed by introducing a per-player handicap option instead of making all forms of offensive maneuvers ridiculously hard to pull off.
winftw wrote: ↑Tossing around some wild ideas:
- Remove prerequisites from tech center (can build it right away)
No, just no.
Doing a tech rush is currently completely impractical:
power+ref+fact+radar+adv power+tech center = $7500 and still need more money for whatever high tech gear is desired. All of this can't be afforded on just 1-2 harvesters so choosing tech over economy isn't even an option. Economy is always the best choice and early game is a tad boring because of the lack of choice.
How about a compromise of removing factory from tech center prerequisites? So tech would need just radar. What'd you even do with a factory if all you want is high tech infantry/aircraft/naval units or if the map is an island map?
Considering the most interesting allied units need a tech center this could give them more options too.
zakedodead wrote: ↑Limit artillery / v2 rockets to like 5 out at a time?
Too artificial. I disagree on arbitrary population caps.
Last edited by winftw on Fri May 22, 2015 3:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
winftw wrote: ↑
About hurting noobies: This should be fixed by introducing a per-player handicap option instead of making all forms of offensive maneuvers ridiculously hard to pull off.
I'd like some sort of handicap system, so long as handicaps are displayed in someway as to allow teams to be fairly constructed
