Balancing Soviets

Discussion about the game and its default mods.
User avatar
Clockwork
Posts: 314
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2017 3:50 am
Contact:

Balancing Soviets

Post by Clockwork » Wed Mar 22, 2017 11:38 am

It is quite clearly obvious that RA has a big problem, Allies are much better than Soviets. Normally I wouldn't share my ideas but I've gained huge motivation after seeing many players recently spreading their very constructive views and suggestions for balance changes so I'm now putting my own ideas out for everyone to also add too and not derail the topic of the OP but that's never an issue with this forum anyway. This is a combination of my own ideas and from random people on the street of Liverpool because they too have a say on the balance of RA.

1. Remove the Yak and Mig and give soviets the Huey and Longbow.

Soviet air units suck, they do not do enough AK/S (Artillery kills per second) as the Huey and Longbow in my team games. Due to concerns on realism the Huey will have to be renamed to the Hind and the Longbow can now be a "Mig Helicopter" This is bad balance and also the Allies get the AAgun which is so OP so this leads to my next suggestion.

2. Give Soviets spies.

We give the Soviets spies, we rename the spies to "KGB Agent" and they can now shut out any power and depower AAguns. The KGB Agent name is once again to stop people from getting upset over lack of realism in a game that involves time travel to kill Hitler and Yak planes that cant dogfight. We can also add a hero unit called "Vladimir Putin" as he was once a KGB agent and he can be a direct copy of Tanya but with new vocals and also can have a Bear upgrade to ride on to increase speed.

3. Give Soviets a new unit "Rocketman"

https://ibb.co/cXnCWF

Here's a sketch of the Rocketman I made

The rocket man can target air and land units with a jetpack. I stole this idea from RA2 but it was an allied unit but because the name isn't faction specific like the Huey it wont be a problem.

4. Remove Heavy Tanks and give the Soviets the T-34

The T-34 was the only tank that could stand up to Panzer divisions in WW2 I don't see why the soviets can't have it now. Having a T-34 will match the Medium tank in speed and power which will balance tank v tank battles. This will also mean the Medium Tank will now be "Panzer Mk6 or Tiger Tank" and the light tank will now be called "M4 Sherman" this is to preserve realism.

5. Give the Allies MRLS

Giving Allies the MRLS means the Allies are no longer pounded by the Soviets in the mid and late game. This will balance the fact Allies suck in every department to the Soviets.

Thank you for reading the combination of mine and random people on the street's suggestions.

Disclaimer: Yes this is sarcasm and satire 100%, I and many others are sick of threads filled with nonsense balance suggestions that are not constructive and are downright stupid. As well as already existing threads being derailed by this "spam" of none constructive suggestions. Omnom tried to make a thread for all this to be dumped in but it clearly hasn't worked. I no longer want to go onto the forums to read through threads and threads of why the Soviets should have King Oni from Red Alert 3. And no offence to the player suggesting these ideas but it just seems like they have never played the game before with what they're spamming here and half the time I just think they're trolls trying to get a reaction.

Hate me for this whatever I'm not bothered but there is a problem on this forum and me and many others are sick of it and its about time someone took notice to this.

Blackened
Posts: 308
Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 6:27 pm

Post by Blackened » Wed Mar 22, 2017 2:50 pm

I know it's frustrating but most of those threads won't amount to anything but brainstorming. Anything that actually does come from it can face swift criticisms on why it is good or bad. Plus any actual change is going to have to go through github and so far the people over there are very cautious and calculated in the things they change.

Derailment is a bigger problem. Heavy moderation could work but the back end problems with the forum make that unlikely. Powering through the nonsense and trying to keep the conversation on the right track is the only real option. But that is quite tedious.
I just think they're trolls trying to get a reaction.
If true than you just fed them with this thread. :?
there is a problem on this forum
I agree I think we should look into getting an official ORA forum. With the amount that this game has grown, using a somewhat defunct forum is only hurting the community as a whole.

User avatar
SoScared
Posts: 1116
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 6:16 pm
Location: Oslo
Contact:

Post by SoScared » Wed Mar 22, 2017 2:58 pm

Skipped the intro. Started reading point 1. Looked back at username. Momentarily increased rate of anger.

Bait successful.

This forum has been swarming with all kinds of ideas as far as I can remember. It's just the nature of idea-brainstorming and from time to time great ideas rises up from the chaos. I understand the need to engage some of the more outlandish suggestions popping up from time to time but I think a lot of people would do themselves a favor and find out a little bit more about the general direction of OpenRA stated by the devs and about how they deal with changes to it. Especially for those concerned with the developers' take on new ideas and suggestions (the player base more or less doubled the past year, adding more concernees thereof) could save themselves a lot of time studying OpenRA's GitHub processes and take a closer look into some important topics covered on wiki:

https://github.com/OpenRA/OpenRA/wiki/Development-Goals
https://github.com/OpenRA/OpenRA/wiki/F ... e-original
https://github.com/OpenRA/OpenRA/wiki

Perhaps some peeps might even back up onto some contribution topics. Regardless, being able to discern what topics to delve into and which to avoid will probably save you a lot of time and frustrations in the future. This is not to discourage free flow of ideas, there's no telling where the next genius solution will come from but for those fretting over the way these ideas come about it could be of some good use.

Chimpo
Posts: 61
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 10:33 pm

Re: Balancing Soviets

Post by Chimpo » Mon Apr 03, 2017 9:01 am

Happy wrote: It is quite clearly obvious that RA has a big problem, Allies are much better than Soviets.

Finally found someone that is clear sighted and honest enough to point out what is obvious to me. Thought I was living in some strange parallel universe. Of course there's the problem of the proportion of the herd that plays allies and lives in the delusion of their 'superior skills' and doesn't want that bubble burst. The shopping list of highly useful and sometimes OP special units (spies, medics, mechanics, tanya), OP plays (arty, chrono) and of course the plain silly GPS. Then there's the defense issue, that is finally being addressed in the new playtest. The list of small and big advantages is just ridiculous. Of course soviets have some advantages and you CAN win but all things being equal I doubt soviets would win much more than 40% of encounters.

A N Y W A Y...the problem we have is that there is no metric that I have seen to determine how well the game is balanced. In a similar (ranty thread) there were valiant attempts to draw out the statistical advantage of playing allies (ie the win %) over hundreds of games, that is what must applied to each version and change so we can make informed decisions and no just spew hot air at each other.

As for what needs changing, It all depends on the character of the game you are aiming for. Personally, given all allies gay toys, cerebal playstyle I'd like to see soviets balanced towards the hard-hitting wrecking ball, mindless action end of the spectrum so there is a clear split. It could really be anything like giving the mammoth some actual menace, even if it meant a longer build time. Make it a 'oh shit unit' rather than than the lumbering waste of money it currently is.

User avatar
SoScared
Posts: 1116
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 6:16 pm
Location: Oslo
Contact:

Post by SoScared » Mon Apr 03, 2017 10:28 am

This isn't new. About little over a year ago there was a trend for some of the top tier players to pick Soviet over Allies simply because they were more fun to play and more challenging.

I wholeheartedly agree with the idea of amping up Soviets more in the direction of the ''wrecking ball'' faction.

User avatar
Clockwork
Posts: 314
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2017 3:50 am
Contact:

Post by Clockwork » Mon Apr 03, 2017 10:54 am

This thread was originally satire based at pointless sugguestions we need to make an actual balance thread to disscuse and maybe you soscared can pick out the best bits for github.

My actual thoughts on soviets vs allies

I dont think its more allies are OP its more that the units allies have are more noob friendly to use. Soviets are harder to play because they arent noob friendly units, having to manuveer v2s etc for precision attacks than A moving artys. Every unit in the allied arsenal can be countered and so can every soviet unit. For example artillery spam? 5 flaks and a iron curtain and that 10 mins worth of massing artillery is gone. However there are some parts of soviet vs allies i think are not balanced, the biggest blaring issue is flame tower vs pillbox BUT teslas have huge range and damage and shoot over walls, is it balanced? I dont know.

lucassss
Posts: 144
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 1:55 pm

Post by lucassss » Mon Apr 03, 2017 11:30 am

It is more than just "allies are noob friendly", note that many good players prefer allies over soviets as well. Soviets seem to require too much effort. I guess that for people who are really good clickers/synchronizers, soviets are equal/better than allies, but for most people, not just noobs, soviets are harder to wield.

Also, I find it weird that the "tank goodness" faction is now allies instead of soviets.

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

Post by Doomsday » Mon Apr 03, 2017 11:51 am

I think biggest flaw in allies vs soviet balance is lack of vision for soviets until yaks come online.

I would address this issue with making dogs a new primary scouting tool for soviet early to midgame. I would do two changes to dogs in order to accomplish this.

1) Cost reduction to 100.
2) Massive nerf to dog's combat power. Very slow "rate of fire" or something like that.

Happy wrote: However there are some parts of soviet vs allies i think are not balanced, the biggest blaring issue is flame tower vs pillbox BUT teslas have huge range and damage and shoot over walls, is it balanced? I dont know.
I think defensive structures are in good spot now. Flame turret is actually useful and teslas are strong now that allied defenses got nerfed. Teslas are very expensive and require specific power heavy build in order to be used so I wouldn't say they are OP until we have way more evidence.
The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.
-Sun Tzu

Minotaur
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2016 7:22 pm

Post by Minotaur » Mon Apr 03, 2017 4:41 pm

what about an seperate secondary scout dog unit that exists solely for that purpose that has the required vision and speed as its perma-sprinting.
Infact you dont need it to come out of the Kennel, it can even be in the form of an motorcycle with an sidecar. RA3 mortar bike thingy comes to mind, except it'd be either without weapons,
or can make the sidecar act like single slot transport that uses the IFV logic morphing its weapon depending on the occupant infantry.
The bike can come out of the barracks but prequisiting weap.

User avatar
Orb
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2017 9:05 pm

Post by Orb » Mon Apr 03, 2017 5:33 pm

Since we're just throwing out opinions I guess I'll toss mine into the ring as well. I think Soviets/Allies are mostly balanced, though Soviets could use some Quality of Life improvements like the Yak vision and buffing Sam Sites.

The flow of the game seems to go as follows, assuming both factions are teching at the same time. Soviets have an advantage early game with APCs, dogs, and better defenses for aggression (especially in base wars). They also have a good amount of cheese options, such as grenadier and flamer rushes. However, once radar tech hits allies get an advantage, with their hinds and arty. While Soviets alternatives are fine, they are certainly weaker and allow the allies to push back against any advantages the Soviets get. Once the tech center stage is hit, Soviets get the advantage again since their iron curtain is very powerful and counters the very advantages allies get on radar tech. They also get, in my opinion, better late game units, though I do have a soft spot for the longbow. Then it swings back into allies super late game when GPS hits.

To illustrate my point, have a replay:
https://www.gamereplays.org/openra/repl ... &id=319173

Unfortunately, its pretty hard to get an example game where both players tech at the same time throughout, but I feel this showcases the early/radar phases really well. Soviets get a huge advantage early game using their dogs, APCs, and defenses, but this swings back into Allies favor once arty/hinds hit the ground. Unfortunately Barf was too far behind to really claw back, though I feel with some good plays he could have stabilized. If this replay had continued, it is likely Barf would have gained more ground until my iron curtain hit, in which case it would have swung back into my favor and won me the game.

tldr, Soviets need to be aggressive early or they negate their advantages.

Murto the Ray
Posts: 486
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 4:34 pm

Post by Murto the Ray » Mon Apr 03, 2017 5:42 pm

How about we buff the dog. It should have infinite ammo and infinite guns and infinite health and it shouldn't be able to be hit by AA. Also, i want the sound effects to all be soscared saying "woof" in russian.

mechANIC
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2017 10:12 am
Location: Saint-Petersburg

Post by mechANIC » Mon Apr 03, 2017 6:08 pm

Murto the Ray wrote: How about we buff the dog. It should have infinite ammo and infinite guns and infinite health and it shouldn't be able to be hit by AA. Also, i want the sound effects to all be soscared saying "woof" in russian.
Like "Гав гав" ? or should we just give them a russian accent ?

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

Post by klaas » Mon Apr 03, 2017 6:12 pm

Allied infantry is better than soviets, because of the medic

Allied armor is better than Soviets, because medium tanks are faster and cheaper. I wouldn't be surprised 10k invested in Medium tanks can even win vs. 10k in heavy tanks, based on hitpoints / firepower.

Allied air is better than Soviet air, because much easier to micro manage, and Hinds don't die at fast as Yaks


The only real advantage Soviets have is tech.

All in all, picking Allies is the logical choice for competative play, as most RAGL masters players did this season.

User avatar
Clockwork
Posts: 314
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2017 3:50 am
Contact:

Post by Clockwork » Mon Apr 03, 2017 6:24 pm

Murto the Ray wrote: How about we buff the dog. It should have infinite ammo and infinite guns and infinite health and it shouldn't be able to be hit by AA. Also, i want the sound effects to all be soscared saying "woof" in russian.
Seconded

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

Post by OMnom » Mon Apr 03, 2017 9:45 pm

Someone get Orb in here and have him tell you guys how broken Soviets are.

Post Reply