[RA Balance] Chronotanks

Discussion about the game and its default mods.

The Chronotank is

Overpowered
2
8%
Balanced
8
31%
Underpowered
16
62%
 
Total votes: 26

User avatar
r34ch
Posts: 137
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2015 2:02 pm

[RA Balance] Chronotanks

Post by r34ch »

Disclaimer
This thread is not to invalidate any of the ongoing overall balance discussions but to keep discussion about a particular unit in one place. Github is not really that place.

Although overal balance is the effect of many different units interacting with each other, for the shake of these threads please try and focus on discussing if the individual unit is unbalanced or not. If an argument is made that the unit is overpowered to balance that faction, an argument could be made that it's a sign of a larger balancing issue.

On behalf of Murto

I invite everybody to discuss.

Kwendy
Posts: 49
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2016 8:53 am

Post by Kwendy »

It looks like balanced, but somehow "for fun" unit. AKA by combat stats good micro can make this unit do lots of good stuff, but most of this stuff can be easyer done without them.
+
It is potentially great as it's good against both infantry (chrono-crush) and armour (decent damage), but unsuited for big lategame clushes it appears in due to high tech requirement.

doggo the pupper
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2016 7:28 am

Post by doggo the pupper »

Oh I just saw this thread, I opened another one about buffing the Chrono Tank.

http://www.sleipnirstuff.com/forum/view ... 2&p=296770

User avatar
MustaphaTR
Posts: 201
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2014 6:38 am
Location: Kastamonu, Turkey

Post by MustaphaTR »

Chrono tank weapon is really nerfed in ORA when compared to original game. Vanilla chrono tanks are able to deal shitload of damage against structures too, one can destroy a Adv. PP with 1 or 2 hits. In OpenRA they actually suck against them. They was good against infantry in RA too, but it can stay as is for OpenRA, we can't make it good vs everyting, it needs counters.

Also vanilla chrono tanks had no range limit. Even if we'll keep the limit, it should be bigger. Current one looks too small to me.

User avatar
Materianer
Posts: 195
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2016 8:27 am

Post by Materianer »

Hi,
i think the chronotank is balanced, the problem is that most of the players just want to win the game and choose an easyier way to win. Im like the only player who build them when i'm playing as germany.
To chrono just a mass of artys and mediums is often better or just a mediumrush or so.
Also it seems to be impossible to go chonotanks and win with 'em on small maps or if you'r under period attack.
In my opinion if it needs a buff its a armorbuff. They'r already really fast ( they crunsh like nearly all infantrys just without they'r chrono )
I always build some mechanics for them, let them make a fast attack and chrono them back into mechanics.
Without any mechanics you have like no chance to succeed with chronotanks.
Chronotanks are much fun already :P

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

Post by lucassss »

Another idea, maybe the chronotank can have several teleport charges? For example, let's say that it has 2 teleport charges, and one charge is restored every 10 secs (or 20 if we doubled the range). This would make it more versatile, and the interface for the charges can be recycled from aircraft.

User avatar
Materianer
Posts: 195
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2016 8:27 am

Post by Materianer »

Yes please double the range hehe.
But you must consider that each cell you give them more range will make them much stronger on island maps. You can already jump on Bombardement islands on serval points. 2 cells more and it will be possible at all of the middle coast i think.
Heres an example on the popular Doubles Islands map.

P.s. shame on the mapbuilder who cutted some coast-tiles. A pain in my eyes to see this nukem map treated that way. But not as hard as the "official" doubles map wich seem to be completely ruined in my opinion hehe
Sorry @soscared i know you putted much work in balancing all this official maps and they seem to be fine, but doubles should be renamed its no longer doubles that way anymore. :cry:
Attachments
You can already jump with 2 chronotanks here with one cell more it would be 4 or 5 maybe
You can already jump with 2 chronotanks here with one cell more it would be 4 or 5 maybe
chronot2.png (237.08 KiB) Viewed 5290 times
chronot1.png
chronot1.png (294.3 KiB) Viewed 5290 times

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

Post by SoScared »

Materianer wrote: P.s. shame on the mapbuilder who cutted some coast-tiles. A pain in my eyes to see this nukem map treated that way. But not as hard as the "official" doubles map wich seem to be completely ruined in my opinion hehe
Sorry @soscared i know you putted much work in balancing all this official maps and they seem to be fine, but doubles should be renamed its no longer doubles that way anymore. :cry:
https://github.com/OpenRA/OpenRA/issues/10988 (based off https://github.com/OpenRA/OpenRA/pull/10303)

Doubles was one of the maps that got a big overhaul and you're not the first person to make complaints about the change as it has been ora's most played maps of all times. Certainly the new map structure would break certain set of detailed build orders (and fond memories) and I can symphathize with the resentment of the new version replacing the old with the exact same name. I think an added detail to the name would be in order (e.g. Singles/Doubles 2.0). As for gameplay, the new version seem to provide for the same quality of action as far as the map structure intends to.

As I see it the new Doubles is part of a map pool overhaul that over time inevitably will swoop the great majority of the classic oramaps off the official map pool. The alterations partially had the intention of giving the older maps a fair chance against the tide of incoming new maps that seeks to replace the old by virtue of being superior in design. Doubles has the advantage of being unique in style but still would quickly begin to pale aesthetically in comparison to others and new players with little-to-no knowledge of the pre-2014 ora era would quickly start point at Doubles as a badly designed map.

User avatar
r34ch
Posts: 137
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2015 2:02 pm

Post by r34ch »

SoScared wrote: Certainly the new map structure would break certain set of detailed build orders (and fond memories) and I can symphathize with the resentment of the new version replacing the old with the exact same name
I didn't realise the 'new map' broke build orders? Regardless, would you mind making a new issue on github for the old singles/doubles maps (with the tweaks you have been doing) to replace the overhauled versions SoScared? People can play the overhauled ones from the resource center and the nostalgic ones can stay in the official pool until a new balanced map with a similar playstyle comes along.

I think that would be the best of both worlds? :)

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

Post by SoScared »

No I was really talking about detailed build orders as in where to place what building where and when. Ore patches and obstacles were moved hence the way some players remember opening their build with was skewed. The overall playstyle and build order is excactly the same.

User avatar
r34ch
Posts: 137
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2015 2:02 pm

Post by r34ch »

SoScared wrote: No I was really talking about detailed build orders as in where to place what building where and when. Ore patches and obstacles were moved hence the way some players remember opening their build with was skewed. The overall playstyle and build order is excactly the same.
Fair. Still, it seems people like the originals so I don't mind at all if you replace the overhauled ones.

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

Post by SoScared »

If there's a popular opinion on reinstating the original Doubles I'd fully support it off course. Also despite being very active around the map pool process the past months I'm in no position to allow or deny any changes to the map pool. I'm simply an enthusiast.

I'd be more comfortable backing a reverse with more active requests by players and some numbers backing it up.

Also, sorry Murto for convevrting the discussion topic completely. Continued discussion on the map pool ought to be brought up in a new thread.

User avatar
Materianer
Posts: 195
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2016 8:27 am

Post by Materianer »

I think the original doubles was one of the most balanced naturally looking map in openra. There are not so many really good maps like this.
Now it looks just mirrored. But i dont think the new version should be replaced by old. Both can be played if you want just make a server with your favorite map hehe
But i think we are at the wrong place to discuss that. If you want make a poll to that but i dont mind ( Í° ͜ʖ͡°)

Look at this Sunset (Navy) by Insert Name. really naturally looking btw much amazing

To get back to this Chronotanks i made a nice match this morning was a bit unbalanced but you can see how strong chronotanks are. http://www.gamereplays.org/openra/repla ... &id=312485 ( i dont know who the fake materia was but he was not funny hehe )
the rokets are good against defense struktures, boats and can crunsh infantry easy either with choro crunsh or with its fast speed. They also can escape the most units or shots.
Escape from this artyshots is not so easy.
This units needs some Training.
Thats the mainproblem i think . Ask the players how often they ever used chronotanks in game. I bet the most of the players didnt make more than 5 chronotänksgames and i bet most of them dont know how to mass-chrono them a much important feature if you want to use them.
And if you see some airuntis flee
Maybe i should do a tutorial-map for that unit hehe

zinc
Posts: 657
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 3:46 pm

Post by zinc »

Materianer wrote: Heres an example on the popular Doubles Islands map.

P.s. shame on the mapbuilder who cutted some coast-tiles. A pain in my eyes to see this nukem map treated that way. But not as hard as the "official" doubles map wich seem to be completely ruined in my opinion hehe
I did the bottom islands. Not quite sure what you are complaining about? The use of copy/paste?

User avatar
Materianer
Posts: 195
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2016 8:27 am

Post by Materianer »

I found 7 fails here 3 on the left island
Attachments
Left island
Left island
Fail3.png (6.51 KiB) Viewed 4958 times
Left island
Left island
Fail2.png (11.28 KiB) Viewed 4958 times
Left island
Left island
Fail1.png (16.82 KiB) Viewed 4958 times

Post Reply