Death_Kitty Posted January 18, 2016 Report Share Posted January 18, 2016 So, having very recently returned to the game, I have been starting to see the same issue that put me off about APB in the past- gross imbalance. Of the 20- odd games I have played since my return, there has been one consistent winner... and when i say consistent...I mean every single time- the allies won every game I played over the past 3 days. even on camos canyon, with soviets outnumbering allies 8-6, they still won. This is getting ridiculous, and here is the main rundown of the issues: 1.) Artillery is way to cheap for how good it is, or at least is feels that way. 2.) momentum of the game is so broken, 2 reasons: a.) allied stuff is so cheap. Now that makes sense, but since allies can get out LT and MT out faster, it forces soviets to go defensive RPG and in extreme situations, defensive engines, draining money to buy tanks. Now I know that soviets have "better" stuff, but the allied ability to get out so much stuff so fast means they cant get any of that stuff. They are too busy defending against allies tanks. b.) The very concept of mechanics: This is a bad idea if I ever saw one- Soviet have to go back to repair of the service depot when their tanks are damaged, or go on with progressively less armor as time goes on, which cost money, while allies just get out, with a quick wrench, that is free, allowing them to keep pushing their advantage. c.) the loss of tech levels- back in the day, yeah, tech levels sucked, but it gave the soviets time to buy their vehicles in time to prepare, or even sally out against allies. So solutions: (this is just a brainstorm) Nerf mech and give the wrench ammo capacity that need to be refilled at base, good for one repair, or make it lose its ability to repair armor. Possibly give the soviets a mobile repair vehicle. give soviets an early econ. advantage, extra 150ish credits or so? (Yeah, i see the potential rush issue here) What do you all think? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pushwall Posted January 18, 2016 Report Share Posted January 18, 2016 Of the 20- odd games I have played since my return, there has been one consistent winner... and when i say consistent...I mean every single time- the allies won every game I played over the past 3 days Funny, of the games I've played, the split between soviet/allied victories was almost equal - though several maps seem skewed towards a particular side. However, looking through the server's last 100 game logs and excluding the "empty games" there are 31 allied victories and 13 soviet ones, which is a bit troubling. Some of those soviet victories have someone named Death_Kitty ingame, so that's some nice hyperbole with the whole "allies won every single game i played!" thing going on there... 1.) Artillery is way to cheap for how good it is, or at least is feels that way. Why is it that people only pop in to say something's OP after it gets nerfed? I remember it happened with the golden wrench in Pyryle's patch after its repair rate was cut in half, and it happened again in this version when its repair rate was cut in half again. If we reverted to the Gamma stats for the arty you'd be complaining even more because its splash radius and DPS to buildings were much higher back then. Guard Duty now has Soviet rangers which are a counter to arties, which previously did not exist on that map which was one of the biggest places that the arty shined. The only map I can see them being straight up "OP" on is Coastal Influence, and there are plans for that. a.) allied stuff is so cheap. Most Allied stuff has only gotten more expensive since Gamma/Beta. Gunboats and Destroyers are 750/1500 when they used to be 500/1000. Medium Tanks are 900 when they used to be 800. MGGs are 1200 when they used to be 600. Rangers are cheaper but that's being reverted in the upcoming patch where they will be 600 again. Possibly give the soviets a mobile repair vehicle lol give soviets an early econ. advantage On most maps they have 950 or almost 950 credits when the first dump arrives anyway, is this really needed? Not to mention medium tanks cost 100 more than they used to so the Allies have less options for what infantry to put in them early on... c.) the loss of tech levels Ah yes, that thing that was responsible for a lot of the hate towards Gamma. Let's not. Your feedback is appreciated though but I think you're finding all the wrong ways to balance the game. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voe Posted January 18, 2016 Report Share Posted January 18, 2016 b.) The very concept of mechanics: This is a bad idea if I ever saw one- Soviet have to go back to repair of the service depot when their tanks are damaged, or go on with progressively less armor as time goes on, which cost money, while allies just get out, with a quick wrench, that is free, allowing them to keep pushing their advantage. The allies use a variety of specialised vehicles to do their duty in the field. Mediums against heavy armour, lights against lighter armour, rangers and apcs against infantry. They strictly rely on their unit composition in the field in order to be successful. Removal of a singular element, like an apc or a medium tank can completely cripple the entire allied force from performing their duty. Soviets, on the other hand, have the freedom of utilizing all-purpose non-specialised units. Mammoths are good against anything, tesla tanks are good against anything. Additionally, when said vehicles die, soviets also posess all-rounded infantry like shock troopers and volkovs, which can continue the fight no matter what the allies are throwing at them. In other words, vehicle survival is crucial for allies in the field, while soviets can maintain their firepower and utility even on foot, as their vehicles die. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Death_Kitty Posted January 18, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 18, 2016 Disregard this topic, I've re-assesed my games, and looked into game logs (or rather, pushwall has)and Ive come to the conclusion that I have been (so hard to say it) wrong. Apparently, the allied team was just really good. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pushwall Posted January 18, 2016 Report Share Posted January 18, 2016 Make no mistake, there's definitely a balance discrepancy (31 allied wins to 13 soviet is nothing to sneeze at... though since my last post it's evened out a bit to 35 vs 18...) It's just not quite as bad as you make it out to be. However, it's true that a good allied team will usually overcome a good soviet team, this has been the case in a lot of prior versions because the allied units demand more teamwork and intelligent play. Giving the Soviets a mobile repair vehicle, in addition to going completely against RA, would turn it completely around and make the Soviets even more likely to win than the Allies currently are, because seriously what advantage do the Allies have left at that point? A commando unit that gets thwarted by easily-placed mines? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Death_Kitty Posted January 18, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 18, 2016 (edited) Make no mistake, there's definitely a balance discrepancy (31 allied wins to 13 soviet is nothing to sneeze at... though since my last post it's evened out a bit to 35 vs 18...) It's just not quite as bad as you make it out to be. However, it's true that a good allied team will usually overcome a good soviet team, this has been the case in a lot of prior versions because the allied units demand more teamwork and intelligent play. Giving the Soviets a mobile repair vehicle, in addition to going completely against RA, would turn it completely around and make the Soviets even more likely to win than the Allies currently are, because seriously what advantage do the Allies have left at that point? A commando unit that gets thwarted by easily-placed mines? Good points, and I guess there is a bit of a balance issue, so what would you suggest? mobile repair for sovs is a bad idea, but the allied ability to just overwhelm with... stuff is an issue Edited January 18, 2016 by Death_Kitty 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dblaney1 Posted January 19, 2016 Report Share Posted January 19, 2016 I think the major issue is that what is balanced in say an RTS (Red Alert) is not necessarily balanced in an FPS (Renegade). Take a look at renegades character lineup. Its completely different than Tiberian Dawns. I think the stand alone mods need to seriously consider doing something similar. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pushwall Posted January 19, 2016 Report Share Posted January 19, 2016 Indeed. That's why the units don't behave exactly like their RTS counterparts. Otherwise we'd have junk like Soviet Tanyas that Allies can't counter well due to not having AP mines, V2s that destroy buildings in 2-3 hits, all tanks being too fast and wide for infantry to ever hope to avoid getting squished by them, medics/mechanics that repair damage instantly, homing tank shells (seriously look at how tank shells land around infantry in TD and then look at it in RA)... the list goes on. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delta Posted January 19, 2016 Report Share Posted January 19, 2016 Tank shells didn't home in in RA1, they just don't have the randomized inaccuracy that they did in TD. If you watch a light tank drive by a horde of heavy tanks, you'll see a whole bunch of shots landing behind the light tank. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganein14 Posted January 19, 2016 Report Share Posted January 19, 2016 Personally, I find the soviet armor to be too squishy. I mean, A solo mammoth tank shouldn't lose all of its armor in a brawl with a single med tank from the front since directional armor is in play, let alone a single light tank from the side. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dblaney1 Posted January 19, 2016 Report Share Posted January 19, 2016 Yeah the autosnapping on the shots was only present in Tiberian Sun if I recall correctly. Shots absolutely miss in Red Alert. They actually do very little damage at all to moving targets. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclical_Yuri_Is_Master Posted January 19, 2016 Report Share Posted January 19, 2016 Yeah the autosnapping on the shots was only present in Tiberian Sun if I recall correctly. Shots absolutely miss in Red Alert. They actually do very little damage at all to moving targets. u back from sleep hi db 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Death_Kitty Posted January 20, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 True- but I joined that game toward the end, when soviets were already boxed in. It is hard to maintain field control when your tanks cost more, and they are slow. Allies can operate solo, thanks to fast vehicles, and mechs, while soviet tanks need to travel in at least pairs. One thing I have noticed is the power of Tesla tanks- capable of ripping away 20 something percent of a med's armor in 1 shot... paired with a heavy, or mamy to cower behind, it makes a deadly opponent. also noticed that games even out when hinds come into play... Im not so sure the navies are so balanced though- subs are powerful, make no mistake, but they are a bit hard to get out.... or is it just coastal influence being better for allies? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devilslayersbane Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 True- but I joined that game toward the end, when soviets were already boxed in. It is hard to maintain field control when your tanks cost more, and they are slow. Allies can operate solo, thanks to fast vehicles, and mechs, while soviet tanks need to travel in at least pairs. One thing I have noticed is the power of Tesla tanks- capable of ripping away 20 something percent of a med's armor in 1 shot... paired with a heavy, or mamy to cower behind, it makes a deadly opponent. also noticed that games even out when hinds come into play... Im not so sure the navies are so balanced though- subs are powerful, make no mistake, but they are a bit hard to get out.... or is it just coastal influence being better for allies? Costal influence is a very Naval focused map. If the Soviets don't take out the Naval yard early game, then the rest of the game is spend getting practically wrecked by destroyers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pushwall Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 Coastal Influence also has the "arty problem". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devilslayersbane Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 Coastal Influence also has the "arty problem". Nahhhhhhhhh.... ok, maybe a little... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pushwall Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 Just to clarify for anyone else this "arty problem" is related to the way the map is laid out and not a problem with the arty itself. If the bases were swapped there would be the exact same problem with the V2. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganein14 Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 I recall there was a time the sovs had two coils instead of one on coastal influence. Why was it removed? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pushwall Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 Because having a coil right next to the bridge meant two things: The Allies had no excuse to keep the bridge alive at all because rushing over it was much more difficult. The Allies had no reason to use LSTs because the only places they could drop infantry were in coil range. Having a coil near the bridge would not make Artillery any less of a problem because they outrange coils. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eternity 6 Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 I also think soviet tanks are a bit too fragile . There was and only post that said that they would add directional armor which I think would help but I've seen no sign of it being implemented . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralCamo Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 It is in-game. Shooting the back of a heavy tank does more damage than shooting the front. So far only the allies seem to be taking advantage of this however. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raap Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 Costal influence is a very Naval focused map. If the Soviets don't take out the Naval yard early game, then the rest of the game is spend getting practically wrecked by destroyers. AFAIK some tweaks are in the works for naval balance, although Coastal Influence is more of a land balance problem. Although I know a map that would probably feel any naval imbalances quite noticeably... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OWA Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 Although I know a map that would probably feel any naval imbalances quite noticeably... Oh my... is that Hostile Waters? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raap Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 (edited) Although I know a map that would probably feel any naval imbalances quite noticeably... Oh my... is that Hostile Waters? People have been asking me for a remake for years, so I figured now is probably the best time to do it. I'll post a preview thread when the map is nearing completion, it's still quite a work in progress, since I'm basically redoing it from nearly nothing (and expanding quite a bit in terms of gameplay depth, hint; naval transports are the most important vehicles). I probably shouldn't hijack the thread about a map though. Edited January 20, 2016 by Raap 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delta Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 Is that the one that was on the 0.9935 server a few years ago and was so large that you just get completely lost? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raap Posted January 20, 2016 Report Share Posted January 20, 2016 Is that the one that was on the 0.9935 server a few years ago and was so large that you just get completely lost? Perhaps, although people getting lost on this map was likely due to the lack of background landmarks, and dense fog. A background landmark has been added that ties into the map plot, and fog will be a little bit less dense. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Death_Kitty Posted January 21, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2016 Well, I do hope some changes for coastal influence are in order, but what is this arty problem everyone is talking about- I've only played on the map twice, and I have not seen the problem- is the allied arty able to hit sovs from in base? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyryle Posted January 21, 2016 Report Share Posted January 21, 2016 Well, I do hope some changes for coastal influence are in order, but what is this arty problem everyone is talking about- I've only played on the map twice, and I have not seen the problem- is the allied arty able to hit sovs from in base? The "arty problem" in Coastal Influence is moreso the allies being able to attack parts of the soviet base from across the bridge, without much need to traverse it. So in the event of the bridge getting destroyed, the allies have the siege advantage. The soviets, on the other hand, are not able to hit the allied base from their side of the bridge. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delta Posted January 21, 2016 Report Share Posted January 21, 2016 Can't you just fix that by making the bridge indestructible? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killing_You Posted January 21, 2016 Report Share Posted January 21, 2016 I'm of the opinion that helicopters would go a long way to solving the arty problem. Only problem is, the bases are already tight as it is. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.