Pushwall

Also it's possible that other games might have been released on the launcher in the meantime.

This was all in reference to Coastal Influence though... Also good luck making Under playable with a missile silo. Even if the tunnels were given no-beacon zones, you'd still be able to hit the enemy base with flares placed in the back of your own base.

Not to mention the map's border geometry was not designed with aircraft in mind. The flight ceiling would have to be like 25m just to avoid having to put invisible walls around the edge of the map or expand the out-of-bounds terrain drastically. And we already know how people feel about Pacific Threat's flight ceiling which is currently 50% higher than that!

What weapon did it say you were killed by though? The M72 LAW/RPG-7 and Redeye/Strela are very different weapons, and I have doubts you were killed by "RPGs" because that would involve Allies stealing a sub, which I don't think is a very common occurrence right now.

I'm not adding credit trickle - people just need to not ignore their own silos. Maybe I could move the Soviet lower silo closer to their base though so it's as easy to repair as the Allied one is...

crappy handling sucks sliding on ice no acceleration painful and unfun to captain. Yeah I've heard this like a dozen times now. They will handle better in the next patch. I'm still not seeing a physics value relating specifically to backwards movement on VTOLs. Vertical acceleration, horizontal acceleration, other ones that affect all movement like mass/aerodrag, and that's it. Pretty sure if such a thing existed, people would have used it to make hacky "fixed wing" aircraft that can't move backwards, no?

Which is amusing when you consider that; It's basically performing the Cruiser's role in the Cruiser's absence, minus the whole "insane DPS and can sit outside of rocket soldier/V2 range" thing.

Yeah, destroyers are kinda meant to be worse than gunboats at the whole depth charging thing. They and missile subs are meant to be anti-base/anti-air artillery that can't fight naval units effectively, and gunboats/submarines are meant to counter those, intercept LSTs, harass the enemy naval yard to prevent anything from coming out in the first place, or protect your destroyers/missubs from enemy gunboats/attack subs. Destroyers being able to launch depth charges out of the missile turret would make gunboats mostly redundant even if gunboats could do it too.

There already is "proximity detection" 17.5m around the depth charge and it's going up to 25m next patch. We can't change vehicle movement speeds on the fly in this engine, outside of completely freezing them in place. The destroyer used to be able to rotate its depth charge ramp in testing. This turned out to make it even more useless because this engine does not handle vehicles with multiple turrets well - you had to look down to make the turret face left, and look up to make it face right. Since you have to look down to even see subs anyway it meant the ramp would always be facing left when you were actually trying to use it. At the very least, it's still a deterrent that means subs can't just go straight underneath a destroyer because of the threat of being instagibbed by a depth charge in the process, they have to circle around it where they will likely run into an escorting gunboat.

You've noticed wrong then. Destroyers and AA launchers do not hurt submerged subs. [Scale_DeepSub] Explosive=0 AntiAircraft=0 If you don't see a blue tint then you're not submerged. There may also be like a split second of lag between the tint and the armour updating, idk. But it's there. Gunboat's deck gun does a minor amount of damage to submerged subs to prevent them from just going "lol nope" and submerging before the last hit and making the gunboat waste a minute or so trying to chase them down with depth charges. The LAW does this for the same reason plus not forcing the player to buy a gunboat (which they may not even be able to do!) for the express purpose of finishing the sub off. But the gunboat's deck gun can't aim down very far anyway; a really submerged sub (as opposed to one just edging the line between submerged and surfaced) can't actually be hit by it.

I suppose I can hotfix it by making the bridge indestructible, or removing arties/v2s from the map for the time being. All the "real" solutions to the problem would take quite a bit of time but I plan to implement a real solution eventually.

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.

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.

Coastal Influence also has the "arty problem".

You actually get full credits for any kills you make, but there's currently an issue with Sergeants and Thieves where they only give 1% of their intended point/cash reward. This'll be fixed next version, and next version half of the kill cash for infantry will be converted to damage cash.

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.

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?

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... 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. 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. lol 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... 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.

Try not bunnyhopping.

I heard you guys like to tease?

PatchNotes.txt in the game folder

Changing weapon models is not possible without triggering the anti-cheat. Imagine if someone made a shock rifle that was 100 metres longer. You now have a shock rifle with 100 more range.

Instead of unlocking more units over time, which severely limited players' options and made the game a lot more boring in the early stages of a match. You can still walk by holding the jump button but it doesn't really do anything except look cool. They're much more comprehensive than the old screens; B shows if someone is a passenger in a vehicle (the [+] icon) rather than a driver and it also tells you who's a spy if you're Allied, and M shows ALL structures instead of just a couple. They also don't get in the way as much; they're transparent overlays that don't prevent you from moving or seeing your surroundings while you're looking at them. There's a limit of 4 skin variations per unit and most of them are already pushing that amount.

Yeah, there's really nothing I can say here that hasn't already been said. :neckbeard: