Coolrock

I'm perfectly fine with the Sergeant/Captain being left if so desired. My only problem lies with the Rocket Soldier being available when the Barracks is down. This is more focused on all the maps then just Pacific Threat. If the team lost both the Sub Pen and the Barracks, then I would expect the base to be destroyed soon after. Plus as you said, there's nothing stopping them from rushing with Chinooks/Hinds. I'm sure plenty could be done to balance things out if a problem arises.

Destroyers/missubs have 160 range and the Redeye/Strela have 170. By staying far enough away to hit parts of the building that rocket soldiers can't stand on, botes can narrow their range disadvantage a bit. Also, the Redeye/Strela do not hurt submerged subs at all, only surfaced ones. But anyway constant rocket spam shouldn't be an issue if it can be stopped by destroying the barracks right? Not sure if sweet talking me, or sassing me. I like it either way <3 Then what would you give the allies if they don't have a their rocket soldier? Pretty sure he just means for the Soviets. I honestly don't mind Soviets having Rocket Soldiers, just not after the Barracks is down.

I don't recall honestly. I never really cared for them. My only say on them is what I assume is the secondary fire is a little, ridiculous to say the least. On Fissure at least, I see them standing in their Barracks just firing off flaming shots that burn you for a bit. With a few of them doing this, it's a little insane. I'm pretty sure this was added later, because the first time we tested them, they didn't do anything of the sort. It's the primary fire. And it was in since beta... only it was less obvious since Beta's fire graphics were terrible compared to what we have now. I left just before Beta released due to misunderstands with the last leader, so I must have missed it. I don't mind it much, as you normally only see them stick out on Fissure. Don't really care for the map with all the tunnels now, but again just opinion. Glad to see a post from you. I hope it at least gets looked into, and I appreciate it. If the majority of people like it, then by all means don't change anything. A lot comes from experience with the game over years and years of changes, but things stayed pretty much the same before I left. A lot of bitterness comes from seeing a lot that I grew up with missing. It's no hate towards anyone here. I know this mod/game has been through a lot, and I just want to help anyway I can to bring back the "golden days".

Look, at the end of the day, it stops the game from ending. When you get to the end of a match, let's say 10 minutes left. The other team has lost their Barracks and Refinery/Silo, and have say $600-$700 left between each player. The other team hasn't lost a single building besides maybe some defenses and we will say the Service Depot, because they're paper anyways. The team has a player collecting crystals, so they have plenty of cash to burn. Of course they're going to be buying tanks/helicopters/ships/whatever. You're going to the base in a vehicle one way or another. You get there, literally to have your vehicle blown up in seconds. Why? Because instead of spending the money for a V2 (I know some players would try a V2 rush or whatever, but we are talking about average games with average players, so stick with me), they all bought Rocket Soldiers. Why? Because they're $300 and if they lose one, you can get another one right after. They will destroy any helicopter that comes towards the base in seconds. They will push back/destroy any naval vehicle that comes within range. They might even kill a few players. Some of them will go Captains/Shotguns any be able to kill even some of the higher tier Infantry units once they pop their vehicles. You draw out matches that should reward the team that managed to take out the production buildings in a game. That's all I'm saying. Kill whoring is a horrible reason to do what has been done. It's part of the game. It's nothing to get mad over. I'm on the line with you. I'm sure Pushwall or someone could confirm? I could be very well wrong, but I tried even inching forward with the front of the ship to make sure I was close enough to fire on people, and still got hit with missiles first. It could be the anti-air rocket. I recall a huge problem with it long ago that let it pick off underwater Subs and such.

I don't recall honestly. I never really cared for them. My only say on them is what I assume is the secondary fire is a little, ridiculous to say the least. On Fissure at least, I see them standing in their Barracks just firing off flaming shots that burn you for a bit. With a few of them doing this, it's a little insane. I'm pretty sure this was added later, because the first time we tested them, they didn't do anything of the sort. That would be lovely. That's really all I was asking for honestly. At least talk it out with others and see where everyone stands. Thank you, sir <3 No problem. Always a pleasure to discuss balance in a civil manner such as this. I agree <3

That would be lovely. That's really all I was asking for honestly. At least talk it out with others and see where everyone stands. Thank you, sir <3

Obviously with the major amount of changes, maps need to be changed also. I mean, one map lets the Soviets have Rangers to balance the map out for them. I still say it's part of the game, and shouldn't have been changed to begin with. It's my opinion of course, but I really feel like it was a bad move. I doubt players just stopped playing APB over dying a few times at the end of a losing match. If so, that's just disappointing.

So, the change was made due to one single player? What the actual fuck?

What's fun in an RTS can be irritating in an FPS. In this case, since you cannot rebuild buildings (or build multiple of the same types), losing a structure is 100% permanent. Plus, in an RTS, you can mass hordes of units to take out a crippled opponent without much trouble, but in an FPS you're limited to who is on your team. Those are just couple of the many factors that go into the decisions we make when transitioning. Plus, it's not like you have specialized units like Engineers, Flamethrowers, or Medics without a barracks. But was never an issue for years. Plenty of other mods did this also, and never had an issue. When did it become such an issue that it needed to be changed? I've only seen one reason, and that's "kill whoring". People actually upset about a K/D Ratio on a free FPS. Someone gets me <3 Big bad moderator is upset

Really? After I brought this up to OWA, he agrees with me that they're doing much more than they should be. If I was "exaggerating", then why are more and more people agreeing on the matter? Why am I even wasting time on you? I don't like you using orange text. It disturbs me.

That's cute. Why do I feel like people never played C&C type games in the past? Why should you be allowed to continue building units, when the production for said unit is taken away? That literally takes away from Command & Conquer, and what made it exciting. There's hardly a penalty when they still have a unit that can fight off everything the other team has, minus Infantry (although I've seen skilled players kill others with Rocket Soldiers). Aww, you're adorable Giving out verbal warnings on the Internet through text

Why the hell does the Medic even have an MP5? To try making people play with it more? Good God.

User was warned for: Openly mocking a moderator / ignoring verbal warning I could be losing it, because I worked a 13 hours shift today, but I swear you repeat yourself over and over again while I've already stated something. Maybe because you're smoking so much. Smoking is bad. Maybe you just don't read. I don't know. I already said that no matter what you say, Rocket Soldiers shouldn't be out ranging, or even at the same range, as a Destroyer. They shouldn't even be around after the Barracks is destroyed. Lucky there isn't any Subs to deal with? Again, I said what's even the point of buying a Sub for what is it, $950? I can buy three Rocket Soldiers for that, and probably take out much more with them than I could ever with one Sub. No point replying to the rest of the post. It's the same thing you've posted and I've answered over and over again. Why did you even post?

Barracks was destroyed, Sub Pen was alive. I never said it was destroyed. Maybe lay off the joint? My argument is for any situation. If the Barracks is destroyed, then they still have to best anti-tank weapon available to them for $300. I see more Soviets use the Rocket Soldier now, then I do Shock Troopers. There were plenty of Infantry attacking along with our ships and Longbow. The fact is there shouldn't be any Rocket Soldiers if the Barracks goes down. You can reply as much as you want, but the fact remains that it doesn't make sense. Ladies and gentlemen, this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it;that does not make sense!

I don't know why you keep typing out these long drawn out posts that have nothing to do with what I'm talking about. Again you fall onto "aiming" and killing everything with head shots, right? How can you even fire on them when you can't get in range to attack them without getting over half your vehicles health blown off? Letting Rocket Soldiers stay around after taking out a Barracks just keeps games going on longer than they should. You're worried about "kill whoring", when most people I see playing would rather just finish the match and get to the next map. You didn't defend the base, and therefore you lost your Barracks. Tough shit.

How much weed do you smoke?

I'll just pick at the Destroyer comment. No, they don't seem to out range everything. Myself, along with maybe three other Destroyers, couldn't even get in range to hit the Sub Pen, let alone the Infantry bouncing around. Each time I'd get in range to shoot a round at the Sub Pen, I'd get hit right away by 1-3 rockets. Why even buy an Attack Sub to counter ships, when you can just spend $300 and do a much better job? This is from multiple matches, not just a single game. Just gave you the "scenario" above. Artillery? The map didn't have Vehicles as far as I'm aware. Are you even sure you were in this game with me? Simple to kill? Depends on skill and many other aspects. Again, this map had no Vehicles besides Helicopters and Ships, as far as I'm aware. Asking anyone to get a head shot on a moving, jumping target, or hell, if they're above you on a cliff, is absurd. You're telling me the answer to a rocket soldier out ranging you is to just get a head shot on them, with a tank shell. If people rage quit after failing to defend a building that allows them to defend, it's their fault. I tested the game for years, and this was never once an issue. We also had 30+ people regularly in the servers, and still had no issues. Maybe it's because people like you tested, is why the balance is shitty now. Probably why any kind of Infantry are allowed to be purchased after losing the Barracks also.

I don't see how well over years and years this was never an issue, and never changed until recently. It's part of the game. If you lose a building, the function to use it should be gone. People complaining about a K/D Ratio is silly in a game like this. Maybe I'm alone on this, but it's so silly to me that the building goes down and one of the Infantry still available is a Rocket Soldier. The one unit that can pick off multiple tanks/helicopters/ships and survive most of the time. Times that by multiple people using one, and it's just stupid. I can't be the only person upset that team effort to take down the Barracks, still leaves the teams with the best option to defend against everything. Kill whoring is something that happens in this game (or did at one point in APB), along with many games based on the same aspect, big deal. People complain about everything. Just the other day, people in a game were complaining about removing MAD Tanks because they lost half a base to them. Guess you should remove those also Glad I'm not the only one then. Asking to rush with more vehicles when I obviously pointed out they can pick off tanks without hardly having to worry about being killed. Any skilled player with one can take out more than a few vehicles, or just about any Helicopter that comes near them.

Isn't using the Gunboat's cannon against subs basically the same as how the old depth charge launcher worked? So even if the new depth charge sucks, you've still got the equivalent of the old weapon. Does it? I honestly didn't try assuming that if they took the secondary fire away, then the cannon wouldn't do anything like in the older versions. Really? Pretty sure between Longbows, Rocket Soldiers, Phase Tanks, anyone skilled with most of Allied vehicles (I've shot down a Hind with an Artillery in a game recently), hell even a group of Captains and Rifle Soldiers can take them down easily if grouped up. Everyone has plenty of anti-air. I didn't care for Rocket Soldiers having the same range as a destroyer. Don't recall the map, but this again fall on Infantry still being allowed to be purchased after the Barracks goes down. Almost half the team on Soviets had Rocket Soldiers sitting in the Sub Pen, dominating destroyers trying to end the game. I don't see how this made the game better to play. Sure, they can keep fighting, but what's the point of killing a critical structure of you can still use it? Just my two cents.

I could see them just fine. The problem I was having was keeping the boat even close to above them to even try hurting them.

The Longbow hands down is the better of the two at Air-to-Air currently. I've started fights hitting them first, and still lost even though I made sure to land every shot I could. It also doesn't help that they have a bigger clip now, but that's not the issue. Also, am I the only one that sees the Depth Charge change being horrible? The ships can hardly turn anymore as it is, and now I need to keep a Sub behind me to even hit it? The turn rate seems horrible also.

2a) I actually brought this up to OWA already. It's bad to the point that I almost always see a Hind running when a Longbow is after it. Plus having a bigger payload now, nothing stops them from just firing shots off and hoping for the best.

Pretty sure I played all day yesterday. I'm sorry I only played with 10-14 players, but that's about all I ever saw in the hours I spent in the game. Pretty sure I know the game considering I've played it since 2004, even if I did take long breaks due to work. I was almost always on top of the leader board, and maps I wasn't were spent defending. Really bad luck? Considering most of the players were testers/staff with the few mixed in randoms I've never seen before, sure. Get off that horse, sir.

I'm guessing that back in your day, the case was "why would anyone grab a heavy tank when you can get a V2". V2s are now primarily used for pummeling enemy buildings when the enemy is contained in their base (which can't be that uncommon an occurrence considering that the win ratio is only marginally unfavourable for the Soviets) and removing minefields and troublesome infantry in the field. Much like an Artillery. MBT duties should be left to actual MBTs. Guard Duty is actually one of the best maps for V2s due to its size and layout, you're just going to have a bad time if you all get V2s and no tanks. Actually no, they were the perfect early rush for Soviets "back in my day", if they got past Rangers and Light Tanks. They were always used for taking out buildings, just not so late into the game that it's almost impossible to use them. I'm not commenting anymore. It's just blowing in the wind. I'll give OWA my feedback instead.

I'm talking about all the maps in general Because why would anyone grab a V2 anymore when you can get a Heavy Tank. Generally I see a few select people grab a V2 who actually know how to aim well with the Arc. V2's are almost pointless given how fast they go down now that within the first dump, Allies have access to just about every vehicle. I downloaded the logs of last 100 games played an hour ago. 31 allied wins, 28 soviet, the rest were 1v1/0v0 situations that don't count because 0v0 obviously means no game and 1v1 comes down to who's the better player more than what team they're on. Doesn't seem that imbalanced to me??? Sure, a little Allied biased, but not problematically so. edit: taking the games that have been played since then into account, that's 33 allied and 31 soviet. Over the last few games I just played (and you were there), 90% of the games were won by Allies. FoI hardly counts, as that has changed into some weird joke of a map now. You get thrown into it not knowing what the hell is going on. Maybe I should sink another few hours in to see which maps Soviets start winning on. I never liked Chronojam's idea path for the game after beta. Too much has changed that made the game enjoyable. The server issue doesn't help either. Yeah the soviet rocket launcher was added in gamma I believe. I think the ore dump change is delta? Soviets have always had some issues with flamethrowers, grenadiers and shock troopers not having definite roles. Rocket soldiers do have definite roles but they overshadow the former two even more then they already are by shock troopers. I don't believe I played Gamma after release. I stopped testing way earlier. Maybe it has been over 5 years since I last played? I don't recall anymore. I always enjoyed Shock Troopers being the go-to Anti-Vehicle for Soviets. Now they're everywhere harassing Allies. I've seen only a handful of them even be used.