Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


des1206 last won the day on April 29 2016

des1206 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

76 Excellent

About des1206

  • Rank
    Rifle Soldier

Profile Information

  • Ingame Username
  • Gender
  • Icon

Recent Profile Visitors

3,410 profile views
  1. When there is only a few players, the maps are always restricted to AI-bot maps. It gets boring real quick and then players leave, leaving no one to seed a game. Can we get rid of the automated map selection where if there is less than 4 players it defaults to an AI-bot map?
  2. des1206

    I feel restricting map rotation to only maps with bots is not a good idea. Any single or two players come on can play those maps only, and they quickly get bored. They then leave without being able to "seed" a larger game.
  3. des1206

    In practice, I find it hard to use that strategy given Heavy's lower maneuverability. Would love to get a second opinion on this though. I get the balance argument. Maybe like you said some other units (Volk/Shock) can be nerfed a bit to allow us to beef up the tanks some more. The AT mine layer does a really good job keeping Soviet armor in check. For the Mammoth, how about we trade 5 hp/second regeneration for 3hp and 2 armor full health regeneration?
  4. des1206

    Would it work if we gave the Heavy a higher ROF, but lower damage, keeping DPS the same? A faster, more frequent shot would help missing shots less of a penalty. The med can do the opposite, lower ROF, higher per shot damage. It could make interesting strategy using its mobility to fire/cover-reload/fire. This is how Ra3 balanced its Allied/Soviet tanks. Side note: Can we give the Mammoth regenerating ARMOR, maybe with a time delay? Not Ralistic I know. It won't make much of a difference in direct battles, but it will help the tank on larger maps have the staying power to get to enemy base.
  5. des1206

    Does anyone else feel Heavy is the worse tank here? I know it's got slightly longer range than the med and slightly greater DPS vs buildings (+6% just like its +6% price), but it has the same DPS vs vehicles (edit: vs Mammoth armor, it's actually worse. It takes 2 seconds longer vs the Med to kill a Chronotank). The real kicker is its slow firing rate makes it misses much more often vs med. That combined with its slower speed, turret turn speed, firing rate, turret limitations, makes this tank all around worse. I really don't see how it's a "heavy" tank at all!
  6. des1206

    Can we ever have a version of Lunar with normal units, but Allies having Soviet War Factory and vice versa?
  7. des1206

    What if we just had a 10 second respawn delay? I realize vehicle build times may not be needed, since Soviets with their slower speed is supposed to benefit the most from slower Allied reinforcements, but defending Allies typically rely on cheaper tanks (lights/meds) anyway, so implementing a vehicle delay will hardly make a difference. People will hardly buy a Phase Tank or Chronotank when Soviets are in front of your door steps.
  8. des1206

    Wasn't Christmas a pagan holiday co-opted by the Catholic church? Jesus said celebrate my resurrection, he didn't say celebrate my birth.
  9. des1206

    Yes, real volcano is a must.
  10. I just want to ask if this is doable (coding-wise) and worth trying? I feel C&C mode favors defenders, especially on larger maps with easy to access gem. Since even if attackers skillfully take down the defenders half way to base, the defenders will just respawn right away and buy the best units they can to defend the now half-health attacking force. This type of game play reward skills less. Only surprise and concentrated attacks can succeed since buildings are not easy to take down. While there is nothing wrong with that, this makes larger maps and maps without cover not fun to play. Would implementing a reasonable respawn time and/or vehicle build time hep solve this problem?
  11. des1206

    Shallow grave should include islands for Chronotanks to island hop. If Allies get cruisers on that map Soviets will need to get Migs. Migs and cruisers will be amazing on A Path Beyond.
  12. des1206

    Pound for pound, Longbows should do more damage than Migs. Migs with their better speed is really more about battlefield patrol and rapid reaction to low-hp allied vehicles. If you want to do REAL damage, buy a Hind and stick around. I lobby for a Mig dmg nerf instead of a boost.
  13. des1206

    Why the damage increase? The previous dmg output seemed to be nicely balanced. I tested the Mig vs Longbow a bit back on Siege. Assuming they were hitting a target in the center of the map, for every 3 attack runs Longbows do, Migs can do 5 (faster speed). Incidentally, Migs also did 60% of Longbow's damage output, which made them perfectly equal in DPS over the long run.
  14. I get they have a specialized niche (CQC anti-infantry base defense), but does anyone feel they are a bit too good at their job for the price? Can we tone their health down to 50/50 at least? A weaker shotgunner will encourage more infantry based raids and also give more differentiation to the higher priced CQC units.
  15. des1206

    GG/MGG bubbles, Phase Tanks, Mines.
  • Create New...