des1206

I mean, he is a BIG tank. It travels slower than most infantries. Extra seat would encourage an extra engin or RS to come along for the ride vs. mines and LB.

I think statistics have shown that Soviets tend to win more on larger games and smaller maps. Maybe it's just harder for Allies to coordinate effectively, or that Soviet tanks/infantry are pretty straightforward to use in attacking, and Allies' natural advantage in flanking/sabotaging lose its effectiveness where there are more Soviet players around to cover the flanks and defend the base (you can only C4 one MCT at a time but there are now 5 engineers trying to disarm). To balance things out, we could buff the Allies depending on the number of players in game, but that would be weird and inconsistent with game-play (i.e rocket soldier doing more damage when there are more players). We could also buff Allied units in general, but that would give Allies an over-advantage in smaller games (i.e stronger tanks AND advantage in flanking/sabotage). How about instead, we try to buff some support units to help them support more players? Mechanic - If we increase his repair radius a bit, it would help him to tag alone and repair multiple tanks at the same time. Spy - I think there were plans to add more features to this unit. It would be great if he can shut down War Factory or Barracks for 30 seconds. Thief - Maybe up his stealing rate to 65% of total funds? Build-Times - Can we lengthen build time of the more expensive units (Mammoth/Tesla/Phase)? This will delay Soviets in fielding their heavy hitters a bit. We should leave the HT build times the same due to LT rushes.

Wait wait wait, what craziness is this? I'm gone for a week and now you guys are seriously planning to change a finally balanced and useful nader? The grenadier is now a great siege unit, that's his battlefield niche. Do you know how satisfying it is to use him after you spent countless hours figuring out where you can hide behind to hit base defenses (note: there aren't that many) on different maps? If you are complaining you can't find him, just spend more time playing the maps as a nader. Then you will see for every base defense, there is usually only 1 or 2 hiding spots. I'm not against nerfing his anti-infantry damage a bit to make him less of a close-range fighter. You can also make the grenade explosion visually more noticeable so people can tell easier which building is being hit. Lastly you can nerf his anti-building damage a bit - a siege unit like him shouldn't do RS level damage. But don't touch his range or the grenade AOE size! His uniqueness lie in the fact his attacks out range base defense and make them not easily repairable! If you are complaining about grenadiers, again maybe you guys could just play him more to learn how to find him better. This is a very specialized unit with a decent learning curve and rewarding play once you master it. Holding down the L mouse button maybe simple and boring, but scouting different map locations and objects to hide behind is not!

How do you guys record videos and more particular .gifs? I want to get a few done for reddit's /gaming/ subreddit for advertisement purposes.

Hey guys can I ask if you use free targeting in 3rd person when using infantry? In these videos I always see 3rd person while the cursor moves around. Does v-targeting help in aiming that much? Can't the Soviets do the samething to Allies?

Too bad I missed it! Hey guys, can you guys talk a bit about how overall strategy and game balance played out when team were able to plan beforehand and coordinate via teamspeak?

Would no tracking be a problem if faster aircrafts (mig/yak) come into play?

On the ToTheCore map, there is a floating tree North side of Allied base right at the base of the cliff.

Actually don't helmets only protect against shrapnel and not direct bullet shots?

@Pushwall can we give the strela a scope? I feel it helps to zoom in and actually point to the center of LBs when they are a bit far off.

Playing a game on Ridgewar today using a streala vs several Longbows was extremely frustrating. The LBs were often within my reach, but unlike the Hind, their faster speeds meant only the missiles that tracked actually hit. I know this is a code issue the dev team hasn't been able to fix. I just want to ask if it is possible you guys can look at the SAM missile tracking code to see how that works flawlessly?

@Pushwall I am actually really interested if we can track the win/loss for these games. Number wise it probably won't be statistically significant, but still it can give a glimpse on how balance shakes out when the game is played the way it's meant to be played - large organized games with RTS like strategies.

I would actually like to see interesting maps like this. Wasn't there also one where there was a bunker that Soviets had to defend from Allies?

I'm in

Nobody liked Allied Assualt? It's time for a reverse Seamist map.

@Pushwall I say take out all base defences (except AA) in the front. This will encourage more aggressive direct naval attacks and LST landings. Keep the base defenses in the back but take out the AA. This will reward helis to circle around to the back (takes too long for boats/LST to do so).

That's fine if we can't do it with Tesla weapons. It's usually easier for hit-scan weapons to aim at a side armor. Is it really +/- 25% already? I could have swore it was 15% when i tested it. I feel embarrassed if that's the case!

Hey guys, the whole conversation in another thread about larger scaled games made me think. I think one issue that contributes to the more pro-Soviet balance is the added difficulty to flank and hit tanks on the side/back in larger games. But what if we upped the ante and rewarded flanking more by upping the rear armor penalty to 20%-25% (from the existing +15% front / -15% rear)? We can raise the front armor bonus to be equal as well to make things even. I think this will not only give a boost to the faster Allied vehicles, but also indirectly give a boost to the RJ, Mobile GAP and Mechanic. The RJ blind Soviets to flanking, GAP makes it harder for Soviets to flank Allied tanks, and the slower rate of damage by front armor bonus helps mechanics to repair more easily. Mammoth will also get a slight boost during its health regen if it is able to keep its front armor facing the enemy. Radar Dome will become a more important building for the same reason as RJ. An added idea is we can make Tesla weaponry to ignore armor bonus/penalty, since electric damage goes through armor. This would be a relative buff to the TT and Shockie since Soviets rarely flank well. Although if well aimed skilled players can always hit a side armor with these 2 units. Lastly faster Soviet units like Volkov and Hind will get a benefit too. Overall this is more of a Soviet tank nerf than an Allied buff. It could encourage more team work on both sides in the game to exploit/protect this new vulnerability. Remember flanking doesn't mean you need to hit the rear, if the front armor bonus is there, all you need to do hit the side to bypass front-armor protection.

No, no, no. That's just the lazy man's way of balancing! I do wonder if there is more potential for a large Allied team if they only coordinated better via mic. Maybe it's not that Allies are worse off in larger games, it's just that it's harder for them to play a coordinated game which can unlock more of their potential.

Can we do the samething to the ranger as well? It's a jeep after all, and jeeps have horns.

I feel the reason supply trucks are effective is because the driver can call people using a horn. Can we give the APC a horn too? It will help to call people to form rushes, or make other infantries in the battle aware that a friendly APC is nearby to take cover in.

The April 1st games were fun and filled with large number of players. It doesn't happen often, but how do we feel about overall game balance and strategy changes when a large number of players (30+) fill up the game? I would think the increase in number of players will make stealth play/flanking by lone RJ/arties/phase much harder (since enemies fill up the map), give a bonus to group support units like the mobile GAP/medic/mechanic/APC, and maybe tanya will be less successful in C4ing (given how 1 C4 is needed per MCT but there are more defenders)?

If I recall from my testing he actually pretty decent DPS-wise if he can always land his shots.

Seems like he's one of those jack of all trades but master of none units huh?

I think most units are pretty widely used these days, even the nader after the range buff - now he's great vs. base defenses! Splash even kills techs quickly! (Although I disagree with the recent engineer buff. It used to take 4 hits from a grenade splash to kill an engin repairing a base defense, now it takes 7). Anyway, Fissure aside does anyone consistently use the flamer? I feel every role he can be in is usually overshadowed by another unit, and his slow speed makes him an easy target. Making him anymore lethal will just be OP on infantry only maps, or eclipse the RPG Trooper vs vehicles or Shockies vs. buildings. He can't be faster too since he was a slow unit in Ra1. Maybe we can: 1. Increase his flame damage, increase reload time, keep DPS constant. Makes him a unit that can really make use of the cover system Volkov style. 2. or Give him more armor, make him a heavily armored but slow infantry. Maybe a bit of an arty/phase counter?