des1206

Did some new tests with the LT, it seems that after recent patches, the LT does almost equilvient damage against medium armor and also buildings as the medium tank. I can only assume it is better at dealing with light vehicles and infantry given its high ROF. With only damage penalty against heavy armor vehicles like Mammoth, Ore Truck and MAD(?) . So as long as the LT doesn't go against the 3 above, it is essentially a faster but less armored version of the medium tank that is better at dealing with light vehicles and infantry, and better at dodging as well. Although probably not the best choice at rushing coil given it gets one-shotted.

He is Allied base defense destroyer Number 1 now, tech/engin repairing die quickly to the splash damage. So much fun on big maps where you can hide and stealth-nader-arty the Allied base. Well done with the balance changes.

No no no, I meant, when comparing fire rate per shell (Soviet fires 2 shells at a time). But never mind on that, I realized the Heavy is already kinda doing what I want for the med -> high burst damage and slow reload, and magnifying that even further would make it hard for heavy to deal with light vehicles.

wrong1.png wrong2.png wrong3.png Try again. It... already does? Unless you're including every other vehicle in this and it's not just between the light and medium, in which case GG, the medium will need a reload time over 8.5 seconds to be slower than the V2, and consequently, over 310 damage per shot compared to its current 70. What is this supposed to accomplish besides making the medium tank a Grand Cannon in a crazy disguise? Nice pic file names , I need to double check the damage. I recall it took slightly longer for the LT to kill both the heavy and bar versus the medium tank. Either way we know for sure it sucks against Heavy armor, maybe we could reconsider the heavy armor penalty? For the bonus I meant give the med the slowest firing rate per shot amongst the MBTs, as it currently stands I think it has a faster firing rate than the heavy?

Currently, the Light Tank DPS is inferior than the medium tank vs. medium armor (by a little), buildings (a little), and heavy armor (by a lot). Given its crappy 250/250 health, what if we actually made the light tank DPS better than the med in every aspect? It would encourage interesting strategies where light tanks are used in the field along with meds/APCs, using them as meat shields to stay alive while dishing out more damage. Or with Mobile Gaps where LTs can survive better. We can up the LT's price if you are worried about balance. The idea came to me with the way MBTs are balanced in RA3: http://www.gamereplays.org/redalert3/portals.php?show=page&name=red-alert-3-main-battle-tank-strategy-guide&st=2 Empire Tsunami ("light") tank had lowest health, but highest firing rate and DPS - great for hit and run. Allied Guardian ("medium") tank had middle health, highest single shot damage, but lowest firing rate and DPS - great for kiting. Soviet Hammer ("heavy") tank had the most health, middle firing rate and DPS. *Bonus: Going along with the above, what if we also gave the medium tank the slowest firing rate, but a higher damage per shot (same DPS)? It would encourage the med to use cover while reloading during tank battles to counter Soviet armor. Granted I know Ralism isn't Ra3lism and those MBTs also had different secondaries to balance things out.

No extra seating to Allied MBTs, let allies use the ranger or APC. I would like to see it in Soviet tanks though. The heavy tank now is essentially the same as a medium tank in terms of damage output/health/price, but with slower speed and harder time to hit a target (need to get both shots in). Giving it an additional passenger seat could make it a "heavy" tank. It shouldn't be too bad in terms of balance, given Soviet tanks are slow anyway and they don't have mechs. I also want to add that the intent of Soviet tanks are to get to the Allied base, and they often encounter mines in the way which an extra engineer passenger could help them detect and destroy. Allied tanks don't have the same issue. You won't encounter mines unless you are trying to infiltrate buildings, in which case you usually won't do it in a med tank. Lastly, I still think giving the APC a horn would help it rallying passengers and get used more.

A gunner is good for when you are retreating and just want to worry about driving to not get blocked by any rocks. Anti-infantry vehicles like APCs/Rangers would work better too.

Hi guys, can we allow this feature to be turned on by the vehicle driver? Right now pushing the "," button while a passenger is in the vehicle and making him the gunner does not work.

I never tried this in-game, but does anyone know if it is possible for a team to collect multiple flares, and then plant them simultaneously (or very close in time to each other)? I've never seen this strategy done in game, but could be interesting when defenders need to rush to 2 separate and opposite locations to disarm 2 flares at the same time.

Questions: 1. All the video recordings of pro-players I saw have them shooting in 3rd person. Does that help you aim better? 2. What recording device do you guys use to record a game?

I remember this mission. That initial spy never makes out of the mission alive no matter what you do.

Does the health/armor and weapon make it OP? Or is it just right now?

You are right. I made a calculation error previously where I only compared the # of seconds traveling to an ore/gem field instead of total harvest time. They are different because even if gem route distance is 2x the ore distance, actual harvesting time is the same for both fields. This results in a scenario where travel time to a gem field can be 4 times the ore field trip, but because both fields the ore truck needs to stay there to harvest, the TOTAL gem harvest time (leaving Refinery to dumping ore) is only 2 times the ore harvest time. The above is the case for the Allied ore truck on Ridgewar. In terms of actual numbers, before you were getting 3x the money, for 2x the commute time. So basically you were going out of your base for 50% extra income. Now it's 4x the money, for 2x the commute time, leaving the safety of your base for 100% extra income.

Some buildings behave different when "hacked" by the Spy. Right now for the Refinery, when the Spy attaches the device, instead of shutting the Refinery down this happens:Every second, 1% of the soviet team's cash is stolen instantly and distributed between the allied players. Since it's always 1% of the "current soviet money", the amount rewired is less and less every second (but increases if the War Miner dumps ore). Hacking devices can be disarmed by Technicians/Engineers to stop the effects. I did a little math on that using Excel. If Soviets ignore this for 1 minute, they effectively lose 45% of their original money. If 2 minutes, then 70% of their original money.

Mid-game (when Allies have mines), Soviet engin driving around with a Supply Truck is a pretty big target, versus just running around and using covers to hide.

Care to elaborate? It will give us something nice to chew on while waiting for this feature.

Don't know how people feel about the 5 minute spy-radar thing. We (Allies) had dome go down on Pipeline mid-game the other day. I infiltrated to get radar back but felt that the opportunity cost of missing 1 person in attacking/defending and needing to spend $1200 every 5 minutes to get radar back (spy + light tank) was just not worth it. Then again, from Soviet's view it is nice to see Allied radar worth destroying now. I guess getting the radar back from a spy should only be a luxury Allies can afford to do if they are doing well in game and not short on cash.

Don't mean to necro but with the recent ore truck changes, it's finally worth it to harvest on KOTG and Ridgewar!

Is there anyway to make this a regenerative weapon instead of limiting it to 3 only? Or just up the # of clearing charges engins get? On maps where Allies lose the War Factory but Soviets still have the mine layer, the 3 charge limit still makes the Soviet base practically inaccessible. If engins can have more CCs, it would make more sense for Soviets to get engineers when attacking (just hop out and clear the mine), or just travel on foot to continuously clear mines. Allies engins can also have some incentive to stay alive after a failed attack on the Soviet base, just sneak around to continuously ninja-clear mines.

Very cool spy logic you got there. Nice touch on the TF2 reference : ) Actually wait, how did you get 2 hands? I thought dual wield isn't possible in W3D engine?

I realized that APC's new armor and speed would actually allow Tanyas to solo the tesla coil. Don't know if this is intended. For now, Soviets mine your coils!

Nice list of changes, thanks for the update. Hopefully the APC doesn't eclipse the Light Tank. But still nothing to the flamethrower and the grenadier?

Oh...oops.

This is his current stats guys. 822 purchased, only 96 kills, 0 vehicles destroyed, and 2 buildings destroyed. Surely he needs a buff! http://www.w3dhub.com/ranks/apb/unitstats.php

Can we up his anti-building damage then? I don't mind paying more for him, it's just that because of his lack of anti-vehicle or close-range defenses, I would expect him to be decent (RS damage) at leveling buildings from a far (think artillery/V2). When I buy him I want there to be real potential damage to be done (building destroyed) other than scoring points. Either that, or the RS anti-building damage is too high (best out of all infantries when vs. building exterior). That unit is too good versus everything (except infantry) given the $300 price tag.