Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Balance'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Quick Links
    • Community Rules
    • Download the W3D Hub Launcher
  • W3D Hub News
    • Community News
    • Project News
  • General Discussion
    • W3D Hub Discussion
    • Community Creations
    • Off-Topic Discussion
    • Help & Support
  • Official Game Servers
    • W3D Hub Game Servers


  • W3D Hub Services
    • Website & Forum
    • Launcher
    • W3D Stats & Ranks
    • Discord & TeamSpeak
  • Red Alert: A Path Beyond
    • Release
  • Renegade: Interim Apex
    • Release
  • Tiberian Sun: Reborn
    • Release


  • W3D Hub
    • Game Launcher
    • Tools
  • Red Alert: A Path Beyond
    • Custom Audio
    • Custom Textures
    • Maps
    • Misc. Files
  • Tiberian Sun: Reborn
    • Custom Audio
    • Custom Textures
    • Maps
    • Misc. Files
  • Classic C&C Files
    • C&C Tiberian Dawn & Covert Ops
    • C&C Red Alert, Counterstrike & The Aftermath
    • C&C Tiberian Sun & Firestorm
    • C&C Red Alert 2 & Yuri's Revenge
    • C&C Renegade
  • Newer C&C Files
    • C&C Generals & Zero Hour
    • C&C3 Tiberium Wars & Kane's Wrath
    • C&C Red Alert 3 & Uprising
  • Other C&C Files

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



Ingame Username



Website URL




Found 36 results

  1. 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.
  2. Does anyone like the new nader? I find his damage output just right for the new price. But it's pretty frustrating to use him against infantry. Too far and he can't reach. Medium distance his Grenade curve throw things off. Too short distance his Grenade bounces away without exploding. When/how do you use him?
  3. It has been ~2 weeks since this unit has been in play. I'm curious how do people like it so far?
  4. Why does he suck so much now? I know that people said to try it against a tank, but that's why Soviets have a rocket soldier for, right? I can hardly seem to kill infantry at all with him now. Maybe I just remember how good he was on maps like FoI and Fissure. Not exploding on death was kind of a let down too. What're your thoughts?
  5. I'm curious on what everyone's thoughts are on the current state of the Shock Trooper? I could be wrong, but is the range shorter than I remember? I find it hard to believe that the Rifle Soldier was always able to out range it. Also, I really miss the splash damage. Probably because out of habit, I'm constantly aiming for the legs. Still seems the same when it comes to vehicles. Haven't noticed anything that sticks out. Seem to do roughly the same damage to them that I remember.
  6. Last one for tonight! What happened to unit pricing and money in general? I found it so odd getting my first Ore Truck dump after returning all these years, only to get $350. I decided to check the PT, and noticed a lot had changed. Ore Trucks are only $700 now? That seems a bit crazy to me. I see plenty of people buy an Ore Truck right away, and by the time you get your next dump, the game has already entered end game. What I mean is, it feels like there's no early game now, minus the usual infantry rush to the other teams base. This has also changed, as you now start with $350. This leads to people rushing with Rocket Soldiers early on, which also means that you hardly ever see V2/Light Tank rushes anymore. Maybe this is what people prefer now, but I personally don't. I've also noticed that Volkov now has a price of $1800. I'd assume because of his recent weapon changes, but even then it doesn't seem he needs such a high price. For $1800, he shouldn't be killed in a single head shot (which I thought he had protection for at one point). Seems a little steep to me. Tanya also remaining at $1200, while he's at $1800 seems odd. Tanya can destroy an entire building in 30 seconds, while killing most things coming her way (depending on the player), while Volkov has been made to be more of a sniper now (I haven't had much success). I liked the pricing how it was before. What're your thoughts?
  7. So there's a bit of a thing involving shotgun units right now. First off, the $200 shotgunners in general. They are far better at mid-range than intended due to the strong afterburn damage that was meant to make it so they don't have to rely on headshots at close range so much. Sergeant's slug barely even matters anymore since you can easily whittle someone down at max range with burn damage if you hit at least one pellet per shot. But even then the slug is boring anyway because it's just M16 trishot++. Second, Starshina's secondary being in a weird place. In buildings it is pretty much just the dragonsbreath but better, and completely unnecessary because Soviets have so many other ways to kill someone in CQC already - the AK-47 sprayshot, the PKM's sheer dakka, the flamethrower's flamethrowerness, Volkov with his shotgun AND his nades, AP mines that prevent Soviets from having to deal with CQC situations in the first place, and even the PRIMARY fire of the starshina. And if I ever see a need to add attack dogs to the game, well, that'll be ANOTHER thing for the Soviet CQC pile. The TOZ secondary has been nerfed many many times, down from its original Beta/Gamma-era state of doing more than twice as much damage as the dragonsbreath, down to now where it only does about 20% more (when you factor in the dragonsbreath's burn), and it's STILL ridiculous. And lastly, Volkov's role just rendering so much of the rest of the Soviet infantry roster obsolete. He's not meant to be an anti-building unit, more of a "field commando" whereas Tanya is the "urban commando" - but his Kovtillery firing mode that has been hanging around since I think Beta, combined with his sheer longevity from 100 health and CQC dominance from having a shotgun and a flamethrower, is likely why he's still considered a superior choice for base assault and base invasion even when compared to the Shock Trooper and Flamethrower who have the highest MCT destruction speed of any non-C4 infantry in the game (Shock Trooper being stronger than Flamethrower but less capable of defending himself in CQC). This is all on top of the intended field dominance from his improved regeneration, having a strong alpha strike against any vehicle that he can ambush, and being able to take full advantage of cover during his 8 second reload. I'm considering tweaking the $200 shotgunners by combining the Starshina's dragonsbreath/buckshot into one "not-buckshot" firing mode that behaves identically to the dragonsbreath but without the burn, and replacing the Sergeant's firing modes with something new that Allies sorely need: a strong armour-stripper, who whether he's defending a building or getting the drop on an annoying field shocky/volkov, will be able to rapidly shred the enemy's armour to nothing - meaning even if he fails to finish the job by himself, his allies can easily pick up the pieces against enemy soldiers who've been rendered much more vulnerable to M16s, pistols, snipers and splash. And of course, like the Starshina, losing the mid-range presence that was afforded by the ability to apply burn damage. However, I am very unsure on how to make Volkov more unique, balanced and fit for purpose without taking too much from him, stepping too much on the toes of other Soviet units, or deviating even further from his intended field control role. The first step in my opinion is getting rid of Kovtillery entirely, and tweaking his AP weapons to be more fit for long-range combat than short-range (like making the AP primary more of a rifle than a shotgun) - but what else? If this much is taken away from him will he even be worth his $1500 price tag? His AT primary clearly doesn't need to be any stronger as there is already no vehicle that can stand up to him except a Phase Tank that gets lucky with tracking (or a Longbow but that's not always available), but I certainly can't make it any weaker if he's going to be losing things elsewhere. Is there anything Soviets lack he'd be able to pick up the slack in to maintain some uniqueness and even out the loss of Kovtillery - obviously excluding a C4-bot who would be OP against Allies' lack of AP mines (as he was in Gamma)? I'd rather not go the Reborn routes of making him one-per-team or unable to use vehicles; the former leads to fighting over it, and the latter is something not communicated very well in the engine (I've lost count of the amount of "why can't I use the vehicle i bought?" "because you bought a cyborg/jumpjet/commando afterwards..." chat from Reborn). Maybe Tesla Tank's phase tank detection could be moved over to him with the reasoning being AUGMENTED *snort snort*, but then he just becomes even more of a vehicle hound and one that phase tanks have a harder time of noticing and avoiding, and kinda kills phase tanks being an intended counter to him. A hard shift to pure anti-tank combat with very poor anti-personnel ability doesn't seem that befitting of a commando.
  8. 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.
  9. Too high or just right?
  10. So, I will cut the introduction short and state the stuff as it is. Most grief when it comes to map balance being scewed in Allied favor comes from a single unit being a pain in the butt. And said unit is Artillery plain and simple. So let's start with the obvious and compare Arty to V2. + Higher mobility due to tracks > wheels. + Higher versatility due to higher ROF and ability to turn. + Higher sustained DPS on enemies due to less punishing misses. + Way better at self-defence: easy to kite slow large soviet vehicles and kill infantry pestering you at close range. + Higher indirect durability. They have the same 150/150 HP but this one is kinda funny. It takes 10 serg slugs to kill a V2 and 5 shock shots to kill an arty. Both take similar time but one is 150 no barracks CQC specialist and the other is "advanced" AT infantry. Also mechanics. + Smaller general profile. + Smaller projectile. + Prop heavy recent map philosophy makes indirect fire far more efficient, esp. combined with V2 projectile size. + Harder to track back due to small trail and large arc. - Less accurate. - Lesser alpha strike. - Lesser splash AOE. That list already doesn't seem right for a cheaper unit, does it? Now let's take a look at what each of them have to deal with. V2 has to deal with faster agile and sometimes stealthy enemies which makes higher punishment on each miss even worse. If infantry got too close to you, you better just run and hope that there would be something nearby to hit to use your AOE which would still not kill the attacker but at least would make killing them on foot easier. If ranger or whatever got too close, you are toast. If Phase fired at you from the side, you are toast. Arty on the other hand has to deal with larger and slower targets most of the time. The only real threat to it are V2s on open terrain. As soon as terrain stops being open, arty gets an upper hand. If soviet vehicle got close which is far less likely due to their lower speed, you just turn around and blast it in the face. Even though you would likely lose your arty, that guy is now crippled with mammy being the only exception. But where were your eyes if you let a huge mammoth tank to flank you? Seriously. Anyway, then you get on foot (serg, cap and RS all work fine here) and finish off that person vehicle making it 1 to 1 trade. And maybe kill the driver. So in economy terms you've lost 600 and killed 700-1500 worth of units (+ maybe driver). A list of solutions (can be applied in any combination): - Make arty 100/100 again and remove tesla resistance (why is that even a thing?). It already has more versatility and mobility than the soviet counterpart to defend itself. No need for it to be tanky also. This will also allow TTs to avoid being cripped by the return fire should they engage the arty. - Reduce turn speed. - Slightly reduce range. - Make minimum gun elevaton higher so it can't fire at everything point-blank putting both it and V2 in the same boat when it comes to close range engagement. - Just make it more expensive (700-800).
  11. I just noticed the MAD tank does not harm ships or air units. Is this intentional? Also, what do you guys thinks about the idea of letting MAD tank shockwave damage mines to 1HP so they are visible for a while? We can slow the mine self-repair rate a bit so they stay visible for awhile longer (20 seconds?). It will give one more reason to use the MAD in the field. Too OP?
  12. 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.
  13. 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)?
  14. 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.
  15. 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?
  16. Right now the Grenadier is mainly used as either a turret/pillbox destroyer (great at that since engineer can't repair without dying), sieging from afar infantries (not so easy) or buildings (small damage, but good for pointwhore). To make him a bit more useful without eclipsing other Soviet infantries, can we make his small splash damage affect vehicles and buildings as well? This way, he can really fullfill the "annoying base sieger" role easily. He can also hit retreating Allied vehicles better or maybe even expose a phase tank or MGG with his large splash range.
  17. Is there anyway we can make the PT have no radar signature when it is standing still? This will help the PT better ambush passing Soviet armor instead of having to make a big loop around them first like all other units. This will also address smaller maps where PTs have no room to navigate behind attacking Soviet forces without being seen. Gameplay will be a bit more exciting too as you sit and wait for your "prey" to passby before unleashing your missiles. A potential imbalance I would see is when players in PT "crawl" into Soviet bases without defenses stealthily. Or just that PTs will be too difficult for Soviets to counter in the field. Would that be too OP?
  18. 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.
  19. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0HCKZHjrwU Mmmmmm.
  20. Does the health/armor and weapon make it OP? Or is it just right now?
  21. 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.
  22. Sorry for all the posts lately, heard Pushwall is doing a patch, so I wanted to get all my thoughts in. One thing I have noticed with how people use the Chinook is that they almost always fly really close to the ground. This makes sense. While Hinds often fly high to find their targets, chinooks just need to get their passengers safely to their destination. Flying this way provides more stealth, and more importantly in the case of being shot at by the RS the nook can get to ground fast enough that everyone will survive. The only negative is potentially getting ambushed by other vehicles at ground level (i.e phase/ranger/apc) that would not have reached the chinook if it flew high. However this is not the way the chinook is meant to be flown! Can we increase the chinook's descending speed (currently very slow) so pilots are more comfortable flying the nook higher in the sky, knowing if RS starts shooting it can quickly descend and save the passengers?
  23. I've ran a few tests on the Flamethrower. It turns out that amongst all regular Soviet attack infantries, the flamethrower does almost the least damage vs. building exteriors (5. Kapitan 4. Flamethrower, 3. Nader/Volk, 2. Shock, 1. RPG trooper), as well as vs. MCTs (4. Kapitan, 3. Flamethrower, 2. Starshina, 1. Shock ). Tip: Flamethrower vs MCT does the same damage as RPG vs. building exterior. I feel the Flamerthrower is eclipsed by every other Soviet infantry these days. The guy just doesn't have his battlefield niche. When infantry rushing a building, we pick Starshina for the higher health, lower $, faster speed, great secondary, easy kill vs engin, and higher dmg vs. MCT. If Tanyas come, it's starshinas on defense as well. In the field, Kapitans have higher health and better range (outrange pillboxes too). RPG trooper are great vs vehicles and building exteriors (also outranges pillboxes). Grenadiers are when you want to outrange all allied defenses, kill mechs, or siege bases for points. But when do we use the flame guy other than infantry-only-maps? C&C Flame guys are always slow, exploding on death, mediocre vs. vehicles, but excellent vs infantry and buildings. The APB one is all those except the last part. (Sometimes they have high health too like the Nod Blackhands). I can see his current unique role as "Can not damage MCT nearly as fast Starshina (~9 sec difference killing bar), but does not have to choose between fighting off defenders vs. damaging the building". While this is true, the flamer's current dmg. vs building is too low to worth bring him onto a rush team in a game that rewards quick building destruction. Therefore, can we give him more damage vs. building exterior to be close to or equal to RS damage, but no change vs MCT? This way, any infantry rush will always bring along a flamer to defend against attackers while not sacrificing killing the building. He will also not overshadow any other infantry this way. Starshina is still better vs. MCT and killing single engin/tanya, Nader's got range, Officer has health and range, RS still anti tank/air/building, Shock still best at almost everything.
  24. Anyone else feel these two units are very situational and still underused? Early game infantry rushes just use the supply truck these, and so does late game when your team dominates the field. There is also rarely any incentive to an APC rushes given how many Allied vehicles out there are +1. Maybe give the APC a way to not just refill, but "overcharge" infantry armor once they are inside for awhile? The medic has a nice healing rate and good anti-infantry, but his anti-vehicle dmg is abysmal, and anti-MCT dmg is worse than the rifleman. For $500, can I at least get a weapon that does rifleman or officer equliivent damage to vehicles and MCT?
  25. Before the Delta update, the sniper rifle had a point and click function. In Delta, it was changed so the sniper rifle fires projectiles that drop over distance. This change was most likely made to discourage excess usage of the class, and make the sniper a more challenging class to use. I'm in favour of the changes that were made, but I've started to question the sniper's overall usefulness at contributing in battle, other than being an annoying "killwhoring" unit. First of all, snipers are really easy to counter, as most maps have lots of obstacles to hide behind. The class itself has poor survivability, a solely anti-infantry weapon with slow fire rate and projectile travel time and drop, which is barely useful on infantry only maps due to their small, narrow spaces. Say, if you needed to kill some enemy infantry, why not just get up close and personal with any other offensive infantry class, rather than trying to awkwardly hit them with a sluggish sniper rifle? Secondly, the sniper is useless most of the time, because enemy players will be driving vehicles (unless they lost their War Factory) or hanging around inside buildings. Due to engine limitations, snipers can't shoot through truck windshields or hit people seated in Rangers. So, the point here is, should something be done to make the sniper a more useful class, or should it stay as it is now?
  • Create New...