Question Additional units in APB?

[des1206]

Given how the game is effectively done and W3DHUB will only do balance/map updates, I am assuming we will never see the Chronotank/Spy Plane/Mig/Yak in action? It's a shame since at least the Chronotank would have been awesome to play with.

[Isaac The Madd]

Dogs and a giant ant map anyone...

[gammae102]

At this point, it would be pretty hard to add the Chronotank just because of balance. If we put something like that aside though, I think it might have to work similarly to how the Devil's Tongue works in Reborn. I'm not sure if it would be possible to have the Chronotank's speed increase while in "subterranean" mode (or even add VTOL), but that's how I could see it being done. Of course, even if that could be implemented, it would seem to steal the Phase Tank's niche.

[SarahNautili]

Honestly, I could see the Phase and Chronotank fufilling different roles pretty easily. Setup the Chrono as the superior anti-armor tank, and better armored, in exchange for it being a hell of a lot slower (only slightly faster than a mammoth), and a lot more specialized - so less powerful at killing infantry than the Phase. And that better anti-tank ability and armor comes with the cost of once you're committed, you're only coming out if you have friends to cover your butt, or you win... preferrably both, with the lesser ability to deal with infantry threats.

[GeneralCamo]

Spy Plane: What would the use of this thing be? Why would I use it over something like binoculars?

[Einstein]

I actually agree with Sarah's Chronotank idea somewhat. The only thing I might add to that is maybe nerf the phase against heavy armored vehicles to encourage the use of the chronotank. Currently, phases are the stealth EVERYTHING counter. They can severely damage/annoy a mammoth and can easily destroy just about anything else if you use the terrain to your advantage and get a jump on your target. When the mammoths are out (assuming the match isn't one-sided yet) is usually when the phases come out. By making the phase considerably less effective against them, you give a place to another unit (chrono). And yes, I realize that they already have more vehicles. But thats who they are really. The soviets use a slow driving force of good-against-all-of-it units while the allies use a quicker set of tactics and an array of rather specified units.

 

Not saying that this should or even could happen...but if it did, this might be something to consider.

 

tl;dr I mostly agree with what sarah said.

[Killing_You]

On the subject of planes, I remember (vaguely) a Yak being modeled and ready to go, with some wonky WIP fixed wing physics testing being shown off to the public. Do we still have it? I was thinking that it would be nice to allow Soviets access to an air strike. Place a yellow flare, moments later a swarm of Yaks pepper the area with bullets. Might be useful for softening up a base during an attack or checking for Phases lying in ambush.

[Isaac The Madd]

I think I like the way DTA did their Chronotank, when it is built it can teleport around but has to deploy and undeploy to fire as which it acts like a slowish tank with a high powered weapon ,it can not go back into teleport mode after this.

[ChAoS]

Spy Plane: What would the use of this thing be? Why would I use it over something like binoculars?

 

Ok! Quick idea: Spy plane is scripted to fly over the allied base, but can be shot down, when it does so it has the same effect as the spy in Barracks/War Factory logic, So it would tell the soviets the makeup of all the allied units. Also on maps with Gap generator it could disable the Gap generator for a short time.

 

On the subject of planes, I remember (vaguely) a Yak being modeled and ready to go, with some wonky WIP fixed wing physics testing being shown off to the public. Do we still have it? I was thinking that it would be nice to allow Soviets access to an air strike. Place a yellow flare, moments later a swarm of Yaks pepper the area with bullets. Might be useful for softening up a base during an attack or checking for Phases lying in ambush.

That was some seriously creative thinking but it wouldn't really work... I don't know if I can go into detail about how that was working but it wasn't actually fixed wing physics.

 

I like the idea for the Yakks, but I'm not sure how accurate they would be or how well they could target moving unit's.

 

 

Just some quick idea's for the other unit's if they ever were implemented just for the sake of it.

 

Cruiser: This would likely require a major re-balance of navel gameplay, but it would have to be super slow and inaccurate maybe a build limit of 1 or 2. It's size could be an issue as well. It would have been nice to at least have a model so it could have been seen in seamist.

 

Chronotank: I like the idea of it working like the reborn underground vehicles, even if the speed isn't increased just being able to move around the map without being target-able is nice. Obviously the phase tank and Chrono tank would need to have separate but clearly defined roles.

 

Migs: Would be cool to see volkov be able to call these in like Boris does in Yuri's revenge. Of course volkovs anti-infantry abilities would have to be toned down, and likely his cannon's strength vs buildings.

[OWA]

I have a suggestion for the Phase Tank/Chrono Tank issue. Since they essentially fit the same role as each other they could be swapped in and out of various maps. So certain maps would have the Chrono Tank and others would have the Phase Tank.

 

Both units are experimental, so it's unlikely that the Allies would be fielding both at the same time if they fit a similar role to each other. They'd choose to deploy them on a case-by-case basis depending on the requirements of the battle. Plus, it's a nice way to stop Chrono Tanks from being abused on maps that weren't designed with them in mind.

[Ice]

On the subject of planes, I remember (vaguely) a Yak being modeled and ready to go, with some wonky WIP fixed wing physics testing being shown off to the public. Do we still have it? I was thinking that it would be nice to allow Soviets access to an air strike. Place a yellow flare, moments later a swarm of Yaks pepper the area with bullets. Might be useful for softening up a base during an attack or checking for Phases lying in ambush.

Airstrikes would be awesome on some maps. I would think that a Badger strike (parabombs?) would at least be feasible to add, considering that certain missions in Renegade (and even a couple of APB fan maps) had stuff being paradropped (weapons, people, etc.) on several occasions. On that same note, we could even add a paratroopers ability which drops 5 rifleman bots on the designated location. Of course, for balance reasons, the Allies would need access to these abilities too, or have some kind of equivalent ability (off-map cruiser/arty shelling in place of airstrike?)

 

I have a suggestion for the Phase Tank/Chrono Tank issue. Since they essentially fit the same role as each other they could be swapped in and out of various maps. So certain maps would have the Chrono Tank and others would have the Phase Tank.

 

Both units are experimental, so it's unlikely that the Allies would be fielding both at the same time if they fit a similar role to each other. They'd choose to deploy them on a case-by-case basis depending on the requirements of the battle. Plus, it's a nice way to stop Chrono Tanks from being abused on maps that weren't designed with them in mind.

I like this idea. Edited February 15, 2016 by Ice

[delta]

So I guess, airstrike would just be called in the same way as the nuke...and do more or less the same thing, but weaker?

[ChAoS]

So I guess, airstrike would just be called in the same way as the nuke...and do more or less the same thing, but weaker?

 

I suppose they wouldn't be disarm-able like nuke flares

[Ice]

 

So I guess, airstrike would just be called in the same way as the nuke...and do more or less the same thing, but weaker?

I suppose they wouldn't be disarm-able like nuke flares

 

Instead the plane could potentially be shot down.

[ganein14]

But how would the Soviet's deal with cruiser fire?

[Ice]

But how would the Soviet's deal with cruiser fire?

Just use the Iron Curtain!

 

 

(But in all seriousness, I'm not sure how Cruiser fire would be balanced apart from a disarm-able flare. Maybe just give both sides the Badger strike initially?)

Edited February 15, 2016 by Ice

[Pushwall]

Don't expect to see any of these get implemented.

 

Except maybe the Chronotank if we get someone to texture it and also we get some new scripts for it. When I was messing around with it a year ago hopeful to actually get it included, something similar to Reborn's underground vehicles was the first thing I considered as a replacement for what's currently there, and it was set up as a primarily anti-armour unit like Sarah said.

[Vuxlort]

I just want the cruiser...

[Pushwall]

Also when I was messing with the Chronotank, the idea was that in addition to it being essentially a tank destroyer, the Phase would be downgraded to frag rockets, making it less effective against heavy vehicles, but still effective against light vehicles (which for the Soviets is the TT, V2, Hind and Supply/Demo Truck), infantry and buildings. The Mammoth would probably have to be raised to tech level 5 if this happened though (except on Seamist) since the Phase is currently one of the biggest counters to Mammoths. The Phase would probably also be reduced in price (around 1600-1750).

[des1206]

Chronotanks are different from Phase. They can get pass base defenses.

[Pushwall]

Which is why they were planned to not be very good against buildings. Of course, 5 units with anti-building damage as poor as a Ranger's popping up behind your war factory is still no joke, but that's pretty expensive to pull off and easy to thwart once defenders get there as I also planned for them to have the ground speed of an artillery and a 30+ second delay to shift out again once you've shifted in. Not to mention they'll know it's happening before it does happen if underground logic is used.

[TK-421]

My idea of balancing the cruiser would be total damage would be 10-20% greater damage than the DD, slightly greater range than DD (but still in range if the strela),really slow, same or higher cost as the missile sub, reload would be slow as the (V2's reload time or slower than that perhaps), rounds would have a big arc (greater than arty or the V2's secondary perhaps) and the turrets would move slow.

[Pushwall]

Yeah that's cool except there's a reason why the Cruisers on Seamist are not visible even if you spectate over to the place the shells are coming from. We don't have a model. There's a bunch of other problems too:

• That range suggestion means it would have a godly 5-10m extra range compared to the Destroyer... hooray...
• A high arc would allow it to hit subs which is totally not what it should be doing. Unless its gun was forced to a high angle which would also mean it would have a lot of trouble actually hitting certain buildings even if it had 100% accuracy.
• "Really slow", only 10-20% extra damage, inaccurate, and a negligible range increase... considering that a Destroyer will get in range of the enemy base much sooner and therefore deal damage sooner and can actually HIT aircraft and can reliably hit buildings other than the sub pen, and will ideally not have a dumb arc setup that allows it to hit units that it shouldn't (subs), why don't I just get a Destroyer instead?
• It would have to have only one turret for the same reason I've mentioned dozens of times about why the Destroyer's depth charge rack can't be turned.
• It's difficult enough for destroyers to navigate the icebergs on Hostile Waters, you really want something twice as big going through there?

[TK-421]

 

 

 

Yeah that's cool except there's a reason why the Cruisers on Seamist are not visible even if you spectate over to the place the shells are coming from. I'll let you figure it out. (It's even been mentioned elsewhere in this thread.) There's a bunch of other problems too:

• That range suggestion means it would have a godly 5-10m extra range compared to the Destroyer... hooray...
• A high arc would allow it to hit subs which is totally not what it should be doing. Unless its gun was forced to a high angle which would also mean it would have a lot of trouble actually hitting certain buildings even if it had 100% accuracy.
• "Really slow", only 10-20% extra damage, inaccurate, and a negligible range increase... considering that a Destroyer will get in range of the enemy base much sooner and therefore deal damage sooner and can actually HIT aircraft and can reliably hit buildings other than the sub pen, and will ideally not have a dumb arc setup that allows it to hit units that it shouldn't (subs), why don't I just get a Destroyer instead?
• It would have to have only one turret for the same reason I've mentioned dozens of times about why the Destroyer's depth charge rack can't be turned.
• It's difficult enough for destroyers to navigate the icebergs on Hostile Waters, you really want something twice as big going through there?

 

I didn't add inaccuracy to the list. what about total damage that arty does, what about just slow, what about a shallower arc, are you sure two turrets won't work? (be creative)

Edited February 16, 2016 by TK-421

[Pushwall]

are you sure two turrets won't work?

 

In testing, the destroyer had its depth charge ramp set up as a second turret. Problem is there can only be one turret bone so it had to use the barrel bone instead - meaning that not only was the missile turret unable to tilt up/down, but you also had to look up or down to rotate the depth charge ramp. Which was terrible because you can't see the subs you're aiming at unless you're looking down so the ramp was ALWAYS aimed to the left when it was in use.

 

If this were done for the Cruiser, both turrets would not be able to tilt up/down (so the gun would be REQUIRED to have either no arc at all or a very shallow one) and the rear one would require you to not be actually looking at the enemy base if you wanted it to aim at either side of the Cruiser. Enjoy staring at the ocean or the sky instead of the carnage. Alternatively you could spend 20 or so seconds turning the Cruiser to face the enemy base so you actually get to see what you're trying to hit, negating the whole "I have turrets that can rotate!" aspect completely, only to realise that since the second turret is on the back of a very huge vehicle, you have to then move about 50m closer to the base just so the rear turret can actually HIT the base. And then you're in range of machineguns and tanks, not just Strelas.

[TK-421]

 

are you sure two turrets won't work?

 

In testing, the destroyer had its depth charge ramp set up as a second turret. Problem is there can only be one turret bone so it had to use the barrel bone instead - meaning that not only was the missile turret unable to tilt up/down, but you also had to look up or down to rotate the depth charge ramp. Which was terrible because you can't see the subs you're aiming at unless you're looking down so the ramp was ALWAYS aimed to the left when it was in use.

 

If this were done for the Cruiser, both turrets would not be able to tilt up/down (so the gun would be REQUIRED to have either no arc at all or a very shallow one) and the rear one would require you to not be actually looking at the enemy base if you wanted it to aim at either side of the Cruiser. Enjoy staring at the ocean or the sky instead of the carnage. Alternatively you could spend 20 or so seconds turning the Cruiser to face the enemy base so you actually get to see what you're trying to hit, negating the whole "I have turrets that can rotate!" aspect completely, only to realise that since the second turret is on the back of a very huge vehicle, you have to then move about 50m closer to the base just so the rear turret can actually HIT the base. And then you're in range of machineguns and tanks, not just Strelas.

 

 

How about making it so that 2-3 players make it fully functional one pilots and uses the front turret and the other uses the rear turret or one pilots the other two man different turrets?

[Einstein]

Heh this guy I'd love to see it ingame personally. And making it a multi-man vehicle is one of the better ideas i've heard so far. But we still need someone to model the thing.....Until this, can't even show it in the distance on seamist.

[Pushwall]

making it a multi-man vehicle is one of the better ideas i've heard so far.

Assuming it's even possible. There's probably a good reason why the MK2's chin gun is automatic.

 

And before someone says "make the rear cruiser gun automatic!" AI can't aim at buildings. The Seamist cruisers are pretty hacky and only happen to hit buildings because they're in their predetermined line of fire.

[TK-421]

Heh this guy I'd love to see it ingame personally. And making it a multi-man vehicle is one of the better ideas i've heard so far. But we still need someone to model the thing.....Until this, can't even show it in the distance on seamist.

Not even the silhouette, how'd you know I was a guy, shame I don't know how to do any modeling except actual models (model rockets for example), thanks and another solution for the two man thing one drives the other mans the turrets if that's possible.

Edited February 16, 2016 by TK-421

[Ice]

Don't expect to see any of these get implemented.

 

Except maybe the Chronotank if we get someone to texture it and also we get some new scripts for it. When I was messing around with it a year ago hopeful to actually get it included, something similar to Reborn's underground vehicles was the first thing I considered as a replacement for what's currently there, and it was set up as a primarily anti-armour unit like Sarah said.

Personally I like OWA's idea of the Phase Tank being available on certain maps, and the Chrono Tank on others, with both filling a similar role but with their own unique advantages/disadvantages. Not only would it vary things up a bit and sorta make sense lore-wise, but in theory it would also require a lot less balancing effort, since you'd simply have to balance the Chrono Tank around the overall balance, rather than having to balance everything else around the Chrono Tank. This should prevent the current balance from needing to be revamped and potentially messed up.

Edited February 16, 2016 by Ice