IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
China, A question
{Lads}RikerZZZ
post 27 Mar 2017, 22:58
Post #51


Certified Shitposter
Group Icon

Group: Donator
Posts: 2263
Joined: 30 December 2013
From: Straya'
Member No.: 10248
pls join my games im lonely =c



rohan, just get the aura remover from the moddb page, because those icons are useful information for the player and they aren't going anywhere


--------------------

Many thanks to IvanMRM for my avatar and Star for drawing my epic signature. You guys rock!
Also, check out our ROTR - Fan group on Facebook.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mizo
post 27 Mar 2017, 23:53
Post #52


AI Coding Expert
Group Icon

Group: Dev. Team
Posts: 1599
Joined: 9 May 2014
From: Poland
Member No.: 10450



I don't understand what's the end goal of this discussion. All am seeing is complains about China's main faction theme which is Quantity over Quality firepower to be a boring playstyle , hence subtly asking/suggesting it to be changed/different to make things 'more interesting'.

Implications of these subtle suggestions would be the complete removal of the horde mechanic to make things "look prettier" , as well as a re-invention of nuclear and napalm weapons to be something completely different ( to what and how is something I have no clue about because what else do you want blazing fire and small-ordinance nuclear explosions that leaves lingering radiation field that mels everything, to do?

China has always been a straight forward faction to play even back in Vanilla generals, were it kept its overwhelming numbers theme while also filling in the bruteforce steamroller role as well via heaviest tanks in the game.

Now Russia exists, and the steamroll role is moved to them. In order to create a diverse set of factions, you have to abuse everything the engine has to offer, and give each of the factions their unique attributes to match the diversity of the original game.

As a result, China was given thr Overwhelming numbers to be their primary theme ( proven perfectly through the mechanic of horde bonus on all units, to encourage you to bulk them in numbers) as well as high area firepower, with some disruptive capabities newly added to the mix. All of these roles will be further exaggerated when the generals are split, being a spammer oriented/firepower oriented/disruptive oriented). Saying that one or two of these playstyles are boring is rather pointless since the point of this is to add diversity in playstyles . Mass Mobilization is a unique rank 1 to General Chen for example, which makes sense given the fact that he is the Mass Army General. All of the nuclear stuff belongs to General Mau who excels in high area firepower, which makes sense as one shot from a nuke cannon would decimate entire army groups.

So really, all this complains stems from the fact that China lacks subversive flare to them ( i.e General Jin units), and would rather revamp the current faction to include more 'interesting yet fitting' stuff. To that I say "hell no.." because the faction is bloated as hell and it'd be pointless to exclude somethings now in favour of this "interesting flare" you all desire, as it gives more balance headaches as well as it being time consuming to implement. So for now, lets be patient and wait.

If these tactics don't interest you, then you are welcome to try different factions since ROTR ( and the soon to be generals) will cover most if not all possible playstyle preferences that a player can endulge upon.

Some people hate and can't stand playing as ECA for example, due to their stail playstyle thst involves playing the waiting game rather than marching forward full gun blazing. Some people dislike slow factions like Russia and prefer a more mobile and dynamic faction such as the likes of GLA nd USA. A good portion of people prefer direct firepower through Russia and China's arsenl of units over the subversive style GLA / the heavy micromanagement nature of USA's units. A few thrive with units that possess high micro potential that can skyrocket their efficiency if played correctly, hence they lean over USA.

This really reminds me of a this talk about wanting ECA to play like Russia in the testing team by improving their units to be more geared towards offensive, and the response to them will always tell them to go play Russia instead.

Stuff are just the way they are for diversity's sake, and will be further expanded upon in 2.0.

As for addressing specific points :

- Horde Bonus is the way it is to apply a faction theme through mechanics rather than outright telling you to spam them in thr tooltips. It's crowded visually, but there isn't really any applicable way to make 'spam' more mechanically influential rather than having the typical " more units = win" that every faction can achieve with cash.

- Abundance of Propeganda is due to bloating. There are 4 sources, 1 of which is stationary while the other 2 ( being overlords and airships, belong to different generals completely) . So really the only core unit right now is the troop crawler that provides it, and in the grand scheme of things that's not as abundant as what you say.

- Battlemaster vs Hoppertanks. Each have their own role. Hoppers are good recon and harass units due to their easiness to horde and speed as well as the spotter ability, while battlemaster scales better due to better survivability and damage when horded. There isn't 1 that's outright superior to the other.

- "Nuclear and Napalm is becoming Banal" , perhaps but then again what else can you do within the limits of the engine that can be applied to Chinese units thst fits within their respective faction/general theme, while not overlapping with others? The confines of Neutron/Conventional airbust/cluster weapons is for ECA, Bio-weapons/High Demolitionis for GLA, Rail/Coil guns , Tesla and thermobaric weapons are covered by Russia, and Lazer, Advanced tactical missile, Cruise missiles and microwave themed weapons are USA's. What else can be done within the game engine that would fit China and properly replace the Nuclear and Napalm weaponry themes? Pretty hard to come up with something creative or more interesting that isn't somehow covered by other factions ( I have not listed everything ofcourse because NDA, but am pretty sure this task is not something one can think off the fly like that). So yes for now we're sticking to Napalm and Nuke weaponary because if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Better to hsve the generic Nuke and Napalm tha having something either too obscure and unfitting for the game design wise , or having something that heavily overlaps with other stuff both visually and mechanically. As of now the mechanical difference between Nukes and any other weapon is that its radiation field melts everything, while the Napalm is the generic burst damage over time.

This post has been edited by Mizo: 28 Mar 2017, 0:43


--------------------


Not a Rusty Spoon........The_Hunter uses a goddamn wooden spoon on his AI Scripters....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
XoGamer
post 28 Mar 2017, 7:59
Post #53


Tactically Toxic
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 101
Joined: 29 February 2016
Member No.: 12634



Yep, waiting for 2.0 it is tongue.gif


--------------------
"It'll be a NUCLEAR winter, this year General." - General Tao
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
__CrUsHeR
post 28 Mar 2017, 13:00
Post #54



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 2609
Joined: 18 April 2012
From: Southern Brazil.
Member No.: 9084
"No. Not even in the face of Armageddon. Never compromise."



I would like to explain first of all that I like all the mechanics incorporated in China and I do not think that any of them should leave the faction; instead, I would like to argue that some of them should be revised, the Horde Bonus system, which as it was said is very easy to be "activated", another point that I think is whether it should be extended to all units as it currently is, in the VGen was something that only favored the Overlord and the Battlemaster making them more iconic and true frontline war machines.

About the topics I mentioned before: Napalm: As I argued before is a very cool theme for China however I get the impression that the Black Napalm is already a redundant upgrade that fit the ZH proposal but not the current ROTR proposal. Napalm-based units are ok in my opinion and fit well in China's framework (usually more tactical units that need to be used in flank attacks). Nuke: Wisely in vGen China's nuclear power was restrained to the max (Nuke Cannon, "nuke tanks") and the most powerful upgrades were devoted to this issue for obvious reasons. In ROTR these powers were released indiscriminately (practically on the same level as napalm) which seems to me a problem (it would be like General Tao being part of the ROTR' cast). Propaganda: A great theme of the faction that has not been used up until now (just a generic upgrade)... it could be much more inspiring to think in a China with propaganda than with weapons of mass destruction on all sides; some new mechanics involving the theme (waiting for Gen Jin)... "Mass Mobilization": Something that seems to be very cool at first sight, in practice not so much; probably this theme has ruined a good part of the gameplay of China and took away the importance of some classic units of China (Troop Crawler, Battlemaster, etc); this gameplay is the most basic possible within the ROTR universe and primary in C&C games; if you have resources to click on the production units and send to the frontline, it would not be a problem for example in Red Alert or RA2, but for a complex game As the ROTR simply became obsolete in face of the other incorporated tactics. It is still a resource to be explored but needs special care in order not to detract from the "ROTR' special gameplay".

I would also like to explain that China's gameplay learning curve is minimal compared to the other factions, and there is a chasm between ECA's gameplay for example with China's gameplay, which should not occur within the same game. I even took years to understand the gameplay of the GLA, assimilate the microplaying of USA, carefully manage the resources with Russia, and understand the defenses of ECA, with China you do not have this moment, this is a problem...

This post has been edited by __CrUsHeR: 28 Mar 2017, 13:01


--------------------

You already imagined how would be SAP in the ROTR's universe? Check out this fan-fiction: South American Pact Introduction
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mizo
post 28 Mar 2017, 17:30
Post #55


AI Coding Expert
Group Icon

Group: Dev. Team
Posts: 1599
Joined: 9 May 2014
From: Poland
Member No.: 10450



QUOTE
Horde Bonus system, which as it was said is very easy to be "activated


How does this remove the need of troop crawlers and classic tactics? You can still do infantry Transportations within Troopcrawlers, and they are still an important source Propeganda.

Also why wouldn't horde be passed by all units? The main idea is that the red army feel inspired fighting near each other, that it makes them fighter. I don't think this is a mechanic flaw ( to extend something that was slightly trivial and unimportant in vanilla generals to something essential for most of their units to operate at optimal capacity). It can be argued that it's easier to achieve in order to make hording more user-friendly rather than having your core units only rely on being in groups of 5 to get their normal unit efficiency. It also helps to keep very powerful artillery/other units like infernos so that they need the horde bonus to preform normally rather than having them at their optimal efficiency from get go ( essentially would require ridiculous nerfs to balance out). It's easier to factor in horde bonus for all units at this point, since it makes scaling firepower of spammable cheap units easier , while also fitting in the main faction theme that is mass numbers.

QUOTE
Black Napalm is already a redundant upgrade that fit the ZH proposal but not the current ROTR proposal.


Doesn't make any sense, since the upgrade is unique to General Mao. This is one of the ways to give him "better infernos/hellfires/Dragon Tanks , and upscaling his unique shenlongs rather than having some generic "qhite Napalm" or "Advanced Inferno cannon" or "advanced Dragon Tank" that really serves no distinction other than being a statistically better unit. , which is typical and boring.

This method of passing a current upgrade that seems generic and boring to turn it into something more exotic ( as a unique upgrade ) is going to probably be applied elsewhere.

QUOTE
Nuke: Wisely in vGen China's nuclear power was restrained to the max (Nuke Cannon, "nuke tanks") and the most powerful upgrades were devoted to this issue for obvious reasons. In ROTR these powers were released indiscriminately


This still doesn't address what I stated above. What other theme could be applied to replace nuclear based weapons that wouldn't be copy paste or a rip-off of other weapons from other generals while still fitting within the specialty of what Mao has to offer , which area firepower.
It's all about diversity, fitting playstyle, and playing off by the rule of cool ( because while you feel nuclear weapons are saturated now, other people enjoy the blasts and find it rather cool).

QUOTE
it could be much more inspiring to think in a China


Implying that this should replace nuclear weaponary? ( because screaming at people with zeal.and patriotism will cause the same.effect on the enemy as of that of a nuke , but that's probably not what you meant). Also this theme bas already been expanded upon, through Frenzy and Spotlight War Propaganda, and the game engine can't really handle any more types buffs so really, what else can you do with it?

QUOTE
Mass Mobilization": Something that seems to be very cool at first sight, in practice not so much; probably this theme has ruined a good part of the gameplay


The spam theme ruined China as a whole? I wouldn't really state this as an objective fact because a good portion of the community here do enjoy large armies.
I could aegue that this theme is a nessessity to create a faction that feels unique from the other 4 , while not having any overlaps ( because REALLY what else can you make China be based on theme wise? Cost efficent tanks that are high quality is covered by Russia, fanaticism and sacrifice is covered by GLA, artillery is covered by ECA, what else can China do that would make them completely stand out from the rest that is possible within the game's engine?

If you come up worth 1 theme, then divide it into 3 generals, thst has to carry the main faction theme, 1 of them being the exaggerator of that said theme.

Again this is for diversing the factions to fit unique RTS playstyles, not to make China authentic and 'interesting' ( that comes as a second priority). Heck what a guy may find boring, can be interesting to.others , so it's better to set styles for everyone to get unto, which again, judging by your distaste to the abundance of nuclear weaponary, and spam being a brain dead tactic, China is probably not something you would find personally fun, but others would.

QUOTE
I would also like to explain that China's gameplay learning curve is minimal compared to the other factions,


Been like this since 1.7, China has always been a Beginner friendly faction that's easy to get into, play as and win with. By that I don't mean that it's a newb faction , but rather it's a faction that's rather straight forward and easy to get into, due to their initial simplicity. It also offers deeper mechanics for veterans to abuse and have fun, for example mixing spotlight ECM tanks with overcharge ect...

Russia and.China are easy-to-learn factions, good for.casuals and people who are new. There is nothing wrong in having 'simpler' factions. Not everything has to mechanically intricate like USA or ECA , or have alot of sneaky options as GLA.

This post has been edited by Mizo: 28 Mar 2017, 17:31


--------------------


Not a Rusty Spoon........The_Hunter uses a goddamn wooden spoon on his AI Scripters....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
__CrUsHeR
post 28 Mar 2017, 23:41
Post #56



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 2609
Joined: 18 April 2012
From: Southern Brazil.
Member No.: 9084
"No. Not even in the face of Armageddon. Never compromise."



QUOTE (Mizo @ 28 Mar 2017, 13:30) *
How does this remove the need of troop crawlers and classic tactics? You can still do infantry Transportations within Troopcrawlers, and they are still an important source Propeganda.

Also why wouldn't horde be passed by all units? The main idea is that the red army feel inspired fighting near each other, that it makes them fighter. I don't think this is a mechanic flaw ( to extend something that was slightly trivial and unimportant in vanilla generals to something essential for most of their units to operate at optimal capacity). It can be argued that it's easier to achieve in order to make hording more user-friendly rather than having your core units only rely on being in groups of 5 to get their normal unit efficiency. It also helps to keep very powerful artillery/other units like infernos so that they need the horde bonus to preform normally rather than having them at their optimal efficiency from get go ( essentially would require ridiculous nerfs to balance out). It's easier to factor in horde bonus for all units at this point, since it makes scaling firepower of spammable cheap units easier , while also fitting in the main faction theme that is mass numbers.


I believe that the horde bonus should not be extended in the way it is currently extended because it makes all Chinese units similar - something that does not seem to be very creative or original - yet as I said before the mechanic itself is interesting, but it is a problem when combined with the effect of "ROTR's China mass units", because you make something that was intentionally limited in something unrestricted (it is very easy to produce tanks in quantity in WF and activate the horde bonus). I do not think that the horde bonus system in vGen or ZH was trivial or unimportant, on the contrary, it was fundamental to decide a game, in ROTR it became irrelevant because in 90% of the times that the game advances you will have active horde bonus; became a rule and not the exception anymore.

QUOTE (Mizo @ 28 Mar 2017, 13:30) *
Doesn't make any sense, since the upgrade is unique to General Mao. This is one of the ways to give him "better infernos/hellfires/Dragon Tanks , and upscaling his unique shenlongs rather than having some generic "qhite Napalm" or "Advanced Inferno cannon" or "advanced Dragon Tank" that really serves no distinction other than being a statistically better unit. , which is typical and boring.

This method of passing a current upgrade that seems generic and boring to turn it into something more exotic ( as a unique upgrade ) is going to probably be applied elsewhere.


Black Napalm's main problem is related to the fact that it directly benefits a powerfull GP Rank 5 of damage that 90% of Chinese players choose, so it's easy to conclude that 90% of players will attempt to purchase this upgrade in order to upgrade its power. Added to this is the fact that it benefits another 30% of China's units (some of the most powerful ones like Shenlong and Inferno Cannon), so it is concluded that 99% of players will choose this upgrade (the same logic as the Capture Building upgrade); so why, after all, does China (or Gen. Mao) need this upgrade?

QUOTE (Mizo @ 28 Mar 2017, 13:30) *
This still doesn't address what I stated above. What other theme could be applied to replace nuclear based weapons that wouldn't be copy paste or a rip-off of other weapons from other generals while still fitting within the specialty of what Mao has to offer , which area firepower.
It's all about diversity, fitting playstyle, and playing off by the rule of cool ( because while you feel nuclear weapons are saturated now, other people enjoy the blasts and find it rather cool).


Probably nothing can be done now about China's abundant nuclear weapons, but somehow it could be tried to make up for this by offering the player alternatives (I will not go into the specific merit of what alternatives these would be in order not to make the discussion into suggestions).

I particularly like the visual effects of the nuclear explosions of China in the game, but I do not really like the idea of seeing soldiers for example blowing up the whole map, even so I understand that many may like it... but it goes against what was said about ROTR to contradict the ZH in terms of style (generalized gameplay).

QUOTE (Mizo @ 28 Mar 2017, 13:30) *
The spam theme ruined China as a whole? I wouldn't really state this as an objective fact because a good portion of the community here do enjoy large armies.
I could aegue that this theme is a nessessity to create a faction that feels unique from the other 4 , while not having any overlaps ( because REALLY what else can you make China be based on theme wise? Cost efficent tanks that are high quality is covered by Russia, fanaticism and sacrifice is covered by GLA, artillery is covered by ECA, what else can China do that would make them completely stand out from the rest that is possible within the game's engine?

If you come up worth 1 theme, then divide it into 3 generals, thst has to carry the main faction theme, 1 of them being the exaggerator of that said theme.

Again this is for diversing the factions to fit unique RTS playstyles, not to make China authentic and 'interesting' ( that comes as a second priority). Heck what a guy may find boring, can be interesting to.others , so it's better to set styles for everyone to get unto, which again, judging by your distaste to the abundance of nuclear weaponary, and spam being a brain dead tactic, China is probably not something you would find personally fun, but others would.


I also like large armies, which is why China is probably my favorite faction in vGen. The problem is in combining several themes that should be restricted in insane combos (even if balanced in some way), such as horde bonus + mass mobilization + black napalm, or horde bonus + mass mobilization + nuclear tank + uranium shells; do you realize how much of this becomes a "step-by-step" rather than a tactic?

But as you said, maybe in version 2.0 that is resolved, as this is currently not much fun for me.

QUOTE (Mizo @ 28 Mar 2017, 13:30) *
Been like this since 1.7, China has always been a Beginner friendly faction that's easy to get into, play as and win with. By that I don't mean that it's a newb faction , but rather it's a faction that's rather straight forward and easy to get into, due to their initial simplicity. It also offers deeper mechanics for veterans to abuse and have fun, for example mixing spotlight ECM tanks with overcharge ect...

Russia and.China are easy-to-learn factions, good for.casuals and people who are new. There is nothing wrong in having 'simpler' factions. Not everything has to mechanically intricate like USA or ECA , or have alot of sneaky options as GLA.


I agree with this statement, but I confess that I expected a leap a little higher since the same applied with the other factions. And Russia, in my opinion, is a faction with an exciting gameplay these days, quite different from yesterday's Russia; the upgrades are well thought, stimulating the player to choose them carefully, there are indeed tactics that need to be well elaborated in order not to lose precious equipment, etc.


--------------------

You already imagined how would be SAP in the ROTR's universe? Check out this fan-fiction: South American Pact Introduction
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mizo
post 29 Mar 2017, 6:54
Post #57


AI Coding Expert
Group Icon

Group: Dev. Team
Posts: 1599
Joined: 9 May 2014
From: Poland
Member No.: 10450



QUOTE
Black Napalm's main problem is related to the fact that it directly benefits a powerfull GP Rank 5 of damage that 90% of Chinese players choose, so it's easy to conclude that 90% of players will attempt to purchase this upgrade in order to upgrade its power. Added to this is the fact that it benefits another 30% of China's units (some of the most powerful ones like Shenlong and Inferno Cannon), so it is concluded that 99% of players will choose this upgrade (the same logic as the Capture Building upgrade); so why, after all, does China (or Gen. Mao) need this upgrade?


So you hate the manditory no brainer upgrades that benefits everything in any situation you pick it?

There are alot of upgrades like that in the game however, so I don't really understand why are you bitter about this upgrade in particular.

Things things that come to my mind, AP Bullets that buffs all Bullet based GLA weapons which make up 30% of their roster, or AP Rockets which buffs 70% of GLA's weapons , both in which also buff their defenses.

You also have Gas Ignition Rounds, which is an insta-click upgrade in tier 2 , obligatory for your gun turrents to be able to outrange Buratinos and Blackbears. ( 230 is a pretty shite range). Those are some upgrades that can come to my mind in the same vain of Black Napalm so am really not understanding your issue with it ( if it provides too many bonuses, doesn't that justify it being a unique tier 2 upgrade for one of the generals?). Why do they need this upgrade? Well yo scale up their unirs from genericly good to better.

Like I said, this is one of the methods that will make General Mao's infernos , pyros, hellfires, dragon tanks and Napalm strikes be different from their other counterparts, by scaling them up from good to great, rather than ating the generic "advanced version" which is rather more interesting.

QUOTE
I believe that the horde bonus should not be extended in the way it is currently extended because it makes all Chinese units similar - something that does not seem to be very creative or original - yet as I said before the mechanic itself is interesting, but it is a problem when combined with the effect of "ROTR's China mass units", because you make something that was intentionally limited in something unrestricted (it is very easy to produce tanks in quantity in WF and activate the horde bonus). I do not think that the horde bonus system in vGen or ZH was trivial or unimportant, on the contrary, it was fundamental to decide a game, in ROTR it became irrelevant because in 90% of the times that the game advances you will have active horde bonus; became a rule and not the exception anymore


I see your point here. You hate how typical horde bonus is when prior to that it was a blessing or a luxury. I guess this is just a consequence of turning the bonus to something core ( unlike vanilla, chinese units were rather okay on their own, but become great with the bonus). In ROTR, your units are under 50% of their ROF, they only become 'normalized' when under the initial horde bonus, and get better after Nationalism upgrade. Am guessing horde bonus is easy to achieve to make playing the faction be more accessible rather than a chore.

QUOTE
I also like large armies, which is why China is probably my favorite faction in vGen. The problem is in combining several themes that should be restricted in insane combos (even if balanced in some way), such as horde bonus + mass mobilization + black napalm, or horde bonus + mass mobilization + nuclear tank + uranium shells; do you realize how much of this becomes a "step-by-step" rather than a tactic?


So all of your issie towards the faction in the end stems from the fact China can do several themes incredibly well?
Hah that's just feature bloat. We all hate it as well, but thst's not something that can be resolved until future versions arrive.


--------------------


Not a Rusty Spoon........The_Hunter uses a goddamn wooden spoon on his AI Scripters....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Shiro
post 29 Mar 2017, 10:34
Post #58


Gamer Girl
Group Icon

Group: Legend
Posts: 3717
Joined: 19 June 2009
From: Disboard
Member No.: 182
ROTR PR Assistant and Friendly Freelancer



QUOTE (Mizo @ 29 Mar 2017, 7:54) *
So all of your issie towards the faction in the end stems from the fact China can do several themes incredibly well?
Hah that's just feature bloat. We all hate it as well, but thst's not something that can be resolved until future versions arrive.

Indeed, and it will finally be solved in 2.0, and not just for China. Various things which the current factions combine are from different Generals and not intended to be used together outside of maybe team games.


--------------------
Joy~
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
__CrUsHeR
post 29 Mar 2017, 11:29
Post #59



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 2609
Joined: 18 April 2012
From: Southern Brazil.
Member No.: 9084
"No. Not even in the face of Armageddon. Never compromise."



QUOTE (Mizo @ 29 Mar 2017, 2:54) *
So you hate the manditory no brainer upgrades that benefits everything in any situation you pick it?

There are alot of upgrades like that in the game however, so I don't really understand why are you bitter about this upgrade in particular.

Things things that come to my mind, AP Bullets that buffs all Bullet based GLA weapons which make up 30% of their roster, or AP Rockets which buffs 70% of GLA's weapons , both in which also buff their defenses.

You also have Gas Ignition Rounds, which is an insta-click upgrade in tier 2 , obligatory for your gun turrents to be able to outrange Buratinos and Blackbears. ( 230 is a pretty shite range). Those are some upgrades that can come to my mind in the same vain of Black Napalm so am really not understanding your issue with it ( if it provides too many bonuses, doesn't that justify it being a unique tier 2 upgrade for one of the generals?). Why do they need this upgrade? Well yo scale up their unirs from genericly good to better.

Like I said, this is one of the methods that will make General Mao's infernos , pyros, hellfires, dragon tanks and Napalm strikes be different from their other counterparts, by scaling them up from good to great, rather than ating the generic "advanced version" which is rather more interesting.

Hmm, I imagine there's no other mandatory global upgrade in the game like Black Napalm; AP Bullets and AP Rockets do not create insane combos, Gas Ignition Rounds have the same glory as Nuclear Tanks or Uranium Shells from China comparatively and I do not think its existence makes it redundant.

Maybe it will work for Mao, as long as there are no other insane combos as there is currently.


--------------------

You already imagined how would be SAP in the ROTR's universe? Check out this fan-fiction: South American Pact Introduction
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mizo
post 29 Mar 2017, 12:00
Post #60


AI Coding Expert
Group Icon

Group: Dev. Team
Posts: 1599
Joined: 9 May 2014
From: Poland
Member No.: 10450



Keep in mind General Mao wont be getting overlords, Mass Mobilization, Communication Interception, ECM tank, Propaganda Airships , so insane combos like spamming tanks + overlords + nuclear artillery won't be possible in the future besides double China in team games.


--------------------


Not a Rusty Spoon........The_Hunter uses a goddamn wooden spoon on his AI Scripters....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
__CrUsHeR
post 29 Mar 2017, 12:08
Post #61



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 2609
Joined: 18 April 2012
From: Southern Brazil.
Member No.: 9084
"No. Not even in the face of Armageddon. Never compromise."



It's a consolation. The problem is having to wait for it... tongue.gif


--------------------

You already imagined how would be SAP in the ROTR's universe? Check out this fan-fiction: South American Pact Introduction
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mr_JAKH
post 8 Apr 2017, 4:02
Post #62



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 4 December 2016
From: Scandinavia
Member No.: 13442



QUOTE (XoGamer @ 14 Mar 2017, 20:43) *
Nah when I was thinking redesigns I was mostly thinking gameplay rehauls like USA's Drone Control Center thing. China seems to be lacking many good upgrades rn, like the troop crawler upgrade is crap - I don't even use them I prefer speakerlords.

Although this is all opinionated, nvm anymore biggrin.gif

If I rembered it right!?O.o' Troop Crawler comes with a 50% raise of durable armor also with the upgrade. Though, I wonder how many people use the War Propaganda ability upgrade in Generals Promotion Tech Tree? That one seems unessery. It would be nice if SWR changed this to something else or add an extra ability for that promotion ability like an upgrade for Battlemaster. My thoughts about this would be a small area of mine drops after it's death on the battlefields. I don't think it will be o.p. I'll guess most folks go for hopper tank if they choose mass production because they come in mass discount 'n' faster buildtime with more (4 in all & only 2000/"creds", normaly 1000 each) at once! Seems Hopper has the same damage output as the Battlemaster, but weaker armor, though faster and scout ability. Good for brute force - guerilla warfare. Just an idea^_^'
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mr_JAKH
post 8 Apr 2017, 4:24
Post #63



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 4 December 2016
From: Scandinavia
Member No.: 13442



QUOTE (Mr_JAKH @ 8 Apr 2017, 5:02) *
If I rembered it right!?O.o' Troop Crawler comes with a 50% raise of durable armor also with the upgrade. Though, I wonder how many people use the War Propaganda ability upgrade in Generals Promotion Tech Tree? That one seems unessery. It would be nice if SWR changed this to something else or add an extra ability for that promotion ability like an upgrade for Battlemaster. They will be more used and enjoyible to play with, even if you go for Mass Mobilization. My thoughts about this would be a small area of mine drops after it's death on the battlefields. I don't think it will be o.p. I'll guess most folks go for hopper tank if they choose mass production because they come in mass discount 'n' faster buildtime with more (4 in all & only 2000/"creds", normaly 1000 each) at once! Seems Hopper has the same damage output as the Battlemaster, but weaker armor, though faster and scout ability, good for brute force - guerilla warfare with a little mix of other units. --Just an idea^_^'


This post has been edited by Mr_JAKH: 8 Apr 2017, 4:31
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zeke
post 8 Apr 2017, 4:44
Post #64


The X General
Group Icon

Group: Project Leader
Posts: 2012
Joined: 7 June 2009
From: Philippines
Member No.: 73
Uniqueness is Overrated



http://forums.swr-productions.com/index.php?act=boardrules

QUOTE
1. Suggestions.

Before all else, do understand that suggestions for any of the projects of SWR are not wanted right now. Please do not open a topic to write suggestions and please do not add suggestions to an existing topic.


This post has been edited by Zeke: 8 Apr 2017, 4:45


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
{Lads}RikerZZZ
post 8 Apr 2017, 4:46
Post #65


Certified Shitposter
Group Icon

Group: Donator
Posts: 2263
Joined: 30 December 2013
From: Straya'
Member No.: 10248
pls join my games im lonely =c



Mate, everyone uses the war prop in PvP. That generals power is amazing, and I wouldn't change it for the world.

Also the team doesnt take ideas/suggestions

This post has been edited by {Lads}RikerZZZ: 8 Apr 2017, 4:46


--------------------

Many thanks to IvanMRM for my avatar and Star for drawing my epic signature. You guys rock!
Also, check out our ROTR - Fan group on Facebook.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mr_JAKH
post 8 Apr 2017, 5:29
Post #66



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 4 December 2016
From: Scandinavia
Member No.: 13442



QUOTE ({Lads}RikerZZZ @ 8 Apr 2017, 5:46) *
Mate, everyone uses the war prop in PvP. That generals power is amazing, and I wouldn't change it for the world.

Also the team doesnt take ideas/suggestions

It's a manner of taste, good to see someone liked it, but as I mentioned before: SWR could add something to War Propaganda if people like you like this one, that wouldn't be to much of o.p. Though, maybe the suggestion would not fit in the ability's name, seperate likely? Nice if Battlemasters got some kind of an extra little upgrade except, the ordinery ones like uranium shells etc. To begin with this was posted in the wrong section, sorry comrades!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hanfield
post 8 Apr 2017, 10:04
Post #67



Group Icon

Group: Tester
Posts: 476
Joined: 24 February 2015
From: Latvia
Member No.: 10884



Could, but no reason to; so we won't.

This post has been edited by Hanfield: 8 Apr 2017, 10:15


--------------------
"don't live, hanfield"
"i swear to god, if this was a room full of you people i'd be taking off my gloves and slapping hanfield every 5 minutes"

- bruce 2016
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Umpfelgrumpf
post 8 Apr 2017, 13:16
Post #68



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 233
Joined: 29 September 2013
Member No.: 10149



While we are on the topic of GP's:

I'd love to see some usefullness added to the ECM Flare drop ability.
No one picks it in pvp, and if so then one point is usually enough to use the effect for an airstrike.

It's to situational compared to all other 3 Star GP's in the game i think.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Maelstrom
post 8 Apr 2017, 13:54
Post #69


Ze Big Cheese
Group Icon

Group: Dev. Team
Posts: 401
Joined: 19 May 2013
Member No.: 9941



QUOTE (Umpfelgrumpf @ 8 Apr 2017, 14:16) *
While we are on the topic of GP's:

I'd love to see some usefullness added to the ECM Flare drop ability.
No one picks it in pvp, and if so then one point is usually enough to use the effect for an airstrike.

It's to situational compared to all other 3 Star GP's in the game i think.

Again, it is used a lot by players who rely on airforce, because, in addition of deflecting missiles, it draws anti-air fire for all anti-air units and structures.Throw thos near defenses, and then send a swarm of Mig Bombers, or a Napalm Drop safely.


--------------------

My Soundcloud profile: right here
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Umpfelgrumpf
post 8 Apr 2017, 15:22
Post #70



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 233
Joined: 29 September 2013
Member No.: 10149



QUOTE (Maelstrom @ 8 Apr 2017, 14:54) *
Again, it is used a lot by players who rely on airforce, because, in addition of deflecting missiles, it draws anti-air fire for all anti-air units and structures.Throw thos near defenses, and then send a swarm of Mig Bombers, or a Napalm Drop safely.


I know what it does and the uses, but my point still stands.
As you have shown in your example, it's very situational, compared to parabombs for example which are always a safe choice because everytime they get off cooldown you can destroy something with them.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mizo
post 8 Apr 2017, 15:51
Post #71


AI Coding Expert
Group Icon

Group: Dev. Team
Posts: 1599
Joined: 9 May 2014
From: Poland
Member No.: 10450



To be fair not every GP is about destruction and disabling.

There really isn't anything to add on to the Flares that wouldn't be covered by other GPs without making it obnoxious ( I had in mind something similar to the ECM overcharge that also prevents stuff from attacking under it but that would be horribly insane and broken).

As for their roles, they're pretty much the best AA/Anti-missile countermeasure GP in game, compared to TMD, a really great asset in team games as well when our ally is focusing on air power.

Another use of the GP is to help your other GPs connect into enemy base incase they have solid heavy AA network.

It's also insane vs GLA.

Really there isn't much to add about it.


--------------------


Not a Rusty Spoon........The_Hunter uses a goddamn wooden spoon on his AI Scripters....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3
Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 18 August 2017 - 17:26