Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

SWR Productions Forum _ Rise of the Reds _ Lets get Crazy :

Posted by: Mizo 11 Apr 2017, 22:38

As you all know, a good majority of people hate playing with SWs. In 1.87, the cooldown ti.ers has been prolonged that made them more acceptable to play with albiet some are either unsatisfied or hate SW games to the bone.

Yet, there is a gameplay setting that none of us tried, which is unlimited SWs. As crazy as it may sound, I did have some games with my wife and we both agreed that while insane, it was still fun.

So, what would matches look like with these settings inmind? Would anyone actually be willing to go for it? What's your opinion on it as a whole?

Posted by: {Lads}RikerZZZ 11 Apr 2017, 22:49

I've played a few of these with bruce and honestly, they kinda suck.

Because super weapons re still at a high price, if youre behind (or have a faction that needs lots of unit investment to stay relevant), you either dont have time to get super weapons and/or if your enemy gets multiple of them you cant really catch up.
When you're in the behind position, it sucks balls and is no fun to play against.

i remember back during the god tier patch i think it was bruce and I did some multiple super weapon games and they were actually okay because the access was there. Because you could build a counter and because things were much faster it worked well.

So my opinion, it could work as a standard playstyle (even if the limit was raised to 3) if the super weapons were back to the cheap easy to acquire state they had before.

Posted by: Maelstrom 11 Apr 2017, 23:22

To me superweapons could be an alternative to destructive GPs, that you get through teching and money, rather than XP grinding.

Lowering their cost would be an option (3500 sounds ok), but something else should be done to balance it (more fragile, longer cooldown, not sure).

BUT, getting back to when it was 2500 is a no-go for me. It's the price of a T2 building. Which means quite cheap for such a thing. A nuke silo that cheap is just a no-brainer. It's $500 more expensive than a nuke cannon, hard to kill, and WAY more destructive.

Posted by: {Lads}RikerZZZ 11 Apr 2017, 23:28

do remember it took 8 mins to fire that "slightly more expensive" nuke cannon and that your enemy had the same level of power.

Posted by: Maelstrom 11 Apr 2017, 23:35

Nuke cannons take ages to construct, and require a GP.
Plus, when constructed, it's slow as hell, takes ages to deploy, has limited range, and can be taken down by a single fighter (the cheapest costing 1000).

Try taking down a fully constructed nuke missile in a single volley of a single mig, I think you may encounter some trouble.

Now I think of it, SWs could require more power in exchange of a lower cost. Thoughts ?

Posted by: {Lads}RikerZZZ 11 Apr 2017, 23:49

More power, no (usa and russia would struggle in that regard) but lower health, maybe.

2500/3000 at half the current health it could work.

Posted by: Mizo 12 Apr 2017, 6:41

Lower health would render building them useless and further promote SW snipes.

Posted by: Marakar 12 Apr 2017, 11:59

I'd be willing to try out that game mode, though theres a few things to understand with unlimited SW:


> ECA Meta will now shift towards pure bunkering in which ECA doesn't have to survive till R5 to win always (its still a good requirement but regardless ECA will have chances pre-r5 in 1v1s).
> SW Rush will become much stronger considering you can spend more than 3.5k on SWs.
> Topols/Missile Silo War vs ECA will be back.
> US will have more fun with multiple Particle Cannons, which will pretty much make it king in 1v1s in high level play.

But most importantly, late game might go completely extinct (or become as rare as Super Late game) with current HP and Cost of SWs.

Posted by: Mizo 12 Apr 2017, 14:53

QUOTE
Topols/Missile Silo War vs ECA will be back.


This wont as bad as prior to SW meta due to cost inefficiency. Then again, SW timers.....

Posted by: XoGamer 12 Apr 2017, 17:53

Wait, so you guys play with limited SW?

lol, I thought all high level plays play with unlimited - that's what I do.

I think SW timers and prices are fine, Nuke Cannon - not so much tongue.gif, though maybe you could just make SW slightly less destructive whilst keeping the same price and maybe slightly smaller timer - then you can have unlimited SW but they won't be sooo OP.

Posted by: (USA)Bruce 12 Apr 2017, 20:36

QUOTE (XoGamer @ 12 Apr 2017, 19:53) *
Wait, so you guys play with limited SW?

lol, I thought all high level plays play with unlimited - that's what I do.

I think SW timers and prices are fine, Nuke Cannon - not so much tongue.gif, though maybe you could just make SW slightly less destructive whilst keeping the same price and maybe slightly smaller timer - then you can have unlimited SW but they won't be sooo OP.



Was waiting for someone, no hoping that there was someone out there that thinks the same,

Reducing the aoe of some SW's in exchange of less of a CD while reducing its HP and timer, oh and increase its size and powercost.

BAM!

FIXED!

Next?

Posted by: GeneralAziz 12 Apr 2017, 20:41

I am willing to try it in high level games and see how many can we really get on the the board XD

Posted by: jl319 13 Apr 2017, 4:45

Played on SWRnet with Dremon 3 days ago, he didn't set the SW limit, so I turtled and built 4 Solar Relays (I got to fire over 10 Solar Bursts, too laugh.gif ). The game lasted a near hour, and I had a lot of fun, even if I got my just desserts in the end. IMO, SWs shouldn't be a problem, as the increased timer just gives you more time to counter them. Besides, ECA Pandora Protocol, SWs are the only advantage of that, pretty much.

Posted by: XoGamer 13 Apr 2017, 9:09

Was the game balanced for limited SWs or unlimited SWs?

@USABruce - Reducing HP and AOE, Increasing size and powercost seem like way too many nerfs for just reduced timer; unless you meant something else that's what I understood tongue.gif, what does CD stand for? Countdown? That's the same as timer huh.gif

I think the main problem is ECA Turtling and damn Topols - really Russia and ECA are unbalanced sometimes way too op with very little weaknesses however I'm not sure if it's the devs concern but I was watching a lot of replays recently of high level players like Marakar and Skitt etc.
Most of the players play either Russia or ECA, while USA is slightly less common and China and GLA are quite rare to see.

In most C&C games you can tell the most OP factions by watching what most of the pros play.

Posted by: Maelstrom 13 Apr 2017, 10:32

QUOTE (XoGamer @ 13 Apr 2017, 10:09) *
Was the game balanced for limited SWs or unlimited SWs?

The game was balanced for 10k start, limited SWs.
Other settings are only used for compstomps or fun matches (ah the memories of 900k matches biggrin.gif)

Posted by: jl319 13 Apr 2017, 10:59

QUOTE (Maelstrom @ 13 Apr 2017, 17:32) *
The game was balanced for 10k start, limited SWs.
Other settings are only used for compstomps or fun matches (ah the memories of 900k matches biggrin.gif)


Awww... there goes my fun with the ECA Pandora Protocol sad.gif

Posted by: Maelstrom 13 Apr 2017, 11:28

QUOTE (jl319 @ 13 Apr 2017, 11:59) *
Awww... there goes my fun with the ECA Pandora Protocol sad.gif

Let me clarify. it has been balanced that way for competitive matches.
Nobody prevents you from having a good time with friends and uncheck that box. I did that with my brother, start with 20-25k, unlimited SW, and 2v2 vs bots. Pandora does wonders here wink.gif
We had a stream once with XAttus, 1v1s with 900k start. Was a lot of fun (balance was thrown out of the window, because 900k start for Russia is insanity). We experienced the GLORIOUS 1fps gameplay, when a player had the good idea to use smokes biggrin.gif

Fun is allowed, outside of tryhard and comptetitive matches smile.gif

Posted by: Mizo 13 Apr 2017, 12:29

QUOTE
really Russia and ECA are unbalanced sometimes way too op with very little weaknesses however I'm not sure if it's the devs concern but I was watching a lot of replays recently of high level players like Marakar and Skitt etc.
Most of the players play either Russia or ECA, while USA is slightly less common and China and GLA are quite rare to see.



Russia is understandably played often due to them being rather easy. ECA is.....well I've only seen 1-2 pub players that play ECA correctly aside from Skittles, other players often don't really know what they're doing.
As for ZOMAGODIMBALANENEWFACTIONS.....eh UsA and China are still top tier. GLA is also up high though with the bombardment of nerfs that they got might make them less appealing. Russia is mid tier, and ECA is shit tier ( only uber in team games). Ofcourse this is from high skill level prespectice, where USA roflstomps everyone, China can do everything and Russia and GLA bruteforces everyone, with ECA being the 'I loose' faction biggrin.gif

Posted by: {Lads}RikerZZZ 13 Apr 2017, 14:25

anything above 10k with the super weapon limit is fun, but it gets old very fast without the tension and risk reward factor the 10k comp game has.

Getting back on topic, i agree with bruce about the nuke to be honest. Less aoe, but more damage (so it can kill a fucking sent its a nuke ffs) and a shorter cooldown would be a great change.

As for this

QUOTE
Lower health would render building them useless and further promote SW snipes.


It would promote sw snipes, but i dont see an issue with that, Maybe not a 50% reduction to what we have now, but more like a 75% from now, so it takes 1+1/2 gp's to kill rather than 2 if you catch my drift.

Anyway i think super weapon sniping with a limit of 3 super weapons would be a brilliant idea for not only ending the tedious crawl that is the late game, but also for pve players too.
Because lets be honest, weve all been caught out of position by the ai when they suddenly have a super weapon just blow your ass to next Tuesday, and its frustrating (especially with the new ai that WILL finish you off) to play against.

Whist i dont agree that the late game will go "extinct" I do agree it will take a huge hit, and im in huge favour of that.
Killing some of rotr's overbearing defenders advantage and its campiness is always a positive in my book.
Not ony is it just boring to play, but its taxing on computer performance too, so speeding everything up (especially with big explosions and lasers) is a far more C&C and just generally fun way of helping that out.

Ive said it before and ill say it again. Rotr peaked in the golden patch internal with the 2.5k super weapons, and I would love to see some of that fun return. Maybe 3k super weapons at the least, but man. Im sorry to everyone who missed that patch, but you guys missed out on some of the best pvp gameplay experiences this mod had to offer.

Posted by: Mizo 13 Apr 2017, 14:53

Back when warfactories would shut down without power? GOLDEN!

Posted by: {Lads}RikerZZZ 13 Apr 2017, 14:58

youre right, that was shit, but the rest was... smmuaa wub.gif

Posted by: Knjaz. 13 Apr 2017, 17:09

QUOTE (XoGamer @ 13 Apr 2017, 11:09) *
Was the game balanced for limited SWs or unlimited SWs?

@USABruce - Reducing HP and AOE, Increasing size and powercost seem like way too many nerfs for just reduced timer; unless you meant something else that's what I understood tongue.gif, what does CD stand for? Countdown? That's the same as timer huh.gif

I think the main problem is ECA Turtling and damn Topols - really Russia and ECA are unbalanced sometimes way too op with very little weaknesses however I'm not sure if it's the devs concern but I was watching a lot of replays recently of high level players like Marakar and Skitt etc.
Most of the players play either Russia or ECA, while USA is slightly less common and China and GLA are quite rare to see.

In most C&C games you can tell the most OP factions by watching what most of the pros play.


Until 1.87 it was balanced for no SWs, after 1.87 - limited SWs.

Posted by: Umpfelgrumpf 13 Apr 2017, 17:29

QUOTE ({Lads}RikerZZZ @ 13 Apr 2017, 15:25) *
Ive said it before and ill say it again. Rotr peaked in the golden patch internal with the 2.5k super weapons, and I would love to see some of that fun return. Maybe 3k super weapons at the least, but man. Im sorry to everyone who missed that patch, but you guys missed out on some of the best pvp gameplay experiences this mod had to offer.


Could you give some more information about why that patch was so awesome?
Were cheap SW's the best part or was there something else?
I'm interested^^

Posted by: Skitt 13 Apr 2017, 18:04

on one hand the 2.5k sw's were fun it was nice to have them earlier, plus who doesn't love massive destruction more frequent with and without the sw lim.

on the other hand however i detested it, games were over too quick and i prefer longer matchs.

Posted by: XoGamer 13 Apr 2017, 18:08

Just leave the SWs as they are, but then maybe they should be balanced so that competitive play features unlimited SWs allowed

Posted by: Hanfield 13 Apr 2017, 20:41

QUOTE (XoGamer @ 13 Apr 2017, 20:08) *
Just leave the SWs as they are, but then maybe they should be balanced so that competitive play features unlimited SWs allowed

How does one leave them as they are and then balance them? That presumes changing them :V

Posted by: {Lads}RikerZZZ 14 Apr 2017, 0:32

QUOTE (Umpfelgrumpf @ 13 Apr 2017, 17:29) *
Could you give some more information about why that patch was so awesome?
Were cheap SW's the best part or was there something else?
I'm interested^^


It was the patch just after the drone plant was dropped and the Drone centre was added, and super weapons prices were dropped down to 2.5k. They also had the old 1.86 cooldowns.

To understand why that was such a big deal you have to understand what i and many others would consider to be rotr's biggest flaw, and that is how its economy works and how its defenders advantage amplifies that.
Rotr's economy is strange because the best way to get money is not to expand and get recourses on the map. It is to turtle and get your Sec eco, then spam that so you have a growing amount of money to use once your supplies quickly mine out.
This (with few exceptions on map) locks the rotr meta into the following:

>get your t2 as fast as you can
>get a small defencing force/base def
>get your t2 economy as soon as you can
>spam that shit so youre safe
>out eco your opponent and just grind spam vs spam till you win

Now i say with few exceptions on map, and that is pretty much the reason we mainly play on just lagoon and homeland rocks, because those maps offer some amount of flanking and expansion opportunities that can turn the meta away from this.
Somewhere along the line the community became totally afraid of allowing maps to have middle supplies or middle tech structures because some people got an obsession with removing TTMOD maps (take the mid or die maps) and they werent wrong, TTMOD maps were pretty bad.
But the issue was fixed wrong. The assets that made it ttmod werent what made those maps shit, it was the lack of flanking, backdooring and counter attacking possibilities that made those maps shit. Without those all you could do was chareg head first into the middle sections, and if the enemy had base def (which they always did because rotr's base defence is wayy too overbloated even on the base non-2.0 stuff) you would just lose because they had defenders advantage.

i should probably explain what that means. Defenders advantage is exactly what it says on the tin. It means whoever is defending, has the advantage.
This is due to many things, but mainly its because:
- Base defence is very cheap and very powerful at most cases due to rotr's hard counters countering shit hard
- Because units build so quickly often you can spam your way through an enemy attack and overwhelm them
- Generals powers come from your side of the map so they get to your base quicker than your enemies in most cases
- very few maps have opportunities to go around a defended area to attack a foe

Now these arent necessarily bad things (especially from the eyes of a pve player because they are needed vs the ai) but when combined with the sec eco economic focus it further pushes the meta into that slower clunkier wall of units vs wall of units.

The best example of this is games like this.

EDIT: youtube link doesnt work, so click https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnpV6J9dhKY&t=7s

You can see how the game just grinds at the end where it turns into a slog for who can get more money and more defence (either in units or base defence) to counter their opponent, and he who has less sec eco loses.
So pretty much, the early/mid game hardly define the game at all and because theyre over so quickly the games becomes heavily focused towards the late game.



2.5 K super weapons fixed this.



Originally super weapons were always supposed to be used to break stalemates and counter the late game crawl, but because originally they cost alot of money, were near impossible to kill if you didnt focus all your generals powers at them, and had rather short cooldowns, they became a balance liability rather than a fix.

However, when the most important issue there was fixed (the cost) the barrier to entry was lowered and super weapons became very very easy to acquire and use.
It was also very important because it meant that 9 times out of 10, if your opponent was ahead and they got a super weapon, you didnt have to slog and cancel units to counter it, you could get your own easily.
Now that was a greta change on its own for that reason alone, but thats not the only reason why they helped.
The cheap super weapons really did kill the late game sec eco meta, because you could kill the defenders advantage.

Ignoring the fact that the super weapons now forced both you and your enemies to play aggressive to counter them (which also helped kill this), it made setting up sec eco and defending it way harder.
If you had a super weapon ready to go often you had a choice of either kill your enemies secondary economy, kill their army or kill their defence lines. Any one of those choices would shatter the sec eco meta.

If your opponent had lots of defences, boo hoo, theyre dead, you blow it up and roll in. If they had shitloads of sec eco, say bye bye to it because its going down and they have to waste all their future money getting it back up again. If they had a huge army but not much else and they werent killing you with it, its their fault for not attacking.

If youve ever played high level shockwave or zero hour you'll know the game is far more unit focused and each unit is more important (with the exception of air units) than they are in rotr. Because you were forced to play aggressively to counter your opponents super weapons the game had a very similar feel to that. The game was simply more fluid.
The late game road blocks that killed the pacing and slowed everything down were removed and the game became a fast fun unit based scramble.

It was amazing.

Now ill admit there were a shitload of flaws to this system too, the first being the original super weapon cooldowns and that super weapons were still GP sponges, but one of those got fixed so it wouldn't surprise me that the other could be fixed in the future too.
But the fact that it broke the meta, the fact it made rotr fluid and fast was one of the single best changes ever made.

QUOTE
Just leave the SWs as they are, but then maybe they should be balanced so that competitive play features unlimited SWs allowed

... what han said...

Posted by: Knjaz. 14 Apr 2017, 1:01

QUOTE ({Lads}RikerZZZ @ 14 Apr 2017, 2:32) *
It was amazing.


Are you talking about short cooldown 2.5k SWs?

that was absolutely unplayable, not awesome. Majority of the tester team's opinion, excluding you/Bruce tongue.gif

Posted by: Umpfelgrumpf 14 Apr 2017, 1:11

^
Thanks a lot for the good explanation Rikerzzz, I'm sure it took some time and I hope people take their time and read through your post because it's very interesting.

I think that rebuildable tech structures for example are, like the changes to SW's and health reduction of T2 economy buildings, a great way in the right direction when it comes to the subject of lategame eco and that, as you said, the maps play a huge role in wether a game is fun and fair or not.

QUOTE
>get your t2 as fast as you can
>get a small defencing force/base def
>get your t2 economy as soon as you can
>spam that shit so youre safe
>out eco your opponent and just grind spam vs spam till you win


that's exactly how games play out often, if one player has a small advantage due to some harassment/ small attacks he will stay in that advantage and outeco the other one.
Another reason is, that if a player has a GP lead it's easier for him to stay ahead and get more GP's and harass the enemy and so on.


QUOTE
i should probably explain what that means. Defenders advantage is exactly what it says on the tin. It means whoever is defending, has the advantage.
This is due to many things, but mainly its because:
- Base defence is very cheap and very powerful at most cases due to rotr's hard counters countering shit hard
- Because units build so quickly often you can spam your way through an enemy attack and overwhelm them
- Generals powers come from your side of the map so they get to your base quicker than your enemies in most cases
- very few maps have opportunities to go around a defended area to attack a foe


A few other things that come to my mind which have a place on that list:
- It's very easy to scout because of good and cheap scout units every faction has, so you will hardly get flanked unlike in Zero Hour where people often play without radar
even and where no dedicated scout units exist.

- Because of scouting and knowing what will come you can often defend more efficient than your enemy, even if you get less money. That means you kill more units of the
enemy then he does with your stuff, which leads to a GP advantage that the defender gets, even when the attacker controls more supplies/ larger portion of the map.
(related to your first point)
-> that makes it even easier to defend yadda yadda.

- infantry units in RotR are very strong compared to ZH (since 1.85 they got so cheap I think) and infantry units are very slow -> better for defending than attacking.



I would very much like to see the game as you described it smile.gif. However a lot of rebalancing would be needed then, if most late game situations were centered on small amounts of money and single units being useful. Stuff like for example cashhack GP, jaegers cash steal, burtons ability to destroy buildings, insurrection mob, ECA protocols, blackbear would be in need for a change.

However that is up to you guys, and I guess also the community, since it's public beta, to figure out smile.gif.
It's very hard to always balance things out if new stuff gets added by the devs in every update. But I think, as I said in the beginning, you testers are on the right way and the game is a lot more fun than it was when I started playing smile.gif.

edit: btw, the video linked doesn't work for me. Does it work for you other people?

Posted by: {Lads}RikerZZZ 14 Apr 2017, 1:40

QUOTE (Knjaz. @ 14 Apr 2017, 2:01) *
Are you talking about short cooldown 2.5k SWs?

that was absolutely unplayable, not awesome. Majority of the tester team's opinion, excluding you/Bruce tongue.gif


>are you
Mate did you even read my reply
Re read my reply.

As for Ump, thanks for letting me know, ive relinked the youtube video in a less nice way. No idea why the tag wasnt working. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Youre very right about scouting too (something bruce is very vocal about). Scouting in rotr is way too easy so its very easy to know everything your opponent is up too at any time.

that said, i feel thats a map issue more than a design issue but you could argue that the scouts have not been designed with the maps in mind rather than the other way around.

Posted by: XoGamer 14 Apr 2017, 17:42

QUOTE (Hanfield @ 13 Apr 2017, 20:41) *
How does one leave them as they are and then balance them? That presumes changing them :V


I meant, Leave them alone OR Change them so that it's balanced with unlimited SWs

Posted by: Knjaz. 15 Apr 2017, 0:03

QUOTE (XoGamer @ 14 Apr 2017, 19:42) *
I meant, Leave them alone OR Change them so that it's balanced with unlimited SWs


I'm afraid it'd either require super weak/super cost-inefficient SWs or ZH gameplay with only small unit group tactics where 2-5 units easily change the game mid/lategame., which is opposite of RotR.

Posted by: {Lads}RikerZZZ 15 Apr 2017, 9:40

I reckon if you tonned down the super weapons and made them more GP-ish it would work for unlimited, or atleast a tight number rather than 1

Posted by: ZunZero97 2 May 2017, 7:38

Or make the SW back with 5k of money with the original cooldown wink.gif

Posted by: {Lads}RikerZZZ 2 May 2017, 11:00



Zun... just stop.

Posted by: XAttus 2 May 2017, 13:43

Or just... remove them and keep them a gig for Singleplayer. No superweapons, one less problem. *runs away*

Posted by: M.P 2 May 2017, 14:40

Or, Go C&C3 route and make all SWs deal same ammount of damage in same AOE, Just with different ways to deliver the damage. (Obviously they'll have same Cool down as well)

Posted by: RedDeadSmeg 2 May 2017, 18:46

QUOTE (M.P @ 2 May 2017, 14:40) *
Or, Go C&C3 route and make all SWs deal same ammount of damage in same AOE, Just with different ways to deliver the damage. (Obviously they'll have same Cool down as well)



Not sure how that would work with the particle cannon...unless you turn it into an ion cannon tongue.gif

Posted by: X1Destroy 2 May 2017, 19:53

Instead of having unlimited super weapons, I'd like them to stay limited but become real game enders. Not by doing some support actions with GPs+airstrikes but just by it being there.

I meant, after it's launched you win automatically because it destroyed the whole base and not just some buildings. The entire point of the game should be to prevent it from being fired. Should have a much longer cool down, like 20 minutes and won't be denied easily with GP.

For the Particle cannon, it would be the exception of the rule. The only reason to build it is to get rid of your opponent's SW, and nothing more. It won't destroy the base for you, but if it get to fire no single building should be able to withstand the blast.


Posted by: Skitt 2 May 2017, 22:23

^^^^^ good luck verses a competent player in reaching there sw before it fires. even with a 20 min timer.
Eca v Russia (russia haveing the sw on a medium/large sized map) for example.

Posted by: {Lads}RikerZZZ 3 May 2017, 0:29

Theres no reason to redesign the entire super weapon mechanic. All that needs fixing is minor adjustments to its implementation.

Game ender super weapons would play like cancer, no super weapons is the same as 1.86 and is a lategame spamfest mess and equal super weapons is an easy way to implement it, but its not very interesting.

As I said in my explanation before, if you want super weapons to work fluidly you need to make them have a purpose and make them fair, and as far as im concerned and untill someone proves otherwise, the best way to do that is make super weapons assessable and slow.

Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)