Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
SWR Productions Forum _ Rise of the Reds _ Manticore and Black Bear problem?
Posted by: WULF1045 2 Nov 2017, 16:42
Cmon seriously!? Why the RUSSIANS GET A SUPER HEAVY TANK CAN WE BUFF THE MANTICORE YOU CAN ONLY BUILD 1 AT A TIME ITS REGARDLESS!!! ECA HAS NO BETTER TANKS I PREFER MY TANKS SLOW AND HEAVY ARMOURED THIS IS DUMB! WE DON'T GET A GOOD TANK AT ALL CMON
Posted by: Hecthor Doomhammer 2 Nov 2017, 16:56
You forget that the Blackbear is an OPTION! You have to select the Ursa Division GP at R5, but it's not mandatory.
Posted by: Hanfield 2 Nov 2017, 17:28
[Deutschland über alles intensifies]
Posted by: WULF1045 2 Nov 2017, 17:42
Wait is the blackbear part of the official 1.87 Update or not? What do you mean Ursa Division? The Manticore is also an option you have to decide Manticore or The Neutron tank or that robot and WHAT THE HELL... WHAT NEW UNITS ARE WE GOING TO GET IN FOR ECA TANKS?
Posted by: Maelstrom 2 Nov 2017, 18:57
First of, stop it with the caps. It just makes your text annoying to read.
Then, blackbear and manticore are different in their role. Blackbear's speciality is to deal heavy damage, while Manticore is a support vehicle. And it got buffed in that aspect by getting the nanoshield.
The Ursa division is the GP that unlocks the Blackbear. And it is an official feature for 1.87.
And no new tank is planned for ECA in 1.87
Posted by: WULF1045 2 Nov 2017, 21:06
what is a Nano Shield?
Posted by: Maelstrom 2 Nov 2017, 21:56
It is an ability for the Manticore.
When you activate it, the tank repairs itself at a very high speed. It is in version 1.87 beta.
Posted by: (USA)Bruce 2 Nov 2017, 22:24
Challenger will come as a leo replacement for 2.0 but generally you forget this one thing;
ECA can go for super Infantry, super tanks and Super SW+Super GP's (They also get the the fenris but I doubt anyone properly uses it)
Russia on the other hand gets to have tanks, tanks, cheap infantry and tanks alongside great helis with tanks.But overall its just a tank based faction all over...
They dont have the flexibility of changing their tactics too much, like their build order difference between a US/ECA/GLA is just the difference of how many mstas(Gorgons)/tunguskas and Tesla's tanks they bring in their never really changing compositions or tank blobs
Posted by: Mizo 2 Nov 2017, 22:30
Bruce I was expecting you to jump on the Blackbear OP bandwagon 
But yeah Manticore got loads of buffs in 1.87 to the point of it being somewhat OP in certain scenarios against GLA.
Posted by: (USA)Bruce 2 Nov 2017, 22:38
But yeah Manticore got loads of buffs in 1.87 to the point of it being somewhat OP in certain scenarios against GLA.
OBLIGATORY MEME
Blackbear is bullshit in 1v1's, sometimes 2v2's but that doesnt also mean that it should loose to a manticore, manticores more multirole and could be resembled to an armored paladin in the middle of your blob more focused on healing and cant be sniped easily while sentinels role is being in the front and kicking ass/killing everything.
Manticore's balanced around the idea that it'll have an ECA blob with it and keep the blob alive with this.Even if you can use this as a spearheading tank, ECA doctrine suggests counter artillery with heavy howitzer/claymore bombardments and molemine/mortar truck fire to destroy defences.Then your forces go in and meet theirs, where they win because of the anvil and manticores silly advantages.Put 3-4 anvils next to your manticore, realise how unkillable it is.Or if your playing vs the AI or someone who cant or doesn't know to force fire on the ground then the same effect can be achieved.
Posted by: Zeke 3 Nov 2017, 3:18
Guys, guys, you are using waay too many words.
Wulf, it's very simple:
> Offensive factions get better vehicles but worse defences
> Defensive factions get better defences but worse vehicles
> ROTR Russia is an offensive faction
> ECA is a defensive faction
Therefore: Russia gets the better tanks
Here's another one:
> The real world gets real world stats
> ROTR is not part of the real world
Therefore: ROTR does not get real world stats
Understand now?
Posted by: jl319 3 Nov 2017, 10:23
Wut lol he made another post just to whine about the Blackbear again? LOL 
Posted by: Zion 3 Nov 2017, 15:48
Wulf, it's very simple:
> Offensive factions get better vehicles but worse defences
> Defensive factions get better defences but worse vehicles
> ROTR Russia is an offensive faction
> ECA is a defensive faction
Therefore: Russia gets the better tanks
Here's another one:
> The real world gets real world stats
> ROTR is not part of the real world
Therefore: ROTR does not get real world stats
Understand now?
except, to win u need to attack
Posted by: Zeke 3 Nov 2017, 16:17
You're point being?
Posted by: {Lads}RikerZZZ 7 Nov 2017, 6:14
The point being that a diffusive faction alone is entirely unviable and will lose every game its in if it cant do some sort of aggression or harassment.
How it usually ends up going is the other side just invests in more sec eco and expands more rapidly. If the other side cant contest that through design (not player skill) then they will win every single time. its a matter of money. If the other side cant keep their production up and is getting out masses and scaled by the other side (plus when you account for things like super weapons and generals powers killing potentially huge swaths of your lifeblood for essentially free) then the defensive faction physically can not stand up to that sort of aggression.
ECA needs some sort of aggression potential and currently it has that through mole mines and infantry + tigers for aggressive based playstyles, and minefields and howitzers for defensive ones.
Whilst It does sadden me that tanks are not a viable part of eca gameplay (even with digouts and manticore) i can see why they are like how they are and tbh theres not much you can really do without accidentally making them to overpowered.
The idea of making them t0 and have more hp is currently being tested on the LG patch, and that actually works pretty well, but I would call that the limit of what could be done to the eca tank roster without making it bullshit overpowered.
Posted by: Zeke 7 Nov 2017, 6:46
How it usually ends up going is the other side just invests in more sec eco and expands more rapidly. If the other side cant contest that through design (not player skill) then they will win every single time. its a matter of money. If the other side cant keep their production up and is getting out masses and scaled by the other side (plus when you account for things like super weapons and generals powers killing potentially huge swaths of your lifeblood for essentially free) then the defensive faction physically can not stand up to that sort of aggression.
ECA needs some sort of aggression potential and currently it has that through mole mines and infantry + tigers for aggressive based playstyles, and minefields and howitzers for defensive ones.
Whilst It does sadden me that tanks are not a viable part of eca gameplay (even with digouts and manticore) i can see why they are like how they are and tbh theres not much you can really do without accidentally making them to overpowered.
The idea of making them t0 and have more hp is currently being tested on the LG patch, and that actually works pretty well, but I would call that the limit of what could be done to the eca tank roster without making it bullshit overpowered.
Cool story, except WULF is specifically talking about "Y russia has the best tanks?" and "Y ECA has shit tanks?" not about ECA having problems attacking Russia. Plus, judging by his posts, it seems he hasn't even played 1.87 and is merely speculating based on update renders.
I too hate ECA's lack of offensive capability, but that's not what's being talked about here, and that's not what I'm defending.
It is common sense for the defense oriented faction to have "shit tanks", provided they have another way to win games of course.
Posted by: XAttus 7 Nov 2017, 11:07
One does not simply kill BB with tanks... 
Posted by: (USA)Bruce 7 Nov 2017, 14:38
https://www.facebook.com/monquez.mansour/videos/1261076130640012/
Posted by: Scud 8 Nov 2017, 7:11
My only real complain about ECA tanks (at least with the leopard) is their speed... I mean, if they were at least something with high mobility like the grizzly tank in Red Alert 2 that would help a lot when playing offensive. They already cost a lot and are slow to build, why they need to move slow too!. I know ECA's main theme is their artillery, but it gets really annoying when your armored forced can't get to the front line in time to support the artillery. It's not that bad but it feels a little weird that the best way to attack with ECA is to -mostly of the times- build defenses as if it were one of those tower defense games.
P.S. I know that the Manticore Protocol unlocks the Hydrogen Fuel Cells, but at that time they are not that usefull when the Manticore that heals your forces is a slowpoke, damn I don't even bother building it when I choose that protocol.
Posted by: Mizo 8 Nov 2017, 9:15
Actually for their stats and class, having a base speed of 32 isn't THAT bad. They're only abit behind Crusaders by abit.
Posted by: XAttus 8 Nov 2017, 9:21
So we are yet again at the point where people want ECA to not only be fucking annoying nightmarish pain in the ass to fight, but also good at the only thing they can't do well. Congratulations.
Posted by: Skitt 8 Nov 2017, 11:37
eca in a nutshell:
Sh**e tank forces due to them just dieing to a sneeze.
long BT's and high prices meaning low tank amounts, pritty crap when ur vs gla/russia/china.
way too much reliance on howitzers due to haveing very limited counter artillery or ability to close the distance to enemy arty (see previous point)
only option in most of the games is to def wall and howy spam, which quite frankly is boring and just pathetic.
the entire faction needs a full price/bt/stats overhaul.
still gonna keep maining eca though, even if i cant see squat due to the region command filling the entire screen (thanks stupid camera height)
Granted most of eca's problems will be solved with 2.0 content but thats not happening any time soon.
Posted by: Scud 10 Nov 2017, 7:36
I actually think they turrets (MG guard tower + AT gun tower) are just a bit overpower (most people don't even bother to build units or the fortifications because of that) also the need of power of the first one doesn't even make sense. My point is why I have to build an attack force that is inferior to most enemies counterparts? (at least until level 5 protocols) specially in a small map (most 1vs1 games) if I just can spam those turrets along side sky shield AA over the map like a moving wall of death. Some units are practically not even worth to built like the Jagdmammut Tank Destroyer that costs $ 1200 and has only 500 HP and the Gun Turret costs $ 1200, can not move, but has a whopping 1400 HP.
Maybe the real problem when balancing this faction is that its defenses alone are very weak, but when you have for example two of each in one place it is practically impossible to destroy them without artillery or a large number of units, mainly because of the amount of HP that they have I would prefer that their defenses were cheaper but their HP were lower (in the case of the gun, is insane how much infantry those can kill without any help) it would be easier for the player to diversify their defenses, surround the base with them, and have some money to spend on units.
Posted by: Mizo 10 Nov 2017, 8:46
Turrent spamming is kind of the core theme of ECA though, so if you really wanted to play offensive, go for other factions as they can fill the role alot better.
Though Gun turrents are only unique for 1 of the 3 generals and lets say that the other AT options the other 2 will get is going to be rather shit.
Current ECA plays alot like General Willem. They barely have any of the core units from the other 2, while having a core from the former ( gun turrent). Adding a unit from the other 2 would horribly break the faction, believe me , as it can give certain capabilities that NO Heavy defensive faction in ANY RTS should have.
Posted by: GeneralAziz 10 Nov 2017, 15:34
Yes blackbear is hard to kill and its strong , But is it better than the combo of Manticore and anvils ?
IMO no specially vs GLA its extremely hard to kill it since you need to kill those shield tanks first so you can attack it , and Jarmen kell can not disable shielded manticore so yea
On the other hand blackbear can be overwhelmed with grads and buggies As well as using upgraded infernos and nuke cannons can do the trick too , basically each faction can kill it if done properly.
and dont forget pandora which is a much more annoying choice vs russia with the nerve gas and neutron bomb .
i think ECA has much more overwhelming tactics in its hand than russia ,
in the end it all depends on the player.
Good luck
Posted by: Neutrino 12 Nov 2017, 18:58
I don't think that slightly buffing the manticore would break balance, especially that you can build only one at a time.
Slightly increasing gun damage and say giving it an offesnsive ability (akin to BBs thermobaric shell) would be good, since the other protocols are way more interesring at this point. Of course, the manticore would then require a longer build time and a higher price, so that you really need to take care of it.
Although this is completely uneeded, it's nice to see ECAs manticore doing better vs BB.
Posted by: (USA)Bruce 12 Nov 2017, 20:59
How about we dont?
Because the blackbear beating the manticore is mostly intended anywhoo...
Posted by: Skitt 12 Nov 2017, 21:10
seem to be forgetting one thing about the Manti v BB
BB is a front line unit designed to be able to front line and beet the shit out of other tanks and survive 6v1's
Manti is a support unit designed to be used in combo with the rest of eca's forces useing the manti bonus' (armor or speed)while providing a regen buff to them as well as some additional firepower, its not ment to go 6v1 as the BB can.
quite frankly if your trying to take an army on with manti then going off to bitch about its offensive capability's cos it failed your just not useing it right.
Posted by: Neutrino 14 Nov 2017, 9:03
Because the blackbear beating the manticore is mostly intended anywhoo...
If you reread my reply, I never asked for manti beating bb. My point was it wouldnt be bad to make manti do a bit (with emphasis on bit
) more damage to the BB before getting completely crushed.I completely understand the distinction between bbs role and mantis role and I simply do not use manti for frontline
. The point of my discussion is not making the manti super OP, but rather making it a more appealing choice. Currently, pandora and venom are much more interesting and unique.
Posted by: Skitt 14 Nov 2017, 14:27
partially why there more appealing is ecas tank forces are crap.
leos and jags fix them and u have an improved mani prot 0 reason to buff the manti yet a better choice to pick.
Posted by: Chuck Kawosky 15 Nov 2017, 19:26
GLA are still the most over powered faction in the game! They changed from Guerrilla warfare to conventional it seems. But i suppose its based on Turkey/Iran/Saudi Arabia.
Posted by: RedDeadSmeg 15 Nov 2017, 20:20
I wouldn't say overpowered, but they certainly had the biggest changes of the original factions since Zero Hour.
Posted by: X1Destroy 16 Nov 2017, 1:47
I still wonder how can they make that 220mm cannon have such a crazy ROF. Fighting the Black Bear without jets or disable stuffs is definitely not a good idea.
BTW, ECA tanks aren't really bad because of theirs speed but theirs turn rate and acceleration. It's a nightmare on mountainous terrain and choke points because flexibility doesn't seem to exist for them.
Posted by: (USA)Bruce 16 Nov 2017, 6:26
How is it based around;
Turkey one of the most western islamic nations of the world
Iran If not the most Shia nation of the world
Saudi arabia possibly the most suuni nation in the world
All at once?
I'd say china changed as much
Posted by: Neutrino 2 Dec 2017, 1:08
leos and jags fix them and u have an improved mani prot 0 reason to buff the manti yet a better choice to pick.
It's just that the manti's cannons are really bad firepower wise. I'm really sure that buffing them and giving them a nicer animation (similar to jads cannon which is pretty awesome) would not at all break balance. Again, my argument comes from the fact that buffing a unit that can only be built once at a time will not break balance.
Posted by: Skitt 2 Dec 2017, 2:02
u wouldn't say that if you have fought the bb when it first came out in the internal test builds..
outranged gun turrets, killed them and most other units/defences in 2 hits and gained max vet from 5 tank kills, it was a pure 1 unit army.
this kind of thing ^^^^ is why were skeptical on buffing a units firepower
Posted by: ZunZero97 3 Dec 2017, 2:57
i think is fine as it now 
Posted by: Scud 3 Dec 2017, 22:54
Epic units were always a pain in the ass to balance and seem contradictory in a RTS game were the point is to manage an army. Damn I hated Kanes Wrath because of those.
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)