RaVaGe

It was a legit answer to your post, while you might find these types of map crap, some other guy might find them amazing. Which means you're going to play if we change the maps, but he's not, we all want an active ladder and with the vetos it's possible to please everyone or in this case have them please themselves.

That only works against people who don't bring their whole Yuri deathball of an army together. AKA Lashers, Gattlings, Magnetrons, MMs, disks, YP, Virus, in a big clusterfuck of the cheesiest unit composition know in RTS to date.

Could have just told me that instead of five posts of "you're going about this wrong", "you're a ra2 player", " you never played yuri"... seriously, was it too difficult to point the map issues instead of personal attacks? I did ask for your & prep's advice and you just ignored that part entirely, continued with your ad-hominems, just like you're getting defensive here for no reason. Also actually, I did play Yuri, I put my foot in the proverbial water and slapped everyone except the top 10, though that was well before anyone knew of someone called 'Jason' in the top 50... Which is probably why you keep saying I never played it. I did get bored fast though, with Yuri's slow ass gameplay and the homosexuality the force field adds to the gameplay. He could do that from the start though, yet clearly, he doesn't care enough to think before typing. The faction per map was probably considered as an option to counter Yuri so players could pick the best faction to vs Yuri, though seems not much thought was given to how much it leaves the system open to abuse. Vetoing maps entirely is not a terrible option as long as the veto count is reasonably low compared to the map pool, if there are 40-50 something maps in QM and you can veto 5-7 that's not going to be easy to abuse, but rather offers people some convenience and improves the enjoyability of the game.

Not what I was pointing out, the fact was with you not telling me what maps you considered 'silly'. So there was no way for me to remedy the problem, similar to how this guy assumes you can read his mind and guess what he finds 'bad'. Instead of practising some common sense & communication all we do is tell each other that we know nothing... After which we have some obnoxious motivation to go and gloat on about our self-imposed feelings of correctness.

That's very informative, let us get right on it and ask our Yuri clones to read your mind so we can implement your preferences. ... How the fuck do you expect us to know what's good in your opinion? Lol, reminds me of your feedback about the map pool... It's so bad bro. ? Let's see how psychic you are.

I don't QM since the drop off in activity, always have to wait. You should check in lobby and PM people, set your client to auto log into the lobby so the pros can pm you when you QM.

Hahaha, make a medium AI play for him.

Harvester harassing is a legit pro tactic and used in most real-time strategy games...

Why not just whip up a survey?

@FlyingMustache Easy rank 1s?

No, I mean that when you have miners, but no refinery and order your miners to harvest ore then sometimes they refuse to harvest the ore and only move to the spot you clicked to harvest.

That behaviour in RA2 is the same. What I was saying is a rare bug or a glitch in intended behaviour. In RA2 when you had at least 1 refinery left you could harvest ore and deposit in your ally's refinery for his benefit, while once the refinery was destroyed the harvesters refused to harvest the ore, except in rare circumstances. I've experienced a similar case in YR where I lost all my refineries but they continued to harvest until full of ore, while in other cases they stopped entirely and refused to accept harvest commands (as in they move to targeted ore, but don't harvest).

Considering that on HV it will be fast tech on both sides, Soviet & Yuri, however Yuri always techs faster so it should have a disk count advantage. Now I don't know a 100% where or if mass disks starts moving in the favour of Soviets or Yuri. In theory Disks should have the advantage due to being able to move while attacking.

It might prevent the problems we had last month, with broken tunnels being listed.

In some rare cases the miners won't start mining the ore, no matter what one does. However depositing ore into an ally's refinery has always been possible.

Kinda pointless to post if you don't describe the specifics of the fault, the developers who are going to be fixing these bugs need to know how to reproduce them.

Yeah, I already considered that and came to the conclusion that the MM should indeed be able to Mind Control up a cliff. That leaves the Soviet side though, Deployed Siege or V3 are kinda slow to get into the position of firing, especially against mobile targets against camping targets sure, though magnetrons/bf ontop of cliffs would give Soviets a bit of a headache.

More information?

Doesn't a combination of gattling tanks and disks beat choppers? Soviet can't attack Allied on a cliff as well.

It would be like in my map, where Magnetrons can't attack buildings and vehicles on-top of a cliff. It can be configured separately as well, only unable to attack buildings on cliff or only unable to attack vehicles on cliff. I would also recommend applying the same change to the mastermind, as it's currently able to mind control units sitting on-top of a cliff.

This is due to a recent problem with Tunnel servers. I'm certain the staff is working on the solution. In the meanwhile you can select empty tunnel servers that state their country, also ones with a larger player count 0/1000~ or more will have greater bandwidth allowance and should provide a better experience. @Grant @dkeeton any update on the tunnel server issues?

Trying other internet providers doesn't always help, if most of them are renting the equipment from the main provider. You'll still have a poor quality connection due to the main provider.

That's exactly what he did in the map pool threads too. Sadly it's how most of the community acts like, I was just playing a 2v2 with KinkyS3x on my team and he complained about the lack of bacons first game, yet he couldn't place one himself, asking for help (ended up blaming me), then later he covers his base with flak cannons while I need anti air, (instead of making a flak track, like quix and gunman did). Then he ends up saying that I have no clue about 2v2... Seems to me that many players in this community can't handle their own faults & a logical discussions are considered arguments about who's better. Which is why absofuckinlutley nothing good will get done. Though kudos to the guys who can just ignore the community opinion and build it, I'm looking at you Grant/Olaf.

Can you two morons just play a few series against each other and set up the 'situational cases where "this" & "that" are used?!?! It's irritating to read of a conversation between two adults who are nearly 30 and the only thing they can agree on is that the other knows nothing on the subject they are discussing.

Half of this post is full of senseless crap. The campaign teaches what to use IN the CAMPAIGN. The best point in the last 5 posts was that Allied & Yuri have effective uses for all of their tier 3 units, while the Apocalypse is generally useless. Deso & Apocs, sure, vs mirage, sure, vs prisms, sure, vs a combo of both mirage & prism with a bunch of rocketeers and a bf, nope just doesn't work, rhinos, nope just doesn't work, a mix of rhinos, flak, apocs, deso, nope apocs are too slow and shitty to micro so just make rhino.