X3M

The MRLS is higher if I where to make the list. By the community balance patch, I feel that the MRLS will absolutely replace grenadiers in combat against bikes and buggies. They also have anti air capabilities. I agree on the Artillery. Seeing a group of Artillery watching as if they are watching a movie. Without throwing something, is cringy. Still, the few times that I used them for defence, they actually saved my ass. They are also my nr.1 choice when I crippled someone to infantry tier only. My artillery on B.

Theatre of War 2 looks better imho

I am agreeing with cn2mc on this one regarding the "they worked with the pixels they had" and "they tried to make it look gritty". Those where awesome graphics in those days. If they try it now. They should not make it look like a dirtied toy.

It is easy to get this game on your pc as well. Further more, I have been uploading some video's about the game. So if you are curious what kind of strategies are played. Take a look. I am strong in the start ups for most games. But since I level up from time to time. I too will be showing more in the future. Episode 6: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdOTH1HrQhE&t=177s The other 5 episodes can be seen by going to my channel. The very first was recorded without commentary on purpose. Remember, to get the game on your phone, click this link: https://redirect.appmetrica.yandex.com/serve/169878688668608468?recruiter_id=1118283928

I don't own the game. Can you enlighten the "not players" what these "pay to win" aspects are? Is there a part where "wait to win" is an option?

Statistical data is needed for a after balance party. When you balance a game after the math, you balance on your personal preferences. Even if it is one unit out of the bunch. Players might already think, "no thank you". While the rest is good. Mine would be more range on the mrls and artillery. And perhaps the chem a bit stronger. But maybe the chem is used to rarely. So, having them sooner is also an option. Just to see what happens. In case of the mrls, my battle was shorter. I raped those B&B. Perhaps because the enemy didn't have had that nuke yet to get rid of mrls before rushing in with the B&B on the tanks themselves?? Who knows what should have happened there. I have a decent experience on balancing games (even if no one on this forum believes me). Not only did I study the balances of other games. And learned some powerful techniques. But also went through a "idea"/"testing"/"gathering feedback" cycle myself at one point for RTS. Please note, the "idea" part of that cycle is always a personal preference of some one. And it is this "idea" part that can also include a misinterpretation of the game as it is. Make sure the balance is on the intended economy. (Money maps, or not, or both?) Balance 1 thing at a time, test it. Then go to the next. Make note of changes, what they where, and why they where. Keep personal preference of yourself out of it. If it is a community balance, the preference should be of the community. How many people out of 100% requested a certain balance? And how many people have been asked?

Who was pushing but not responding?

I think. I am one to give feedback. I like the fact that it is now an option. What is a shame is that weapons can't be altered. Because weapon changes give more personality to units.

My 2 cents. When I look at these games. I look at every aspect. Are units useful or not? How is the economy? Keep in mind, playing the game as intended by the designers is important. But also that the community has its own way to play these games. TS and Red Alert are played completely different these days as how the designers intended. Which I don't mind. But it certainly makes a lot of units obsolete in the long run. Also, keep in mind that if you use only 1 or 2 of a specific unit every game. They aren't useless. In fact, they are the most useful in their respective amount. Infantry or fast unit scouts. That one detector. 2 to 3 carryalls. A squad of 4 stealth tanks. MK2 accompanied with some disruptor tanks carried by those carryalls. I see the discussion spark every time for every game. That certain units are useless. But useful to others. The biggest difference between the 2 parties is the way how they play. One side plays as intended by the designers. The other side plays with certain things maxed out. Micro skill/depletion economy/1 type strategy etc. It also depends on the games and even the maps. Both sides have their own rights to be right in their own perspective. But please see each other side as well. It will be much more constructive on both your opinions and skills in the games. I hardly play TS in multiplayer. But have done so with TD. And every, I mean really EVERY unit in TD has been at one point useful to me. Even the Chem-troopers and the Artillery of NOD saved the day for me at a certain point. Even the choice between a sandbag and chain fence was obvious to me in their respective strategic purpose. O god, I still remember the accusing salty response of that guy Play the game differently. And you will see, other units show more use.

What about standing under a blossom tree?

While the prerequirements for the chem warrior are changed. Are any other changes planned on this unit? I gave it a thought on which units I never build. And it really is the chem. Only one time as fun. But never for strategic reasons. And I thought, what is the strategic advantage again of this unit over the flamethrower? It sure can't walk through tiberian. Maybe give it the vehicle status. No crushing, nor damage from tiberian. Just an idea. Even artillery have been build for strategic purposes by me. Further more, can you reduce the speed of the engineer by 1 more? This way other infantry are better choices to fill in that APC. Hear from you soon.

Good one Fireworks Edit: The long I look at it, the funnier it gets.

The downside of forum material is that, if/once you disagree with something or someone. The other guy immediately sounds (in your own head) negative. [If so, don't respond, let it rest for a while] The fun part about 4k is that details ARE visible in the game. At least for me, since I don't need glasses (for my eye's) yet. The fact that they start a remaster, IS their chance to make something masterful. Thus also more realistic if they find a way. I just hope they can take the critics with a grain of salt. Whether it sounds negative/sarcastic or constructive. And english not being in my nature, adds towards negativity. If I had a chance to talk to them directly. It would have sounded completely different. "Take a look at a construction site if you have the chance", would be one of my advices. They have to find a way in between to keep all sides a bit happy. That is one of the hardest jobs on this planet. You can't really win it.

I agree with EZER here. I find it funny that no one has started arguing about the crane itself. How would it function? The shape goes zigzag, which is very unstable. And I know that the original is like that as well. But back then the graphics needed to be awkward to show some extra movement. There are no pistons whatsoever to spot in the picture. And the grip itself is very small. Too small for the building projects that the CY fulfils. Look at these: https://www.cat.com/en_GB/products/new/equipment/material-handlers.html Which is what the crane is supposed to be, right? Look at this toy: https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71ShKjQ25eL._SL1200_.jpg Ain't that a realistic and functional toy? It 'Rivals' that of the picture if you ask me And by the big spaghetti monster, I hope the fans of the air condition blows towards the outside. Because that is what they are supposed to do when you work at a freaking construction site!! Cooling the fresh made materials, or at least remove the bad (with metals toxic) air. I don't like the bolts in the floor. I am used to concrete though. But slabs never have bolts unless they are elevated.

You can't change anything regarding weapons. Gotcha. I missed that point because you said 4 units shared the same weapon. Regarding the bike. I never said to buff them. I named a counter solution, and that was less health. +20% damage requires -20% health or something along those lines. It depends on the game play really. The only way that this less health would be of "less" use as a counter is indeed the range. Overall. You guys don't seem to have much options except for health, speed, the costs, prerequisite and swapping weapons? What else can be changed?

You know Chem. Compared to some others. You are still a sweetheart. I don't know what you did or said this time. But if you get a ban, then some others need a perma-ban.

I have seen the crane being like that before. In other images. Check out the explanation here: https://www.ppmsite.com/

Maybe changing the weapon is the answer here to all the problems. What happens when the range is +1(or even +2)? Rocket infantry already needed a boost. More range means better of use in all situations. The Bikes, can have a little less health to counter the rocket distance. They get a bit more of a support/hit'n'run function this way. I know that grenadiers are less useful now. But the Rocket infantry has more of the role in this regard. I don't know the effect on the Orca. The stealth tank would also benefit from that +1 range. You still can use the extra health. But please keep the price at 900 because of the stealth. If +1 range isn't your cup of tea. Or not sufficient. Have the rockets do a little bit more damage. +15 or +20% or so? If rocket infantry have the chance to shoot only once. They do more damage. For the stealth tank, this would be good as well. I don't know about the orca and bike though. Then there is changing the ROF for the rockets. What would that do? Would rocket infantry still have their first shot? Maybe slowing the fire rate while increasing the damage. This would mean better rocket infantry and stealth tanks, but the bike remains roughly the same in direct combat. They only benefit from the hit'n'run effect. I am talking about the "first shot" here. Just think about it and let me know if you see use to it.

Feedback MRLS: The opponent was massing buggies and bikes. I had M.tanks and grenadiers. The basic battle if you will. I decided to build the Comm Centre in order to get Adv.GT and Adv.Comm Centre. And eventually thus the MRLS. Since the MRLS was available right away. I build those instead of Adv.GT for the reasons we all know. And simply added more factories instead. Since the opponent was panicking, he simply build more bikes. Stealth Tank: It is to bad that it can't be changed. What about other factors? ROF, Range etc? I remember something vaguely about some units having the same weapon from the ini. Is this a fact for the Stealth Tank?

I had the chance to play this on a money map. Having those MRLS sooner than my opponent expected was a great benefit. I raped his army (twice). That was a lot of fun. Either way, I have been thinking about your Stealth Tank adjustments. While they remain a Recon Bike with Stealth option. It is this Stealth that makes them what they are. A surprise amount of damage when hunting harvesters or fending of air units. Also, the scouting of your opponent. So here is my suggestion: Instead of health increase and cost decrease. How about just one extra rocket that they fire? Increasing their damage with 50%. This way, their price stays loyal to the original. And they look a bit like their big brothers in C&C3.

Nice work!!

Do, please do!!!

Try one of the game design forums for this, including board game designers. You can find more skilled people there. Also, supply with more detail. What you are willing to pay. And how much you need. Good luck.

You're saying that 33% extra HP does not mean 33% extra overall power? Yes. Exactly that. As strange as it might sound to you. It depends on the situation (practical balance), counter fire and the damage itself does as well. At first I was doubting what your goals where. At first it looked like you where trying to get buggies equal to hummers, henceforth the +33% health looked doubtful to me. But that is not your goal. Your goal is clearly stated now that hummers have to be a bit better than they used to were. But are not going to be equal to buggies. Then +33% is all good. There is only one situation where +33% health means doing roughly +33% damage (or power as how you put it). And that is when they are dying for sure.

Well, I was simply assuming that you guys did simple reasoning to that. But if it is a coincidence of choice regarding the aspects that you had chosen. Then you may consider it, not said. Has it been tested yet? Did it feel right? It would be pretty neat if the +33% is a coincidence towards practical balance. Aka, the situation of the hummers against buggies+bikes. +33% health does not mean +33% time. (until it does during a fight?) I did not assume here that it was only a hummer vs buggy fight. I am not so sure about the bikes though. Do you understand my reasoning for doubting?