Lucifer

u r a n00b

can you post the current map pool ?

lets be real tesla tanks should cost like 600 credits l0l those thanks are useless!

Rise my young apprentice, rise. The QM maps can have maps anywhere in the habitable zone. But there are maps that are in the dead center -- these would be the maps played if players were actually trying to play professionally. Not a concern here ofc, but worth the hypothetical. Indeed, the discussion would begin with what could be considered a 'perfect candidate' , and i must disagree on country swing being it. But again, another topic my friend ; ) Ill leave you with this though: Why do desolaters regenerate health while rocketeers and chrono legionaries do not ? *scratches beard*

cuz u play vs afk opponents ! Play vs opponents who simply press "d" when the ifv comes anywhere nearby and it explodes.

the single lamest thing to me is engineer eating. But the Chinese absolutely love it. the 2nd most lame thing to me is drone-in-miner but pretty much any soviet player-- good or bad-- absolutely love it my favorite thing to do is mass rocketeers. But Ive met players who think air is lame and should never be made Seal-ifv = 1600 credits + warning "seal ready". If you get seal'd, u fucked up / ur opponent had great multitasking. Imo its the opposite of laming -- its cool. A sentry gun kills a seal. A tesla coil kills a seal, a war miner kills a seal, a group of tanks kill a seal, a terror drone kills a seal, siege choppers kill a seal, and above all else a desolater can kill an infinite # of seals from a distance. l0l

Modern day games are constantly being updated for balance changes. Yuris revenge was not updated much in its past, and when it was, it was not updated by someone who actually understood the nuances of the game. That being said, its worth noting that mustachex could fix a chunk of (1) simply by making the allied power plant have less build time. Also, he could drastically reduce the problems of (2) simply by reducing the cooldown of the chronosphere; childsplay for mr mustache. However, (3)can not be fixed; its too ingrained, but by reducing (1) + (2), (3) is reduced indirectly. It does not logically follow that the difficulty of allies (3) by itself makes them weaker than soviets, but being more difficult does make them weaker when they are already weaker. If that makes any sense. Bottom line: those 2 minor changes would drastically balance the game. Secondly, and more importantly i think, we can conclude that, apart from these two potential game-balancing modifications, it comes down to one central question : What maps(4) are best suited to balance the iron curtain - chronosphere problem (2), the APP (1), and make the overpowered situations less overpowered (3) while keeping both positional and tactical options numerous for both sides (2/3), a solid early game for sov, but not too solid (1), some narrow passageways, some open space, etc. In other words Which maps fall into the "goldilocks zone" between allied and soviets ?

France is not overpowered, but overgayed. This situation isnt overpowered, its overgayed. Pros want ggs, not dick in the ass. Alas, the point of a CBL is to add skill while simultaneously removing homosexuality. Is the most important thing removing yuri , france, and adding superweapons? No. The most important thing by far, especially considering the gibbous relationship between allied and soviets, is the map selection. That is to say, competitive maps should include the maps with the least amount of homsexuality--if you will-- and the most amount of skill. Im going to replace the word gay with the word cheese. A quintessential example of a non-pro, so to speak, map is little big lake: bottom is clearly in a winning position off spawn. Now, there are more subtle examples that some may struggle to recognize, but if there is anything to be picky about, its the maps. They need to be fair, dynamic, diverse, and cheeseless. Everything else is secondary.

Yes, it must. --VWWWWW, one of the true GOATs (that stands for greatest of all time) is telling you why superweapons are on. If there is anyone on the planet to listen to--this is the guy. --Prep, one of the most famous and experienced YR / Ra2 players in the history of the series, is telling you at wonderfully articulated length why supers need to be on. Just....read his explanation --Gunman, one of the better current allied players, is telling you why you shouldnt make the rules. --Lucifer, the Lord O' freakin' darkness, is telling you why supers need to be on. --Leozownall, a random noob, is telling you that you aint qualified to make the rules. I i know its difficult, but you should try the other half of communication-- its called listening.

Everything is easier in YR...its a much slower, more economically friendly version of the game where defense is enhanced. i.e. forceshield. It is not a very dynamic game, the tactics need to be very carefully selected so you have to be SMART to win, whereas in ra2 the tactics are right around every corner-- need to be tactical / fast / multitasking in order to win. In YR, superweapons are on to make the game more dynamic and more fun. Watch the Marko vs Tej series. There is indeed very little movement going on--- u need supers! Easier does not mean better though. The more dynamic nature of ra2 allows allies to hit and run more effectively. Also, for reasons i cant fully explain (due to the difference of physics in the game) both grizzly tanks / rocketeers are more reliable vs soviet units than in yR. But as you said, the battle fortress is outta control powerful. It, amongst many other things in yuris revenge, makes the AvS matchup highly asymmetrical causing allied maps to be ALLIED maps and sov maps to be SOV maps, whereas in ra2, the matchup is more symmetrical and its about the same on any map-- which is what makes the game more balanced By symmetrical i mean constant exchange-engagements. In yuris, everything hits everything else so hard, you cant really engage unless you have the advantage. boom shalalaka

u should consider putting a sexy, fair, veteran player in charge of choosing the settings / maps for ur showmatches mate. I recommend xxprepxxxx. Hes been around for decades, has played at the highest levels-- and is a logical fellow-- he understands what makes things competitive and what does not. I say this because Superweapons are actually essential for ggs. Both competitive and for fun

Cherry-picking the details. The sov have an advantage in the form of something thats of essential importance to everything in the universe. I believe its colloquially referred to as --------- time------- . if i were to cherry-pick to avoid ur overall point, i would point out how irrelevant bringing up tank destroyers is. Fact of the matter is, the allied have their specialties and the sov have their specialties, and we can debate forever about what compensates what, but nothing makes up for the temporal disadvantage the allies have from the APP. this is debatable and worth discussing.

great stuff man. Should do this on a regular basis

u would like ra2. The game is much more balanced because allies can indeed rely heavily on rocketeers.

LeOwNzAll = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi5QtsHLQH8 Lucifer = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g37-s5NXDmk

# topic closed

no allied on the planet can take my soviets. 200$ a series. Dont make luci reinstall, fellas Put that in ur pipe and smoke it.

I find that my logic is often incorrect upon examining the results of an experiment. Yes, mcvs produce buildings quicker. But I wasnt clear in the purpose to my question: do mcvs add an additional speed bonus to tank production on top of multiple warfactories ?

what about multiple mcv? is it the same ratio? and does it effect tank build time in addition to buildings?

Even if you do this in a way that actually inconveniences the sov , you only equalize--no advantage is gained. You could also mess up and drop a bunch of rocketeers to one flak track, granting it veteran status in the process. Anything can be debated and has a counter, apart from the APP, its elementary. My analog to you would be chess. White moves first and therefore has an intrinsic advantage.

Allow me to elaborate on the so-called allied power problem (APP) to clarify why i think its so fundamental to this topic, knock some sense into u knuckleheads ---The tesla reactor takes ~5 seconds to construct, whereas the allied equivalent takes 8 seconds. Lets take a moment to consider the situation that this puts allies in at tier 1. 1. If, for any reason, such as landrush, the 2 factions spawn next to each other, the allied will be killed in under 60 seconds. 2. . If you go one miner as an allied, and the soviet goes 0, at 1:20 the sov will have 2 rhino tanks to your 0 --count them-- 0 ---weaker tanks. Meaning: you could be killed in 2 minutes. 3. The allies have no rush threat 4. The sov scout faster 5. The sov capture oils and ports faster therefore 6. Are better at / vs laming and 7. Have reinforcements / additional funds faster 8. The all-important first reinforcements from America's airforce command are 3 seconds late ---At tier 2, the second power plant is constrcuted-- a total of 6 seconds now. The problems get worse. 1. The sov timing pushes (2, 3, 4 war) are enhanced in strength 2. And duration 3. The allies have no tier 2 push of their own, they are still bleeding from loss of time 4. Sov middle game hits first 5. Miner all-ins are extra threatining. 6. The solution for allies is to go tier 3 and --Tier 3 is reached and the allies fall further behind. 1. The very first thing you do at tier 3 is get another power plant 2. The sov's 3rd power is the nuclear reactor, the last source of power they will ever need. 3. In fact, they can sell their previous power constructs (and ore refineries) and essentially get the nuke reactor for free as a cherry-on-top. 4. While power is now a non-factor for sov, the allied can not build a chronosphere and ore pureifier at the same time-- they each require an additional power plant 5. Weather storm and prism towers? Extra power plants 6. Sov tier 3 units hit first **** and this is a big one, boys For instance. That time window where the dreadnaught first hits..... nuff said 7. Ic is up first. On average, 2 ics hit for every chronosphere, and this is assuming the ore pure isnt prioritized 9. nuke is up first 10. Critical mass of mirage is delayed 11. Spy attempt is delayed ......etc etc the list goes on . It allllll comes down to the power problem, boys. Fix it, and u fix the game (in my not-so-humble- angel-of-darkness opinion)

The only mod needed to balance the game is making the sov and allied power plant have the same cost, build time, and power.

I'm afraid the rush factor is just the beginning of the alliedz problems. For me personally, rocketeers seem nowhere near as good in yr, and it's the reason I prefer using sov there. But you are all missing the root of the imbalance , where all of the allied problems stem from and are amplified by: the allied power problem.

this post sums up the topic quite nicely, i think. With the exception: I find allies are better in ra2 than in yuris (nobody agrees with this though). In 1v1, allies need to win 1.5 times in order to win once, whereas sov can just push through with miners at any given moment. In team games, the allied weaknesses can be covered by their team mates and they quickly become super-dooper powerful.

its not the maps as much as it is the game; camping is often the smartest thing to do