XXxPrePxX

You read it wrong. I said I look forward to you kicking my ass in QM, not the other way around. So you don't have an argument here.

Why? I'm 26-25 this month and haven't played in 4 months (sans this QM period). What do you seek to prove? If you are losing (0-2) to me in QM, then you are not polished enough to be the champion of this ladder with the current set of players. You should have not lost to me based on our skills right now, but your lack of experience cost you twice. There's no debate that you are more skilled than me in our current states. I fail to see what a 1on1 series would prove.

I did just successfully engi rush him on GSF. I'm sorry Matt -- when I saw GSF my eyes lit up with old time strategy. The engi walk on GSF is absolutely deadly and I created that strategy over 10 years ago... don't feel bad tho, that strategy is what got me many times clan rank 1 on Ra2 XWIS against players like Tommi/Steffen/Joku/Edd/Sash/w0nna and the like :p. No one expects it on GSF because people don't scout the outskirts of the map and focus entirely on the middle. I look forward to you kicking my ass in QM.

"Overall the IC is pretty powerful, but almost all map's with bridges the chronosphere is better. If you take the IC away from Sov's late game it becomes almost impossible to deal with the clusterfuck of mirage/bf/prizim, only mass Siege deployed have a chance and on most map's allies can just go around them." In no world is the chronosphere ever better than the IC. Even on a map like Tsunami, IC is still preferable IMO. That's the only situation where it comes close to 50/50. Chronospheres 7-minute timer and the allied power plant absolutely kill it's usefulness. While by the time your first IC is ready you have an actual army to use.

To be fair, I didn't mention any advantage... other than the map has a potential to become an endless battle and no one wants that in QM. DVG has a very high potential of both teams camping their respective side of the bridges and without supers it easily becomes a 'first person to attack loses' game. I particularly remember a game against ZigZag like this on XWIS YR QM when SW's were random (and off in this situation).

Yeah - SW's would have to always be on on maps like Hammer, Isle of war, and Death Valley. That's the way it was on XWIS YR. Those maps are awful SvA with SW off.

Yeah... it is somewhat insulting to suggest I do not know the dynamic between soviets and allieds in this thread and to suggest that one merely needs to harass (but at the same time tech up on 4 miners as allieds). It's clear the META is pretty simple in SvA combat. Soviets go fast IC on most generalized maps, while allieds try to tech up if they are permitted. I've never seen a game where I can casually tech up as allieds, get my forces, and then fight. That's too be expected... but it's incredibly frustrating trying to do this every game when the sov IC is up in 3 minutes. As Kireek has pointed out, there are ways the soviets can combat late game allieds. Really, it's like a time bar in general... Soviets have the 100% advantage starting out and as every minute goes by the bar creeps to allieds advantage... Or at least it should in theory. With the IC in play, it basically makes it sov advantage entirely. Now, with that being said... I think Frequenzy makes a good point that in a ranked atmosphere it is important to have standards... So... do with that as you may. If I am the only one that is getting wrecked and a touch bored of the constant rush to IC, then so be it -- do not mind me and I will continue to enjoy QM in different ways (Rushing/ playing as sovs etc). But I have to imagine other (allied) players are bit peeved at constant IC battles.

Yeah -- I'm totally on boat with the fact that soviets need IC in a very late game vs. allieds, especially when considering certain maps... But I've just been steam rolled so many times as allieds vs. a sov that just goes straight IC and it feels like by the time the IC is ready I haven't even started with my forces. That's because I'm kinda fucking around and also bad with allies, but I imagine others feel the same way. Basically, the M.E.T.A of going fast IC to kill allies is basically dominating QM right now when it comes to SvA games, and to me -- that makes it a bit repetitive and boring after a while ( from an allies perspective). Tho, with the large map list that helps a bit! ps. where the hell is Marsh! We need his allies on the ladder.

I completely agree with you on superweapons. 100%. The other options, I don't understand the point of and would produce problems... but if I may, I want to add to the superweapon point: Right now games are very one dimensional (which may not be bad)... I think it would be nice if supers were always on in mirror games and yuri games, and random for SvA. As someone who has been messing around with allies, it kinda sucks to see a sov go fast IC and me have to do shit to stop it constantly. It would be nice if SW were random so they'd at least have to fight some games on equal footing :p.

Yeah, the donor --> badges idea is the same sort of thing Rocket League and Fortnite do. "Pay" for new skins and different items in the game that have no meaning based on the game other than to look cool. It's basically a hidden donation. Good ideas.

With SW off, perhaps the camp would work brilliantly, but with SW on all it takes is 1-2 desos to kill dolphins thus soviet owns sea and a 5 minute IC is just brutal there. A small deso push + ic tanks every 5 minutes is GG there. But again, just based off one quick game and my very low current level of allied play.

River rampage is pretty fucked up Allied vs. Soviet, no? Soviet has massive advantage, methinks. Either way, idc sine it is a nice map, but just posting for opinions.

Is it just me or has the activty on the ladder been absolutely fantastic so far in March? JokuJak? Showtime? All are playing. I might have to get my old ass on and play some, for activity's sake. Keep this ball rolling and we got some good things going on. Map list looks great, a lot of fun in there. It's easier not to care about the small maps when I can veto a few of them and have 30's++ to play on!

Nice on OwnG and Heldro :D.

Caverns + Coldest Peak I'm not too familiar with. I honestly don't have an image of those maps in my mind. When I think of them, I think they are smaller maps and the cliffs aren't as important. I could be wrong there tho. Just unfamiliar with them. Dry heat is small enough to wear desos can rule the map. Never had too big of an issue there. Anyway, let's give others a chance to comment and not derail the tread. Thanks for putting this together and getting this loaded map list in.

Heck vs. Yuri is fine with allieds because that plays well into their game for the most part (long, big maps, with enough resources for allieds to get to tech units). But for soviets it's a bit of headache. The length of map means it's more difficult to consistently pressure the Yuri with IC+land units and the cliffs make attacking yuri with tanks incredibly hard (due to magnetrons). The addition that slave miners take the middle is another problem for soviets. I wouldn't call this map incredibly overpowered to the point where I wouldn't even consider it, but it's not enjoyable to play on as soviets vs. yuri. As for Double Trouble, once again, allieds can play this map well vs. yuri to some extent. Enough resources and defense for the allied team to get to their tech units and have a game against yuri, but soviets have an incredibly hard time attacking yuri over the long cliffs. Kind of a similar situation to Heck here as yuri is locked away in a cliff induced camp with tons of gems and super weapons and the soviet player has to find out a way to get from his base to yuri's base without running into a problem. Just a headache for the soviet player. Dustbowl really helps out yuri with the buildings+initiates and it's a map that magnetrons can run wild on due to the buildings/trees/rocks/small river. Always had games on this map where I was yelling at the screen. The one good thing about this map is that as soviet I can usually take all 4 oil derricks against any average yuri player. That, at least, helps. Once again, not absolutely awful, but if we are trying to balance the maps it just doesn't sit right. So, Heck: YvA and DT YvA I don't have an issue with. Heck YvS I only have a small issue with. DT YvS I have a larger problem with. Dustbowl YvS/A is kind of in the same vein as hidden valley for me. Sure, it can be done, but man it's frustrating. I don't have other maps to replace those, yuri maps are very hard to find that are balanced and I'd have to do a lot of digging to try.

Nice to see such a large map list. No problems at all with Soviets/Allieds maps. Yuri vs. Soviets on Double Trouble is my highest concern. Not a fan of Hidden valley vs. Yuri either. Mild dislike of Dustbowl vs. Yuri Not sure how I feel about No wimps vs. yuri. Not horrid but not enjoyable either. Heck vs. Yuri as soviets is also a pain in the ass. No problem for allies tho. I would probably vote "No" to these 5 scenarios, but only have a strong opinion on Double Trouble.

TBH, you come off wrong. You came in here saying the map list was why you didn't QM, but you didn't really know what you were talking about regarding them. You didn't give any real examples until your latest posts, and even then, the examples you gave were either not real (Urban hasn't been in CNCNet QM from what I recall) and not supportive of your argument. Perhaps, it's your perception of the map list that is why you do not QM. The actual map list, if you took a second to check, is actually good and what you kind of seem to suggest. There is a negative perception of the map list since the CNCNet client was launched with 10 or so maps that were not good for QM competition.

Not only that @Legolas, but you admit you haven't played in a while. Have you played since ZigZag's map additions? If not, then what you are saying is harshly outdated. ZigZag has a total of something like 30 maps in QM. I find it hard to believe the ratio is anywhere near 10 bad maps to 1 good map. You bring up OK-ish points on some maps like Dune/CS. I can grant you that, but there is a lot of maps in QM now. I believe this is the updated list: https://forums.cncnet.org/topic/7984-yuris-revenge-january-2018-qm-map-list/ I don't nearly see a 10:1 distribution. For me, there might be like 3-6 maps I don't personally like, but understand why they are in QM.

With all due respect, that is a very bad argument you are setting up for. For one, the current ladder environment is in no way competitive yet. Next, we've seen Mustache dominate the ladder as yuri, which brings me to my next point. Historically, yuri faction has turned weak/average players into good players and good players into rank 1 players. We look at Sunny who, otherwise, is a GOOD player. Now, he likely would have a hard time trying to get into top 10 as allieds/soviets when this game is competitive to some extent, but he is a good player that I can easily see ranked 10-40 in any given ladder as allies. You let him abuse yuri and he is the most hated rank 1 player of all time (the addition of map hack also helped, but that TOO is a common theme, yuri players have historically map hacked to get the advantage). We look at Kickyou73 and Reano1 (Kickyou actually banned for maphack as well) who are both weak players overall. They'd competitively be in the ranks of 40-90 in any given ladder as allieds/soviets. However, you give them yuri and all the sudden reano1 becomes a rank 8-20 player. Give kickyou73 yuri faction and he becomes a 20-40 ranked player. The list can continue to go on, but look at MustacheX. Give him Yuri faction and he is one of the best on the current ladder. Give him soviets/allieds and he isn't going to ahve anywhere near that same ratio of wins/losses. Same with yourself, and other yuri players. The bottom line has always been that players abuse yuri to get a higher rank in the ladder. These players are almost always the players that need yuri faction the most to advance their rank. My argument isn't whether or not this is OK, but there is a clear relationship to taking Yuri faction in the ladder and boosting your rank greatly because of how abusive it is.

Yo Biz, first a few things: 1) Ra2 XWIS is rather dead. Check www.xwis.net/xcl , Feb 10th with no clan in the ladder yet. If you still are interested in this, go to www.xwis.net forums and you should find a link to buying a serial there. 2) CNCNet client is the future of the game with over 300+ active users normally. Unfortunately for you, it is mainly a YR client with a 'Ra2 mode option' that is only played by a minority. There is a QM ladder in beta mode. CNCNet is your best chance to find a consistent series of games at any time of day. Further, if you find downloads (cough cough www.xwis.net/xcl in the top right downloads --> Red Alert 2 and Yuris Revenge) and then download cncnet client you can get on the game and play.

Giving teams like Russia and Libya the option to build a machine shop makes them instantly a good team to play as in Sov vs. Sov combat. Personally, I'd choose them over Iraq 90% of the time. You'd have to make the machine shop only buildable after a battle lab tho, similar to a cloning vats. Machine shops are pretty damn powerful. Still, iraq desos would be necessary vs. yuri and likely vs most top allied players.

Love these ideas. It would make each faction that much more complex by just adding small changes that flow with them well. Germany would be able to build a machine shop, maybe so would Russia. A lot of different ideas you can do here, the GB example you gave sounds mouthwatering.

Love these, except the elite rockies fire on the move... their too easy to get and dominate enough already. :p.

I've received some prizes from XWIS back in the day, but prizes have been an afterthought on the ladder for over 5-8 years really (plus, was it really motivation for average player x to play on the ladder when they knew they won't get rank 1 aka a prize?). Even money tournaments don't work out well, so I don't think it's the prizes that hold things up... it's the players.