Jump to content

CnCNet Forums

Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

CekaJ (Jake)

Ladder Tester
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by CekaJ (Jake)

  1. Read why we don't need a patch in my post before my last; the one talking about yuri vs soviet and yuri vs allied
  2. There are 4 things you must understand though: Yuri's Revenge is meant to be played with Superweapons on OR soviet tier 3 is massively underpowered If Superweapons are off then not only would we have to nerf Yuri, we would have to also nerf Allied Factions have different advantages Manetrons dropping miners on refineries is fair in context 1 & 2: Either Yuri's revenge is meant to be played with Superweapons on or Soviet is underpowered. When you think of the strongest tier 3 units Allied, Soviet, and Yuri have; you think Battlefortresses, Masterminds, and Apocalypse Tanks. Anyone with eyeballs can see that Apocalypse tanks lose to Battlefortresses and Masterminds. The issue then is: What does soviet have that can beat Battlefortresses and Masterminds without superweapons? The answer to that is nothing in many cases. If you compare each faction's arsenal while assuming equivalent number of war factories + all tech structures but no superweapons, then soviet has nothing to compete with the battlefortresses and masterminds. If superweapons are on though in that situation then soviet can use the iron curtain to chase down battlefortresses, and iron curtain drones to eliminate masterminds. Therefore either soviet's tier 3 IS the Iron Curtain (proving my point that this game is meant to be played with superweapons on) or Soviet is underpowered. Are we going to buff soviet so we can play without superweapons? Are we going to nerf both yuri AND allied so soviet can play without superweapons? OR are we going to play with superweapons on and change nothing balancing all 3 factions. 3. Factions have different advantages. For example: Allied can teleport stuff large distances. Should we let soviet do that as well? Soviet can make things invincible. Should we let allied do that as well? Yuri can have unlimited money. Should we let the other factions do that as well? Maybe it turns out that in 2v2 on certain maps having an unlimited money late game is good? Is that by nature overpowered? Is good overpowered? Just because there is in infinite to something does not mean that it is too good for this game. All it means is that their opponent (if not Yuri) needs to be proactive. There is nothing wrong with pro-activity. AND on maps with more ore drills the ore purifier and industrial plant stay even with the mutator in the long run. 4. The magnetron dropping miners on refineries is fair if Allied and soviet can do similarly powered things. Soviet's desolators and drones can literally prevent a tier 2 (no lab) yuri from ever winning. Allied gets free paradrops forever, has the most harass options available, and has arguably better tech. Dominator instant casting doesnt make or break yuri. Yeah its good but is it overpowered? It's just different. Also there is no way to justify it mind controlling units if it had a start up time since predictions would need to be made. You would have to completely change it to be basically a nuclear missile. If people just learned to play with and against yuri there would literally be no complaining. If yuri has some power then so be it; so does soviet and so does allied. All I can ask is: Have you ever actually tried to fight against yuri and tried to learn how to beat it?????????
  3. Idk enough about boomers to discuss boomers but in general after discussion with Sunny, Mustachex, Buffalo, Marko and Marsh this is my understanding of Yuri USING "QUICK MATCH" SETTINGS: (Skip to the end for a tl;dr) Soviet vs Yuri in a vacuum: Iron Curtain + Drones > Masterminds (even with gat support) Desolators > Gat mag combo, Genetic Mutator Brutes Flack Tracks > Discs, Fodder for Yuri psychic Towers (even more so if u bring some conscripts) Rhinos > Slave Miners, buildings Terror Drone > Chaos Drone Nuclear Missile > Base defenses/ Buildings War Miners are good fodder for gat bunkers and magnetrons Industrial plant can compete with genetic mutator income until map runs out of ore, even then it can if there is enough ore drills *This is all using quickmatch settings. If super weapons are turned off then soviet has no answer to Gat + Mastermind combo making Yuri overpowered vs soviet.* (and probably Allied would be overpowered as well) Discs > Desolators Masterminds > Rhinos Gat mag > Flack tracks, Rhino Psychic Dominator > Still units, Base defenses Genetic Mutator > Industrial plant only once the map runs dry of ore and assuming there are few drills Allied vs Yuri in a vacuum: Mirage Tanks > Mastermind, miners, brutes in moderate numbers Grizzly and or Mirage + Harrier combo strike > Gats and mags in low numbers (Target mags with harriers so the mags must turn around and run; at the same time run in with grizz/ mirage to close distance.) Battleforts with Gi > Gats and mags in high numbers Ggi ifv > Discs, support in killing vulnerable masterminds 2 harriers > Gat bunker Prism tanks > Base defenses Tanya > Vulnerable Yuri miners Ore purifier > Genetic Mutator until map runs dry unless there is enough drills (If the yuri keeps the brutes youll have more money to fight them. If he grinds them then his masterminds will be more exposed to mirage) Seal Fort > Mass Brutes Weatherstorm > Gat bunkers, Base defenses in general, Force Shield (Assuming 1 Yuri Lab), Slave miners (Eye of storm can kill 1-2 miners) Chronosphere + Weatherstorm combo > Buildings/ Superweapons, Base defenses, Force Shield (Assuming 1 Yuri Lab) Robot tanks are supplemental support units and are good in low numbers if a specific situation calls for them. (Mastermind/Mindcontrol heavy rush before allied lab. Or to strike vulnerable high value yuri buildings like a battle lab/ war factory/ mcv even while they are defended by masterminds/ psychic towers.) Masterminds + Brutes > Mirage Tanks Gats and mags in low numbers > Grizzly tanks/ Mirage tanks without harrier support Gats and mags in high numbers > Grizzly tanks/ Mirage tanks Mags + Masterminds > Battle Forts Psychic Dominator > Still units, Base Defenses Genetic Mutator > Infantry in general, Brutes to support masterminds, Ore purifier once the map runs dry of ore assuming there are few drills Gats > Paradrops Brutes > Robot Tanks Lashers > Robot Tanks Gat bunkers > Mirage/ Grizzly Tanks Tl;DR: Unless I'm somehow drastically wrong about all this even after discussions with: Sunny, Mustachex, Buffalo, Marko and Marsh we don't need this patch. We need educated players. Instead of this patch, focus energy on educating players through: "Vs Yuri Strategies" forum posts "Vs Yuri Strategies" Video guides Links in the main Cncnet client to these forum posts and videos Links in the custom game lobby to these forum posts and videos This in my opinion would be the fastest and easiest way to inform anyone who has an issue with the Yuri faction; not a patch altering literally 14 separate units/ buildings.
  4. There should be a ranked reward that transfers over to the main cncnet client. That way players who dont play ranked will have more incentive to play ranked and the players that do well in ranked have more incentive as well. Maybe have people who rank top 10 in qm have their name appear in a special color in the "online name list" on the right. I suppose you could just give the awards to that players ip address since people technically dont have accounts on the main client. idk
  5. I like your idea but i feel it's still too debatable and controversial which maps Yuri should be allowed on; too arguable. It's less arguable tho if you either allow him in competitive play or not based on him being generally overpowered. Most good players now don't even play with Yuri in non ranked games so I'm pretty confident the people who really are concerned with the ladder would not mind if Yuri wasn't allowed; apart from a few exceptions. We have to remember we're talking about a balanced competitive mode here. We aren't banning Yuri from cncnet. We would be banning him from competitive play only. No startcraft 2 faction is banned from only "some" maps. We will never be able to balance Yuri and agree. Is it possible we just leave the competitive ladder to Allied and Soviet factions only? Would there be a great majority of people happy with a Non-Yuri ladder? Thank you for seeing my point about AVS more balanced without supers on balanced maps. My concern still is 1. Supers are on and the sov iron curtains every 4 minutes, the allied chronos prisms or gi forts every 7 2. Supers are off and the soviet actually needs to win the navy war. and or siege chopper walk on campy maps. All of these maps you named are already considered to be allied maps. That being said soviet can still win but allied is favored. There are also maps where soviet is favored. If we leave the map veto system in place but also turn super weapons off a pure soviet player can simply veto the strongest allied maps and the allied player can simply veto the strongest soviet maps leaving us back to "OUR" side of the arguement: I agree that maps that don't require SW's often have a more balanced matchup AvS without super weapons. However, then you need to eliminate a lot of these fun maps which have "creative" outputs in gameplay. We would be left with balanced maps. btw A map like hidden valley with super weapons off can easily be a soviet map late game if the sov pressured the allied early and develops into a siege chopper walk. With map vetoes and supers off can we have a balanced ladder? I say yes. Again i feel it's too debatable as to which maps should be super weapons on and which they should be off. Would it be simpler to have supers on in mirror matches and them off when it comes to allied vs soviet? (Yuri banned.) Then having map vetoes so sov players can veto camp/ water maps and allied players can veto open and small maps? That seems pretty balanced and fair.
  6. Ok so you agree with everything i said except this one part. Now i see what you're interested in. You're interested in the most generalized set up that works across many different maps/situations and promotes a more creative style of play. That's good to be interested in but I am not interested in the same thing you are. I'm interested only in balance. Balance is all i am interested in. That being said what do we know about balance in yuri's revenge? We know that Yuri is too good on many maps. We know that xwis was dominated by iraq since yuri was banned on many maps, and we also know allied was never represented anywhere near as close as iraq while supers were on random. What we can discern from this? Either allied is incredibly hard to play or that in the absence of a free and respected yuri environment Iraq is better than allied. You said it yourself that iraq is overpowered. So therefore iraq is better than allied generally. So is there anything we can do to nerf iraq or buff allied to make them closer to evenly balanced? Yes. We can either mod the game files OR we can actually just turn supers off. Turning supers off in theory nerfs soviet slightly while also buffing allied slightly. It also opens up need for other units in each army's arsenal. I.e. Chrono legionnaires, v3, siege chopper, etc. Why build v3s if you can just kill that stuff with 9 invincible tanks. Why build legionnaires if you can just tele a gi fort there? Did you not say: I am interested in the most generalized set up that works across many different maps/situations and promotes a more creative style of play. Since when is nothing but rhinos and iron curtain creative? Are rhinos, siege choppers, v3, kirov, ivan bombs more creative than nothing but rhinos and iron curtain? Most would say yes so while i respect your opinions I just cannot see the logic in saying limiting soviet's late game to repetitive iron curtaining is a "creative style of play" On the other hand allied have always had to be creative to get ahead vs soviet so allied is creative regardless. Turning supers off generally nerfs the what you call "overpowered soviet" and therefore buffs the faction which isn't as powerful. As someone who plays Yuri i also don't think it's fair if you only let yuri play on some maps. I would want Yuri to be playable on every map but sadly it would be not balanced. So either we ban yuri all together from competitive or only let yuri play on some maps. But i would never feel happy being a yuri player not being able to play the maps where my faction is at it's best. Why do i have to let someone else decide the maps Yuri can play on? Each map has to be figured out independently. That's more of a hassle than just deleting yuri from the quick match all together. Leave yuri to for fun games. Any right minded person should see only allowing some factions to be played on some maps does not add to a competitive format. france on the other hand may be playable but we'd have to test it. Would be dumb to have "those maps" where u just auto pick france. lol Can you not see that nerfing the overpowered iraq and buffing allied makes the game more balanced? Turning supers off does this. Allied is generally stronger with supers off than if supers are on. You cannot argue that. Not that every game comes down to supers BUT wouldnt turning supers off increase the odds over all games played that allied comes out ahead? The only other option i see with superweapons is limiting them to mirror matches. That way they still get used but allied's win percentage against iraq is actually brought closer. Now that's a good solution!!!! What do you think?
  7. Thank you. Yes but in regards to "RANDOM SUPERS" since when has a random number generator ever added to the competitiveness of a game? Dice rolls don't promote skill.Variance isn't suggested in ANY competitive game.That's why we don't play with crates either; their random.
  8. It doesn't take 9 years playing the game to understand balance. After all I'm the one who set up the buffalo vs marko series last month. I set it up with these exact rules: No Yuri no france no supers multi engi on. Our map pool was balanced and fair. The games were great and competitive and not once did we have to watch constant iron curtaining every 4 minutes. Buffalo even picked allies on reconcile and used chrono legionnaires to zap markos mcv. How often do you see chrono legionnaires in supers games? You don't bevcause it's not the (M)ost (E)ffiecient (T)actic (A)vailable. Seriously tho most of the time for soviet the m.e.t.a. is making nothing but rhinos and some deso then if the game goes long iron curtain constantly. That closes off strats and thinking "How well can i use my 9 invincible tanks every 4 minutes. I'd argue it's more fun and crazy with supers off. With all the focus freed up not having to worry about when the 9 invincible tanks are coming or where the teleported gi forts are going, people can split and do other shit. But yeah Kireek isn't in on this with me it's just me. That being said I invite you to play as allied vs @Kireeek 's iraq late game and then tell me if you really think it's unfair. Please come play him so we can stop talking about how op allied late game is. I used to think like you that we need supers on to have great games but once i saw how he plays soviet late game i realized the game is even more interesting with supers off. AND both factions a lot of the time end up utilizing more of their arsenal doing so. Sw ARE even more of a problem in team games as well. IMO sws should turned off 3v3 games or else it just comes down to who can iron chrono first or who can triple ic the same 9 tanks throughout their opponent bases. in 3v3 the game literally devolves into constant iron curtaining/ iron chrono-ing which is a joke. I know most of the good players on cncnet and have heard many's opinions on this. but yeah if you really wanna know how good i am then play me. More importantly please play Kireeek and he will show you you don't need super weapons for both factions to have a good game. when can you play kireeek?
  9. So you're saying soviet has nothing to do late game if allied techs and supers are off? Do u even know what a siege chopper is? Soviet can camp incredibly well too. I guess you've never used siege choppers then. Oh well! Maybe someone can teach you. @Kireeek (ggi prefer fire air units so run in with siege choppers in the front of ur rhinos and all the ggi in the bfs shoot up not at ur rhino) lol As for maps where soviet necessarily needs the iron curtain to have a chance. Would you then dare to say that the map is unbalanced? Even then, are allieds allowed to have a map they're advantaged on? Im putting together some info and writing down things that should be banned and i literally wrote those exact 3 maps down that need to be banned if supers are off. Isle of war, hammer, and death valley girl. before you even mentioned it. if supers are banned then those maps should prolly be too. (unless u just wanna camp with siege choppers vs battle fortresses where the best strat is to not attack.) We're Going for balance here. Duh Ultimately, what I get from you is that you are pretty good, but you are just inexperienced with supers off, authoritative and not concerned with balance. If anyone here is concerned with balance all they have to do is listen to the words of xxxPrePxxx, "You, as the user, have the choice here to be the overpowered soviet or the badass ultra skilled allied player that beat the soviet." We're going for a competitive 1v1 quick match format. Balance is when both factions are as close to a 50% win ratio as possible. Some people say supers should be on random but, since when has a random number generator ever added to the competitiveness of a game? Should we punish someone wanting to build a super weapon just to find out they can't? or vice versa? Randomness and roll of the dice mechanics never adds to the competitiveness of a game. On the other hand, if supers are left on 100% of the time then we are left with the "overpowered soviet." as PreP would say. But if you turn supers off it nerfs the overpowerd soviet and buffs the underpowered allied tightening the margin of power, bringing both closer to a win percentage of 50% depending then only on the map. If you see a problem with soviet late game vs allied then you simply haven't pressured the allied at all, don't know how to use siege choppers, or are already playing on an allied favored map which is fair due to Soviets having Soviet favored maps. Then keep Yuri banned completely since having him only playable on some maps doesn't add to the competitiveness of those maps. Also because if supers are off soviet literally has no chance of winning apart from radar first deso rushes on tiny maps. If everyone is so concerned with Yuri being playable in quick match then make a separate ladder or mode with all of the same maps where there are no bans. Call it the "Legacy format" as opposed to the "Competitive Ban-list Format" Then we can see who is the king of Yuri dittos which is what it would devolve into assuming a Pro Yuri player actually tried and the map pool was balanced. If supers are off Yuri vs Soviet simply is not fair. If supers are on Soviet vs Allied is simply not balanced enough. Ban france because with no supers the grand cannon walk can be too good in some situations warping the game around the cannons themselves. (Offense defense, Tour of egypt, France is even more of a problem in team games) 4 Black Eagles can't even destroy a cannon in 1 salvo. Then to address the "Soviet needs iron curtain on this map to win" and "this map is a camp map and the games go on for an hour" problems you simply address and ban the offending maps. From what people have said the main ones are: Death valley Girl, Hammer and Sickle, and Isle of War. This part is more debatable but in regards to a competitive 1v1 format, the map pool can balance itself out if we add an equal amount of maps that favor Allieds and Soviet. But this is just some information. I'll go into more detail later in my next post.
  10. The maps are half the problem. No one wants to play water, bridge, huge, maps which are allied. the other half of the problem is supers. Since these maps are already sov maps the iron curtain is better than the chronosphere. (iron better on sov maps and chrono better on allied maps generally) SO to make it balanced either we turn off supers or force people to play maps they dont want to play but no one wants balance so theyd rather play small maps with supers which is just "who is the best iraq"
  11. In your opinions what are the 5 most popular/ played competitive 1v1 Yuri's Revenge maps? From what I've seen i'd say Tour of Egypt Heck Freezes Over Country Swing Dune Patrol Hidden Valley
  12. that was 3 months ago which was literally 50% of the time ive been playing this game. ive only been playing 6 months and since then ive learned many things. I was top 5000 in overwatch when there 11 million people playing it. #1 on a mobile game. and high up in other games so don't act like i don't understand games when i was literally new to the game. I assume you think actually blowing up buildings with the seal is lame then
  13. No the use of the seal ifv is to kill deso because i cant use air cuz the deso is sitting under a flak cannon.
  14. either we change everything or ban things that are too good. or we do nothing and whoever is the best yuri is the best player. but yuri is "lame" in 1v1 so whoever is the best allied player is the best player. Cuz u all think that if u play allied to a pro level then allied is slightly better than sov. but no time in history of the game has that ever been shown so in reality since yuri is "lame" the game becomes who is the best iraq; like always.
  15. But on dune and you're allied you're most likely gonna lose before the game even started
  16. I mean after u shoot the deso. Now the deso is dead then u get his war lol
  17. Competitive 1v1, soviet map, you're allied cuz u like allied. Is it lame to seal the soviet war factory if u made seal to kill deso but then see opening?
  18. Yes allied does need more skill. Therefore if you have 2 players of equal skill allied should lose most of the time. Therefore soviet better generally. Therefore turn off supers to buff allied. especially considering maps like tour of egypt, dune patrol, blood feud, etc are the most popular maps played and all are soviet maps. That's the logic. It would make it closer to even in terms of balance. Even on maps the size of Africa the soviet can pressure allied and move his mcv closer to the allied base. (assuming supers are off) Also sov can siege chopper camp. I still think the CBL (comp ban list) is the most balanced version of the game especially if you ban maps that are unbalanced in addition to the setting bans. I.e. Hammer and sickle, Montana Dmz
  19. Gun man you're a soviet player. Are there any biases? Forget 3v3 for the moment and talk only about competitive 1vs1. Listen to what PreP has to say. He has played for many years. in competitive yr 1v1s he's painting a picture that Allieds have it incredibly hard (on most maps not the size of Africa) much harder against an equal skilled soviet. Basically everyone's argument is that allied doesn't suck there are just no good allied players. Does that makes much sense? If you have two pro players of the same skill; BUT ALLIED REQUIRES EVEN MORE SKILL, then the soviet will win most the time. Does that not kind of suggest soviet is more consistent and more powerful than allied in general? Why does the allied player HAVE TO HAVE MORE SKILL THAN THE SOVIET PLAYER TO BE ABLE TO WIN? Tell me that? Is that balanced? With 2 players of equal skill both factions win percentage should be as close to 50% as possible in a 1v1, with the only thing swaying the odds being the specific map you're playing on. Most of the popular maps favor soviet with super weapons on. ALSO maps like hammer and sickle are unbalanced and shouldnt be allowed in competitive 1v1s anyway due to top right having no entrance and MORE gems. Therefore, ban unbalanced maps, ban unbalanced settings, ban unbalanced factions. The only thing we can do to buff allied in 1v1 is: Remove super weapons to reward the allied player late game for surviving the soviet superior early game pressure. OR force people to play maps the size of Africa, is an ocean, or maps that have only like 2 narrow paths to the opponent's base. NO ONE PLAYS THESE MAPS. Even on maps like tsunami it benefits soviet to have supers off. perfect example of how supers off benefits the faction which is already behind based on map selection. Final note. If you don't see what I see then i invite you to join me in playing nothing but allied on cncnet. Join peoples supers games and try to win. ------------------------------------------------------ ps: i wrote this message a few days ago when everyone replied but didn't post it. Since then i have warmed up to supers some but still think banning everything that is unbalanced equals a balanaced game. Albeit the games could go longer and allied would be better on choke point maps but soviet would still be better on open maps. That's balance and could require even more skill depending on the map. Competitive ban-list works in term of balance whether you like it or not. Supers games/ no rules still work and are competitive but generally yuri is the best - then iraq - then an allied faction. PS PS: if you're going to play allied with supers on against soviet on a map which isn't the size of Africa or in an ocean than you should probably be Korea.
  20. Oh because i haven't played the game for 20 years like you it must be that I am incorrect with my opinions. But yeah, there really is no point in debating this actually because nothing said here can be proven without any evidence. Maybe once the quick match is up and running well Grant can provide us with the statistics oh which factions win the most on which maps. If they could turn supers off for a month maybe we would see a trend
  21. All that said, the current "Competitive Ban-list Rules" are: Super weapons Banned Yuri Banned France Banned Multi-engineer on
  22. The series between Marko and Buffalo i organized this last weekend followed those rules and we got many great games out from it. Buffalo even chose Allied against Marko and beat him. Iron curtain has intrinsic problems which make it too powerful and warps the Meta into a soviet one. (one problem being the 4:20 second timer with casting time considered) Although non-supers games may take longer it balances the game between allied and soviet. Many games with no active development team use a ban-list to balance it's competitive scene. Since nothing can be buffed due to no development the next best thing is to ban everything that is overpowered. Look at Team fortress 2 for example https://wiki.teamfortress.com/wiki/Competitive_item_restrictions Development on that game has been slow for the last 10 years and the competitive players took it upon themselves to balance through bans. The same philosophy can be applied here if balance is what the current community actually desires.
  • Create New...