Jump to content

CnCNet Forums

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

DAIJOUBU?

Members
  • Content Count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6 Neutral

About DAIJOUBU?

  • Rank
    Rifleman

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Although some kind of checkbox in-client could theoretically accomplish this, you're basically asking for a situation that allows you to always pick your army second, which can't be made a fair option in any ladder format, because you'd need to add an option to dodge mirrors and either way your feature wouldn't be working as intended. It's weird enough that we have a blind pick matrix that encompasses every single map already (or anywhere near this many maps to begin with). Another layer of complexity would only be more inelegant.
  2. The only option I can think of that would remotely resemble your suggestion while still being somewhat logical is if both players know the name of the other player before they select their army. That would of course require an overhaul of how matches are made at all and whether names are hidden at the diplomacy screen, and would probably require harsher punishment for disconnects and 3 second games. If you like Allied mirrors perhaps you should lobby to get Yuri banned instead.
  3. yet another mistake: never ever share the results of an open survey
  4. voted no because there is insufficient competitive data and the ladder maps would be refined before we talked about banning an army in-lobby ranked games as a replacement for QM is a very good idea, but would require the implementation of other lobby features such as blind pick and army-hidden-during-load. otherwise cncnet qm team loses their already questionable focusing of the meta and every friend circle arbitrates their own destabilizing splinter meta based on the kind of game they want to play, I can't get behind a partial implementation without adding these features and forcing them to be on top 4 players on a free ladder picking the same out of 3 viable armies is nowhere near good enough to warrant a ban in any game, ever, so dismiss that idea entirely
  5. Bear in mind that a few warheads were originally balanced around medium armor being reserved for miners. This means that the gatling tank will now have some extra resistances that you might not have intended. The most important warheads that you should visit in the code and consider are [UltraAP] [UltraAPE] and [GUARDWH], which affect the Tank Destroyer and all GGI-related weapons, all of which are weaker against miners than against both tanks and light vehicles. I'm sure you've considered this too, but since you mentioned flak spam, the flak anti-ground warhead is exactly as effective against medium armor as against heavy armor, which the competing flak track happens to already have. Other than that, looking forward to playing the mod. I would have liked if you explained each group of changes so we knew exactly what problem was being addressed or what your intention was (you have listed adequate explanations for many changes). I will never want to see this on ladder without a 2/3 majority agreement.
  6. weirded out by actual good news from EA it's been almost ten years since they've given the C&C community so much as a neighborly nod
  7. pushing is impossible on a sufficiently active ladder whatever you frame as the problem, the power to better things belongs to everyone
  8. If you're doing pre-RA2, I want the same game with more options and cleaner high res If you're remastering something later than that just make sure we can at least tweak existing mods to work the same
  9. yeah shrinking the map pool is a no-brainer to me; we have easily more than three times as many maps as there's any reason to be, except if trying to state that RA2/YR is so shallow that you want to emphasize map specifics. I guess it has something to do with most of these maps being ladder maps before we had the tech to ban yuri to mirrors. so we have this convoluted compromise between balance and purity instead of a simple sane map count.
  10. Rules? Maps? Timeframe?
  11. rules? maplist? 1v1? yuri ok? outside of the mystery I'm interested
  12. No comments = no complaints imo. This is my first month on ladder since like 2003 and I'm only rank #93, but I think that if Yuri breaks a map, it's not robust enough in principle to be on ladder even if you've developed the technology to isolate the offending side in mirrors there. Meaning I'd trim the map list down as much as possible. There are no specific maps I would thumbs down, I'd only have the general category of Yuri maps thinned somewhat.
×
×
  • Create New...