Is Allied vs Soviet Balanced?

[Lud0wig]

2 minutes ago, xe3 said:

AND YET MOST GAMERS PLAY THESE MAPS

CHECKMATE

Get out. Now.

[xe3]

ok cupcake

[XXxPrePxX]

4 minutes ago, xe3 said:

AND YET MOST GAMERS PLAY THESE MAPS

CHECKMATE

No and No.

1. It is an entirely different argument.

2. I'd like to see your statistics to back up your statement that most games are played on those maps. Why? Because that's also wrong.

[xe3]

hahah a 17 year old game with the developer six feet under can bring the most outta you people. laters!

[Lud0wig]

Just now, xe3 said:

hahah a 17 year old game with the developer six feet under can bring the most outta you people. laters!

Why are you even here?

[Lucifer]

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. 

[Lucifer]

  # topic closed 

[LeOwNzAll]

On 17/09/2017 at 1:02 AM, Lucifer said:

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)

Hi Lucifer,

 

Your ague is OK at start.

But you forget somethings; the time rhino needs to get at allied base.

In Yuri's revenge, there is also IFV +GGI which are build very fast.

For your example, on map like Blood Feud or dune Patrol; when the sov has 2 rhino and then reach to the allied base; if allied makes IFV + GGI he will have 2 of them vs 2 rhino; he can handle; if allied goes to grizzly, he will have almost 2 grizzly when rhino are there. And he can pop-up some pillbox or gi's. 

At tier 2 allied has rocketer/harrier. -> forcing sov to make 1 or 2 flak, and then re-balanced the number of grizzly vs rhino. 

[XXxPrePxX]

3 hours ago, LeOwNzAll said:

Hi Lucifer,

 

Your ague is OK at start.

But you forget somethings; the time rhino needs to get at allied base.

In Yuri's revenge, there is also IFV +GGI which are build very fast.

For your example, on map like Blood Feud or dune Patrol; when the sov has 2 rhino and then reach to the allied base; if allied makes IFV + GGI he will have 2 of them vs 2 rhino; he can handle; if allied goes to grizzly, he will have almost 2 grizzly when rhino are there. And he can pop-up some pillbox or gi's. 

At tier 2 allied has rocketer/harrier. -> forcing sov to make 1 or 2 flak, and then re-balanced the number of grizzly vs rhino. 

The problem with your argument here is the relative difficult assigned to each player and the money/skill in each of those scenarios.

For soviets in your scenario: They simply need to make the rhino tanks, and attack well. Maybe get a flack trak if it get's to that point.

For the allied player in your scenario, they need to spend money on ifv+ggi / grizz / teching up to get rockies/harriers (more $$$) and be able to manage all the units properly. 

First off, there is simply a money difference. Then you have the skill difference needed to win in each scenario. There is also a time difference due to the APP and allied unit building. It's just not comparable. 

And if all else fails, the soviet has the one unit that can essentially kill the entire allied defense early game (especially relevant on blood feud) -- deso.

 

It's the relative difference in skill required to pull off each scenario that means soviets >> allieds. 

[ore_truck]

On 9/24/2017 at 11:35 PM, xe3 said:

rocketeers will force apocs to shoot them first

No, they didn't.

On 9/24/2017 at 11:35 PM, xe3 said:

unlike the shitty industrial plant.

Learn the importance of economy, especially if you're playing as Soviet in RA2.

On 9/25/2017 at 1:55 AM, xe3 said:

no problem all i have to do is buy 1 seal $1000 and insta-blow up the only bridge. commie doesn't have this luxury.

"Ivan's not home..."

On 9/25/2017 at 1:55 AM, xe3 said:

fuck soviets,

I wonder if the Siskova sisters still live here. Mmmm.... Natasha and Nastier.

On 9/25/2017 at 2:21 AM, xe3 said:

technically speaking 1 seal or tanya can also sink 100 dreadnoughts. name one commie unit that has such value. damn, allied has everything covered!

1 squid can sink 101 aircraft carriers.

hahah a 17 year old game with the developer six feet under can bring the most outta you people. laters!

Man, I just got my popcorn.

 

 

[LeOwNzAll]

12 hours ago, XXxPrePxX said:

The problem with your argument here is the relative difficult assigned to each player and the money/skill in each of those scenarios.

For soviets in your scenario: They simply need to make the rhino tanks, and attack well. Maybe get a flack trak if it get's to that point.

For the allied player in your scenario, they need to spend money on ifv+ggi / grizz / teching up to get rockies/harriers (more $$$) and be able to manage all the units properly. 

First off, there is simply a money difference. Then you have the skill difference needed to win in each scenario. There is also a time difference due to the APP and allied unit building. It's just not comparable. 

And if all else fails, the soviet has the one unit that can essentially kill the entire allied defense early game (especially relevant on blood feud) -- deso.

 

It's the relative difference in skill required to pull off each scenario that means soviets >> allieds. 

yes that's true that allied requires more skill than soviet.

It's also true that teching requires more skill than just a rush, even in SvS. If you go 1 miner vs no miner on BF/DP you have to play well to resist 1st.

 

I would just answer to lucifer telling that Sov run over Allied. At low skill yes, just pop up Rhino and you win, and APP has nothing to do with. At good skill it's completly different. 

[Lucifer]

LeOwNzAll =   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi5QtsHLQH8

 

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

 

 

[VWWWWWWWWWWW]

NVM

 

 

 

Edited September 29, 2017 by VWWWWWWWWWWW

[scalpem]

soviet is king. i think the biggest problem is how overpowered soviet flak is. very underrated. all anyone talks about is rhino tanks blah blah blah. rocketeers($600) die so quickly to flak tracks($500) its ridiculous. 

i think allies would be a lot stronger if they were able to rely on rocketeers more than they do now. 

[a1nthony]

I would have to say with sw's off, there are more maps allies have winning chances on compared to super weapons on. However in YR I think the slight edge goes to the soviet faction in general, assuming you are playing as Iraq.  It comes down to simple things.

1.soviets usually can attack first to control the pace of the game.

2.desolators/desobombs win vs every unit except the battle fortress

3. Iron curtain is quicker to make and quicker to recharge.

 

yes allies have tricks, and at a high level they are far more able to defend and win(especially Korea) but I think soviets just have an easier time with economy, gameplay, and still have the units needed to deal with the allied faction which is why they continue to maintain a slight edge over allies in my mind...

 

[Lucifer]

On 9/29/2017 at 9:14 PM, scalpem said:

 

i think allies would be a lot stronger if they were able to rely on rocketeers more than they do now. 

 

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

[Kikematamitos]

Small maps soviets, large maps allies that is all 

[JSDS]

Allied > soviet 

[XXxPrePxX]

40 minutes ago, JSDS said:

Allied > soviet 

Feel free to explain this opinion in light of the discussion we just had regarding the exact opposite inequality.

[ore_truck]

13 hours ago, JSDS said:

Allied > soviet 

Care to elaborate?

[fir3w0rx]

15 hours ago, JSDS said:

Allied > soviet 

Solid argument here. Well I guess that settles this debate. I never looked at it that way, it's all clear to me now.

Edited October 15, 2017 by fir3w0rx

[ZiGZaG]

On 03/10/2017 at 2:06 AM, Lucifer said:

 

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

say what?

 

YR is far more balanced AvS than ra2 imo.

[ZiGZaG]

On 17/09/2017 at 12:02 AM, Lucifer said:

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)

Im sorry but i disgaree with so much of this.

 

'The allies have no rush threat' - utter nonsense. GI ifv's/quick seal/rockies/planes 

'Sov scout faster' - Completely depends on the map. Does a sov scout quicker on artic cricle? Probably not.

'Are better at / vs laming' - This i disagree with completely, the allied factions with its versatility and speed makes it much more effective for laming. 

' 1. The sov timing pushes (2, 3, 4 war) are enhanced in strength and duration. So can allies. 

 3. 'The allies have no tier 2 push of their own, they are still bleeding from loss of time'  - Rockies/planes/para or depending on faction eagle/TD/Cannon/Sniper. Good allied players will slow a down sov players considerably at this point.

 

 

 

[sunny]

Allies have a higher learning curve than sovs, if someone trains you then you might learn much quicker but still lack experience, as a1thony said it's all relative to the skill and how ou use every unit,  remember on YR gi's are stronger so that helps in the early stage holding off a rush and later on with camping if need be. How would TD's make any considerable difference?  They can potentially be used to stop a rush but could anyone explain how they could possibly be useful mid game with supers? dogs and deso fodders render them futile. GB are good against stray infantry including desos , making them a fun choice if you're a high pressure player and blitz the sov with tech and snipers, your fortress wont have to drive very close and you could deal a lot of damage picking off desos and making them go broke rebuilding them. America is overall the easiest to use, for allies you get 8 paratroopers for free every minute or so, other factions take higher skill and require much more orchestrated offensive tactics.  America and korea are usually the most effective in a supers game,

  If you're France against a good player you spend 2k for cannons while the sov can just drive around them, however, if you're skillful enough prolonging the game against sovs and survive, then you could potentially use cannons to create choke points if the map allows for it or stretch to their base late game (as you could do to yuri players).

Edited October 16, 2017 by sunny

[Lucifer]

14 hours ago, ZiGZaG said:

Im sorry but i disgaree with so much of this.

 

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------- . 

14 hours ago, ZiGZaG said:

 

 3. 'The allies have no tier 2 push of their own, they are still bleeding from loss of time'  - Rockies/planes/para or depending on faction eagle/TD/Cannon/Sniper. Good allied players will slow a down sov players considerably at this point.

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.

15 hours ago, ZiGZaG said:

 

YR is far more balanced AvS than ra2 imo.

this is debatable and worth discussing.