Unanimous Change

[ore_truck]

What's with changing the TD's damage on infantry and structures? TDs are meant to be a specialized anti-tank unit while suck against anything non-vehicle so lets keep it that way. Improve their tank battle effectiveness. Change them by making them not redundant, something that makes people wanna build them over mirage tanks and Battle fortresses for countering tanks.

1. Turn it into a heavy anti-tank artillery by allowing it to 1-shot a Grizzly but reduce its speed, firing rate, etc. But this might change the Allied fundamentals of being quick and nimble so maybe the next option..

2.  Make it similar to grizzly tank in terms of speed, firing rate, etc but give it a mirage tank's damage or higher against vehicles (damage against infantry and structures is unchanged)

3. Or something in between the two above.

Don't know about you guys, but I make use of tank destroyers in my casual games. But if changes are needed, I rather have it like either of above.

[dkeeton]

8 minutes ago, ore_truck said:

What's with changing the TD's damage on infantry and structures? TDs are meant to be a specialized anti-tank unit while suck against anything non-vehicle so lets keep it that way. Improve their tank battle effectiveness. Change them by making them not redundant, something that makes people wanna build them over mirage tanks and Battle fortresses for countering tanks.

1. Turn it into a heavy anti-tank artillery by allowing it to 1-shot a Grizzly but reduce its speed, firing rate, etc. But this might change the Allied fundamentals of being quick and nimble so maybe the next option..

2.  Make it similar to grizzly tank in terms of speed, firing rate, etc but give it a mirage tank's damage or higher against vehicles (damage against infantry and structures is unchanged)

3. Or something in between the two above.

Don't know about you guys, but I make use of tank destroyers in my casual games. But if changes are needed, I rather have it like either of above.

For some reason this comment just snapped me back to reality.

There is no way a topic about balance changes is ever going to work if we get comments about what should or ought happen. Instead, make your change that you want to see put it in a map file test it then just report your exact changes with why you think the change works, no more shoulds or oughts or hypotheticals, it's never gonna end. Just make the change and test it.

No disrespect meant to you ore_truck, this comment all over the place and triggered my internal consistency filter.

[Lucifer]

4 hours ago, FReQuEnZy said:

Don't care.
 

 the    reason this forum sux and will always sux

[[CC] RaVaGe]

6 hours ago, dkeeton said:

 

There isn't really a buff vs infantry here, the 50% is only vs Brutes and Desos. I added a moderate buff vs buildings and harvesters because the enemy can counter your tank destroyers by simply not building any tanks. It doesn't feel right to have this unit being something that you can only use after the enemy commits to tanks.

As it stands now 5 TDs can't even overcome the rate of repair on a building.

If anyone wants to experiment with versus the order is:

Verses = infantry, hero infantry (tanya etc), heavy infantry (brutes/deso), light vehicles, medium tanks, heavy tanks, normal buildings, armored buildings, walls/conyard, drone, missles/rockets

Verses=2%,2%,50%,100%,100%,100%,15%,15%,15%,100%,100%

 

And a thought about Libya trucks: I think they should cost less and do less damage but have way more hit points, maybe Strength=500 and do only enough damage to kill a power plant and a battle fortress, then give them the speed to run a bf down like a cheetah. Eh, just a thought, I haven't even tried that in a game.

I have mine work in a way that keeps it damaging against vehicles and base defences, but with reduced damage to normal structures.

It's meant as a defence buster.

[ZiGZaG]

Tank destroyers are pretty good the way they are.

Ive won games with them and ive lost games against them. People making out they are useless yet players have won ladders and been extremely effective with them in the past. (Brett for example) They arent supposed to be effective against buildings/infantry.. the clue is in the name. Id mabye make them fire on the move but its not really neccessary considering you can ctrl shift.

I think a lot of changes people are making/suggesting are very overkill its very easy to cross the line and end up with ridiculously overpowered units.

 

On 2/8/2018 at 10:21 AM, FReQuEnZy said:

I have mine work in a way that keeps it damaging against vehicles and base defences, but with reduced damage to normal structures.

It's meant as a defence buster.

 

No its not, its meant as tank destroyer that's its only purpose, claiming its supposed to be good against defenses e.g sentry gun/prisim tower seems like a rather wild assumption.

Edited February 9, 2018 by ZiGZaG

[XXxPrePxX]

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.

[Lud0wig]

Tech Machine Shop doesn't have a buildup/sell animation. Imagine a tank battle between someone who has a Tech Machine Shop and one who doesn't have one

[Legolas]

3 hours ago, XXxPrePxX said:

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.

no one is going to take iraq when russia/lybia has a machine shop. so the svs thing is not going to be changed at all. 

 

p.s. if russia would take stronger tanks than other soviet factions, the thing above is going to happen again. no one will take other factions in svs and the vanilla Xtank vs Xtank will continue.

[[CC] RaVaGe]

10 hours ago, dkeeton said:

There is no way a topic about balance changes is ever going to work if we get comments about what should or ought happen.

Everyone has an opinion on what and how, but we should consider what will actually work in play and how effectively.

• Will the change cause more people to play the faction?
• Will it hold out in pro play?
• Will it deviate too much from Westwood's original design?

Edited February 8, 2018 by FReQuEnZy

[[CC] RaVaGe]

31 minutes ago, Legolas said:

p.s. if russia would take stronger tanks than other soviet factions, the thing above is going to happen again. no one will take other factions in svs and the vanilla Xtank vs Xtank will continue.

Lets say the Tesla Tanks

• Good vs Battle Fortress
• Good vs Rhino 
• Good vs Grizzly
• Bad vs Mirage
• Bad vs Prism Tanks
• Bad vs Desolator
• Equal to Tank Destroyer
• Low damage vs Buildings (like grizzly)

 

Then Russia will have a unique advantage while Desolators, Terrorists, Demo Trucks can still pop Tesla Tanks similar to Prisms if properly controlled (micro).

[ZiGZaG]

Giving the option to build a tech machine shop to certain countries seems a ridiculous notion imo.

[[CC] RaVaGe]

3 hours ago, ZiGZaG said:

Giving the option to build a tech machine shop to certain countries seems a ridiculous notion imo.

Exactly what I thought, self heal on all armoured units... Impossible to balance vs that.

[Kireeek]

To simplify this thread, would people agree with these minor changes to these underused tanks and units:

 

Apocalypse Tank: Shoot on the move (Like Rhinos)

Tesla Tank: Shoot on the move (Like Rhinos)

Tank Destroyer: Range increase (Same range as Rhinos)

Tesla Trooper: Range increase

 

(Forget Yuri for now, these are changes so simple, I think most people would agree with these.)

Edited February 10, 2018 by Kireeek

[ZiGZaG]

12 hours ago, Kireeek said:

To simplify this thread, would people agree with these minor changes to these underused tanks and units:

 

Apocalypse Tank: Shoot on the move (Like Rhinos)

Tesla Tank: Shoot on the move (Like Rhinos)

Tank Destroyer: Range increase (Same range as Rhinos)

Tesla Trooper: Range increase

 

(Forget Yuri for now, these are changes so simple, I think most people would agree with these.)

Aslong as this is simply a mod like the mx map's id say seems reasonable. Dont really see the point of making these units shoot on the move though when u can just force move them.

[Ford (retired)]

I don't play YR too much anymore, but if aiming for balance, I'd suggest buffing underused units into their own specific niche.

IE. Tank Destroyers give Germany the edge in early game and allow for aggressive tactics. Maybe remove the damage penalty against Miners, give it 6.5 range so It can be useful offensive, but is slow so is bad at repositioning/retreating. Just remember TD's have 1.0x build time, while grizzly have 1.5x so it's possible to churn them out quickly already.

Tesla Tanks are hard to balance, since they are good vs infantry and tanks. So if they are equal vs rhinos $ for $, then they just make rhino's useless. I'd suggest making their strength hit-and-run or mobility based, good vs light armor instead of just buffing them to be able to win tank battles straight up, because they also neutralize fodder. They actually nerfed the Tesla Tank ROF from 60 to 75 a long time ago.

Demo Trucks are also a very hard unit to balance, either they wreck you and can't recover, or you can counter it and it's useless. The only use I've seen with them is with the Iron Curtain. It's a shame people have mixed feelings about super weapons on when I feel it allows Soviets to compete fine in the late game against Yuri and Allied factions. I think the Soviet faction is also balanced around super weapons on. Westwood nerfed these way back from 400 to 300 damage and 0.25 to 0.1 area damage.

 

People seem to overbuff units, or just increase to HP or damage when simply usability buffs go a long way (build time, turn rate, range, speed, etc.) Small buffs and playtesting is a good way to achieve a balanced game state.

[FlyingMustache]

3 hours ago, AndrewFord said:

I don't play YR too much anymore, but if aiming for balance, I'd suggest buffing underused units into their own specific niche.

IE. Tank Destroyers give Germany the edge in early game and allow for aggressive tactics. Maybe remove the damage penalty against Miners, give it 6.5 range so It can be useful offensive, but is slow so is bad at repositioning/retreating. Just remember TD's have 1.0x build time, while grizzly have 1.5x so it's possible to churn them out quickly already.

Tesla Tanks are hard to balance, since they are good vs infantry and tanks. So if they are equal vs rhinos $ for $, then they just make rhino's useless. I'd suggest making their strength hit-and-run or mobility based, good vs light armor instead of just buffing them to be able to win tank battles straight up, because they also neutralize fodder. They actually nerfed the Tesla Tank ROF from 60 to 75 a long time ago.

Demo Trucks are also a very hard unit to balance, either they wreck you and can't recover, or you can counter it and it's useless. The only use I've seen with them is with the Iron Curtain. It's a shame people have mixed feelings about super weapons on when I feel it allows Soviets to compete fine in the late game against Yuri and Allied factions. I think the Soviet faction is also balanced around super weapons on. Westwood nerfed these way back from 400 to 300 damage and 0.25 to 0.1 area damage.

 

People seem to overbuff units, or just increase to HP or damage when simply usability buffs go a long way (build time, turn rate, range, speed, etc.) Small buffs and playtesting is a good way to achieve a balanced game state.

Yeah, I can definitely agree. I've seen first hand how little changes can affect the great massively. Small changes and play testing.

[Kireeek]

7 hours ago, ZiGZaG said:

Aslong as this is simply a mod like the mx map's id say seems reasonable. Dont really see the point of making these units shoot on the move though when u can just force move them.

These units are in dire need of an upgrade, they are almost never used, even with "CTRL + SHIFT". 

Apocalypse Tanks and especially Tesla Tanks have a very, very limited application in Yuri's Revenge, their usability is hindered by the fact that they are unable to shoot units while running away, nor chase units effectively, CTRL + SHIFT does not grant the same benefits as "Shoot Move". Under CTRL + SHIFT, the tanks have to shoot, then stop, then move. "Shoot Move" is the reason Rhino Tanks outclass the more expensive and higher tier Tesla Tanks and Apocalypse Tanks. Rhino Tanks have the ability to attack units that are chasing them or vice versa, this gives Rhino Tanks a tremendous advantage over those units. If Apocalypse Tanks and Tesla Tanks HAD this ability, this would help them greatly in their mobility, while also granting them the ability to kite if on the retreat.

Apocalypse Tanks are the tier 3 equivalent of Battle Fortresses and Masterminds. They are supposed to be improved version's of Rhino Tanks, this is reflected on their status as a Battle Lab unit, with a cost almost double that of Rhino Tanks. They NEED to be better than Rhino Tanks, and should be a unit that Soviet players can see as a unit, worthy of inclusion into their armies.

In the MX maps, the Apocalypse Tanks were granted the ability to "Shoot Move", this made them much more usable. Soviet players in Supers or Non-Supers games would make these tanks because their limitation was removed. They are much, MUCH better because of "Shoot Move".

Edited February 11, 2018 by Kireeek

[ZiGZaG]

29 minutes ago, Kireeek said:

These units are in dire need of an upgrade, they are almost never used, even with "CTRL + SHIFT". 

Apocalypse Tanks and especially Tesla Tanks have a very, very limited application in Yuri's Revenge, their usability is hindered by the fact that they are unable to shoot units while running away, nor chase units effectively, CTRL + SHIFT does not grant the same benefits as "Shoot Move". Under CTRL + SHIFT, the tanks have to shoot, then stop, then move. "Shoot Move" is the reason Rhino Tanks outclass the more expensive and higher tier Tesla Tanks and Apocalypse Tanks. Rhino Tanks have the ability to attack units that are chasing them or vice versa, this gives Rhino Tanks a tremendous advantage over those units. If Apocalypse Tanks and Tesla Tanks HAD this ability, this would help them greatly in their mobility, while also granting them the ability to kite if on the retreat.

Apocalypse Tanks are the tier 3 equivalent of Battle Fortresses and Masterminds. They are supposed to be improved version's of Rhino Tanks, this is reflected on their status as a Battle Lab unit, with a cost almost double that of Rhino Tanks. They NEED to be better than Rhino Tanks, and should be a unit that Soviet players can see as a unit, worthy of inclusion into their armies.

In the MX maps, the Apocalypse Tanks were granted the ability to "Shoot Move", this made them much more usable. Soviet players in Supers or Non-Supers games would make these tanks because their limitation was removed. They are much, MUCH better because of "Shoot Move".

Rhino tanks do not outclass apocs. Not a chance in hell. Tesla yes, apocs no. Making them shoot+move seems to me that they become ridiculously o/p, its taking the slower, bulkier element away from them, which is designed that way deliberately. Remember apocs have aa aswell, they are already much better than rhino's. They arent used on mass because they are slow, not because they dont shoot on the move, incorporate some into an army of rhinos and the effect is devestating in both sva and svs

 

Tesla tanks are designed for use when camping or breaking camp, they are already extremely effective at this, place a wall infront of em and watch em go. On a map like Stormy Weather/Hidden Valley tesla tanks are incredible. They could probably use a slight range boost but apart from that their fine. Just because very few players use units the way they are intended doesnt mean the units are weak, it just means the player base is.

[FlyingMustache]

6 minutes ago, ZiGZaG said:

Tesla tanks are designed for use when camping or breaking camp, they are already extremely effective at this, place a wall infront of em and watch em go. On a map like Stormy Weather/Hidden Valley tesla tanks are incredible. They could probably use a slight range boost but apart from that their fine. Just because very few players use units the way they are intended doesnt mean the units are weak, it just means the player base is.

They're incredible there? lol That's a bold claim seeing as there's no evidence of this. No video of those maps has them being used, even while they're supposed to be "incredible" there. I say that's a baloney claim.

Edited February 11, 2018 by FlyingMustache

[ZiGZaG]

1 minute ago, FlyingMustache said:

They're incredible there? lol That's a bold claim seeing as there's no evidence of this. No video of those maps has them being used, even while they're supposed to be "incredible" there.

play me 1v1 sov v sov or sva and ill show you, we can make a video if it makes you happy. Tesla and apocs are not supposed to be main units, they are supposed to incorporated with main units, when this is done they are extremely effective. You seem to think everything needs to be on video for it to true, i think you just lack experience and ability.

[FlyingMustache]

3 minutes ago, ZiGZaG said:

play me 1v1 sov v sov or sva and ill show you, we can make a video if it makes you happy. Tesla and apocs are not supposed to be main units, they are supposed to incorporated with main units, when this is done they are extremely effective. You seem to think everything needs to be on video for it to true, i think you just lack experience and ability.

Ok. Also, apocs are not supposed to be main units? Where does it say this? And rhino are? Where does it say this as well? This is simply your opinion, no basis.

[Kireeek]

6 minutes ago, ZiGZaG said:

Rhino tanks do not outclass apocs. Not a chance in hell. Tesla yes, apocs no. Making them shoot+move seems to me that they become ridiculously o/p, its taking the slower, bulkier element away from them, which is designed that way deliberately. Remember apocs have aa aswell, they are already much better than rhino's. They arent used on mass because they are slow, not because they dont shoot on the move, incorporate some into an army of rhinos and the effect is devestating in both sva and svs

 

Tesla tanks are designed for use when camping or breaking camp, they are already extremely effective at this, place a wall infront of em and watch em go. On a map like Stormy Weather/Hidden Valley tesla tanks are incredible. They could probably use a slight range boost but apart from that their fine. Just because very few players use units the way they are intended doesnt mean the units are weak, it just means the player base is.

There's barely been any player that uses Apocs aside from myself. Soviet players will not be making Apocs, especially Soviets vs Allies in tier 3 late game. By making Apocs, the Soviet player is deliberately handicapping themselves against late game Allies. For the price of one Apoc, you can make two Rhinos that can catch Battle Fortresses and overrun an Allied army along with Desolators. Apocalypse Tanks are DEFINITELY better than Rhinos in terms of utility, power and health however, because of their inability to "shoot move" for such an expensive unit,  it isn't worth building these tanks in Yuri's Revenge. They are too easily harassed and require too much micromanagement to make them of any use. This weakness is not on the Battle Fortress or Mastermind.

[ZiGZaG]

37 minutes ago, FlyingMustache said:

Ok. Also, apocs are not supposed to be main units? Where does it say this? And rhino are? Where does it say this as well? This is simply your opinion, no basis.

Apocs are tier 3 unit's 'the soviet ultimate tank' 'war in a can' quotes directly from the campaign. if you dont understand the difference between a main unit e.g. rhino, grizzly compared with a heavy unit e.g. apoc, bf then you are more clueless than i believed. This is why your mod sucks, you dont understand the game in the slightest, If they where supposed to be the main unit's you would have them much earlier in game. This isnt an opinion, this is years of experience and basic common sense, i think you should go play the campaign's and actually listen to what it teaches you. You'll probably learn a thing or two.

 

33 minutes ago, Kireeek said:

There's barely been any player that uses Apocs aside from myself. Soviet players will not be making Apocs, especially Soviets vs Allies in tier 3 late game. By making Apocs, the Soviet player is deliberately handicapping themselves against late game Allies. For the price of one Apoc, you can make two Rhinos that can catch Battle Fortresses and overrun an Allied army along with Desolators. Apocalypse Tanks are DEFINITELY better than Rhinos in terms of utility, power and health however, because of their inability to "shoot move" for such an expensive unit,  it isn't worth building these tanks in Yuri's Revenge. They are too easily harassed and require too much micromanagement to make them of any use. This weakness is not on the Battle Fortress or Mastermind.

There is no inability to shoot+move it works with ctrl+shift this isnt 'micro-intensive' its holding 2 more buttons while you click. What your trying to do is completely change the purpose/design of these units to suit your desires, comparing there weakness's with a battle fortress/mastermind is ridiculous. a major weakness of a standard bf is a sentry gun, i dont see apocs having that issue? you gonna make them weak vs pillboxes aswell? 4 conscripts beat a mastermind on its own, shall we make 4 conscripts own an apoc?

You can also make 10 apoc instead of 20 rhino which will do much more damage vs mirage. We can play scenario's all day, knowing how and when to use a unit comes down to experience.

Edited February 11, 2018 by ZiGZaG

[FlyingMustache]

13 minutes ago, ZiGZaG said:

Apocs are tier 3 unit's the soviet ultimate tank if you will, if you dont understand the difference between a main unit e.g. rhino, grizzly compared with a heavy unit e.g. apoc, bf then you are more clueless than i believed. This is why your mod sucks, you dont understand the game in the slightest, If they where supposed to be the main unit's you would have them much earlier in game. This isnt an opinion, this is years of experience and basic common sense, i think you should go play the campaign's and actually listen to what it teaches you. You'll probably learn a thing or two.

 

There is no inability to shoot+move it works with ctrl+shift this isnt 'micro-intensive' its holding 2 more buttons while you click. What your trying to do is completely change the purpose/design of these units to suit your desires, comparing there weakness's with a battle fortress/mastermind is ridiculous. a major weakness of a standard bf is a sentry gun, i dont see apocs having that issue? you gonna make them weak vs pillboxes aswell? 4 conscripts beat a mastermind on its own, shall we make 4 conscripts own an apoc?

You can also make 10 apoc instead of 20 rhino which will do much more damage vs mirage. We can play scenario's all day, knowing how and when to use a unit comes down to experience.

The best part of this post is that you have no idea what opinion is. EVERYTHING you typed is opinion. Personal experience is anecdotal. There's no source where you derive this from.

Also, four conscripts will only beat a mastermind if you don't touch your mouse. Don't be absurd, input matters. Don't make foolish claims like this and expect to be taken seriously.

We understand this game and how it works. Also, resorting to personal attacks shows that you can't debate either.

Edited February 11, 2018 by FlyingMustache

[Kireeek]

57 minutes ago, ZiGZaG said:

Apocs are tier 3 unit's 'the soviet ultimate tank' 'war in a can' quotes directly from the campaign. if you dont understand the difference between a main unit e.g. rhino, grizzly compared with a heavy unit e.g. apoc, bf then you are more clueless than i believed. This is why your mod sucks, you dont understand the game in the slightest, If they where supposed to be the main unit's you would have them much earlier in game. This isnt an opinion, this is years of experience and basic common sense, i think you should go play the campaign's and actually listen to what it teaches you. You'll probably learn a thing or two.

 

There is no inability to shoot+move it works with ctrl+shift this isnt 'micro-intensive' its holding 2 more buttons while you click. What your trying to do is completely change the purpose/design of these units to suit your desires, comparing there weakness's with a battle fortress/mastermind is ridiculous. a major weakness of a standard bf is a sentry gun, i dont see apocs having that issue? you gonna make them weak vs pillboxes aswell? 4 conscripts beat a mastermind on its own, shall we make 4 conscripts own an apoc?

You can also make 10 apoc instead of 20 rhino which will do much more damage vs mirage. We can play scenario's all day, knowing how and when to use a unit comes down to experience.

This isn't for me, this is for the game. Also, you need to cease with your ad hominem attacks, we're simply having a discussion with regards to these units, keep it civil. 

Apocalypse Tanks may be decent against Mirage Tanks however, add Battle Fortresses into the mix and those Apocs are as good as dead. Why is it that when Allies and Yuri go to the Battle Lab, all of their Battle Lab level units are used? In pretty much every game for Soviets, it will always be Rhino Tanks, while Apocalypse Tanks are relegated to mostly Soviet on Soviet battles. At this point, it is clear that Apocalypse Tanks are lacking, I'm fairly certain that Apocalypse Tanks were intended by the developer to be used every game, otherwise why add a unit with a very limited application? Apocalypse Tanks are meant to be used, its like you said this is "the ultimate Soviet Tank" however, there's nothing "ultimate" about these units if most people never build them. They just don't offer enough benefits to warrant building an army of these tanks. Rhino Tanks, in most scenarios will always be the better tank.

Once again, CTRL+SHIFT is not the same as "shoot move", it is much simpler to control your armies if they auto fire, as there is no need for an additional command to get them to fire. This is again, the reason Rhinos are superior. By having one less command to initiate, the player is free to micromanage their armies during a battle. For example, whenever I send my Rhino Tanks to battle an opposing army, the first Rhino in the line of fire is immediately directed towards the back of the line, I repeat this step of rotating my units, in order to minimize my losses, attempting this with units while using CTRL+SHIFT is difficult, even more so if you are chasing an army.

Edited February 11, 2018 by Kireeek