Jump to content

Should Multi-engineering be forced on in Yuri's Revenge Competitive Games?


Grant
 Share

Should Multi-engineering be forced on in Yuri's Revenge Competitive Games?  

23 members have voted

  1. 1. Force Multi-engineer on in Quick Match Competitive games? (It will force the player use multiple engineers to capture a building instead of 1)

    • Yes
      10
    • No
      13


Recommended Posts

I can go either way on this one. Personally, engi-rushing has never been a big problem for me to stop.

However, I voted "YES" to multi-engi on. There's 15 years of complaints from players supporting a consensus that dislikes the idea of being engi-rushed. I want to see what happens when it's not a possible tactic. 

I've never considered seal or Tanya rushing to be lame, or even ivan-rushing as lame. The reason is because those units require advanced tech and thus more $$$ up front making it that much easier to stop as you have more time to fend off against them.

I also don't think that this makes yuri that much more difficult as others have stated. I always found yuri amazingly difficult to engi rush against as they often build a gattling tank early to scout and have it around to stop engis+drones. For me, engi rushing against yuri was a waste of time unless I walked it in in the first 1 minute. Once yuri has a magnetron out, engi rushing is useless against them. 

 

I think this is a simple solution to the lamest tactic in the game of immediate engi rush. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/25/2018 at 10:44 PM, FlyingMustache said:

Soviets can ivan the enemy allied players lol

lol, radar isn't viable early game, most soviet won't even make a radar until you make a lab,

Edited by ZAIN
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, ZAIN said:

Terrible idea lol, you can tanya and seal me, and i can't engi you back, those settings are for ffg's and let it be with ffgs , 

With multi-eng Allies would effectively lose the ability to engineer because IFVs can carry only 1 engineer. On the other hand, 1 Flak Track could hold all 3 engineers needed to take a building.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, dkeeton said:

With multi-eng Allies would effectively lose the ability to engineer because IFVs can carry only 1 engineer. On the other hand, 1 Flak Track could hold all 3 engineers needed to take a building.

who the hell will make 4 engi to capture mcv lol, it is too much economy loss.

9 hours ago, RaVaGe said:

It's okay, Zain is just a mid level player. ;)

you don't have any top ten rank since, 2-3 month, i guess it's you who is low tier player, 

11 hours ago, FlyingMustache said:

That's not true. Soviets often make radar to counter afc paras. 

2 flaks > paradrop 

how the hell you guys can compare ivan and seal? ivan can't kill mcv, sw, while seal is freewin if you distract properly.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, ZAIN said:

try play me with "rhinotanks" if you win series i will quit qming for a month. deal ?

You have to be Allied or Yuri if you guys do this competition.

Also, Ivan can totally be compared to seal. It has pros and cons when compared to it. It can kill multiple oils without dying to one. It can create bomb tracks. It has no calling card. It is cheaper by $400. It can more quickly target multiple buildings.

It can definitely be compared.

Edited by FlyingMustache
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, FlyingMustache said:

You have to be Allied or Yuri if you guys do this competition.

Also, Ivan can totally be compared to seal. It has pros and cons when compared to it. It can kill multiple oils without dying to one. It can create bomb tracks. It has no calling card. It is cheaper by $400. It can more quickly target multiple buildings.

It can definitely be compared.

i did beat martin as allied in a shitty ass soviet map lol last time i matched him, why i have to be allied or yuri lol ? when i can win him as soviet easily,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, ZAIN said:

i did beat martin as allied in a shitty ass soviet map lol last time i matched him, why i have to be allied or yuri lol ? when i can win him as soviet easily,

To truly refute the topic at hand. Your gripe is of an AvS scenario. (Seals vs rhinos) Why the hell would you go SvS to demonstrate your perception of this scenario? Go Allied, forget Yuri. Go Allied against his Soviet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, FlyingMustache said:

To truly refute the topic at hand. Your gripe is of an AvS scenario. (Seals vs rhinos) Why the hell would you go SvS to demonstrate your perception of this scenario? Go Allied, forget Yuri. Go Allied against his Soviet.

sure, i can try that, but i won't claim my bet then , if he can go soviet vs my soviet, i will stand by my words ;) 

Edited by ZAIN
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a better idea:

Insert a qm checkbox where player can turn on "no engi" before they were matched. If both player have checked this box, the game will start with multi-engi, if one players has this box unchecked, the game starts without multi-engi.

The best example is the user heldro. This discussion i regonize since the game has releases.... buuh, engi is cheap, engi is weak, no skill... bla bla. The same discussion we have about yuri, spy, sov rush, ivan, miner kill, chrono leg, battle fortress, super weapons... and so on. To be honest, i also complain about engis 15 years ago. But why its the case? Because players has to fokus on it, its called skill. If someone engi, defend it or engi back or whatever. At least, think about it and dont complain, even though a engi hurts in some games. But also strange tanke battles where you lost hurts. Or some lucky movements against supers or whatever. This is called competitive gaming.

Its not skilled if you complain about something what is not in your favor. Learn to deal with it. Complainig is about things which are not "overpowered" or a "cheat/bug" is a strong weakness in competitive gaming. Therefore i highly recommend a "management board", where 1-2 top players (frequently changed), experienced gamers and admins decide about frequent patches. Whats the advantage? The advantage is, that the META-GAME is changing continously (not by huge steps, but a little bit). Maybe sometimes we reach a perfect state, but i dont think so.

But only because some players dont like the engi mechanics, why we should abolish it? Whats is the next step? Some people dont like rushing so we implement a 10 min attack barrier? Thats something for FFA-games. Competitive means handling all facets of the game (except cheats, bugs or other illegal things).

If you want to make some competitive changes (balance changes), create a management board which ist responsible for the balance changes. The community is absolut biased of a 17 year old static META-GAME. This is the way of success and a attractive future. Maybe, if RA2/YR gets remastered, this kind of trial and error patch framework could be a role model funtion for the developers, but this is a other topic.

Edited by reflexion
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...