Jump to content

Rocket soldier


Bananas
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Moderator
Rocket soldiers are really strong right now. They rival a PIC/Railgun in damage to vehicles.

I would say decrease the damage by a slight amount and increase the time for lock on to occur.

Also removing the extra swap time from rocket launcher to other weapons would be a nice change.

I like their damage, as it doesn't transfer to infantry well, has less total ammo and fires at half(?) the rate. The swap would be fun if anything not to have anymore but that might be a limitation of the weapon's animation keeping it unswitchable after firing for so long or while/after reloading.

Basically, it plays a vital role which is why it should cost but always be available as well. However, I can see it getting 10% damage nerf. Just not much else. Slight price increase?

Rather gunner get changed more (or both), than I really care for rocket soldier. Also cared to see a thread about Officer more than this. Haha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree. They are good as they are right now. Its 5hits to kill flyer, arty, mrls. Its 5x3s? 15s is good time if you imagine that your targer can run or kill you if he wills.

Its problem of railguns which should be adjusted to destroy vehicles +- in same time as rocket soldier do and should have another benefits, like I suggested before-bigger beam/thicker projectile so it would be easier to hit anything.

What I wanted to say is, that this is PIC/Railgun problem, not Rocket soldiers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator
I disagree. They are good as they are right now. Its 5hits to kill flyer, arty, mrls. Its 5x3s? 15s is good time if you imagine that your targer can run or kill you if he wills.

Its problem of railguns which should be adjusted to destroy vehicles +- in same time as rocket soldier do and should have another benefits, like I suggested before-bigger beam/thicker projectile so it would be easier to hit anything.

What I wanted to say is, that this is PIC/Railgun problem, not Rocket soldiers.

I want to agree with you, just so they buff pic/rail with larger projectile, and make that shtuff insane.

It would be way OP though. But dem Kamehamehas. Jus do it in honor of the new Dragonball Super coming out.

Honestly, the PIC/Rail is fine, if not just a little lackluster with all 3 1k units being a lot more situation rather than omnipotent. The 150-350 units are most useful. I like that to be honest. At the same time, maybe they should be a lot worse at what they weren't meant for so the 1k units can shine at being generally good at all.

This is my only problem with the rocket soldier. I have no problem with it, other than the 1k units don't feel worth it anymore. I still don't want to change the rocket soldier though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Developer

I'm just going to re-iterate it: why on Earth did they DOUBLE buff the Rocket Soldier. They upped its damage to make it 6 hit kill on light vehicles with 400hp, which was good. From 8 hits to 6 was a buff... from 8 hits to FIVE was ridiculous. The only thing limiting the Rocket Soldier is their ammo count, and one could argue their ability to really kill infantry (which a Carbine breaks anyway). That's to say nothing about the fact that it does roughly the same damage to heavy armour, meaning the $225 Rocket soldier is a better choice for defending a base from range, whilst only somewhat losing out to the tier 2 options at mid-range. Don't even get me started on the PIC... I campaigned for it to get a reasonable buff, just for it to suddenly get completely overshadowed again.

The launcher definitely doesn't need to go back to being 55 damage all around, but it could definitely stand to go back to the FIRST buff statistics from B4 testing. 75 Damage to light armour and around 65-70 for heavy armour.

Seriously, we've broken the tier system entirely. The PIC/Railgun DO NOT need a buff in any way, except possiby range to compensate fro the tank range buff from b2 to b3. They're already powerful, especially if more than 1 of them is on the field at any given moment. As to why you would need to give them a bigger projectile is beyond me. They're a point and click, hit-scan adventure... if you missed well...you just missed.

P.S The Rocket launcher and the PIC have roughly the same rate of fire.

TL;DR : You should already know my stance on the rocket launcher. Dat ish got BROKE. A rocket soldier and a carbine/tib-weapon is the only offensive infantry you really need anymore to go after vehicles. Maybe use a Lolficcer every now and then to fight off Artillery.

STL;DR: Rocket soldier needs that damage scaled back from 80/75 to 75/65

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm torn with this one. I think that the rocket launcher does too much damage for how little it costs, relatively. But, it's one of the very few anti-air weapons that nod is able to possess (and GDI without a WF). I really think that if the rocket launcher is to be nerfed (which it should), something else needs to be buffed to be better anti-air. Renegade had these be the ramjets. I'm not opposed to buffing the ramjets to do 75% damage from the current 45% they do per clip to apaches/orcas.

Basically, the rocket launcher needs a nerf, but only if another weapon is buffed in a way to deal with anti-air better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rocket soldier feels fine. They don't burst because their rocket is a projectile vs. the pic/railgun being hitscan. They do shit to infantry (unless you get a lucky lucky headshot). Their projectile is dodge-able through corner play while in vehicles. They have very low field time (limited ammo). Who cares if they deal "too much" damage to vehicles per rocket. Repair it? They SHOULD obliterate light armor vehicles, it's what their class is made to do.

Rocket solider counters light vehicles, does good against heavy armor vehicles, and is hard countered by infantry. Sounds like he fits the role fine to me.

Is this why all the noobs are being rocket soldiers lately? Because they think he's broken? I got new for you: Vehicle + repair + sniper >>>>>> rocket soldiers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

STL;DR: Rocket soldier needs that damage scaled back from 80/75 to 75/65

That's all I'm suggesting too. Just a small damage nerf and a slight increase on the time it takes to lock on. It shouldn't be anything to make rocket soldiers terrible.

Basically, the rocket launcher needs a nerf, but only if another weapon is buffed in a way to deal with anti-air better.

Even with a slight nerf, rocket soldier will do fine against air. Most things in the game do fine against air. I don't think we should go back to relying on a single op anti air unit. Instead, air units could probably use an hp nerf of maybe 25-50 or so.

I wanted to say is, that this is PIC/Railgun problem

No. Railgun/PIC is probably the weapon with the most potential in the game right now. It still one shots free infantry, can kill any infantry in the game with a headshot, wrecks light armor, hurts heavy armor a lot, and it's hitscan. There's nothing wrong with the gun. The only thing I think the class could use is something to make them more resistant to vehicles. I think yosh mentioned splash damage reduction before which would be awesome.

1k characters are just overshadowed right now by how strong the early game units are. Why buy a 1k when officer or rocket soldier will cover all your needs? Or just buy a hotty + tib flechette and you are as strong as a mobius while being able to do other things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't think that there's many units that can efficiently counter air units. The rocket soldier is probably overall the best infantry unit vs them, with its range and homing missiles, added in with its extensive damage per shot. Nerfing that would mean less anti-air efficient infantry units. I do agree that it needs a nerf, but something really should be buffed while this is nerfed, in order to deal with apaches/orcas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Developer
No. Railgun/PIC is probably the weapon with the most potential in the game right now. It still one shots free infantry, can kill any infantry in the game with a headshot, wrecks light armor, hurts heavy armor a lot, and it's hitscan. There's nothing wrong with the gun. The only thing I think the class could use is something to make them more resistant to vehicles. I think yosh mentioned splash damage reduction before which would be awesome.

Quote for truth. The PIC is probably the sole weapon that feels like it no longer needs to be touched (aside from maybe range as stated earlier).

The problem is people whined about tier 1 infantry being just barely better than the free classes...and that's kind of how they were supposed to be.

Is this why all the noobs are being rocket soldiers lately? Because they think he's broken? I got new for you: Vehicle + repair + sniper >>>>>> rocket soldiers.

Umm, well that was a stupid point to bring up. Repairs on vehicles + snipers basically counters any infantry not in mass... so that was pointless. It also only takes 2+ Rocket soldiers to overpower the repairs of a single Technician, which is the same number it takes for the PIC.

does good against heavy armor vehicles

No, it does outright great vs. heavy armour ESPECIALLY for just $225 and being around without a Barracks. Couple that with infinite* range and the problems only get compounded. The PIC may be hit-scan, but also becomes useless outside of like 70 yards.

I really don't think that there's many units that can efficiently counter air units. The rocket soldier is probably overall the best infantry unit vs them, with its range and homing missiles, added in with its extensive damage per shot. Nerfing that would mean less anti-air efficient infantry units. I do agree that it needs a nerf, but something really should be buffed while this is nerfed, in order to deal with apaches/orcas.

Yet again, people are acting like we're asking to push it back to how it was, when in reality we're just asking it to go back to being a choice as opposed to basically the best choice for the money ALWAYS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yet again, people are acting like we're asking to push it back to how it was, when in reality we're just asking it to go back to being a choice as opposed to basically the best choice for the money ALWAYS.

That's quite the assumption to jump to. I'm not acting like that at all. I just personally see the apache/orca as too powerful right now, not because they are overly strong weapon wise, but merely because of a lack of units able to counter them. One of the very few weapons that can counter them needs a nerf. So I really believe that something else needs to be more efficient against apaches/orcas from an infantry stand-point. I've thought this even before the rocket soldier is up for debate on being nerfed, but it just is even more prevalent now that the nerf debate is taking place. Again, I do also believe that the rocket soldier does indeed a nerf, but just included with a buff to another weapon that can be anti-air.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator

I am entering dangerous territory here. But how about we just increase the price of McFarland, Officer, and Rocket Soldier, and Chem Troop, to around 300-350? Oh, and remove rockets lock on infantry? I only ever have problem as infantry against rockets, if the rockets are across maps with height advantage, read:Walls.

Besides, the shotgun and grenadier are top tier and still free, so the other question, is why don't we make 1k classes 800? They are 2x more than 500 snipers and can never be worth it without being stupid strong. 800 is a great price for them in retrospect.

Lastly, if the rocket soldier lost damage or fire rate, the damage likely has to go back to sniper based weapons again. At least, a bit more to marksman and a bit more to ramjet. For the cost, 500 doesn't entirely need AA capability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but merely because of a lack of units able to counter them. One of the very few weapons that can counter them needs a nerf. So I really believe that something else needs to be more efficient against apaches/orcas from an infantry stand-point.

This.. The thing is though that lots of guns are semi-capable, its just that people in general dont really think of using them. Carbine, autorifle, heavy pistol and even marksman etc.. If 3 people used any of these at the same time then the orcas HP will drop fast enough for it to have to retreat.

But alas i always find myself being the only one frantically emptying weak shots on flyers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Developer
but merely because of a lack of units able to counter them. One of the very few weapons that can counter them needs a nerf. So I really believe that something else needs to be more efficient against apaches/orcas from an infantry stand-point.

This.. The thing is though that lots of guns are semi-capable, its just that people in general dont really think of using them. Carbine, autorifle, heavy pistol and even marksman etc.. If 3 people used any of these at the same time then the orcas HP will drop fast enough for it to have to retreat.

But alas i always find myself being the only one frantically emptying weak shots on flyers.

This is the primary reason we went ahead with letting so many gun weapons be hit-scan. We were drawing away the Ramjet being the only real good AA infantry weapon by letting the Officer and other weapons be dangerous toward Orcas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but merely because of a lack of units able to counter them. One of the very few weapons that can counter them needs a nerf. So I really believe that something else needs to be more efficient against apaches/orcas from an infantry stand-point.

This.. The thing is though that lots of guns are semi-capable, its just that people in general dont really think of using them. Carbine, autorifle, heavy pistol and even marksman etc.. If 3 people used any of these at the same time then the orcas HP will drop fast enough for it to have to retreat.

But alas i always find myself being the only one frantically emptying weak shots on flyers.

This is the primary reason we went ahead with letting so many gun weapons be hit-scan. We were drawing away the Ramjet being the only real good AA infantry weapon by letting the Officer and other weapons be dangerous toward Orcas.

I think the attraction to weapons that are good AA are that they can shoot then hide. Having to remain out in the open against an apache or orca is very dangerous, and so people don't generally do it unless they are already inside of the base. Apaches and orcas are fast and kill infantry pretty fast. People don't want to waste their purchase by having to stay out in the open to fire. That's where the attraction to the rocket soldier and ramjet vs air vehicles is strong. And I think that's why it'd be better if the ramjet were buffed vs them for this reason (not quite Renegade level where 5 shots kills one, but at least where 1 clip does 60% damage).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, here's a little something that should give you food for thought:

Please note that the missiles do not slow down mid-air, and therefore is not able to turn in extreme angles. The same principle applies with every homing missile. Make it impossible for homing missiles to change their speed mid-air, thus decreasing it's turning speed, allowing enemies to dodge enemy missiles more easily.

So, what do you guys think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

With the most recent update, I feel as if the rocket soldier was nerfed too much. I understand the decrease in damage to infantry because that was present in most of the older C&C games but I feel like they should deal a bit more damage to vehicles than the grenadier considering how the rocket soldier is a priced unit. In terms of the lock on range, I feel like it's too short of a distance (especially on maps like Whiteout). I've tried base defense from to point of the respective base wall and the crosshairs can't get a lock on the aircraft bombarding the base's Hand of Nod or the base's War Factory. If a rocket soldier can't perform its main purpose of anti-air support, then it defeats the purpose of the unit.

To balance out the damage rate on vehicles, maybe rockets can only lock onto air units but not ground units. It would seem fitting that the rockets need a lock on for fast moving aircraft but not on slow moving land vehicles. In the case of the RTS C&C games(Tiberian Dawn, Tiberian Sun, Red Alert 1), the rocket should inflict more damage to aircraft than it would to ground units.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator

It is due a slightly faster lock on than now, but longer than old lock on.

Besides that, it does plenty of steady damage from safety. You can't say a grenadier it a steady source of tank damage, it is either a sacrifice unit or a very frequent peck and run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didnt read all posts.

Rocket soldier was absolutely SWEET before you broke it. He perfectly fit's into the dynamic of game. And now he is just boring. And it's not only about RS, it's about all characters, about whole game system.

I see your way of thinking this way:

"Lets make a super cool game full of action, explosions, flying asses and the intestines! Wait wait.. this need to be more like old renegade.. And this need's to be more realistic.. nooo I dont like, how freely can players play and decide without team-lets limit them!"

-limit airstrikes, limit ammo, limit longevity on battlefield, limit mines, very limit range of weapons (mega nonsence)-limit dynamic of the game! oh my god and this invisible walls everywhere!

I don't care about there are new vehicles now, I don't care it's reborn of old REN. Even through I am big fun of C&C series, I am not going to play it just becouse of that. As soon as players realise, that there is only few things you can rly do, and game has phases, very few phases, it's starts to be boring.

I want use my airstrikes anytime I want and anywhere I want, move freely, use my stuff's freely, I want what is promised in trailer's, I want dynamic gameplay.

And I am not writing only for myself. I am writing for whole comunity who requires this. (There is not playing only few ppl just becouse the game is unknown, but becouse it is "washy, wishy").

SO PLEASE! Bring back Rocket soldier like he was in B4 at least! and make the game more dynamic way, full of action, explosions, feels of no limits (its very important part of any good game), flying asses and intestines (not in gore meaning).

I wonder what are you planning to realease in full game..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Developer
I didnt read all posts.

Rocket soldier was absolutely SWEET before you broke it. He perfectly fit's into the dynamic of game. And now he is just boring. And it's not only about RS, it's about all characters, about whole game system.

I see your way of thinking this way:

"Lets make a super cool game full of action, explosions, flying asses and the intestines! Wait wait.. this need to be more like old renegade.. And this need's to be more realistic.. nooo I dont like, how freely can players play and decide without team-lets limit them!"

-limit airstrikes, limit ammo, limit longevity on battlefield, limit mines, very limit range of weapons (mega nonsence)-limit dynamic of the game! oh my god and this invisible walls everywhere!

I don't care about there are new vehicles now, I don't care it's reborn of old REN. Even through I am big fun of C&C series, I am not going to play it just becouse of that. As soon as players realise, that there is only few things you can rly do, and game has phases, very few phases, it's starts to be boring.

I want use my airstrikes anytime I want and anywhere I want, move freely, use my stuff's freely, I want what is promised in trailer's, I want dynamic gameplay.

And I am not writing only for myself. I am writing for whole comunity who requires this. (There is not playing only few ppl just becouse the game is unknown, but becouse it is "washy, wishy").

SO PLEASE! Bring back Rocket soldier like he was in B4 at least! and make the game more dynamic way, full of action, explosions, feels of no limits (its very important part of any good game), flying asses and intestines (not in gore meaning).

I wonder what are you planning to realease in full game..

Umm.. there are limits on things to make them balanced and not game-breaking. Trust me, it's far less fun to deal with 18 airstrikes back-to-back than probably anything in the game... save like.. snipers.

The Rocket soldier will get his day, but definitely not going back to B4 where he was basically better than the PIC and Patch.. and everyone else

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There wouldn't be any limitations if certain "problems"/things were solved differently than just copying them from original.

Well, I am glad that RS will be buffed somehow. Ty for the quick reply.

Cya in final version of the game.

Are you implying by that that the only thing you liked about the game were Rocket Soldiers? If so, could you please explain a little as to why this is so? Why do you think 'copying' certain aspects of the old game must be a bad thing? I could see why you'd say such a thing, but some extra feedback would be nice so we can see these 'issues' from diffrent aspects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason why I loved RS so much is, that he was doing his role very well. This character presented "how do I think" this game should look like. Dynamic, strong, enjoyable. He was doing his job, nothing more. Simple character without need of any other special benefits. Also Perfect as co-driver or buggy driver.

I didnt wanted to write much about this, becouse developers are already working on release of final game. They got plan and an clear vision of how this game should look like. So there is nothing what ca stop them...

OK LET'S START CRYING!

The Rocket soldier will get his day, but definitely not going back to B4 where he was basically better than the PIC and Patch

My opinion on this was always: Buff PIC and Patch and let RS be. Make them special in something else.

Why do you think 'copying' certain aspects of the old game must be a bad thing?

It's not bad. But it's also not good becouse many people in the games mainly appreciates freedom, freedom to make decisions and movement freedom.

Invisible walls: I am not saying that all invisible walls should be removed, but they simply should not feel so much limiting. If I see clear path behind rock so I want go there.. but.. but i can't! I would feel much more free if there was placed mega wall or crashed tank. (it's just feel of freedom. Playing with minds so players could feel comfortable).

Airstrikes If I bought it for 700c I want to use it freely. It's nothing gamebreaking. It worked fine before. Great antisniper, antitank thing. Or simply make that airstrike could'nt be placed on same location 2 times in shorter time than 30seconds.

Mines: mines are very limiting. It does not limit just one player, but the whole team. I tried discuss about it not such a long time ago. Nobody was interested in discussion and finding solution. If mine system stay as it is now, there would never be more than 2 full servers...ever.

As I said, the game is not unknown. Many youtubers did gameplay videos with 10k-150k-???K views on this.

And there is much more thing that I think should be reworked. But I'd rather not mention them, becouse local nostalgic tribesmen would bite my head off!

I think there should be an experimental server.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see it as crying... See it as doing the community a good service by providing them with valuable information regarding important game aspects! And at least I can see better where you're coming from ;)

Your vision of the game is just fine, and if it wasn't, everyone has the right to have their own opinion :P . Let's start off with what i agree with, which is how some map borders are closed off with invisible walls, it indeed does the map feel a lot smaller. And i would like to see some more testing on whether some of the infantry only paths need to be infantry only, like the top of the hill on under. The trees there alone already should provide a lot of cover for infantry.

What i still don't agree about however is your opinion on weapon balance. And i know how you frel about it, because i sometimes felt the same. I'm not really sure on how i should explain this, but i'll give it an attempt.

I used to play Red Alert: A Path Beyond for a while some time ago. And the developers there had a peculiar way to balance weapons and vehicles there. Some units were so powerful that it could barely be matched in it's own way. Instead of balancing that unit, the developers wanted to hold on to what made that unit so great and instead buffed another unit to made it a more viable counter. The problem here is that it does fix that specific balance issue for a specific unit, but not for others, which makes you end up with units with amazing powers but enormous weak points, which also need balancing. You could go on forever to balance these new issues. It works, but requires a lot of work and creates a bit too many gimmicks and stuff.

From what i feel so far, the developers have been trying to avoid this by avoiding overpowered units overall. Sometimes people do go too far and make it kind of weak, but easier to nerf once than to buff multiple times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator

I won't lie, I too kinda wish 1k infantry could be 800 or just be stronger."

I wouldn't mind if PIC/Rail had 4 shots that fired faster, with a slower reload, just for the high burst damage.

I wouldn't mind the exact opposite for the Ramjet, be single shot but the reload between be rather fast so it can consistently fire round after round.

In comparison to the 500 sniper that gets 4 shots without dropping scoping but has that long reload.

The volt is already pretty ok given it's range and it's longer secondary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Developer

Or.... we ... just... build a tech tree. That way things can GET Overpowered through progression.. but would also not be that overpowered in comparison to things around them that also are progressing. Basically just let everything slowly differentiate itself a bit more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tech tree sounds interesting. How do you imagine it?

I see it the way there would be 3 trees-Balanced, Defensive, and Ofensive tree. In the end of each tree would be special ability for specialization and you must open some improvements before you reach it. While you are leveling, you will get tech/progress points. You can use this points to upgrade yourself. You can get as much points just to reach special ability +2-3 point's so you can use them in other tree.

Defensive would be ofc +hp (+50%->+100%->150%), +armor, in the end of tree "regenerateable armor", +25, +50, +75HP to your vehicle, absorbing explosion damage 10,20,30% etc...

Ofensive-increased range 20, 40, 60%, increased explosion radius for any explosive weapon 10,20,30%, decreased lock on time, more ammo, increased fire rate 3, 7, 11% aaand special ability could be perma airstrike with cd 1minute aaand infinite ammo...

balanced.. something with sprint stamina regeneration, +20, +40, +60%hp (i know its in defensive tree (supertank with maximum of 310hp?), sprint stamina increased, more ammo, tanks speed...

And you know what I mean. And you would be able to reset your tech points anytime (or only in main menu).

Ofc weapons shoud be rebalanced then, and it's much of work around it. Weapons would be buyable at terminal. Then there could be added cosmetical shop to buy skins for your character for real money. Some futuristic armor or classic character skins like a Havoc etc.. for 2.5-3-5$. You can collect them.

It's just couple of ideas throwen away. Ignore it if you dont like it. I dont think tech tree is much necessary.

I'd still like to know how do you imagine your tech tree Yosh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Developer
Tech tree sounds interesting. How do you imagine it?

I see it the way there would be 3 trees-Balanced, Defensive, and Ofensive tree. In the end of each tree would be special ability for specialization and you must open some improvements before you reach it. While you are leveling, you will get tech/progress points. You can use this points to upgrade yourself. You can get as much points just to reach special ability +2-3 point's so you can use them in other tree.

Defensive would be ofc +hp (+50%->+100%->150%), +armor, in the end of tree "regenerateable armor", +25, +50, +75HP to your vehicle, absorbing explosion damage 10,20,30% etc...

Ofensive-increased range 20, 40, 60%, increased explosion radius for any explosive weapon 10,20,30%, decreased lock on time, more ammo, increased fire rate 3, 7, 11% aaand special ability could be perma airstrike with cd 1minute aaand infinite ammo...

balanced.. something with sprint stamina regeneration, +20, +40, +60%hp (i know its in defensive tree (supertank with maximum of 310hp?), sprint stamina increased, more ammo, tanks speed...

And you know what I mean. And you would be able to reset your tech points anytime (or only in main menu).

Sounds interesting, maybe we should discuss this on a brand new topic

Ofc weapons shoud be rebalanced then, and it's much of work around it. Weapons would be buyable at terminal. Then there could be added cosmetical shop to buy skins for your character for real mon-

whoa whoa I think I should stop you there because... EA. Sue. No more RenX

Also, I'd always like to know what I'm up against. Sure maps like Training Yard allows you to collect things, but it then confuses you and makes you unable to determine the threat. And on a minor note, this is not Counter Strike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tech tree? If we're going to build tech trees here, and use them in a gunfight, nobody will know what they're going up against. No matter how big a tech tree gets, units should remain effective what they're supposed to be good against, and not what they're not designed for. I don't want to fight a really fast medium tank with added splash damage as a gunner. If we are going to add tech trees, i want them to be puchasable with experience and not credits, making it sort of a vet system and have tiny icons next to their unit name to show what skill they're trained in. Triangle ring for offensive, square ring for balanced, round ring for defensive, 2 or 3 rings over each other for level 2 or 3.

What do you guys think? It's been discussed before, so you guys could get yourself heard one more time :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator

To be honest, any form of tech tree is acceptable. Although, I swear sooner or later I'm going to bait one of these servers to add a repair gun secondary weapon to the pt. After playing 3 marathon games this last week, albeit marathon is alright, I have noticed at least 3 3hr long games that would have lasted 40 minutes if building armor was a thing. Various times the obby on field or hon on walls were dropped down to 14 percent time after time just to last another 2 hrs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After playing 3 marathon games this last week, albeit marathon is alright, I have noticed at least 3 3hr long games that would have lasted 40 minutes if building armor was a thing. Various times the obby on field or hon on walls were dropped down to 14 percent time after time just to last another 2 hrs.

Decreasing building max health whenever it gets damaged beyond certain level should take only few lines of code.

For example if 50% of building health is armor and other 50% is unrepairable HP then pseudocode would look like this:

if (buildingHealth < 0.5*maxHealth)

maxHealth = (0.5 + buildingHealth/maxHealth) * maxHealth;

If building health drops to 20% then new maximum health would become 70%.

I could probably code it today but issue is that there is only 1 or 2 active servers and I imagine admins aren't willing to implement new mutators cuz changing stuff is risky and they might lose players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After playing 3 marathon games this last week, albeit marathon is alright, I have noticed at least 3 3hr long games that would have lasted 40 minutes if building armor was a thing. Various times the obby on field or hon on walls were dropped down to 14 percent time after time just to last another 2 hrs.

Decreasing building max health whenever it gets damaged beyond certain level should take only few lines of code.

For example if 50% of building health is armor and other 50% is unrepairable HP then pseudocode would look like this:

if (buildingHealth < 0.5*maxHealth)

maxHealth = (0.5 + buildingHealth/maxHealth) * maxHealth;

If building health drops to 20% then new maximum health would become 70%.

I could probably code it today but issue is that there is only 1 or 2 active servers and I imagine admins aren't willing to implement new mutators cuz changing stuff is risky and they might lose players.

I thought BroTranquility ( or do you want to be called Yagi Hige? :P ) was working on this, it could have been someone else, correct me if i'm wrong. There was a problem with the game code which made it impossible to apply at that time, changes have been made however but if i remember correctly it still isn't entirely possible to do so yet.

I'll make an edit to my post if i managed to find the forum thread if i can.

Here it is! viewtopic.php?f=135&t=75217

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Developer
After playing 3 marathon games this last week, albeit marathon is alright, I have noticed at least 3 3hr long games that would have lasted 40 minutes if building armor was a thing. Various times the obby on field or hon on walls were dropped down to 14 percent time after time just to last another 2 hrs.

Decreasing building max health whenever it gets damaged beyond certain level should take only few lines of code.

For example if 50% of building health is armor and other 50% is unrepairable HP then pseudocode would look like this:

if (buildingHealth < 0.5*maxHealth)

maxHealth = (0.5 + buildingHealth/maxHealth) * maxHealth;

If building health drops to 20% then new maximum health would become 70%.

I could probably code it today but issue is that there is only 1 or 2 active servers and I imagine admins aren't willing to implement new mutators cuz changing stuff is risky and they might lose players.

That... and you'd just be really tardy to the party

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For some reason Beta 5 SDK is failing to download and I only have Beta 4.

I've read what BroTranquility is trying to make. I think reason why he encountered difficulties was because he tried to change building health through internals class.

Month ago I made a small mutator which removes repair guns and buffs vehicle and building HP with certain multiplier. I encountered similar issue and what worked for me was changing building HP through Rx_BuildingObjective class, not building internals class.

Although mutator I made can successfully modify building max health it does so before game fully loads. I'm not sure if building max health can be changed during the game after buildings have already been spawned.

If that turns out to be an issue then we can try to mod repair gun instead so it stops repairing buildings beyond target percentage.

If I manage to download beta 5 SDK I'll attempt to code a mutator for this.

edit: Mutator BroTranquility is trying to make is much more sophisticated than what I'm suggesting here. He is trying to add actual armor values which would be graphically represented. I am on the other hand just suggesting to tweak building max health. Its much more crude approach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Buyable upgrades; I really hope, if such a system ever is put in place, it's only per-round. Having rank-unlocks outside per-profile would nearly completely destroy my interest in the game. It's one of the things that's so shitty about most modern shooters.

@Building damage; That sounds like a very good idea, but I imagine it being really hard to balance around marathon and non-marathon.

Mines: mines are very limiting. It does not limit just one player, but the whole team. I tried discuss about it not such a long time ago. Nobody was interested in discussion and finding solution. If mine system stay as it is now, there would never be more than 2 full servers...ever.

You really shouldn't state your opinion as if it's an universal law. You simply can not know how many people didn't keep playing just because the game has mines.

Anyway, removing mines would completely cripple GDI and make the game unplayable. GDI relies on having them as a steady defense against SBHs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude, I wasn't talking about removing mines from the game. I just wanted to say that current idea of use mines is bad becouse it limit's whole team and may put team in danger and screw whole game, and this system should be replaced.

I am totaly for keeping mines, but not in meaning as it is now.

Also there are many ways how tech-tree can look like and if it's done good, then we don't even need to worry about if upgrades would be permanent. And I bet my butthole that Yosh can do it good. I can't wait to see new features in the game!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Make dumbfire unique from tracking rockets in some way.

Some combo or slower/faster, more/less splash, more/less dmg vs infantry/veh.

There should be some reward for landing dumbfire rockets, probably something like lower splash radius, higher dmg, 10% faster. Maybe a slightly higher dmg multiplier vs infantry, especially if tracking is removed vs infantry (bad mechanic that encourages bad play)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Developer
Make dumbfire unique from tracking rockets in some way.

Some combo or slower/faster, more/less splash, more/less dmg vs infantry/veh.

There should be some reward for landing dumbfire rockets, probably something like lower splash radius, higher dmg, 10% faster. Maybe a slightly higher dmg multiplier vs infantry, especially if tracking is removed vs infantry (bad mechanic that encourages bad play)

I know it's not hit-scan so you've never used it, but this is already a thing. Right click is significantly faster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...