[ X ]
Balancing medic
Post new topic   Reply to topic Goto page «  1, 2, 3  »
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
OMnom
Level: 37


Position: Registered User
Joined: 28 Oct 2016
Posts: 250
Kel: 263  [ Donate ]

Online Status: Offline
PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 6:42 pm  Reply with quote

SirCake wrote (View Post):
The build is: pp rax ref ref pp wf sd mcv pp ref rax rax rax pp ref dome.
Basically this, variations are just shifting around when something is built by one or two slots.
This leads to allways multi-mcv, allways infspam and defense spam into trench war.

You cant omit the second ref or the warfactory or multiple rax or sd, because if you do, you'll lose to overwhelming numbers.
This applies of course only to top level players, minions and below is relatively fine.


I don't necessarily mind how every game starts off with a 2refSD build and ends up in an arty spam fest, but I dislike how the players don't even have viable options to diverge from the "meta." As you've said, anything goes if you're a casual gamer, but any "competitive" game always results in the same linear progression.
Back to top
View user's profile Find all posts by OMnom Send private message ICQ Number
SirCake
Level: 41



Position: Registered User
Joined: 04 Feb 2016
Posts: 134
Kel: 46  [ Donate ]

Online Status: Offline
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 11:09 am  Reply with quote

Yeah, and its not going to be changed by "+10% here, -3% here". You can only improve the current meta with that kind of approach (like BLK-Navy-Improvements or SoS's approach).

We need bold playtests.

_________________
Check out my moddb page!
Back to top
View user's profile Find all posts by SirCake Send private message Send e-mail ICQ Number
anjew
www.memers.club
Level: 58



Position: Registered User
Joined: 08 Nov 2014
Posts: 428
Kel: 122  [ Donate ]

Online Status: Offline
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 11:50 am  Reply with quote

OMnom wrote (View Post):
I don't necessarily mind how every game starts off with a 2refSD build and ends up in an arty spam fest,


This right here makes the game quite non-dynamic. You will always have the same linear progression if you can only have so many openings. I was talking to smitty about this and th viability of other strats. The impression I got was 2refSD is the build with the most success in an equal matchup, though not without its flaws (being behind in the bigger picture if not taken advantage of).

I don't know what you guys like but I prefer being able to choose from a variety of openings that I know are viable later into the game (aka. not cheese).Sorry if you hate remembering this mod exist but TD allows for a quite a few openings that can still be viable later into the game. I reckon this mainly comes from the light support. Would be interesting to try RA with balanced light support to allow more scouting. Might actually see a WF first build.

_________________
http://i.imgur.com/3Eya0Wf.png
Back to top
View user's profile Find all posts by anjew Send private message ICQ Number
Happy
Level: 35



Position: Registered User
Joined: 06 Jan 2017
Posts: 255
Kel: 295  [ Donate ]

Online Status: Offline
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 12:24 pm  Reply with quote

anjew wrote (View Post):
Might actually see a WF first build.


WF first is just as good as double ref, it's map dependant. Going Double Ref on Shadowfiend is just as suicidal as going WF first on Agenda. A lot of top players have many strategies and practise and apply different tactics to different maps. I feel the weaker players are the players who do the same build and strat on every map which is fair because they are not as strong they don't have a variety too choose from and will just go with their strongest play, I used to do this as well and it's best to master and nail your best game style before trying to get good in others Smile

Also I think every build since the beginning of time for the winning player has always been variant of 5+ harvs into SD, it gives nice eco for any play style and the option to expand. You would really need to edit how everything works to remove that as the kingpin.

What I'm trying to say is that RA always has this style because it is the proven best. 5 harvs into SD = good eco, expansion options, tech potential, 7 rax potential. It can lead to anything.

Also I want to point out that in my time over playing RA I've realised that RA can't be seen as a army contains unit x, enemy army in unit y, both armies fight and because unit x is hard counter to unit y then your army wins kind of deal. Its how you use your armies, every army is the same and its now the game of chess you play with your opponent. Armies are like the pawns, Air are bishops etc etc you get the picture. The idea I see is not to have units to counter units, its the chess game within a game of multi pronging, army engagements and attacking and defending. It's a sterotype that players just make 1 big army and attack but that is one way how to lose a game every time vs someone good. It takes a while to understand the game in this way but once you do then your on track to becoming a top class player.
Back to top
View user's profile Find all posts by Happy Send private message ICQ Number
Smitty
Level: 34



Position: Registered User
Joined: 26 Sep 2016
Posts: 131
Kel: 157  [ Donate ]

Online Status: Offline
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 1:17 pm  Reply with quote

anjew wrote (View Post):
I was talking to smitty about this and th viability of other strats. The impression I got was 2refSD is the build with the most success in an equal matchup, though not without its flaws (being behind in the bigger picture if not taken advantage of).


I spent that entire conversation trying to explain that wf first is a viable and successful build. At no point did I say 2ref into SD was the top build in terms of success. It's a solid build, but so is wf opener and even radar before sd is having plenty of success right now.

_________________
Creator of the most requested map in OpenRA.

Lifetime OpenRA winnings: $183.03 .... Still shocked I made money doing this.
Back to top
View user's profile Find all posts by Smitty Send private message ICQ Number
OMnom
Level: 37


Position: Registered User
Joined: 28 Oct 2016
Posts: 250
Kel: 263  [ Donate ]

Online Status: Offline
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 1:44 pm  Reply with quote

anjew wrote (View Post):
OMnom wrote (View Post):
I don't necessarily mind how every game starts off with a 2refSD build and ends up in an arty spam fest,


This right here makes the game quite non-dynamic. You will always have the same linear progression if you can only have so many openings. I was talking to smitty about this and th viability of other strats. The impression I got was 2refSD is the build with the most success in an equal matchup, though not without its flaws (being behind in the bigger picture if not taken advantage of).


The linear nature of this game is a byproduct of the ClassicProductionQueue and how Tech, Eco, and Production are all placed in a single queue. This is mitigated in TD since building a 2nd Barracks is basically the equilvalent of building 7 barracks in RA ; less time spent on investing in production means more room for tech.

There's a huge list of reasons and pages of theory as to why there are not more viable early game build orders, but I'm sure I've already said my piece on this subject ages ago. I'm tired of explaining things...better to just do what I want to do and present a working solution instead.
Back to top
View user's profile Find all posts by OMnom Send private message ICQ Number
anjew
www.memers.club
Level: 58



Position: Registered User
Joined: 08 Nov 2014
Posts: 428
Kel: 122  [ Donate ]

Online Status: Offline
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 3:11 pm  Reply with quote

Smitty wrote (View Post):
-snip-


Building a barracks doesn't make it war factory first. That makes it barracks first.

Also what you said was
Smitty wrote (View Post):

If you open double ref and your opponent goes wf first. You will be behind if you don't do early damage


Since going wf first puts you without defense, good luck trying to fend this off at all. Especially against the *skill* of blob.

_________________
http://i.imgur.com/3Eya0Wf.png
Back to top
View user's profile Find all posts by anjew Send private message ICQ Number
Happy
Level: 35



Position: Registered User
Joined: 06 Jan 2017
Posts: 255
Kel: 295  [ Donate ]

Online Status: Offline
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 3:59 pm  Reply with quote

anjew wrote (View Post):
Smitty wrote (View Post):
-snip-


Building a barracks doesn't make it war factory first. That makes it barracks first.

Also what you said was
Smitty wrote (View Post):

If you open double ref and your opponent goes wf first. You will be behind if you don't do early damage


Since going wf first puts you without defense, good luck trying to fend this off at all. Especially against the *skill* of blob.


In RA we call it "WF first" because its a quick WF or sometimes WF rush. It has always been that. With that logic we're all doing power plant openers, how boring I want to be able to build the barracks before the power plant, - it's literally a tent right why does it need power? This games too linear I'm sick of all these players doing stupid power plant openers.

Many players know how to defend a double ref attack its a simple process you build a pillbox, done. Don't believe me? Check out some POV's of Barf, Lorry Smitty and Kazu they seem decent at this barracks second build vs a barracks second build followed by two refinery blob.
Back to top
View user's profile Find all posts by Happy Send private message ICQ Number
Smitty
Level: 34



Position: Registered User
Joined: 26 Sep 2016
Posts: 131
Kel: 157  [ Donate ]

Online Status: Offline
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 4:03 pm  Reply with quote

anjew wrote (View Post):
Smitty wrote (View Post):
-snip-

Building a barracks doesn't make it war factory first. That makes it barracks first.


OK, I see what's causing confusion here. What I was saying is that PP-RAX-REF-WF is viable vs. PP-RAX-REF-REF.

You seem to be lamenting the idea that PP-REF-WF isn't viable in a situation in which you get attacked. I would argue that going for WF before RAX is just as big of a gamble as an early cheese, and should be viewed as such. It can still work and I've seen it work, but it is and should be a gamble.

An SC2 equivalent I can compare it to is the Terran command center rush in which you forsake building a rax and just build your first command center after a supply depot. If you get attacked you will die, but that's what you are gambling for a great eco advantage.

_________________
Creator of the most requested map in OpenRA.

Lifetime OpenRA winnings: $183.03 .... Still shocked I made money doing this.
Back to top
View user's profile Find all posts by Smitty Send private message ICQ Number
anjew
www.memers.club
Level: 58



Position: Registered User
Joined: 08 Nov 2014
Posts: 428
Kel: 122  [ Donate ]

Online Status: Offline
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 6:53 pm  Reply with quote

Happy wrote (View Post):

In RA we call it "WF first" because its a quick WF or sometimes WF rush. It has always been that.

I'm sorry that in RA you don't know what your first built production building is. I guess since you have been misusing the words since the end of time everyone should just understand what your language means.
In TD we are used to dynamic openings so we prefer to use the terms more logically.

Smitty wrote (View Post):

I would argue that going for WF before RAX is just as big of a gamble as an early cheese, and should be viewed as such. It can still work and I've seen it work, but it is and should be a gamble.
An SC2 equivalent I can compare it to is the Terran command center rush in which you forsake building a rax and just build your first command center after a supply depot. If you get attacked you will die, but that's what you are gambling for a great eco advantage.

Any attempt to use SC2 comparisons before have been shot down with "these games are completely different." Though personally I'd equate that kinda of build to a fast MCV since technically the 2ref is ahead in eco of a WF first, especially on a map with oil, where as in SC2 the eco is equal until the second command center has finished building.

Why should going WF first literally signal the end of a game vs a competent opponent?
Why MUST the player be forced to build a barracks if they want to survive? All this does is entrench the non-dynamic nature of this meta. Something that has been identified by many people.

OMnom wrote (View Post):

The linear nature of this game is a byproduct of the ClassicProductionQueue and how Tech, Eco, and Production are all placed in a single queue. This is mitigated in TD since building a 2nd Barracks is basically the equilvalent of building 7 barracks in RA ; less time spent on investing in production means more room for tech.


This is a fallacy, if you actually watched TD games you would see that the multi queue isn't taken advantage of until much later into games so that doesn't at all explain. Also technically RA players spend a lot more on production since you build multiple production facilities, i've never seen a TD game where a player has 7 barracks.

There are 2 main differences between TD and RA competitive matches that make the gameplay more dynamic .

1. Light support: Light support is used in TD not just to protect players against bike rushes but also to allow scouting so players don't have to sit in their base praying to Allah that the enemy doesn't decide to have a look. Players are able to play dynamically and reactively to their enemies. It also devalues the oil of a map due to possible sniping. A feel a lot of RA is built around the oil on the map which also entrenches barracks first.

2. Harvest rate and unload time: This obviously ties into scaling as well but this also increases the potential money at the beginning of a game. RA harvs deposit $500 every full trip yet TD deposits $980 every full trip however due to the harvest and unload rates, a well micro'ed RA harv vs a well micro'ed TD harv deposits much more money which exponentially grows. Add in a second ref, you have so much money you can actually start spamming infantry.



I'm not turning this into RA vs TD but you have to admit that the one thing TD has over RA is viable build orders (non-cheese).

SirCakes assumptions of pp rax ref ref pp wf sd with variations seems correct to me. Or at the most basic, pp rax ref ref/wf. How many other viable build orders are there?

_________________
http://i.imgur.com/3Eya0Wf.png
Back to top
View user's profile Find all posts by anjew Send private message ICQ Number
Happy
Level: 35



Position: Registered User
Joined: 06 Jan 2017
Posts: 255
Kel: 295  [ Donate ]

Online Status: Offline
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 7:29 pm  Reply with quote

anjew wrote (View Post):

I'm sorry that in RA you don't know what your first built production building is. I guess since you have been misusing the words since the end of time everyone should just understand what your language means.
In TD we are used to dynamic openings so we prefer to use the terms more logically.


Why do you call Rocket Soldiers "e3" when its quite clearly labelled rocket soldier in game, on the command and conquer wiki and also the original games official manuel? Why is your unit abbreviated to a move in Battleships?

WF first is a nickname for it, every RA player understand when someone says WF first they mean pp-rax-ref-wf. It's like when you say hummers you means humvees or e3 is rockets. It is obvious to us but I do understand if a noob has problems with the acronyms.

Also that double ref build noted is bad its pp-rax-ref-ref-pp-wf-ref-sd don't miss out the third ref or your gonna go broke on 3 harvs Smile

Also I dunno what you mean by comparing viable build orders they're two very different games that's like comparing RA's build orders to Dune2k. TD has different tech requirements, power and units even if game play is kinda similar.


Attachment:

Rocket soldier.JPG

 Filename:  Rocket soldier.JPG
176.32 KB :: Viewed 155 Time(s) :: [ Download ]

Back to top
View user's profile Find all posts by Happy Send private message ICQ Number
MustaphaTR
Level: 54



Position: Registered User
Joined: 04 Aug 2014
Posts: 147
Kel: 76  [ Donate ]

Online Status: Offline
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 7:48 pm  Reply with quote

[quote="Happy";p="305142"]
anjew wrote (View Post):

Why do you call Rocket Soldiers "e3" when its quite clearly labelled rocket soldier in game, on the command and conquer wiki and also the original games official manuel? Why is your unit abbreviated to a move in Battleships?


Not sure if you know or not, but e3 is the name of Rocket Soldier in code: https://github.com/OpenRA/OpenRA/blob/bleed/mods/cnc/rules/infantry.yaml#L60
Back to top
View user's profile Find all posts by MustaphaTR Send private message ICQ Number
Happy
Level: 35



Position: Registered User
Joined: 06 Jan 2017
Posts: 255
Kel: 295  [ Donate ]

Online Status: Offline
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 7:52 pm  Reply with quote

MustaphaTR wrote (View Post):
Happy wrote (View Post):
anjew wrote (View Post):

Why do you call Rocket Soldiers "e3" when its quite clearly labelled rocket soldier in game, on the command and conquer wiki and also the original games official manuel? Why is your unit abbreviated to a move in Battleships?


Not sure if you know or not, but e3 is the name of Rocket Soldier in code: https://github.com/OpenRA/OpenRA/blob/bleed/mods/cnc/rules/infantry.yaml#L60


Yes I did know that I was trying to be sarcastic and a smart ass to make a point about acronyms thanks.
Back to top
View user's profile Find all posts by Happy Send private message ICQ Number
SirCake
Level: 41



Position: Registered User
Joined: 04 Feb 2016
Posts: 134
Kel: 46  [ Donate ]

Online Status: Offline
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 9:40 pm  Reply with quote

Since we now have established that RA is basically a game of chess with all pieces being pawns (which nails it pretty hard imho) what do we do about it?

Bold experimental maps please !

_________________
Check out my moddb page!
Back to top
View user's profile Find all posts by SirCake Send private message Send e-mail ICQ Number
eskimo
Level: 29


Position: Registered User
Joined: 17 Jan 2017
Posts: 117
Kel: 122  [ Donate ]

Online Status: Offline
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 10:36 pm  Reply with quote

I'm gonna go 5x WF first on the new release.

The 5th is just for celebration
Back to top
View user's profile Find all posts by eskimo Send private message ICQ Number
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Goto page «  1, 2, 3  »