Strategies 2017.
Publicaciones: 212
Visitado por: 496 users
I know i said i was going to step away from any strat changes but doing so just because of the flaming/harassment from a small number of loud players is a poor reason. Players are asking for a few changes and I know nobody else will do it. I was going to wait until the buildings are live but Ivan tells me thats a few months away yet because coding is required and clovis is busy with the mapmaker. Here is what we've got so far.
Desert Storm:
-1 defence to helicopters.
Many players are asking for this. It's hard to deny that it's needed. It is also a pretty minor nerf and will fix that issue where you send a mixed stack of inf/helis at a city to contest expansion and the helis defend randomly instead of the infantry due to them both having the same defensive stat.
Master of Stealth:
-1 attack +1 defence to infantry.
An interesting suggestion by trollface/chess. Personally i think it is worth betaing for a while at least. Anyone who plays mos can attest to its' poor defensive capabilities. The strat definitely struggles in close quarters vs all the competitive strategies even within its niche and this would help remedy that. While it weakens mos' t1 expansion slightly it does improve its' expansion contesting capabilities with mixed marine/inf stacks. The overall net effect should be that of a boost to the strat. It should expand upon the strategies niche where it is only good if played far away from any opponents.
Guerilla Warfare:
Remove marine defense bonus vs infantry.
Gw militia had 5 defence until amok fixed the city defense bonus bug. Defence bonuses were removed from all strats except for gw which was accidentally skipped over. However gw is a very popular strat so most people were ok with it. Gw counters the infantry based strats pretty hard so they do need this.
Blitzkrieg:
+1 range to all units
The idea to to improve the strats unique playstyle as a counter to defensive players.
Iron fist:
+1 range to militia.
This was suggested 5 years ago but not implemented as it was too controversial. Almost all the strategies have been boosted since then and now iron fist finds itself in competition with lb. This will give the strat the ability to use its militia to wall.
Lucky Bastard:
-3 crit to all units
The strat has been continually boosted since its original nerf from +15 crit back in 2011/2012. Almost all the strats have seen boosts since that time and we are now at +13 crit as well as having the cost nerfs to the infantry and militia removed. We've gone too far and need to take a step back. The strategies primary units are militia, inf, tanks and transports. It boasts close to pd defence and ironfist attack without the range nerfs. The only nerfs on the strat are to its tanks and transports. This is not enough given all the benefits.
Feel free to throw out any other suggestions/ideas you have regarding these or any of the other strategies. Maybe its time to revisit blitz or LB. I will update the thread as we go. Please keep it constructive and civil. I will be deleting any trolling/flaming or offtopic comments. Also please refrain from adding the usual reactionary posts to this thread. Let the fun begin.
Desert Storm:
-1 defence to helicopters.
Many players are asking for this. It's hard to deny that it's needed. It is also a pretty minor nerf and will fix that issue where you send a mixed stack of inf/helis at a city to contest expansion and the helis defend randomly instead of the infantry due to them both having the same defensive stat.
Master of Stealth:
-1 attack +1 defence to infantry.
An interesting suggestion by trollface/chess. Personally i think it is worth betaing for a while at least. Anyone who plays mos can attest to its' poor defensive capabilities. The strat definitely struggles in close quarters vs all the competitive strategies even within its niche and this would help remedy that. While it weakens mos' t1 expansion slightly it does improve its' expansion contesting capabilities with mixed marine/inf stacks. The overall net effect should be that of a boost to the strat. It should expand upon the strategies niche where it is only good if played far away from any opponents.
Guerilla Warfare:
Remove marine defense bonus vs infantry.
Gw militia had 5 defence until amok fixed the city defense bonus bug. Defence bonuses were removed from all strats except for gw which was accidentally skipped over. However gw is a very popular strat so most people were ok with it. Gw counters the infantry based strats pretty hard so they do need this.
Blitzkrieg:
+1 range to all units
The idea to to improve the strats unique playstyle as a counter to defensive players.
Iron fist:
+1 range to militia.
This was suggested 5 years ago but not implemented as it was too controversial. Almost all the strategies have been boosted since then and now iron fist finds itself in competition with lb. This will give the strat the ability to use its militia to wall.
Lucky Bastard:
-3 crit to all units
The strat has been continually boosted since its original nerf from +15 crit back in 2011/2012. Almost all the strats have seen boosts since that time and we are now at +13 crit as well as having the cost nerfs to the infantry and militia removed. We've gone too far and need to take a step back. The strategies primary units are militia, inf, tanks and transports. It boasts close to pd defence and ironfist attack without the range nerfs. The only nerfs on the strat are to its tanks and transports. This is not enough given all the benefits.
Feel free to throw out any other suggestions/ideas you have regarding these or any of the other strategies. Maybe its time to revisit blitz or LB. I will update the thread as we go. Please keep it constructive and civil. I will be deleting any trolling/flaming or offtopic comments. Also please refrain from adding the usual reactionary posts to this thread. Let the fun begin.
|
Desert Storm: I support Master of stealth: I am conflicted and unsure if I should support or not. Guerrilla Warfare: I support Blitzkrieg: + 1 range Iron Fist: I support
---- Hi
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
Are you sure that - 1 range for marines in the answer for gw, i agree gw should definitely be nerfed, but is this the correct way?
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
You read it wrong... His suggestion is to take out that marine defence bonus against infantry.
---- Hi
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
omg my bad, yes i agree with that one 
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
|
Stop ruining IF with this +1 militia range.. IF is legit already beastin, you guys just dont know how to play with it.. You seriously put up IF on it bcs of 2 or 3 people who don't know anything besides PD or GW commented to make +1 militia range. IF will be way to OP with that.
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
agree, i mean isnt the whole point of IF the cancerous range but op units, now u can wall with mils the other nerfs to range seem minor
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
Nigga you can already wall with mils without having +1 range, just think ffs. The 'other range nerfs' aren't even that big of a deal. I mean its save to say IF is mosty likely a strategy for europe and perhaps some other continents, which is mostly used for rushes on there, but the +1 militia range won't change a thing to that. It will only make IF way more overpowered since, you can now wall all your coutnries and cities with the (in your opinion) useless militia, and use the infantries to attack, which will make it way to OP for the costs and prices. Now you have to make a move between or using those 3 infantries to keep a city/country save by wallling, or use them in the attack. The unmoveable militia is what makes IF and I strongly agree that it will make this strategy way to overpowered and people will complain about it and then it will get even nerfed to a worse state than the state it is now. Which has happened plenty of times. The range of IF right now is currently fine for Europe and is still one of the best strategies for the western-europe gameplay. Just stop messing around with the strategies of this game to idk, feel the need to fix things that aren't broken? 
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
ofc u can wall using gen range suka
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
walling is waste of units anyways
---- Our next Moments are Tomorrows Memories
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
completely agree, the inf and tank range completely sucks but I can still work with it, the militia nerf is the only one that seems actually...balancing for the massive bonus that the other units get.
----  
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
|
RA adds +2 crits to tanks, If u guys add +1 att to Blitz Tanks, There won't be any little sense to play RA anymore. I Think Blitz should get +1 Militia Defence bonus and Tanks should Cost 110 not 120. also RA must get +1 att point to tanks I think.
---- Jewing is my jew. Kebab reich stronk Eat kebab Drink ayran
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
|
I have play Blitz really often, and i think i can say, except in certain circumstances, the +1 range will note really be efficient, a +2 or 3 would have been great but 1 not really, except maybe for militia and with tanks +1 attack it will be good! or if it's to OP to make +1 att tanks, make it cost 130 for 9 att, it will cost 14,44$ per point of attack instead of 15, not a great dif, with that make +1 range militia and it will become more competitive. But if i had to choose between +1 attack tanks and +1 range, i prefer +1 attack! In any case thank you for this thread.
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
ye buying tanks as blitz turkey is good idea
---- Our next Moments are Tomorrows Memories
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
eh, why play blitz turkey in first place 
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
you are right blitz ukr/germany/uk/italy/poland/volga/spain/france seems more legit
---- Our next Moments are Tomorrows Memories
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
yes! long live blitz pol
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
No point. Such a buff would be negligible. We should either go the full -10 or leave it altogether.
---- 
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
Blitz: should stay constant, currently it works well depending on the situation, if it ain't broke don't fix it. Iron First: It's already great for close combat, and +1 range won't do anything really except maybe be able to attack rome with miltia without using General or AT's. Iron Fist: -75 cost AT, +1 range sea trans, -10 cost Infantry, Just imagine this being some type of viable for cws since it's actually never used unless playing UK or France in a 1v1. Lucky Bastard: Clearly overpowered at the moment, +5 more cost for all units. MOS: -1 attack, +1 defence to infantry. AND -1 attack, +1 range for militia. +1 defense for marines, The reason i call for +1 defense is because every other attack unit along with their strat for example SM/Bomber, DS/Heli, RA/Tank, all have 4 defense for their attack units, MOS is the only one that has 3 defense for its attack unit.
---- 
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
|
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
|
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
-10
---- No such thing as a good girl, you are just not the right guy. 
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
|
Suggestion for SM. -50 cost for bombers because they are useless, cant take cities. Not worth to spam them. That should make strategy playable. Ty.
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
Give Bomber 1 capacity just to militia/infantry sounds cool
---- Do you fear death? Do you fear that dark abyss? All your deeds laid bare. All your sins punished. 
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
Sure but reduce cost of AAs by -50 too.
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
Meh, that would balance the strategy and looking at the comments here you dont want that, you just want to make good and completely playable strategy easier to play with, which makes no sense, at least to me. And i'm so tilted just by looking at the "buff sm" posts because i know what that strategy is capable of and there is no need to make it even stronger. -10 cost, +1 capacity, neutral inf attack. Like holy fucking almighty big elephant size shit, those are some good fucking suggestions. Clap fucking clap.
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
|
Lets leave sm for now. The only argument for a boost is that of its' popularity. The fact that we've 2 different groups both at odds about it suggests that the strat is fine. It is also worth noting that it is mainly the sm players who want the change. So Anything further on the other changes? If not ill mail Ivan tomorrow. Edit: I should add. The MoS change is a beta. If it turns out to be bad for the strat we will reverse it.
----
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
|
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
nice putting a huge response without any reasons why. do you really think you will change someones mind or?
---- Do you fear death? Do you fear that dark abyss? All your deeds laid bare. All your sins punished.
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
I think this small change wouldn't be enough for iron fist. Let's give this strategy an opportunity to be selected for larger maps as well. Add what I suggested, +1 to air transport for range and capacity. Since this will be an experimental phase, if these changes turn out to be too strong, we can fix it.
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
|
Im a believer in 1 step at a time. That change wouldnt make much of a difference. To make ironfist even viable on large maps youd need to completely reinvent the strat.
----
Cargando...
Cargando...
|
