Nerf the Multiple Rocket Launcher

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Nerf the Multiple Rocket Launcher

      This is it, this is my time to shine
      It’s that time. Time to nerf the MRL

      On the morning of March 5th, 1953, Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin was found dead in his bedroom. The death of the Soviet leader marked a turning point in the history of the Soviet Union. After much suffering, there was hope that things would change

      This is that time for Conflict of Nations. The time that tyrannical MRL finally gets nerfed, the time when we can enjoy a true balance. If you are unfamiliar with the subject: The Multiple Rocket Launcher is considered to be one of the best units in the game, if not the best. MRL “Doom Stacks”, which consist of MRL as well as a few other support units, are difficult to counter and frustratingly effective compared to other strategies. My ultimate goal is not to outright destroy the MRL, but to bring it down to a level where it is truly comparable to the other artillery types instead of being objectively better.

      How should the MRL be nerfed: Minimum Range
      In addition to a maximum range, MRL will have a minimum range of 40 as well as 0 defensive damage. My reasoning is as follows:
      -Towed and Mobile artillery posses the ability to fire on enemies within sight distance. This is known as direct fire. Usually, when artillery realizes the enemy is upon them, they fires shells directly at them, similarly to a tank. This is presumably represented in the game by these artillery units having a defense damage applied in melee combat
      But what about MRL?
      Multiple Rocket Launchers often have a minimum firing distance. This means that an enemy that is too close simply cannot be fired at due to the nature of the weapon. This would be quite simple to represent in-game, by adding a minimum range


      What effect would this have in the game?

      -For starters, artillery-to-artillery combat would be unaffected. Enemy artillery wouldn’t be within 40 range of your MRL anyway unless you just let them come up to you

      -MRL’s ability to provide fire support would also be unaffected. Their max range and damage is unchanged, allowing them to perform their duties just like they would before the nerf

      So for the most part the operational aspect of MRL is unchanged. What does this affect then?

      -Enhancement of “soft” counters
      As you may already know, Spec Ops is a unit sometimes used to combat these stacks. However, Spec Ops often lose units and are mediocre as a direct counter, partially because an MRL stack has brutal damage even in melee. My change will allow them to mature into a full counter. With MRL having no defensive damage, and being unable to fire at nearby Spec Ops even with a CRV, the Spec Ops will be able to close in and destroy them with ease. This punches a big hole in the MRL strategy while preserving its ability to conduct its mission

      -Two groups of units benefit from this change: Armor, and other artilleries

      >Armor is used rarely by skilled players, but this new vulnerability may promote the use of armored
      units like CRV and AFV to defend MRL stacks from spec Ops. On the other hand, many offensive armor strategies will become viable. A basic MBT rush may be effective, but not as good as a air assaulting tank destroyer. The tank destroyer, which excelled at tearing apart armor units, will devour a MRL stack if it gets within range

      >Other artillery units, especially mobile artillery, may find a new place within the balance of the game. Mobile artillery already had some small advantages over MRL, but nothing that truly made them a good alternative. Now, the ability of Mobile Artillery to engage any units within its range, in addition to its currently high armor damage, will make it ideal as a unit to handle armor rushes


      This is a fairly powerful nerf, so to complement it I suggest a buff at the same time: Doctrine bonuses

      Western Doctrine: +5 HP
      Eastern Doctrine: +20% Infantry Damage, +10% Speed
      European Doctrine: No change
      Also please fix the unit icons
      Yee Haw
    • Aaaaaah he said the N-word! Ban him pls!

      tbh i dont find the idea of a minimum range that bad of an idea tho to be fair if you want artillery to shine more then maybe a in general heavier impact of doctrine on them might be a decent idea (not just mrl), especially on the stats that are kinda important for arty like range or speed
      or just outright different abilities

      picked eastern? your towed now ignores entrenchment or something similar whack
      I am The Baseline for opinions
    • Kalrakh wrote:

      Toweds need two buffs:
      - being low signature like all other soft units (infantry & planes on the ground)
      - being able to fire while disembarking after air assault to regain mobility
      I don't think the second of these is needed. If they had Low radar, you'd at least be able to disembark them on your own territory with less chance of enemy radar seeing them. If you could fire immediately after landing and then take off and leave again right away, it'd make them a bit OP I think.

      Colonel Waffles wrote:

      How should the MRL be nerfed: Minimum Range
      In addition to a maximum range, MRL will have a minimum range of 40 as well as 0 defensive damage.
      I like the principle of the idea, but I think 40 is too much as a minimum. I'd say 20 or 25.
    • WalterChang wrote:

      Kalrakh wrote:

      Toweds need two buffs:
      - being low signature like all other soft units (infantry & planes on the ground)
      - being able to fire while disembarking after air assault to regain mobility
      I don't think the second of these is needed. If they had Low radar, you'd at least be able to disembark them on your own territory with less chance of enemy radar seeing them. If you could fire immediately after landing and then take off and leave again right away, it'd make them a bit OP I think.
      Then they would still become useless as soon radars are able to detect low signature, like stealth units became useless in old times, as soon all radar units got to the stage of detecting them.

      They still have only short range, so you try to catch them in mid flight with ASF. Air assault is quite slow compared to most air units.
    • Kalrakh wrote:

      You can't really evaulate their usefullness with 'public games' as a factor
      You can evaluate their usefulness in public games, which is all I play.

      Even in the later game if you're fighting someone with longer-range artillery, they still have their uses - not to out-fight MA or MRL in a toe-to-toe battle, but as a supporting unit to attack enemy units that aren't protected by other artillery, to quickly jump to different front, or to add extra firepower to a battle where your own MA/MRL are already engaged.
    • Kalrakh wrote:

      Toweds need two buffs:
      - being low signature like all other soft units (infantry & planes on the ground)
      - being able to fire while disembarking after air assault to regain mobility
      Only disagree with the "fire while disembarking thingy" because we all know how it ends :D

      But i can't argue that we would suddenly all develop a very graceful style of fencing ^^
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.
    • that’s actually a good idea

      about deploying from heli tho
      i think they should give us individual deploy time for each units and also reduced when upgrade to next gen.

      maybe something like this

      spec ops: 60/50/40
      airborne inf: 60/50/40
      towed arti: 45/40/40
      crv: 45/40/40
      maa: 60/60/50
      sam: 60/60/50
      td: 60/50/40

      oh lmao this getting hella confused fast
      let just go with 60/50/40 for all
      This post was made by Leader of the Church of ROAD
    • There are a few ways to deal with balance for this unit but I think you have to look at how easy/hard it is to use all three artillery peices.

      The reason people use the MRLS so much is because it's a single unit that hurts both soft and hard from a great distance. You don't have to swap units or research two different artillies depending on your target like you do with towed and mobile artillery. Plus even if you do research those two the ranges are different so you can't just order it out into the field and get maximum damage every time they fire. You'd need to make sure you research towed and mobile artillery to the same range and then if you want to upgrade one you have to upgrade the other.

      I think the way you make up for this is range. The MRLS should be shorter range. Start at 50, go to 75 and tier 2 and 85 at tier 3.

      Towed should start at 75, go to 100 at tier 2 and stay at 100 with a boost to soft damage at tier 3.
      Mobile should start at 75, go to 100 at tier 2 and get a hard damage boost at tier 3.



      Another option might be to drop the building req's for each. Towed is tier 1 barracks. Mobile is tier 2 barracks and MRLS is tier 5 barracks. I can't understate how much of a disadvantage it is to have to research and build two different units if you wanted to have something like the MRLS in a stack using towed and mobile. It's just not that difficult to build an extra barracks level and build mrls all day versus researching 2 different artilleries multiple times and you get better range and more effective damage without as much attention needed.
    • "The reason people use the MRLS so much is because it's a single unit that hurts both soft and hard from a great distance. "

      No. It's 100% the 100 range. The best proof i can give is that if you think of it deep enough ---> "as long as nobody does MRLs, you don't need MRLs. It's only when someone does MRLs lvl 4 with 100 range that suddenly, your mobile and towed artillery become threatened and you need to step up"


      "I think the way you make up for this is range. The MRLS should be shorter range. Start at 50, go to 75 and tier 2 and 85 at tier 3."

      Do that, and the MRL becomes suddenly replaced 100% by the mobile artillery, that gets 85 range T2, while requiring less infrastructure, and having a incredibly efficient need of resources (infantry based).

      Of course, if we proceed with the rest of your proposal, the Mobile Artillery just becomes the new MRL, with more HP, more armored damages, less requirements, and cheaper.

      "not sure i follow".


      "Mobile is tier 2 barracks and MRLS is tier 5 barracks"

      Towed Artillery : Military base lvl 2
      Mobile Artillery : Military base lvl 3
      MRL : Military base lvl 4.

      I don't understand the conclusion. CoN remains a game that encourages its players a LOT to pay real money as to fill holes in the battle line, so people that don't use it tend to go for the most efficient options, whatever they may be.
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.
    • Tumbler wrote:

      There are a few ways to deal with balance for this unit but I think you have to look at how easy/hard it is to use all three artillery peices.

      The reason people use the MRLS so much is because it's a single unit that hurts both soft and hard from a great distance. You don't have to swap units or research two different artillies depending on your target like you do with towed and mobile artillery. Plus even if you do research those two the ranges are different so you can't just order it out into the field and get maximum damage every time they fire. You'd need to make sure you research towed and mobile artillery to the same range and then if you want to upgrade one you have to upgrade the other.

      I think the way you make up for this is range. The MRLS should be shorter range. Start at 50, go to 75 and tier 2 and 85 at tier 3.

      Towed should start at 75, go to 100 at tier 2 and stay at 100 with a boost to soft damage at tier 3.
      Mobile should start at 75, go to 100 at tier 2 and get a hard damage boost at tier 3.



      Another option might be to drop the building req's for each. Towed is tier 1 barracks. Mobile is tier 2 barracks and MRLS is tier 5 barracks. I can't understate how much of a disadvantage it is to have to research and build two different units if you wanted to have something like the MRLS in a stack using towed and mobile. It's just not that difficult to build an extra barracks level and build mrls all day versus researching 2 different artilleries multiple times and you get better range and more effective damage without as much attention needed.
      Uhh
      Well…
      I was trying to balance artillery, not obliterate it

      Even I, who is notorious for this nerfing thing, couldn’t get behind making MRL range lower than the other artilleries. That just doesn’t make sense

      Alternatively, you could mess around with them like this:

      Since they have similar cannons, MA and Towed Arty have the same range (T1: 50, T2: 75, T3: 75)
      MRL should be the longest range of them all. It’s kind of the point: The longest range artillery for far away fire support

      Then you really flesh out Towed Arty and MA to make them strong in their own way
      Maybe distribute some abilities between those two:
      -Ignores Fortifications (Towed Arty)
      -Unrelenting fire: Slows attacked unit down considerably for short time (Towed Arty)
      -Allow them to use chemical and nuclear shells in their attacks (Both)
      -Army boost +3% attack to armor (MA)
      -Fire on the move with reduced range (MA)

      stuff like that. Making them special to make them more unique and useful.
      Yee Haw
    • WalterChang wrote:

      Kalrakh wrote:

      Toweds need two buffs:
      - being low signature like all other soft units (infantry & planes on the ground)
      - being able to fire while disembarking after air assault to regain mobility
      I don't think the second of these is needed. If they had Low radar, you'd at least be able to disembark them on your own territory with less chance of enemy radar seeing them. If you could fire immediately after landing and then take off and leave again right away, it'd make them a bit OP I think.

      Colonel Waffles wrote:

      How should the MRL be nerfed: Minimum Range
      In addition to a maximum range, MRL will have a minimum range of 40 as well as 0 defensive damage.
      I like the principle of the idea, but I think 40 is too much as a minimum. I'd say 20 or 25.
      There is a reason it is 40 specifically
      CRV (which can detect spec Ops) has a sight range of 40 outside of mountains. This means that unless in mountains, spec ops can approach easily. This also plays nicely with MRL also being much better in the mountains

      20-25 would have no effect. At that point you would just take away the defensive damage, because melee is pretty much going to happen at that range. 40 is wide enough to open a considerable hole in the MRL defense, though keep in mind the enemy would still have to trek through 60 range of rockets raining down to reach the area. The point is that they are vulnerable enough that even big armor stacks can reach the inside if there is no retreat, and that is where the armor becomes more valuable in the gameplay
      Yee Haw
    • MRL already require so much... and I don't think the other artillery are too weak to compete.

      Many regard MRL as the arty meta staple... feel that it's apex and without a proper counter.
      I don't.

      Time isn't on MRLs side.

      Mind you, I'm a "kill your enemy in the cradle" kind of player.

      If anyone on the map has so much as an Army base 3 they'll have my attention.

      I agree that a minimum range would make sense for realism, and might be fun for gameplay... but an MRL build takes so much time and dedication...If there are any unrestrained players on the map watching, you wont have an army base 4 for long enough to mobilize "enough"...

      A minimum range would be exaggerating a weakness that I already exploit with TD... 40 safe zone, I'd use it... but don't NEED it.
    • Smallsword wrote:

      MRL already require so much... and I don't think the other artillery are too weak to compete.

      Many regard MRL as the arty meta staple... feel that it's apex and without a proper counter.
      I don't.

      Time isn't on MRLs side.

      Mind you, I'm a "kill your enemy in the cradle" kind of player.

      If anyone on the map has so much as an Army base 3 they'll have my attention.

      I agree that a minimum range would make sense for realism, and might be fun for gameplay... but an MRL build takes so much time and dedication...If there are any unrestrained players on the map watching, you wont have an army base 4 for long enough to mobilize "enough"...

      A minimum range would be exaggerating a weakness that I already exploit with TD... 40 safe zone, I'd use it... but don't NEED it.
      So your argument as to why MRL is fine is “I just kill them before they can make it”?

      Again, the operational aspect of MRL doesn’t change. It’s still as good as it was before, just now you have to be more weary of the enemy armies around you. Also, I’m not sure what you are referring to with the 40 safe zone and TDs
      Yee Haw
    • Smallsword wrote:

      MRL already require so much... and I don't think the other artillery are too weak to compete.

      Many regard MRL as the arty meta staple... feel that it's apex and without a proper counter.
      I don't.

      Time isn't on MRLs side.

      Mind you, I'm a "kill your enemy in the cradle" kind of player.

      If anyone on the map has so much as an Army base 3 they'll have my attention.

      I agree that a minimum range would make sense for realism, and might be fun for gameplay... but an MRL build takes so much time and dedication...If there are any unrestrained players on the map watching, you wont have an army base 4 for long enough to mobilize "enough"...

      A minimum range would be exaggerating a weakness that I already exploit with TD... 40 safe zone, I'd use it... but don't NEED it.
      Your strategy works well vs the common public match players, but against some of the experts here I seriously doubt you could prevent them from getting their doom stacks up and running :saint:
    • Colonel Waffles wrote:

      So your argument as to why MRL is fine is “I just kill them before they can make it”?
      Again, the operational aspect of MRL doesn’t change. It’s still as good as it was before, just now you have to be more weary of the enemy armies around you. Also, I’m not sure what you are referring to with the 40 safe zone and TDs
      I don't think it's a bad idea to have the min range of 40 (what I referred to as a safe zone for opposing units)
      I'm not really making an argument... just saying that MRL already have weaknesses... the major one being that it takes so much time and research to even get one made.. let alone a doomstack... and an airassault from TD seems to be really effective against MRL already.

      Aeneas of Troy wrote:

      Your strategy works well vs the common public match players, but against some of the experts here I seriously doubt you could prevent them from getting their doom stacks up and running :saint:
      I'm sure it would be a much greater challenge against MVPs of the game... especially with " 7-18 days of peace" terms...which would really just blow the "kill in the cradle" strategy entirely.