Radar Rework, Artillery Nerf

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

    • _Pyth0n_ wrote:

      Teburu wrote:

      Counterpoint: I propose we nerf Waffles
      B-but, that would disrupt the balance of the forums...
      We would need to rebalance everything.
      Mr. Prosser: Do you know how much damage this bulldozer would sustain if I just let it roll over you?

      Arthur: How much?

      Mr. Prosser: None at all.
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD
    • Dealer of Death wrote:

      _Pyth0n_ wrote:

      Teburu wrote:

      Counterpoint: I propose we nerf Waffles
      B-but, that would disrupt the balance of the forums...We would need to rebalance everything.
      Mr. Prosser: Do you know how much damage this bulldozer would sustain if I just let it roll over you?
      Arthur: How much?

      Mr. Prosser: None at all.
      I’m making a new PowerPoint presentation to send to DG later this week. I’m gonna call it “Game Developer’s guide to Nerfing MRL”
      Yee Haw
    • Colonel Waffles wrote:

      Dealer of Death wrote:

      _Pyth0n_ wrote:

      Teburu wrote:

      Counterpoint: I propose we nerf Waffles
      B-but, that would disrupt the balance of the forums...We would need to rebalance everything.
      Mr. Prosser: Do you know how much damage this bulldozer would sustain if I just let it roll over you?Arthur: How much?

      Mr. Prosser: None at all.
      I’m making a new PowerPoint presentation to send to DG later this week. I’m gonna call it “Game Developer’s guide to Nerfing MRL”
      waffles.jpg
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD
    • Colonel Waffles wrote:

      Dealer of Death wrote:

      _Pyth0n_ wrote:

      Teburu wrote:

      Counterpoint: I propose we nerf Waffles
      B-but, that would disrupt the balance of the forums...We would need to rebalance everything.
      Mr. Prosser: Do you know how much damage this bulldozer would sustain if I just let it roll over you?Arthur: How much?

      Mr. Prosser: None at all.
      I’m making a new PowerPoint presentation to send to DG later this week. I’m gonna call it “Game Developer’s guide to Nerfing MRL”

      You do not bully or hurting to MRLS units.

      We want standar rocket ammutions, not fireworks rocket munitions.

      ........................................................

      Opulon say...

      Now, i disagree that your general proposal would nerf the artillery. In my opinion, it would nerf ANY kind of reckless offensive playstyle.
      Ironically, this would also make melee a marginally more useful playstyle because it has more HP hence more tolerance for blind attacks. It would however not really change the predominance of artillery, for human reasons.
      - The guys who play artillery well didn't need such a change to already conduct extensive spotting. CRV, UAV, Special Forces, are already very popular for those players, but it's also because when you are hyper active, you want to agressively get intel in order to know what should be shot, in what order.
      - It's about attrition and forcing the other side (the one without artillery) to come expose itself, where you can see him without the need for advanced spotting.
      I however like a lot your UAV proposal because yeah, i would like to see more interesting gameplay for artillery vs artillery spotting, for the early to mid game.
      Guns are always loaded.
    • @Opulon once again you put lots of thought on this matter but ypu missed one thing in your concept. Your Argument with cold war technology. In CON we are past this time/scenario.

      I must say there are so amy issues in this game that shpuld be addressed. Such as Hlt and run...I wouldnt even think or fantasize about new dynamics.

      Otherwise I would question why defenders can see the whole Komposition of an attacking army as long as f
      Province is theirs...and as soon as the province is conquered they have a Blackout...
      Alle sagten: Das geht nicht. Dann kam einer, der wusste das nicht und hat es einfach gemacht.
    • kurtvonstein wrote:

      @Opulon once again you put lots of thought on this matter but ypu missed one thing in your concept. Your Argument with cold war technology. In CON we are past this time/scenario.

      I must say there are so amy issues in this game that shpuld be addressed. Such as Hlt and run...I wouldnt even think or fantasize about new dynamics.

      Otherwise I would question why defenders can see the whole Komposition of an attacking army as long as f
      Province is theirs...and as soon as the province is conquered they have a Blackout...
      i always thought (maybe arbitrary) that the unit visuals and tiers were roughly representing the "sub eras" of the Cold War.

      Tier one : Post-Korean War ( 1960 onward )
      Tier two : Post-Vietnam War (1970 onward )
      Tier Three : Post USSR collapse ( 1991 onward )

      it doesn't work 100% of course, but i think there is some "vague design" merit behind this association

      For the sake (= the fun) of the reasoning of the original poster, it's what i used as a prism of view. But yeah, you're right, it's a rabbit hole. We would have à 200 pages documents

      and after a few design brainstorming, the game would be closer to the military software :D
      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.