Why don't I like RD?

User avatar
NATO Potato
Captain
Posts: 1691
Joined: Sun 20 Jan 2013 01:22

Re: Why don't I like RD?

Postby NATO Potato » Tue 3 Jun 2014 22:19

Shrike wrote:
Mike wrote:
Countess Bathory wrote:Are you suggesting that 15pt ultimate meatshield Centurions weren't used in ALB?


Oh I saw them plenty in tournaments Centurions taking blows for the Leopards and Abrams.

I still yet to see this Centurions, M113 RR and T-34/85, SU-100 meta that people speak of. All I have seen in pub games is just spec ops helo rushes, atacm spam, and 1000kg bombs.

I find it hard to believe that

Doeko
Master Sergeant
Posts: 158
Joined: Wed 15 May 2013 16:48
Contact:

Re: Why don't I like RD?

Postby Doeko » Tue 3 Jun 2014 23:08

Mike wrote:
Countess Bathory wrote:Are you suggesting that 15pt ultimate meatshield Centurions weren't used in ALB?


Oh I saw them plenty in tournaments Centurions taking blows for the Leopards and Abrams.


In contrast to using them as a spam or opening move unit, this actually is a valid tactic! I have yet to see a Leopard or Abrams in a ranked game (against someone who actually knew what they were doing).

Also, since nobody has really responded to this I'd like to highlight this from my OP:

Doeko wrote:Taking away the ability to play mixed decks (in ranked at least) would probably fix all the issues I have with the balance in this game but the blight that is mixed decks has been with us since the beginning of time so I doubt that is ever going to change. I don't understand why because their presence makes the game realistically impossible to balance for Eugen.


I wouldn't mind the "cent spam" or any other kind of spam nearly as much, if it wasn't supported by all the other uniquely overpowered units. For example the air and/or helo rush which often comes along with the cent spam, would be much less feasible if it was restricted to commonwealth. That said, even without mixed deck the cents obviously are in need of a solid hit with the nerfbat. I find it rather unfeasible that anything costing only 15 points should have more than 4 or maybe 5 armor.

It's hard to imagine that if mixed decks had never been included in wargame, that they would be a highly requested feature. Imo the mixed decks only take away from the game's authenticity and furthermore make the game impossible to balance.

With regards to spam in ALB: Yes, it happened. However, it was much easier to overpower the cheaper units with more expensive units. Whether this is due to map design or the unit stats, I am not sure. The fact remains that decks which opened with an MBT were quite feasible, but putting an MBT into the game at ANY POINT in an RD match is a total waste of points compared to the alternatives (even if it is covered by good AA, it will still get roflstomped by vastly inferior ground units).

User avatar
TheDemolitionmech
Sergeant
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon 10 Sep 2012 00:17
Contact:

Re: Why don't I like RD?

Postby TheDemolitionmech » Tue 3 Jun 2014 23:22

F-22 wrote:That's basically why I've taken a bit of leave from RD right now until the DLC comes out, it just doesn't feel correct right now, at least for me.


I'm sort of the same way I feel now. It is pretty annoying that I (being a pact player) have to play NATO and play those tactics to even compete with the enemy. I understand how if there is a slight meta difference leaning towards one, the top players who want to win will pick that one. However, the way that it is now is just ridiculous and it IS possible to get both sides close to each other as far as balance. I am really antsy for a patch or DLC to fix the numerous problems

Gneckes
Warrant Officer
Posts: 482
Joined: Fri 10 Feb 2012 16:48
Contact:

Re: Why don't I like RD?

Postby Gneckes » Tue 3 Jun 2014 23:45

TheDemolitionmech wrote:
F-22 wrote:That's basically why I've taken a bit of leave from RD right now until the DLC comes out, it just doesn't feel correct right now, at least for me.


I'm sort of the same way I feel now. It is pretty annoying that I (being a pact player) have to play NATO and play those tactics to even compete with the enemy. I understand how if there is a slight meta difference leaning towards one, the top players who want to win will pick that one. However, the way that it is now is just ridiculous and it IS possible to get both sides close to each other as far as balance. I am really antsy for a patch or DLC to fix the numerous problems


Couldn't agree more, feeling the exact same way.
I'm just not comfortable playing these competitive games.
Common sense shall thus be referred to as rare sense.

MENTORImage

User avatar
Akula161
Master Sergeant
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu 6 Feb 2014 14:41
Location: Montevideo, Uruguay
Contact:

Re: Why don't I like RD?

Postby Akula161 » Wed 4 Jun 2014 00:32

I guess i agree with the whole "tank meta" issues, the centurion and T-34 spam, but the game isn't doomed, hell i even heard a marshal hinting that there's a tank rework patch coming soon! The issues are being addressed, the thing is you just gotta give Eugen some time, these things take work and time. :)
Image

User avatar
chykka
Brigadier
Posts: 3387
Joined: Wed 28 Nov 2012 14:55
Location: Canada, Alberta
Contact:

Re: Why don't I like RD?

Postby chykka » Wed 4 Jun 2014 01:02

Shrike wrote:
Mike wrote:
Countess Bathory wrote:Are you suggesting that 15pt ultimate meatshield Centurions weren't used in ALB?


Oh I saw them plenty in tournaments Centurions taking blows for the Leopards and Abrams.

I still yet to see this Centurions, M113 RR and T-34/85, SU-100 meta that people speak of. All I have seen in pub games is just spec ops helo rushes, atacm spam, and 1000kg bombs.



I see much less 1000kg bombs Eugen did a very good job fixing that.

Centurions can kill t80's I've done it many times (and I play nato less frequently and bring those tanks even less)

Su-122 is garbage ap, was even worse in EE. HE is great, the KVPT is helpful I like to use them if I need more infantry support. (because that's what a 'standard' match requires is revolving around infantry and it's support.
M113 RR can be useful. But by no means I never see it used, unless by my own hands.. T34's I see enough of now, They are T34s still
Centurions currently have way too much armour, a bad gun doesn't mean much if you have the softer units being protected.
Those units all fall into early game meta, before Arty, before more sustainable planes, Before heavy armour, Before your AA network, And typically before you have recon securing your flanks. Before the sleeves roll up and it gets into the tactics, the micro, the maneuvers, and grad strategy. Your centurions and opening planes/recon rely a lot on luck.
So IMO there is no Centurion 'meta' lol :lol: just like there was no f111c reliance although it may of seemed like it in beta ranked :twisted: . Only hoping your opponent doesn't start with a unit composition (and initial positions) That make the centurions more of a burden.

Late game they are pretty useless, (t34s have a few advantages in some areas ;) ) So I really see no issue with those tanks, however they just as available as t34 pretty much. The cards 'total cost' should be considered when balancing tanks availability.
Especially for late game when you can take the more expensive centurions. Better choice for lasting longer.

But anything over 20 minutes is a millennium in some match set ups :roll: I like short matches now and again, but setting them up to end fast, or expecting to end it fast usually ends in a lamer match. Even if cheese prevails, karma will balance. Or a balanced Season ;)
Image

User avatar
Mike
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 12409
Joined: Thu 20 Feb 2014 01:09
Location: Virginia, United States of America
Contact:

Re: Why don't I like RD?

Postby Mike » Wed 4 Jun 2014 02:14

Doeko wrote:
Mike wrote:Oh I saw them plenty in tournaments Centurions taking blows for the Leopards and Abrams.


In contrast to using them as a spam or opening move unit, this actually is a valid tactic! I have yet to see a Leopard or Abrams in a ranked game (against someone who actually knew what they were doing)


Seeing that this game is set in 1991, I think that's a serious problem.
Image
Courtesy of KattiValk

User avatar
MajoorHokie
Master Sergeant
Posts: 166
Joined: Sat 25 Feb 2012 20:30
Contact:

Re: Why don't I like RD?

Postby MajoorHokie » Wed 4 Jun 2014 05:23

WRD fixed everything that was wrong with ALB (Massive air spam, no use for artillery, no need for recon). So I can understand why people from WALB don't quite get the same enjoyment out of WRD.
Image

User avatar
FUBAR1939
Warrant Officer
Posts: 412
Joined: Thu 13 Jun 2013 06:24
Contact:

Re: Why don't I like RD?

Postby FUBAR1939 » Wed 4 Jun 2014 05:45

MajoorHokie wrote:WRD fixed everything that was wrong with ALB (Massive air spam, no use for artillery, no need for recon). So I can understand why people from WALB don't quite get the same enjoyment out of WRD.


You still can air spam, easy as in ALB.

There was use of artillery in ALB, mortars, and good arty. No need for recon? wut
Image

User avatar
Admiral Piett
Colonel
Posts: 2910
Joined: Sun 12 Feb 2012 22:04
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Why don't I like RD?

Postby Admiral Piett » Wed 4 Jun 2014 06:06

I feel that Red Dragon has far more potential than AirLand Battle ever had, but right now I'm taking a break until there is a big, meaningful balance patch. The Special Forces-MANPAD-cheap vehicle/tank spam kind of wore out its welcome a long time ago for me.

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 61 guests