Outpost Universe Forums

Outpost Series Games => Outpost 2 Multiplayer => Topic started by: Angellus Mortis on August 29, 2010, 04:01:43 PM

Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Angellus Mortis on August 29, 2010, 04:01:43 PM
I was in a 2v1 match against Zhall and LORDOFPAIN and Zhall thinks it is acceptable to cut my tubes when I am already against 2 of them. Opinions? I personally think it is  a move one would do because they are too afraid to lose.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Zardox Xheonov on August 29, 2010, 04:10:55 PM
It generally ruins the "spirit of the game" and ultimately gets old very fast... It is also frowned upon within most of the community (i think?).

as for zhuall and his 'rofl's it was very inmature.... i think he should stop the spaming use of 'rofl' for the time being before he gets a penalty of some sort...

(tbh i was laughing pretty hard on my seat) mainly for the stupidity

also we could of avoided this if i had told you about that earthworker, though i did not know it would end the game... i did however see it parked with its lighs off... had i known it would ruin the game i would of told you... or warn zhall...
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Hidiot on August 30, 2010, 02:15:12 AM
Your poll question, it makes little sense.

How exactly does cutting off a CC end the game? The CC is the fail condition, as far as I know.

How early in the game did it happen? If it happens before any form of defense can be set up, then yeah, not nice. But if it happens after your target has weaponry, well... then your target needs to pay better attention: innocent.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Angellus Mortis on August 30, 2010, 07:29:30 AM
No this was like right after I got my CC and other factories built. It seriously screwed up my early game production.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Highlander on August 30, 2010, 10:24:39 AM
Personally, I consider this a legit tactic. Though indeed, it is somewhat low and I rarely resort to it unless I am pressed early game.

Reason i consider it legit: It is fairly easy to stop, and if it fails, it leaves the aggressor in a bad position.


Also, this tactic can be avoided by leaving some distance between you and your opponents or the way you set up your base.



And please, fix the questions for the poll so that they are understandable.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Sirbomber on August 30, 2010, 10:58:27 AM
They'd make more sense if Hooman would stop being a censor-nazi.  n0[size=0] [/size]0b gets automatically changed to "new person".  Of course, you all know the various ME[size=0] [/size]S HA[size=0] [/size]L stuff is getting censored, but you can't even say "has [size=0] [/size]sex with" (on a slightly related note, how did you find that out Arklon?).  It gets changed to "procreate with".  What is this, the Sesame Street forums?!

Anyways, here's what I'm guessing the original questions were:
Yes, very n0[size=0] [/size]0b. NEVER do.
Yes, very n0[size=0] [/size]0b, but allowed.
No, allowed, after all it is no rules.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Zhall on August 30, 2010, 12:44:16 PM
Ill admit it was a (p*nis) move. Rofl even p3n!$ got censored.

You know what i meant

Yes yes fine the unspoken rules are almost always

NO TUBE CUTTING
NO EMP MISSILE SPAM
NO MARK CHEATING BM OR AM
NO SPEEDGEARING? I dont know if it even works with op2..
NO... Lagging out? lol

And come on, he had a three bar, i and my team mate were done for if not for elfish tactics.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: TH300 on August 30, 2010, 02:17:54 PM
Cutting tubes early in game when players don't have combat units is not acceptable for me. It just ruins the game.

As soon as players can defend themselves, tube cutting will probably anyway stop working. And if it still works, its the player's fault. But since that is probably very rare, most people don't cut tubes.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Arklon on August 30, 2010, 02:40:41 PM
Quote
What is this, the Sesame Street forums?!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-Wd-Q3F8KM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-Wd-Q3F8KM)
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Angellus Mortis on August 30, 2010, 03:05:52 PM
Quote

Anyways, here's what I'm guessing the original questions were:
Yes, very n0[size=0] [/size]0b. NEVER do.
Yes, very n0[size=0] [/size]0b, but allowed.
No, allowed, after all it is no rules.
Yes. Correct. I did not even see the censor.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: CK9 on August 31, 2010, 11:58:26 AM
Bottom line as far as I'm concerned:

if you cut someone's tube before they have any chance of defending themselves, you are beyound just a new person.  There is no excuse for it.  It's a lot like killing a child because they might one day become the next hitler.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Angellus Mortis on August 31, 2010, 12:05:13 PM
Quote
if you cut someone's tube before they have any chance of defending themselves, you are beyound just a new person.  There is no excuse for it.  It's a lot like killing a child because they might one day become the next hitler.
Thank you. Lol
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Highlander on August 31, 2010, 03:04:51 PM
Just blow up his earthy before it cuts any tubes ? Then send your earthy his way and return the favor.

You can always defend from this tactic unless your opponent manages to sneak into your base..
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Zardox Xheonov on August 31, 2010, 05:29:04 PM
Quote
Quote
What is this, the Sesame Street forums?!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-Wd-Q3F8KM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-Wd-Q3F8KM)
OMG ROFLMFAO!!!

btw i am curious who in there right minds would check the 3rd answer in this poll because the answer within the community is obvious: the 1st!!!!

oh and need i mention that building an advlab near enemy vital structs (or building a power plant or even spaceport) is also n()()bish? it fallls under disrespect becuase you are anoying the other player by playing the game the way it's not suppost to be played and ruining it for everyone who wants to enjoy a nice long game of op2. This is CLEARY against the rules... (Or at least should be for the better good of opu community).
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: evecolonycamander on August 31, 2010, 07:17:09 PM
why would someone do that.... its 1800(?) common ore down the tubes. and if they are a new person like you say they are then that ore is very much needed.  
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: CK9 on August 31, 2010, 09:24:47 PM
I don't have a problem with the tactic once the game has progressed to the point where you have some form of defence available, but when the game is just starting and you haven't even gotten a chance to research defenses it is just a no-honor tactic and a good way to get people to stop playing against you.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: evecolonycamander on August 31, 2010, 09:46:06 PM
i agree
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Zhall on September 01, 2010, 12:14:02 AM
Quote
Just blow up his earthy before it cuts any tubes ? Then send your earthy his way and return the favor.

You can always defend from this tactic unless your opponent manages to sneak into your base..
Um.. with what convecs? I guess it could be possible by detonating em, and you dont need your surveyor or dozer anyway.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Highlander on September 01, 2010, 03:40:55 AM
Quote
Um.. with what convecs? I guess it could be possible by detonating em, and you dont need your surveyor or dozer anyway.
Exactly.

SD your own earthy + surveyor and accept the loss
OR
Use surveyor and 1 (or 2) convecs, then send your own earthy to opponents base.

In any case, best defense for this and most other early game tactics - get some distance between yourself and your opponent.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: evecolonycamander on September 01, 2010, 04:01:15 AM
that doesn't help when you are tailed by them early game
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Highlander on September 01, 2010, 07:21:34 AM
If they are tailing you, then you have a lot of opportunities to place them in a bad position.

Only a few maps are so small that both of them can tail you in any case. Secondly game rules can be manipulated to avoid this from happening. (Either agree to none of these tactics, or make BM small enough they cannot follow you before BM is up, choose a bigger map etc)
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Arklon on September 01, 2010, 10:09:39 AM
Quote
In any case, best defense for this and most other early game tactics - get some distance between yourself and your opponent.
Yeah, doesn't exactly work on LoS maps.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Angellus Mortis on September 01, 2010, 10:11:51 AM
It was actually on a large map. I had just got my VF and Common Ore Smelter up (started with high res) and my Standard Lab kit had just finished. He cut the tube tom my Common Ore Smelter then my VF.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: evecolonycamander on September 01, 2010, 05:27:04 PM
I never use the build mark rule. i just build where ever and when ever i want.... so do my opponents. i do how ever use an attack mark. speaking of witch should self destructing a unit or tube cutting be considered in the attack mark?
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: TH300 on September 01, 2010, 05:48:52 PM
I'd expect that most people would at least agree that the rules that are set before the game starts must be obeyed. If players agree on a build-mark, don't build before that mark. Also, if players agree that tubes should not be cut, don't cut tubes. If such agreements aren't made, you are free to do (almost) everything. And here is really the problem: the rules have to be made clear before the game starts (usually the hosts task)

Also, since cutting tubes and selfdestructing units near enemy units are offensive acts, they fall under the attack mark.

Some of your questions may also be answered here (http://forum.outpost2.net/index.php?showtopic=1698) (although some are also discussed).
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Highlander on September 01, 2010, 06:42:09 PM
Quote
I never use the build mark rule. i just build where ever and when ever i want.... so do my opponents. i do how ever use an attack mark. speaking of witch should self destructing a unit or tube cutting be considered in the attack mark?
Personally I consider BM's more important than AM's, since they allow people to chose their appropriate base positions rather than building on the first 1 bar they encounter in open terrain, or to sort out teams/allies on the map.
(If someone builds 30 marks before others then they will probably have weapons 30 marks before the other players as well and thus - GG)


Personally I will attack any unit that enters my immediate base area (As defined by natural cliffs or walls), be that scouts, earthy's or combat vehicles. (Usually I leave surveyors and convecs happening by alone if they don't interrupt my activity)
Whether or not I consider it a mark break depends on the type of vehicles and the actions they take.
- A single SD'ing non-combat vehicle isn't exactly a war declaration and neither are tubecutting. I would give a warning if it happened, if the opponent continues after warning, I probably will retaliate.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: evecolonycamander on September 01, 2010, 06:51:11 PM
that makes since... what about units sitting on every common/rare ore spot on the map. i find it very annoying when one player takes all of the ore spots
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: CK9 on September 01, 2010, 10:02:57 PM
only possible on low-ore/small maps.

it's a legit tactic if they fall within the pre-defined building restrictions.  i remember a few games on rockplain a long while back where most of the time was spent taking and re-taking ore spots.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: evecolonycamander on September 01, 2010, 10:18:06 PM
i understand this tactic in midis and large maps. nothing else
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: CK9 on September 02, 2010, 01:08:05 AM
Have you played rockplain? lol

I don't think there is a single 3 bar common on the map, and maybe 1 or 2 good rare ore spots, which leads to the ore wars.

anyway, I kinda think we should come up with a list of the standards that the older players have come to expect, but the newer players aren't fully aware of.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: evecolonycamander on September 02, 2010, 01:42:24 AM
yes, we should.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Highlander on September 02, 2010, 04:40:12 AM
Quote
what about units sitting on every common/rare ore spot on the map. i find it very annoying when one player takes all of the ore spots
I don't mind players staking out their claim on a preferred base spot or an ore location or two. (I.E putting a lynx on top of a good 3 bar between two bases or put a lynx in a bottleneck to deny others entrance to the area beyond)

Taking possession of all mine locations or fully blocking an opponent from expanding is too much though.



Rock Garden as CK is referring to, is a pretty tough map. The only rare ore is in the middle of the map, thus difficult to hold and most often painfully far away. + Dynamix seems to have different ideas than current players how and where to build decent bases :P
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Freeza-CII on September 02, 2010, 09:59:50 AM
i would consider suicide bombing or tube cutting to be a covert attack or even better trading them a unit and telling it to attack and then trade it.  Its a attack if it does some thing detrimental to your opponent its a attack.  Now say some one wants to be a dick <looks at sirbomber> and wants to "park" a starflare/nova in your base before the attack mark hopefully you notice this before the attack mark and wonder what the f***. but i would say thats a attack to.  Place ment of military hardware or any units really inside some ones base before the mark would have to be a no go.  But the way i see it.  If you got killed by a earthworker or your convec with the cc got blown up in a suicide mission then you need to work on you observation skills in the game a bit more.  certain things can be avoided.  It is in my opinion a crap way to win or loose. but to put it more blattently its like letting off a giant steamy load in some ones face.  

On the other note of maps new and old.
Seeing as its suppose to be a challenge to build those higher class units the rare ore is suppose to be harder to get then the common such as in rock garden. if you can hold it your pretty much going to win but things that use rare ore usually cost more common to so there is plenty to think about.  How ever out of sheer need to beable to rush and build tigers most player maps have a 2 or 3 bar rare in there base as to make the game speed up abit.  how ever that can lead some some long stalemates and some one wins out of boredom or time.  I would say that newwer maps should be built on the princible that rare ore should be harder to get and that once you get it you have to protect it so you can win. thus adding that multitask of op2 that we love instead of taking it away for the sake of conevience.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Highlander on September 02, 2010, 10:22:40 AM
Quote
I would say that newwer maps should be built on the princible that rare ore should be harder to get and that once you get it you have to protect it so you can win. thus adding that multitask of op2 that we love instead of taking it away for the sake of conevience.
(thumbsup)  
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Sirbomber on September 02, 2010, 11:41:05 AM
Great, make the game even more unbalanced for Eden.  Why not just double the strength of Microwaves and remove Lasers while you're at it?
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: CK9 on September 02, 2010, 11:43:33 AM
Quote
Rock Garden as CK is referring to...
D'oh!  I guess I need to start playing again, I'm forgetting the names, lol
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Highlander on September 02, 2010, 01:51:37 PM
Quote
Great, make the game even more unbalanced for Eden.
Game has always been "balanced" like this.
Plymouth is strong early game, Eden is strong late game.

An Eden without rare is of course a weakened Eden, but it is only slightly inferior to a Plymouth without rare. Sticky and RPG gives Plymouth an advantage true, but in most cases Eden can use terrain to hold out long enough to get rare. (Rock Garden is just about the only map that highly favors Plymouth)

Once Eden gets rare they get the upper hand - big time. (Unless of course you have given your enemy enough time to prepare a lot of ports/missiles (and ore to run them) - then it becomes somewhat more tricky)
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: TH300 on September 02, 2010, 05:31:56 PM
There have been times when people didn't play as Eden... I'm glad, that has changed. So lets not make Eden more inferior. And after all it would be boring to play only maps with similar ore distribution. Just lets not make maps where the only rare is at one spot in the middle which is impossible to defend. Maybe even make common ore harder to get (1bar mine in every base, 2 or 3bar at spots which are more difficult to defend).
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: evecolonycamander on September 02, 2010, 10:38:18 PM
i agree... that would be a very interesting twist in the games mechanics
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Arklon on September 02, 2010, 10:45:24 PM
Quote
Once Eden gets rare they get the upper hand - big time. (Unless of course your enemy knows how to use ESG effectively (not as powerful as Thor's Hammer but can very nicely deal out some damage to any types of units when done right) and/or you have given your enemy enough time (AKA not a huge amount more than it takes to research Thor's Hammer and prepare an expensive army using it) to prepare a lot of ports/missiles (and ore to run them (and due to the insane returns you get from EMP missile spam, putting ore towards it should be high priority anyway)) - then it becomes impossibly more tricky)
Fixed that for you.

And I've seen many games (particularly team games) that degenerated into "Plymouth players spam missiles, Eden players can only sit in their base and build MDs (which suck up a lot of power and colonists, which slows down research and vehicle production immensely unless it's gotten late enough into the game where you have plenty population) and can't go out to attack because their units will just get missiled over and over and eventually picked off, and therefore the game is totally stalemated, unless (pre-1.3.5) Plymouth players abused the MD bug to guarantee successful missile strikes against Eden, or (also pre-1.3.5) the unit cap prevents building adequate defense for Eden to turtle well, and/or (any version now) the terrain doesn't favor turtling well, OR it is a team game and the Eden player has a Plymouth teammate that somehow manages to out-missile spam the enemy, which often takes a very very long time", so don't make EMP missile spam sound harder to get up and running than it is.

OR Eden can MD creep up to the Plymouth base and win that way!!!!!!!!111one one one. (Don't even try that, except perhaps on La Corrida; it typically doesn't work (mostly because you'd have to defend your huge MD line as well as your base, which you probably aren't gonna be able to do due to ore and the unit cap, and you'll need loads of colonists, much more than you'll have except late in the game, and build a bunch of power plants), it's just plain impractical. I have successfully done this on La Corrida vs. one opponent, since the size and design of the map happens to negate the major problems with the tactic, although it was still a pain and I had to idle most of my VFs and it stopped my research progress dead in its tracks for a good while due to the workers needed to run the MDs; I've tried it on Pie Chart as well and it didn't work, even though that's also a small map with many chokepoints and seperated player bases etc.)

The only other thing you can try is EMPing your own army just before the missile hits (basically an exploit of a game mechanic: if a vehicle is already EMP'ed, it can't get re-EMP'ed, even if the original EMP didn't have the same total duration as the would-be "new" EMP). You have to do it fast. You have to select every individual EMP unit and EMP a vehicle not already being EMP'ed by another unit; again, this must be done very fast; you don't have a big window of time before the missile hits, and if you do it too early, the vehicles will come out of EMP (the duration of which is shorter because friendly-fire EMP doesn't last as long as regular EMP and not nearly as long as missile EMP) before the missile hits. You'll need highly refined micro skills to pull it off, and it should be mentioned that micro is much more difficult in OP2 than in other RTSes because OP2 doesn't "automate" a lot of things that other RTSes typically do. You're also gonna need very quick and sharp eyes to immediately tell your EMP units apart from your other units since they look very similar due to the sharing of chassis.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Sirbomber on September 02, 2010, 11:33:43 PM
Not to mention that Plymouth has more (and better) units that don't require rare ore compared to Eden, allowing them to easily camp on all the rare ore spots.

Seriously Highlander, you sure you're playing OP2?  Because from the way you're talking it sounds like you have no idea how the game really works.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Spikerocks101 on September 03, 2010, 12:02:19 AM
So, your saying, to make it more balance, give MD's less power requirements (maybe half or less), and larger range, aswell as give EMP Missiles less range and effect time?
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: evecolonycamander on September 03, 2010, 12:07:16 AM
hey Eden has a huge advantage once all research is done... i have yet to see a player lose once they have finished getting a good sized army up and running. even if Plymouth spams the hell out of EMP missiles Eden is safe if the player is constantly moving units around. the only disadvantage Eden has is  it requires a lot of micro-management and ore
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: CK9 on September 03, 2010, 01:27:39 AM
eve, that's because you havne't seen an effective use of chokepoints.  I've stated this several times, and I'll continue to do so because I'm damn proud of it: I've annihilated a strong EMP/Thor Tiger mix of 32 units with just 16 RPG tigers on La Corr because I was fortunate with the choke point.  Get someone who actually knows what they're doing, and they're going to be able to push out towards the enemy base by forcing the opponent to be on the bad side of a choke point.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Arklon on September 03, 2010, 01:59:02 AM
Quote
So, your saying, to make it more balance, give MD's less power requirements (maybe half or less), and larger range, aswell as give EMP Missiles less range and effect time?
No, that's what you're saying. I was pointing out how things are as it is right now, not how they should be.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Highlander on September 03, 2010, 03:26:54 AM
Quote
Not to mention that Plymouth has more (and better) units that don't require rare ore compared to Eden, allowing them to easily camp on all the rare ore spots.

Seriously Highlander, you sure you're playing OP2?  Because from the way you're talking it sounds like you have no idea how the game really works.
Yes Sirbomber, Plymouth gets Sticky, which is 1 more weapon than Eden gets.

Personally I find Sticky best as a measure to hold chokepoints or slow down advancement of an enemy. I much prefer EMP when it comes to fighting, though indeed Sticky can have it's special uses.

As for the other weapons, we can disregard EMP and Flare's since they are the same for both factions.

Laser vs Mic (Both upgraded): Mic's will win have an advantage, but if you upgrade armor on lynx's Mic's will have a smaller advantage. Thus having a few extra lasers in your army might tip the battle in your favor.

Rail vs RPG (Both upgraded): Is just about an even match strength wise. RPG has the advantage because it does not require a direct line of sight.

And where does the "easy camping on rare ore" come from ? (Apart from Rock Garden) Most maps has rare inside the base area or in the immediate vicinity. On the maps where this does not occur you can either attack the "camping units" or you can strike at his base, since he should have less units in his base since he has split his forces.




Arklon, if we are gonna take player skill levels into the consideration here, wouldn't it be natural to assume that the Eden player knows how to avoid the ESG ? Not just assume that the Plymouth player is the only one who knows how to move units around ?

Secondly, if we are comparing weapons - wouldn't it be more natural to compare Acid vs ESG, rather than Thor vs ESG ?
Acid's have virtually the same cost as ESG and "same" weapon effect. While ESG has 1 tile longer range, Acid's can damage buildings as well. But, perhaps most importantly - Acid's is about twice as strong as ESG.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: evecolonycamander on September 03, 2010, 05:31:17 AM
i would like to see a small list in order of the most powerful to the least. both before and after all research
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: TH300 on September 03, 2010, 07:53:45 AM
Quote
i would like to see a small list in order of the most powerful to the least. both before and after all research
If you want numbers, just read the sheets.vol (particularly concussion and penetration damage columns plus reload time). But its really not so simple. How powerful a weapon is depends on your capabilities of using it.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Sirbomber on September 03, 2010, 08:47:11 AM
Quote
And where does the "easy camping on rare ore" come from ?
Maybe from your own suggestion to make more maps where you don't have easy access to rare ore?

Also, Rail Gun is crap.  The "extra" damage it deals as compared to the RPG is so minuscule that it won't matter in a big fire fight (100 concussion/50 penetration for Rail Gun vs 100 concussion/45 penetration for RPG), and even after its rate-of-fire upgrade the Rail Gun is too slow (65 for Rail Gun, 55 for RPG).

And you say Laser is only "slightly" disadvantaged compared to Microwave?  Let's look at that too.  Upgraded, Laser deals 45 penetration damage.  Microwave deals 30 concussion damage + 30 penetration damage making it much more useful against armored targets.  After the upgrade (which it doesn't get until the end of the game, mind you) Laser's rate-of-fire is 22; Microwave's is 20.

We can look at ESG too if you want?  Acid Cloud damages buildings.  Great.  ESG deals massive damage to enemy vehicles (even Tigers) and is easily spammed at chokepoints.  Acid isn't nearly as effective at that.  ESG's damage is instantaneous.  Acid can be dodged.

Assuming these are 1-to-1 fights (which they won't be of course since Plymouth stuff is cheaper and more easily spammed), Thor's Hammer is that only weapon Eden has that isn't outclassed by its Plymouth counterpart.  It's the only thing that gives Eden any fighting edge.  It also requires a boatload of rare ore, something Plymouth only needs to worry about for ESG and Supernova (which is useless in a firefight anyways).  So if a Plymouth player isn't using any of their rare ore because none of their best units need it, what should they do with it?  Why, spam EMP Missiles of course!  So now Plymouth gets to pour 90% of their rare ore into EMP Missiles (assuming they're building some ESG) and now Eden has to split their rare between Thor's, Acid, Observatories, and Meteor Defenses.  This is assuming Eden can even get rare ore, because apparently you think we should make it harder impossible for Eden to ever get any decent rare.

But no, please.  I love it when people tell me OP2 is balanced, or that "Plymouth excels at the start while Eden excels at the end" so I can't wait to hear more about how little you understand this game Eden's hidden strengths.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Highlander on September 03, 2010, 11:10:03 AM
Quote
Also, Rail Gun is crap.  The "extra" damage it deals as compared to the RPG is so minuscule that it won't matter in a big fire fight (100 concussion/50 penetration for Rail Gun vs 100 concussion/45 penetration for RPG), and even after its rate-of-fire upgrade the Rail Gun is too slow (65 for Rail Gun, 55 for RPG).
So basically we agree that Rail is more or less equal to RPG like I said in my previous post ?  (Except of course for the line of fire limit on Rail)


Quote
And you say Laser is only "slightly" disadvantaged compared to Microwave? Let's look at that too. Upgraded, Laser deals 45 penetration damage. Microwave deals 30 concussion damage + 30 penetration damage making it much more useful against armored targets. After the upgrade (which it doesn't get until the end of the game, mind you) Laser's rate-of-fire is 22; Microwave's is 20.
It's hardly a end game tech, if you play as Eden against Plymouth, Armor upg and Fire Upg is the things you focus on if you cannot immediately get your hands on rare.


Quote
We can look at ESG too if you want? Acid Cloud damages buildings. Great. ESG deals massive damage to enemy vehicles (even Tigers) and is easily spammed at chokepoints. Acid isn't nearly as effective at that. ESG's damage is instantaneous. Acid can be dodged.
Acid does more damage/fires faster than ESG (Since you like numbers, you can look up which is correct), making Acid nearly twice as powerful as ESG.
Acids can just as easily be spammed at chokepoints - thus this is a mute arguement.
The cloud of Acid can be driven out of - yes, but the vehicle still sustains some damage. Overall, both ESG and Acid will either hit or not, depending on micromanaging of units and whether or not opponent pays attention. This sort of action is however rarely decisive and usually just forces the player to move his vecs around. If you drive two armies into each other, Acid will win over an equal amount of ESG.
Also, since you seem to ignore Acid's ability to damage buildings, consider this:
- Acids can destroy a line of Plymouth GP's without taking much damage. ESG must either wade through and take considerable beating, or the army must wait or go around. (Or be reinforced with other weapons)
- An army of Acids can act as both a suppressor and  throw a punch against a base. ESG can only suppress enemy vehicles.


Quote
Assuming these are 1-to-1 fights (which they won't be of course since Plymouth stuff is cheaper and more easily spammed),
Not entirely true. At lynx level, prices are much the same for non-rare units, offering Plymouth something of an advantage true - but it is not so overpowering.
At Tiger level, you can build 5 ESG tigers for every 4 Acid tigers. - Assuming Rare or is the limiting factor.
Perhaps some minor tweaking of costs could make Eden more competitive early on.


Quote
Thor's Hammer is that only weapon Eden has that isn't outclassed by its Plymouth counterpart. It's the only thing that gives Eden any fighting edge.
Wrong. Acid Cloud is Eden's strongest card. Thor is nice if you want to get rid of walls or destroy buildings quickly, but Acid is better against other vehicles.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Sirbomber on September 03, 2010, 11:41:18 AM
Quote
Quote
Also, Rail Gun is crap.  The "extra" damage it deals as compared to the RPG is so minuscule that it won't matter in a big fire fight (100 concussion/50 penetration for Rail Gun vs 100 concussion/45 penetration for RPG), and even after its rate-of-fire upgrade the Rail Gun is too slow (65 for Rail Gun, 55 for RPG).
So basically we agree that Rail is more or less equal to RPG like I said in my previous post ?  (Except of course for the line of fire limit on Rail)
No, that's exactly the opposite of what I said.  Rail Gun is extremely inferior to RPG.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Highlander on September 03, 2010, 12:45:41 PM
Quote
No, that's exactly the opposite of what I said.  Rail Gun is extremely inferior to RPG.
Perhaps you should test them against each other ingame then. Extremely inferior certainly is not the correct phrasing.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Spikerocks101 on September 03, 2010, 01:34:41 PM
Seems the RPG and Railgun are pretty balanced. The Railgun has 10% more penetration then the RPG, but 15% less rate of fire. On reverse, it looks like: RPG has 18% more rate of fire, and 11% less damage. I think they still are with in a 10% difference, so I feel that they both would be pretty evenly matched in a fight, but lynx vs lynx, rpg wins for sure, but tiger vs tiger, the rail would more likely win.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Arklon on September 03, 2010, 03:01:10 PM
Quote
Arklon, if we are gonna take player skill levels into the consideration here, wouldn't it be natural to assume that the Eden player knows how to avoid the ESG ? Not just assume that the Plymouth player is the only one who knows how to move units around ?

Secondly, if we are comparing weapons - wouldn't it be more natural to compare Acid vs ESG, rather than Thor vs ESG ?
Acid's have virtually the same cost as ESG and "same" weapon effect. While ESG has 1 tile longer range, Acid's can damage buildings as well. But, perhaps most importantly - Acid's is about twice as strong as ESG.
Maybe, but you may have trouble dodging the ESG mines and killing the ESG units using your Thor's Hammer.
As for acid being stronger than ESG, no. Well, if you're talking about lightly armored targets like lynx and arachnids (which you almost never see), yes; against tigers, ESG outclasses it significantly. The fact that acid can damage buildings isn't much of an upside as it really isn't an efficient weapon for that. You can also turn acid against their owner by charging some scouts into their army, causing them to disperse friendly-fire acid on themselves; ESG doesn't do that.

Quote
Seems the RPG and Railgun are pretty balanced. The Railgun has 10% more penetration then the RPG, but 15% less rate of fire. On reverse, it looks like: RPG has 18% more rate of fire, and 11% less damage. I think they still are with in a 10% difference, so I feel that they both would be pretty evenly matched in a fight, but lynx vs lynx, rpg wins for sure, but tiger vs tiger, the rail would more likely win.
After they get their respective upgrades, the only thing the rail gun has over RPG is +5 penetration damage per shot - and RPG still has a faster rate of fire, which means it gets more DPS anyway. Not to mention RPG can fire over obstacles, whereas rail gun cannot. And, oh yes, they also have the same exact cost. RPG kicks rail gun's ass. I can also attest to that by my own experience when I've played games as Eden and there was no readily accessibly rare ore, and therefore had to use rail gun/EMP vs. RPG/EMP. I got massacred every time. The Plymouth player grabbing some rare ore and throwing ESG and supernovas at me was just the final nail in the coffin.

Quote
- Acids can destroy a line of Plymouth GP's without taking much damage. ESG must either wade through and take considerable beating, or the army must wait or go around. (Or be reinforced with other weapons)
GPs have other issues that make them fairly useless, such as damaging vehicles next to them (which makes throwing them in with a bunch of tanks to form a solid defense line work badly), spontaneously exploding, being disabled due to damage (tanks don't become "disabled"), tigers dealing more DPS (and being mobile to boot), etc. Pre-1.3.5 the structure limit was too low to be able to competitively build smelters/VFs as well as build a line of GPs.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Highlander on September 03, 2010, 03:44:46 PM
Quote
Maybe, but you may have trouble dodging the ESG mines and killing the ESG units using your Thor's Hammer.
As for acid being stronger than ESG, no. Well, if you're talking about lightly armored targets like lynx and arachnids (which you almost never see), yes; against tigers, ESG outclasses it significantly. The fact that acid can damage buildings isn't much of an upside as it really isn't an efficient weapon for that. You can also turn acid against their owner by charging some scouts into their army, causing them to disperse friendly-fire acid on themselves; ESG doesn't do that.
No. Acid is stronger than ESG. 1 ESG tiger vs 1 Acid tiger means Acid tiger will come out of the fight with more than half the health. About same story with Lynx vs Lynx. (ESG gains some ground here though)
That Acid can damage buildings as well is actually quite significant. It might not be as efficient as other weapons, but 4-8 Acids tends to get a couple of smelters or the like down fast enough.
Yes, Acids may damage their own units - true. Pay attention to what is happening, and this rarely prove to be a decisive factor though.


Quote
GPs have other issues that make them fairly useless, such as damaging vehicles next to them (which makes throwing them in with a bunch of tanks to form a solid defense line work badly), spontaneously exploding, being disabled due to damage (tanks don't become "disabled"), tigers dealing more DPS (and being mobile to boot)
Correction: For Plymouth they are fairly useless. For Eden they are a solid boost of defense where they are set up.
Just wall up, set a line of Acid/EMP GP's behind the wall, get them connected to CC. Keep a few extra units as defense, and you'll have a hard nut to crack for any Plymouth player wishing to pass through.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Arklon on September 03, 2010, 04:58:43 PM
Quote
Quote
Maybe, but you may have trouble dodging the ESG mines and killing the ESG units using your Thor's Hammer.
As for acid being stronger than ESG, no. Well, if you're talking about lightly armored targets like lynx and arachnids (which you almost never see), yes; against tigers, ESG outclasses it significantly. The fact that acid can damage buildings isn't much of an upside as it really isn't an efficient weapon for that. You can also turn acid against their owner by charging some scouts into their army, causing them to disperse friendly-fire acid on themselves; ESG doesn't do that.
No. Acid is stronger than ESG. 1 ESG tiger vs 1 Acid tiger means Acid tiger will come out of the fight with more than half the health. About same story with Lynx vs Lynx. (ESG gains some ground here though)
That Acid can damage buildings as well is actually quite significant. It might not be as efficient as other weapons, but 4-8 Acids tends to get a couple of smelters or the like down fast enough.
Yes, Acids may damage their own units - true. Pay attention to what is happening, and this rarely prove to be a decisive factor though.


Quote
GPs have other issues that make them fairly useless, such as damaging vehicles next to them (which makes throwing them in with a bunch of tanks to form a solid defense line work badly), spontaneously exploding, being disabled due to damage (tanks don't become "disabled"), tigers dealing more DPS (and being mobile to boot)
Correction: For Plymouth they are fairly useless. For Eden they are a solid boost of defense where they are set up.
Just wall up, set a line of Acid/EMP GP's behind the wall, get them connected to CC. Keep a few extra units as defense, and you'll have a hard nut to crack for any Plymouth player wishing to pass through.
Yes, the Acid vs. ESG scenario there is totally true... if you're not keeping the enemy acid tiger moving (which is total fail with ESG)! If you keep the enemy moving across your mines, which is what the mechanics of the weapon demands you do, you'll notice it magically doesn't suck so much anymore. Making an argument based on a scenario involving massive failure on the Plymouth player's end tells me you're trying too hard grasping at straws to justify that Eden = overpowered, and EMP missiles are fine.
Also, more cheaply produced lasers are going to be more effective than acid cloud at taking down structures (and with the bonus of being one of the best weapons for taking down walls; something acid cloud can't do at all). Again, they're not a very good weapon for that task. Edit: Set up a test. An acid cloud tiger took 19 marks to disable a guard post, and additional 8 marks to destroy it. A laser tiger took 4 marks to disable a guard post, and another ~0.5ish mark after that to destroy it. The acid cloud may be able to take out a few adjacent GPs simultaneously, but lasers will still end up doing it faster, and for less cost.
Also, I don't see how GPs work for just Eden just because of acid cloud. They don't. I also don't see any reason why Plymouth couldn't just build a line of EMP/ESG GPs. I've tried GPs, they're pointless. Just get tigers.

Edit: As another test, I pitted a fully upgraded rail gun tiger against an unupgraded RPG tiger. Guess what? The RPG tiger came out the victor. Now imagine how big the gap between the two is when the RPG gets upgraded. On top of that, an unupgraded RPG lynx vs. a rail gun lynx with a fully upgraded turret will end in a draw, or the RPG lynx just barely managing to win (depends on if the turret happens to be facing the rail gun lynx when the fight starts); though the RPG would win after getting some upgrades as you might imagine.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Highlander on September 04, 2010, 05:59:14 AM
Quote
Yes, the Acid vs. ESG scenario there is totally true... if you're not keeping the enemy acid tiger moving (which is total fail with ESG)! If you keep the enemy moving across your mines, which is what the mechanics of the weapon demands you do, you'll notice it magically doesn't suck so much anymore. Making an argument based on a scenario involving massive failure on the Plymouth player's end tells me you're trying too hard grasping at straws to justify that Eden = overpowered, and EMP missiles are fine.
The only 2 situations where you willingly go through a ESG field is to break a strategically important point (Read bottleneck or just outside base), or if you are in pursuit of a damaged enemy (in which case it makes more sense to flank).
Once the Plymouth player cannot retreat or otherwise force the opponent to move, he will then either have to sustain heavy losses or avoid attacking, which would be the scenario if Plymouth is attacking Eden, Eden is attacking Plymouth base (where Plymouth cannot retreat any further) or if Plymouth is in pursuit of Eden units.
Also once two armies clash head on (As in a base battle or fight for a strategically important point) vehicles will all take instant damage from ESG mines instead of rolling over them - which means Acids will have the upper hand again.

Most of us know ESG works best when the enemy goes straight through a mine field, thus when the roles are reversed we know it's generally a bad idea to go straight at some ESG's even worse to pursue them head on. Hence a Plymouth defending must stay ahead of his opponent and block his every way forward. (With humans this is often quite hard, and you often end up yielding ground) Eden on the other hand, must offensively dodge ESG's. Defensively it's better to stand your ground (preferably dig in with GP's) and trade losses with Plymouth or to use Thor/Acid to make a slow retreat same way Plymouth would.

I do believe a Plymouth without missiles faces an overpowering Eden yes. As mentioned before I also believe missiles in themselves are fine, it's more of the way we play today that makes them abuse able. Then again I don't think I have ever opposed any attempts at making this game more balanced ?


Quote
Also, more cheaply produced lasers are going to be more effective than acid cloud at taking down structures (and with the bonus of being one of the best weapons for taking down walls; something acid cloud can't do at all). Again, they're not a very good weapon for that task.
As I have been trying to explain all along, it's not about the effectiveness of Acid vs buildings, it's the fact that Acid does damage buildings. It means you can wipe away defenses on a base/mining outpost and proceed to destroy the base afterwards without involving any lasers/rail's etc. At also means you have to react to the acids wherever they are or risk losing buildings.


Quote
Also, I don't see how GPs work for just Eden just because of acid cloud. They don't. I also don't see any reason why Plymouth couldn't just build a line of EMP/ESG GPs. I've tried GPs, they're pointless. Just get tigers.
Perhaps I was a bit confusing earlier. It's is not because of Acid cloud in itself - that is just my preferred turret type.
GP's work for Eden because Plymouth are not effective in killing GP's as Eden are. Thor's will easily ravage walls and Plymouth GP's, making a Plymouth GP line of defense very weak against quick hit and runs - thus you must tie up more tigers in the defense of your base. Or you can use Acid's to destroy GP's (and leave wall intact for later breach) - GP's take time to replace.
Plymouth on the other hand cannot get close enough to GP's without taking damage to the units. If you have some extra units beside the GP's, Plymouth cannot even touch the walls without suffering damage.
The point of GP's is to slow down armies, stop minor attacks and most importantly free up Tigers for offense instead of having them as defense. If you cannot see the value of having more firepower in your army than your opponent - well, then I guess there is no point continuing this discussion about GP's.


Quote
Edit: As another test, I pitted a fully upgraded rail gun tiger against an unupgraded RPG tiger. Guess what? The RPG tiger came out the victor. Now imagine how big the gap between the two is when the RPG gets upgraded. On top of that, an unupgraded RPG lynx vs. a rail gun lynx with a fully upgraded turret will end in a draw, or the RPG lynx just barely managing to win (depends on if the turret happens to be facing the rail gun lynx when the fight starts); though the RPG would win after getting some upgrades as you might imagine.
As I originally were saying: Rail and RPG is just about an even match in strength or more or less equal.
It seems like I must modify this to: RPG is slightly stronger than Rail.
Setting fully upgrades weapons against each other 10 times each, here is the results:
Tiger: Mutual destruction: (3/10), RPG Wins: (7:10), with the average RPG tiger surviving with 66 HP
Lynx: Railgun wins: (3/10), Mutual Destruction: (2/10), RPG wins (5/10), with the average RPG lynx surviving with 37 HP.
Damage seems to variate due to where the projectiles hit.
More research will of course be needed if you want more detailed numbers, yet it seems that statements such as "Rail Gun is extremely inferior to RPG" would be stretching the truth quite a bit ?
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Sirbomber on September 04, 2010, 07:07:18 AM
Quote
It seems that statements such as "Rail Gun is extremely inferior to RPG" would be stretching the truth quite a bit ?
No.  A 30% win rate against a weapon it's supposed to be more or less identical to is unacceptable.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Freeza-CII on September 04, 2010, 08:07:22 AM
the only answer would be to make the rail gun cheaper then the rpg.  thus making it able to stay on par with the rpg.  

Now i have read alot of these threads before eden and plymouth blah blah blah.  Guess what you all say the same thing eden end game and plymouth early game.

That would be the major problem here. People will pick plymouth because of its early game advantage the mic lynx and the sticky (baby emp) if you get those and rush them in against eden which could have laser and maybe emp by then isnt going to make it because it wont have the same production because of the time researching so you might be stuck with producing lasers there for your going to loose still becuase the stickies.  acid can damage buildings well so can sticky foam sticky foams have been used for a long time to take out the gp in pie chart using its multi tile attack. so another ply unit invalidates the argument of the eden unit.  the one advantage.  EMP missiles are fine if some one isnt going to try to chain fire them and keep the enemy units down.  but thats going to happen any way becuase no one can resist a good dick waving.

Under optimal conditions such as la co or pie where the rare is in the base eden is still going to loose because it requires alot of expanion to deal with the need for rare ore use where as ply isnt to concerned.

And oh yes i made the suggestion about rare ore on maps.  Now you might be thinking well just put on rare in the middle and thats that.  No my thinking is make the rare a bit more exposed rather then hiding it in the base make things a bit more challenging. rather then oh look my ore is here lets build here for quicker games so i can watch more porn faster.  quality of games is what i am after rather then speed of how many you can play before the next hard on.


But all of this has been said before i believe to balance out the factions is to lower the cost on eden with exception of thors hammer because it is a nice weapon befitting its costs and emp becuase both sides have it at the same costs and rates of fire.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: jcj94 on March 23, 2011, 08:12:54 PM
If you have ESG tigers, set a line outside your base, and set them to constant attack stratigic points, making a wall of mines.  This way,  you don't need as many GP's, the downside, You might have to keep those reinforced.  The upside, Eden units have to send Units STRAIGHT through to get to your base, if setup right.  And if you do this in a thick enough layer (remember, mines don't hurt friendlies) you might be able to kill a bunch of thor tigers when they come charging at you, with minimal losses (relative to plymouth's armor strength)
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Sirbomber on March 24, 2011, 09:34:47 AM
I just wanted to take a minute to say THANK YOU, jcj.  I thought this discussion had finished about 6~7 months ago, but you've really revitalized the conversation with that extremely relevant and insightful contribution!  And such an interesting and useful tidbit!  Kiting with ESGs?!  What an innovative, game-changing strategy!!  Truly, you are a tactical genius.  The greatest mind of your generation.

This may be my finest work.  Go ahead and delete it, I dare you.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: evecolonycamander on March 24, 2011, 10:59:44 AM
Quote
I just wanted to take a minute to say THANK YOU, jcj.  I thought this discussion had finished about 6~7 months ago, but you've really revitalized the conversation with that extremely relevant and insightful contribution!  And such an interesting and useful tidbit!  Kiting with ESGs?!  What an innovative, game-changing strategy!!  Truly, you are a tactical genius.  The greatest mind of your generation.

This may be my finest work.  Go ahead and delete it, I dare you.
lmao, damn sirbomber you lovable troll. without you this forum would be dull and uninviting :D
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: Zardox Xheonov on March 24, 2011, 12:22:31 PM
Quote
I just wanted to take a minute to say THANK YOU, jcj.  I thought this discussion had finished about 6~7 months ago, but you've really revitalized the conversation with that extremely relevant and insightful contribution!  And such an interesting and useful tidbit!  Kiting with ESGs?!  What an innovative, game-changing strategy!!  Truly, you are a tactical genius.  The greatest mind of your generation.

This may be my finest work.  Go ahead and delete it, I dare you.
Quote
Wow, sir, i never realized you had such a kind heart for newbies. You must be VERY generous and caring when you give lectures. If i diden't know any better, i'd say your among the kindest people opu has ever seen. Wow maybe even pure at heart?

Let's end this trash-talk and lock it. This thread is obviously being necroed.  (thumbsdown)
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: evecolonycamander on March 24, 2011, 12:53:28 PM
It's a bit off topic but i have to say that if the staff REALLY didn't want us to post here the could have locked the topic after about a month. just my opinion though.
Title: Cutting A Player Tube
Post by: BlackBox on March 24, 2011, 05:26:15 PM
Locking this thread.

You have been repeatedly warned to stop necroing (posting in old threads). As to the comment about locking old threads, it's probably that no one can be bothered to. It's a pretty common rule in most internet forums to not post in topics that are very old (some places will even ban you for doing it multiple times).

That said, for the others in the thread, flaming him was not really necessary either.