Available playersTop players Chat Forum External sites: Wiki

«

previous 1 2 3 4 next

RockyDog

Berserker

Offline

dropping AA and increasing attack str of assault arty vs air would be good. but unless you make it same as the AA or higher (due to AArty increased cost) I'd also increase slightly the H.Inf air attack value. 450 to get an anti-air land based capability will be too costly. the h.inf increase should be by 2 or 3 att str (based on the forumlas) so that they do 1-1.5 more damage per encounter.

CaptainCupCake

Tank

Offline

H.inf attack (def?) boost v air - two calloused gaming thumbs up here (it always sounds bad put like this, but it had crossed my mind and I forgot to mention it, honest guv )

So there you go Weewar Towers, one less unit to support and some lesser used units get a little more interesting and useful. Now where's our commission RD?

skywalkre

Trooper

Offline

jeye wrote:
I think removing units is a bad idea because every unit has a situation where it is useful. This situation may be rare and therefore there are not so many credits spend on some units. The examples you give certainly have their purpose:
Assault art: good to kill DFA. Also useful as a flexible and fast first hit unit if you can afford it.
Light art: good against trooper clusters.
AAA gun: good to kill air units. Particularly when teamed up with a jet.

Assault Art: Are Assault Art really useful to kill DFAs? If they were, you would think we'd see a higher bar for them in both graphs since DFAs are so prevalent, but they're still one of the least purchased units. From my experience, the conditions needed to get 2 Assault Art up close to kill a DFA are near impossible, and an easier route is to just use a fighter. I do agree they're useful on resource-rich maps where you can pump them out early, but that's a very rare (and map dependent) purpose.
Light Art: With the DFA & mass trooper strat you would think these would be used more often. They're not. I certainly have no problem with them in-game now, but again they're a very niche unit (in rough terrain against mass inf swarms, usually in an area where neither player is pushing hard).
AAA: I have no issue with these as is, but my understanding was most players think they're rather useless.

If not removing them, why not at least make changes to their stats? The changes made so far on the test realm do nothing to make players want to build the light art and assault art more (though I'm seeing more air units in my games, so maybe AAA will be indirectly buffed as a result). What would be wrong with making light art do more damage, or cost less, or both? And with assault art... well, yeah, I'm still not sure what intended role it's meant to fill. It's too expensive, too small of range, and too little punch even against light units. Would any player really shed a tear if it were removed?

skywalkre

Trooper

Offline

Casaubon wrote:I'm against having units that are too multifunctional (like current destroyer), which makes the game more income driven and very hard to win against a richer player. If you want play less units on a map, you still can choose some of the set and disable for a particular game = more options than having less "merged" units.

I agree. The destroyer is too good at everything right now and as such we see them purchased the most. However, why make a new unit to fix this issue? Why not just drastically drop the soft, hard, and boat damage of the destroyer so that it's only useful against subs and air (like the cruiser is on the test server)? The BB is now useful because it's the only way to rule the seas and bombard the land, and you'll still need destroyers to protect them from air and subs.

Making BBs more prominent would also slow down naval gameplay, which would have the indirect effect of making land combat more important. The problem with destroyers in the live version now is that they are extremely fast with good range. Moving a naval force across the Med in one of Stirling's Europe maps would be much slower with a BB heavy force, and give time for land combat to play out as well as an opponent to build up defenses. Isn't this, in a way, what the changes are aiming for?

What I'm seeing on the test server is mostly destroyers, with cruisers for protection, and BBs built very rarely. The latter's only use is for shore bombardment, which is a niche role.

RockyDog

Berserker

Offline

CaptainCupCake wrote:H.inf attack (def?) boost v air - two calloused gaming thumbs up here (it always sounds bad put like this, but it had crossed my mind and I forgot to mention it, honest guv )

So there you go Weewar Towers, one less unit to support and some lesser used units get a little more interesting and useful. Now where's our commission RD?


I think your commission comes in the form of a digital pat on the back and a chance to lose more points to General_Death.

CaptainCupCake

Tank

Offline

RockyDog wrote:I think your commission comes in the form of a digital pat on the back and a chance to lose more points to General_Death.


Hehe, it figures

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 13/08/2010 06:50:15

Casaubon

Tank

Offline

usefullness of HV. TROOPER:
.) base protector: best choice to protect a base quickly if 2 enemy land units (other then troopers) are approaching your single unprotected base. solid & cheap defense against most enemies.
.) passive air defense: the best unit (lowest price and terrain bonus) that can be built to have a no air zone created with their ZOC, if placed in 3 distance from each other, ideally on bonus terrain as mountains and such.
.) tank battle resolver: kills a weakened tank of any kind, if it was damaged by other unit(s).

>>> hv trooper is VERY usefull

usefullness of LT. ARTILLERY:
.) early attack emphasis: in early or low income trooper driven game LA stays affordable and it's cost efficiency relation is among the highest. a well placed and accompanied LA makes a base conquerable if enemy can't build anything worth 300$ or more there.
.) attack bonus dealer: reduces defense strength for successive attacks rather then dealing much damage to medium units.
.) first line eliminator: in late trooper spamming game, LA can be usefull next to heavy artillery (or DFA) to weaken enemy's first line of trooper attack and prepare them for finishing of with your defensive troops. your HA is free to attack approaching hard units then. LA does the same job as HA here but is much cheaper.

>>> lt artillery IS usefull

usefullness of AT. ARTILLERY:
.) quick attack support: the move and shoot ability makes this unit best choice, if you plan to take a closeby trooper defended base within move range along with 2 other units. other than LA or HA the assault artillery can attack instantly within a radius of 6 & suffers no counterdamage.
.) DFA counter: usefull after other units shot a hole into enemy troops defending a HA or DFA and opened a path for your ATA.
.) second use purpose: in mid-game you can use your ATA for weakening enemy aircraft to be finished off by your AAs or due to its high mobility to hunt down heavily damaged enemy aircraft or support land combat.

>>> at artillery IS worth it in a series of special situations

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 13/08/2010 11:06:24

Tygerdave

Heavy Tank

Offline

You are basing a lot of your assumption and arguments on what seems to be a small amount of games played against lower level players and the build #'s.

The build numbers are merely suggestive, they can NOT be a basis for a true balancing attempt because they lack any grounding in the circumstances of the build

skywalkre wrote:
Assault Art: Are Assault Art really useful to kill DFAs? If they were, you would think we'd see a higher bar for them in both graphs since DFAs are so prevalent, but they're still one of the least purchased units. From my experience, the conditions needed to get 2 Assault Art up close to kill a DFA are near impossible, and an easier route is to just use a fighter. I do agree they're useful on resource-rich maps where you can pump them out early, but that's a very rare (and map dependent) purpose.


Assault Art's can easily change the game, and are esp. useful at the beginning and end. Yes they are useful at killing a DFA and even more useful at crippling one. People anchor their defenses around DFAs and if you cripple one you get a nice place to attack. People also push their attacks with DFAs, the presence of an Assault art hampers an opponent's movements and by crippling a DFA in a key position, can stall an offensive and turn the battle. The move+fire at range is useful in a number of other situations as well.

skywalkre wrote:
Light Art: With the DFA & mass trooper strat you would think these would be used more often. They're not. I certainly have no problem with them in-game now, but again they're a very niche unit (in rough terrain against mass inf swarms, usually in an area where neither player is pushing hard).


These are actually used a fair amount and are general purpose, useful in almost any situation, price and power is at a good level since their price was lowered last time.

skywalkre wrote:And with assault art... well, yeah, I'm still not sure what intended role it's meant to fill. It's too expensive, too small of range, and too little punch even against light units. Would any player really shed a tear if it were removed?


YES

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 13/08/2010 19:46:10

General_Death

Tank

Offline

I have to agree with Tyger,

And I would shed many tears if the assault artillery or the light artillery are taken away. Assault artillery can play a wide range of roles, and it's a very versatile unit

Streen

Heavy Tank

Offline

I was just bored for a few minutes and read this.
But I would just like to point out that Assault Artillery is an extremely crucial unit!

They are extremely useful against DFAs (especially in maps without airports )
and the only ranged land unit that can move & shoot.

I would seriously miss it

I also use Light artillery extremely often, especially in all those 50/cred per base maps that seem to be overly popular these days.

Somar96

Tank

Offline

I want assault artillery

mattwell22

Trooper

Offline

Have these unit changes been made to the real game? Is there a good place to see all units characteristics, other than the wiki, which looks like it hasn't been updated in a while? Thanks, in advanced!

spadequack

Heavy Tank

Offline

These changes have not yet been introduced to the real game, only in a test version of the game. You can check out http://weewar.com/specifications for info about unit types and terrains and such. It is mostly complete but lacks some of the more subtle unit behavior that I think is still described on the Wiki (such as how double move or double attack works or how repair patches work)

xXODTDXxSHIELD

Heavy Trooper

Offline

in advance wars days of ruin only landers and gunboats could go across enemy or neutral ports, this would be a cool addition, perhaps even a beach addon, and the ability to build buildings or even defensive towers, not overly strong but balanced, this could set this game apart and might add appeal perhaps, i always wished they let you build bunkers and such in advance wars, i wish i could make my own games

Jef

Trooper

Offline

I guess I'm a bit behind, but I never read any of this til today. Since I don't think any major changes have been made, I didn't miss too much. Any word on any of these changes? A few of my recommendations would be:

1. Allow aircraft to repair anywhere, just one unit strength. Continue with 3 on the airport.

2. Certainly not get rid of Light Artillery, Assault Artillery, and Anti-Aircraft.

3. Weaken jets against helicopters. Jets make helicopters impractical as a general rule. Could you change the movement to 4-2 or 5-1? If you move 5 you could move 1 but if you move up to 4 you could move 2.

I don't have time at the moment for naval comments, that's going to take awhile.

previous 1 2 3 4 next