Red Alert-GAME Thread

[Sonereal]

Between Greece and Turkey.
Oh, and don't allied ore mines store 2000 ore instead of 1000?

No.

And yes, you need naval ships to cross.

 

[Nonevah]

It said so in the rules. CAn you change that? I don't want to forget that or anything.

 

[Double A]

You forgot to add: in the most recent ones before the events we have played oursleves, I was pushed back to where my starting position was, although to make up for it, I and Rangoon, who was a neutral power at the time, declared war on India, gaining our land there and causing the Indian government to collapse. Right before the start of this game, the Tibetan Capital was moved from Lhasa to Delhi in fear that the Mongols would soon invade again.

What do you think of this, Rangoon?

Um... no. Indian government already collapsed. In fact, anyone who isn't a color on the map is not a country. So no Indian government. Some provinces asked to join Rangoon, and I was about to work on that before you sniped them.

 

[mechaerik]

Is there anyway to negotiate with the remains of the Celtic Armed Forces?

 

[Nukeknockout]

Our Great Comrade Leader who's name we are embarrassed to say has released a statement on the conflicting histories of Tibet, Siberia, Mongolia, Rangoon, and Russia:

"One has but to look outside to see all these squabbling over what happened, without a care as to what will happen. Look to the future, my comrades, not the past. In the future, there shall be much rejoicing. No one shall be left to starve, nor shall leaders make those who have trusted them less equal.

Let the Old World die, let it simply fade, so that this New World, a better World, may come alive. But before this New World can happen, those who would resurrect the Old World must die with it. This is the fate of Empires.

We do not know what happened, nor do we need to know precisely what happened. After all, we already know what it is like today, yes?"

-Nukeknockout

 

[Lighthearter]

Our Great Comrade Leader who's name we are embarrassed to say has released a statement on the conflicting histories of Tibet, Siberia, Mongolia, Rangoon, and Russia:

"One has but to look outside to see all these squabbling over what happened, without a care as to what will happen. Look to the future, my comrades, not the past. In the future, there shall be great rejoicing. No one shall be left to starve, nor shall leaders make those who have trusted them less equal.

Let the Old World die, let it simply fade, so that this New World, a better World, may come alive. But before this New World can happen, those who would resurrect the Old World must die with it. This is the fate of Empires.

We do not know what happened, nor do we need to know precisely what happened. After all, we already know what it is like today, yes?"

-Nukeknockout

OOC: In the future, we shall eat Robin's Minstrels.

-L

 

[Sonereal]

It said so in the rules. CAn you change that? I don't want to forget that or anything.

I thought the fact that the the buildings in the list always say XXXX/1000 instead of XXXX/2000 was a giveaway but I already fixed the error.

Is there anyway to negotiate with the remains of the Celtic Armed Forces?

The remnants of the CAF in Britain are deserters (there's only one really). If you let them keep the capital, they will gladly stay neutral in the Allied/Warsaw conflicts.

 

[Lighthearter]

@Sonereal - I'm listed as having 3 power plants but only 100 power - I'm following the "number of buildings" guide)
Also, my Radar Dome ought to be in province 1(Oahu) IIRC.


Hawaii:

1(Oahu):
Upgradex3(180)
Subpen(200)

2(Maui):
Upgradex3(180)

4(Falkland Islands):
Subpen(200)

3(Midway):
Freighter(20)

Bank $59

-L

 

[Nukeknockout]

Question: Is there a point to the Allied Ranger, Light Tank, or Medium Tank?

So far as I can see, the Artillery outperforms all of them and is cheaper.

Ranger: cost $60 +5% vs infantry.
Light Tank: cost $75 +5% vs buildings and vehicles.
Medium Tank: cost $80 +10% vs buildings and vehicles.

compared to:

Artillery: cost $60 +15% vs infantry and vehicles, +5% vs buildings.

May I suggest:
Ranger: cost $50 +5% vs infantry, +20% vs Grenadiers.
Light Tank: Cost $65 +5% vs buildings and vehicles, + 10% vs V2.
Medium Tank: Cost $75 +10% vs buildings and vehicles, +5% vs Flame Tower.

This would give those units a reason to ever be built. Ignore me if you want, just saying

 

[mechaerik]

The remnants of the CAF in Britain are deserters (there's only one really). If you let them keep the capital, they will gladly stay neutral in the Allied/Warsaw conflicts.

So I don't attack them, they don't attack me.

 

[Sonereal]

@Sonereal - I'm listed as having 3 power plants but only 100 power - I'm following the "number of buildings" guide)
Also, my Radar Dome ought to be in province 1(Oahu) IIRC.

Odd. Will be looked into.

Question: Is there a point to the Allied Ranger, Light Tank, or Medium Tank?

So far as I can see, the Artillery outperforms all of them and is cheaper.

Ranger: cost $60 +5% vs infantry.
Light Tank: cost $75 +5% vs buildings and vehicles.
Medium Tank: cost $80 +10% vs buildings and vehicles.

compared to:

Artillery: cost $60 +15% vs infantry and vehicles, +5% vs buildings.

May I suggest:
Ranger: cost $50 +5% vs infantry, +20% vs Grenadiers.
Light Tank: Cost $65 +5% vs buildings and vehicles, + 10% vs V2.
Medium Tank: Cost $75 +10% vs buildings and vehicles, +5% vs Flame Tower.

This would give those units a reason to ever be built. Ignore me if you want, just saying

I dislike having a unit design specifically to counter other units.

However, this is probably a problem with the V2s as well.

In any case, I'll look into splitting up the bonuses in time for the next update which is coming tomorrow.

Here's the changes I was thinking

Artillery: Costs $100 each. Requires WF. One Free Strike. 10% bonus against vehicles. 5% bonus against strucutres.

V2 Rocket: Costs $100 each. Requires WF. One Free Strike.. 10% bonus against infantry. 5% versus structures.

So I don't attack them, they don't attack me.

Exactly.

 

[Nukeknockout]

Alright. That still doesn't address the epic Soviet Grenadier thing, or the uselessness of Allied Tanks, but ok

It's actually not a problem with V2s, since they have a first strike and are purpose-built to take down structures.

$80 +5% vs infantry and vehicles(far less than other Soviet stuff), +15% vs structures, 1 free strike.

The main issues as I saw them are that there is no efficient Allied counter for Grenadiers, and that the Artillery obsoletes the Ranger, Light Tank, and Medium Tank in every aspect at present.

That's not a problem with the V2 since it doesn't obsolete the Heavy Tank.

Anyway, just me musing

 

[Sonereal]

Hmm. In that case, I'll add anti-inf bonuses to LTs and MTs and boost and nerf everything else accordingly.

 

[Nukeknockout]

I'm really sorry to put you to this trouble

 

[Sonereal]

I'm really sorry to put you to this trouble

No problem. Didn't see how hilariously broke it was until it was brought up.

How's this look?

Ranger: Costs $60. Requires WF. 10% bonus against infantry.

Light Tank: Costs $75 each. Requires WF. 15% versus infantry, 5% versus structures and vehicles.

Medium Tank: Costs $80 each. Requires WF. 10% versus infantry. 10% bonus against vehicles and structures.

Artillery: Costs $100 each. Requires WF. 15% bonus against infantry and vehicles. 5% against structures.

 

[Lighthearter]

The Arty and the LT have almost the same bonus now - and the LT is stronger. Give the Arty a free strike.

-L

 

[Double A]

Wait, Rangers have a 10% bonus overall, LTs have 25%, MTs have 30%, and arty have 35%. Wouldn't it make more sense to have LTs 10% effective on infantry? I don't see how a stronger tank is worse against infantry.

 

[Sonereal]

The Arty and the LT have almost the same bonus now - and the LT is stronger. Give the Arty a free strike.

-L

Giving.

Wait, Rangers have a 10% bonus overall, LTs have 25%, MTs have 30%, and arty have 35%. Wouldn't it make more sense to have LTs 10% effective on infantry? I don't see how a stronger tank is worse against infantry.

I always thought LTs were mainly for infantry support, not anti-tank like the Medium and Heavy Tanks. Their speed and the presumed RoF would make their main weapon more an effective anti-inf than anti-tank.

However, I see what you're saying. *Ponders*

I could reduce the LT bonus to 10%, boost the anti-inf bonuses of the LT, MT, HT, MT, and ST accordingly, but give LTs and MTs a speed boost along with the APC.

 

[Double A]

Oh yeah, how fast are they, anyway? I don't recall you giving a firm number.

 

[Sonereal]

Oh yeah, how fast are they, anyway? I don't recall you giving a firm number.

Every unit has a base speed of 3 and the only modifiers was infrastructure.

D'oh.

How's this look?

Speeds

LTs: 6
APCs: 6
MTs: 5
HTs: 4
Everything Else: 3