rpgs...

[CFalcon]

and ive hit gardners alot with harriers because of the fact that hit let and then all...ooo pulled some mechanics on YOU...how you like that.

You mean in the same way that RPGs target LET and then ALL?

I'm not trying to talk down to you, but when you say that harriers kill gardeners because they target LET/ALL, and then say that RPGs don't target gardeners (when they also target LET/ALL) it makes you look very much like you don't know what you're talking about.

Again, I don't want to patronise you. You say I "don't agree with you". We're talking about facts here, not opinions. It is not an OPINION how targetting works. It just does work this way. The only reason I'm talking is because you are making claims which are factually wrong.

EDIT: And I haven't bothered with the people skills in this thread, which I am quite capable of deploying, as I've seen you posting before on these forums and know they will have absolutely no effect. Although I'd be intrigued to know where you got the idea that I insulted you from...

 

[NightNinja]

and ive hit gardners alot with harriers because of the fact that hit let and then all...ooo pulled some mechanics on YOU...how you like that.

You mean in the same way that RPGs target LET and the ALL?

I'm not trying to talk down to you, but when you say that harriers kill gardeners because they target LET/ALL, and then say that RPGs don't target gardeners (when they also target LET/ALL) it makes you look very much like you don't know what you're talking about.

Again, I don't want to patronise you. You say I "don't agree with you". We're talking about facts here, not opinions. It is not an OPINION how targetting works. It just does work this way. The only reason I'm talking is because you are making claims which are factually wrong.

first off learn how to spell patronize and secondly....yeah rpgs also have the buff that really does make a difference cuz i also had a **** ton of gardners and it made not a DAMN bit of difference harriers will at least hit SOME of them granted yes they do hit let more often not. And apaches ive seen them hit inn FIRST when they are supposed to hit let first. so lets just get rid of the other two routes then cuz rpgs over all are a faster route...from shockers down and each unit does it job better and faster...and fyi rpgs didnt kill the rangers the snipers finished them off pretty good but to hell with it im wrong..im tired of arguin with you..just leave the damn route broken...and while we're at it get rid of the other two pointless routes that have the same weakness against the same routes except the fact rpgs pwn them....and more times than not they do since you can HORDE them....and after this round me and my buddy will prolly be done anyway...arrogant player base...arrogant admins...to hell with this...my buddy started in round 1 when azzer was playing...
i as you can see below started in round 2 when the bs rpgs werent even a thought in the game when grenadiers where the best unit in the game and spec ops, robos and fantasy wasnt even close to an option.

 

[NightNinja]

and

EDIT: And I haven't bothered with the people skills in this thread, which I am quite capable of deploying, as I've seen you posting before on these forums and know they will have absolutely no effect. Although I'd be intrigued to know where you got the idea that I insulted you from...

your from the uk arent you? and i find it insulting when ppl talk to me like im an idiot...but hey that is the smug english way walking around like you guys are the cream of the crop in your stuck up little country. thats why it was us the USA who bailed your asses out in WW2..REMEMBER. Just sayin...you guys down americans alot i think that is the real issues cuz ive run into so many of you who are convinced that just cuz your on that damn island your oh so important while we are a bunch of barbarians and tell me im wrong plz...cuz i know im not on that one buddy.

 

[Davs]

I chose to ignore the last 5 or so posts as you seem to be misunderstanding CF's major point.

RPGs target LET then ALL. This is exactly the same targetting as the following units:

harrier
assassin
secret agent
officer
heavy weapon
grenadier
sniper
ninja
bunker

and several others

They all target in EXACTLY the same way. None of them prioritize specific unit types, they just look at unit class. IIRC this means that 70% of them will target LETs (spread across all hostile LETs in the same proportions as the proportions of the LETs there. Then the remaining 30% of them target everything that is left [ignoring class completely].)

I.E. If there are 10m RPGs vs 2m strikers, 2m apaches, 2m grens, 1m HWs (random example) and a load of flak and geos etc, 7m RPGs would specifically target LETs (2m RPGs would target 2m strikers, 2m RPGs would target 2m apaches, 2m RPGs would target 2m grens, 1m RPGs target 1m grens) and the remaining 3m RPGs would target everything left following the same rule about proportions except disregarding the class of unit.

Your attackers undoubtedly know that this is how it works, and as such send enough RPGs to ensure that enough RPGs are present so that the proportion of them targeting your strikers and apaches is big enough to kill them. Note how the grens and HWs tend to take proportionately fewer losses as they have considerably more health and RPGs do ARMOUR damage, not HEALTH damage, so very few die even if far more RPGs target them.

I am of course very tired, and making the huge assumption that 2 + 2 + 2 + 1 = 7.

Essentially, what I'm trying to say is that CF is right, stop having a go at him for trying to help you.

 

[NightNinja]

i understand that how it works but my point is not just the extra bonus in damage..it is also the fact snipers fire quickish too...and rpgs are easily massed so why even have the other two is my point since rpgs are head and shoulder better ask whats left of the player base. and the part about that i missed im nice touch cant be just informative gotta be a smart ass too i see. thats fine. as i stated i had a br and granted it was about 4-5 rounds ago maybe longer but i hada lot of all my health units just to flak out rpgs and it didnt make a difference you cant get enough flak because they are so damn cheap too...make em more expensive or buff the other two routes cuz as it stands it is quite pointless...to have the other save maybe the fact you can hit vamps with apaches...but i wouldnt recommend it.

 

[CFalcon]

The fact that RPGs beat striker and ranger route doesn't mean that strikers and rangers are useless, it just means they have different uses.

SAs beat RPGs. Does that mean we should get rid of RPG route because SAs beat them?

But Rangers beat SAs. Does that mean we should get rid of Rangers?

But RPGs beat rangers. Does that mean we should get rid of RPGs?

But SAs beat RPGs. Does that mean we should get rid of SAs?

But Rangers beat SAs. Does that mean we should get rid of Rangers?

But
But
But

You see what I'm saying? One route beating another doesn't mean they shouldn't be in the game.

No-one's arguing that RPGs don't trample all over strikers and rangers, but strikers and rangers are both more useful in other situations.

 

[NightNinja]

The fact that RPGs beat striker and ranger route doesn't mean that strikers and rangers are useless, it just means they have different uses.

SAs beat RPGs. Does that mean we should get rid of RPG route because SAs beat them?

But Rangers beat SAs. Does that mean we should get rid of Rangers?

But RPGs beat rangers. Does that mean we should get rid of RPGs?

But SAs beat RPGs. Does that mean we should get rid of SAs?

But Rangers beat SAs. Does that mean we should get rid of Rangers?

But
But
But

You see what I'm saying? One route beating another doesn't mean they shouldn't be in the game.

really cuz rangers dont fire til AFTER sa and assassins and they much like rpgs are easy to mass.. ive seen more times that not Secret agents smash harriers/ranger routes. They have pretty much the same weaknesses so why are they even around? TL's pwn military in general right? as do fanatics and extremists.....give me two uses for the other two routres that rpg route cant handle because SA's i dont buy..too many players play that route and its easy to mass them without anyone knowing what you have.Only real weakness they have are poms tbh.

im saying that the other two needed buffed or something atleast harriers cuz they only two routes i see as easy victims are puppets and robos..

 

[CFalcon]

The fact that RPGs beat striker and ranger route doesn't mean that strikers and rangers are useless, it just means they have different uses.

SAs beat RPGs. Does that mean we should get rid of RPG route because SAs beat them?

But Rangers beat SAs. Does that mean we should get rid of Rangers?

But RPGs beat rangers. Does that mean we should get rid of RPGs?

But SAs beat RPGs. Does that mean we should get rid of SAs?

But Rangers beat SAs. Does that mean we should get rid of Rangers?

But
But
But

You see what I'm saying? One route beating another doesn't mean they shouldn't be in the game.

really cuz rangers dont fire til AFTER sa and assassins and they much like rpgs are easy to mass.. ive seen more times that not Secret agents smash harriers/ranger routes. They have pretty much the same weaknesses so why are they even around? TL's pwn military in general right? as do fanatics and extremists.....give me two uses for the other two routres that rpg route cant handle because SA's i dont buy..too many players play that route and its easy to mass them without anyone knowing what you have.Only real weakness they have are poms tbh.

Secret Agents beating RPGs is one of the safest bets in the game. Why? Because RPGs do nothing to secret agents; almost zero damage. Snipers do hurt SAs, but they fire AFTER SAs, meaning it's usually too late.

In the same way, Rangers are well known for hurting SA/Sin, because even though the SAs/sins fire first, they do barely any damage. Rangers have both health and armour. When the SAs fire, the Rangers still have their armour on, and SAs don't do armour damage, so the SA fire bounces off. When the sins fire they take the Rangers armour off, but the sins don't do any health damage so the rangers survive. Then the rangers fire and wtfpwn.

Harriers are more useful than RPGs against robots in alot of situations, because they fire after poms/SAs, allowing the pom/sa to clear away health flak, meaning the harriers do ALOT more damage to robots than RPGs could.

F117s are excellent pom killers.

Striker/Apache can fight SAs while RPGs can't.

Strikers can also be alot more useful than RPGs against armour for the same reasons as harrier; that they fire later allowing for flak to be cleared.

Striker/Apache is ALOT tougher than RPG, meaning you can send them into big alliance battles and come away with very little damage, while an RPG would take LOADS of damage.

Similarly, Rangers are alot more useful in big alliance battles as they target pure LET, not LET/ALL, and fire in the sweet spot between too early and too late, so flak can be cleared before they fire but they do damage before the late firers.

In alot of high-end alliance play you have to be able to last tick a target during mass incoming. RPG/Sniper is absolutely useless for this.

--------------

There are PLENTY of situations where a striker or ranger is more useful than an RPG. Alot of people might agree with you that Ranger route is under-powered, but that has nothing to do with the RPG damage bonus. And you'd be hard pressed to find anyone agreeing that strikers are under-powered.

 

[LuckySports]

Okay, first off.. I played RPG 2 rounds ago, and will probably never do that again.. It sucked..

RPG don't fire last-tick, so when you attack an alliance, not matter what, they can easily last-tick you unless you attack with someone.
And then RPGs are super squishy. They do a lot of damage, but die very quickly.
And also, when your alliance last-ticks an incoming, your are effectively lethal flak..


Secondly, harriers kill more gardeners because they do some Hp damage, RPGs do much less. They will both target equally.

And finally, Rangers are a fairly underpowered route, harriers are squishy and don't do too much damage, they are best for massing rangers to kill SA or for those big battles.


Also, on a final note.. I LOVE strikers.. They are a very powerful route. Hard to kill, early firing AD unit that fires all ticks, with a stealth lethal flak unit that's incredibly difficult to kill.. And Apaches are one of the hardest units in the game
To kill..

 

[Dimitar]

I don't need to read any of above to come to the conclusion that this is a stupid thread. RPGs have their weakness and their strength. Learn to use both in your advantage

 

[Dark_Angel]

You pretty much must be contactable to play RPG, or (as has been pointed out already) an SA will have their dirty way with you at some point (more likely sooner rather than later). That makes the route really quite difficult to play solo (lest you're very active). Even big RPGs in top alliances are given headaches by comparably small SA players who can keep them up all hours.

Your input, though appreciated ^^, would make RPGs dangerously less desirable to play.

not really all you need is good pom guy on line in an alliance an the tls and sa fall by way side...to be harrier or anything else you need to go into sleep mode or be active because of the early iniative and ill tell you they hit what they are supposed way more than apaches do...it says let than inn that is a load of crap they hit inn first

I speak from experience here, trust me. Time after time I've seen (even very experienced players) struggle to play RPG because even in an alliance with decent PoM players you are not going to escape the innumerable number of attempts a dedicated SA/TL player will take to zero your RPGs.

Your own argument here suggests you believe that RPGs aren't vulnerable "IF" a decent PoM player is on hand to defend. The same can be said of pretty much any unit on Bush, Cybernetic Warriors are vulnerable UNLESS an RPG is online to counter striker inc. That's the way the game works.

The bottom line is, and the broad consensus of the responses here support this, RPG is not an "easy" route to play. It takes a great deal of patience and is one of the worst routes for requiring "contactability" to avoid certain death.

You speak of wanting RPGs to have a "draw back" - I put it to you this is a massive drawback, one you're not fully appreciating

 

[Dax]

dude i can show you brs they hit armor units first most of the time...i mean cmon a harrier fires slower, are just as crappy at surviving and dont get a bonus why should the fastest unit the game get that?

Er, CF has a complete BR simulator, that has taken into account every single unit in the entire game and the random effect factor. You are just wrong.
And ofc Apache target LET first. Don't be ridiculous.

You're either really dim, ignorant, or a troll.

 

[LuckySports]

Also - on another note, Tl aren't that amazing at killing RPGs, the get something like 3:1 on them. Here's a BR I saw and saved.. Surprised the he'll outta me.



[middle] 23,903,195 hostile RPG Trooper attacked, killing 4,005,953 allied staff.
[middle] 4,663,296 allied Terrorist attacked, killing 1,036,248 hostile staff.
[middle] 23,591,793 allied Hooligan attacked, disabling 3,370,812 hostile staff.
[middle] 28,378,684 allied Terrorist Leader attacked, killing 10,947,148 hostile staff.

 

[Davs]

that really is surprising... that being said, RPGs do next to nothing back, so it's still a profitable attack.

 

[Dax]

that really is surprising... that being said, RPGs do next to nothing back, so it's still a profitable attack.

That was a defence against Dando, I believe - I had the same reaction as Lucky in that I was very surprised they didn't clear him right there and then.

 

[LuckySports]

Yeah, I always thought TL destroyed RPG, but apparently they do less HD than we thought. That is why I would never choose Tl over SA as a HD route. Tl do have their uses. They do a bit of AD and have a bit of armor so they can kill some things SA cannot. And survive a bit better.

 

[atsanjose]

didnt they get nerfed a while back?

going from hd heavy to ad heavy?

 

[LuckySports]

They get about 1:6 on Cw an 1:5 on strikers.. How AD heavy are they really? I'll stick with my Strikers/Sa ^_^

 

[tobapopalos]

didnt they get nerfed a while back?

going from hd heavy to ad heavy?

Yeah. I've played TL god know how many times, and since they got changed they've just been a bit **** imo.

And on topic, this isn't the first time NightNinja has made a laughably ridiculous complaint about a route which is written from a standpoint of total ignorance of game mechanics. Huzzah for him getting banned.

 

[willymchilybily]

nightninja please read this post, it will help you long term:

the targeting of a unit is always labeled t1|t2 or t1|t2|t3 and t1 is always first primary target. with only two targeting sequence (primary and secondary) it splits 70%|30%

with three it splits the fire power 50%|35%|15% (or so im told)


this is irrelivant of unit bonuses. apaches do not tartget innocents first. they are just ridiculously power ful health damage. and they target LET|INN so instead of units like sanipers targetting LET|All and wasting the damage the do to innocents on other lethals and nld/nlt too, apaches will not!

you garentee 30% of the units that fire will only hit innocents. this can give them riddiculous ratios compared to most other routes. I have seen 1million of them kill 20 million flak.

but if you look at them hitting lethals (pure) despite 70% firing they can get less impressive ratios [middle] 57,397 allied Apache Longbow attacked, killing 102,338 hostile staff. because the units are stronger and have more armour.

it may look like they hit the inn. flak first, but they dont. the flak is just majorly health based. so they get amazing ratios

also you have to bare in mind rpgs target lethal all, and they have an additional 10% ad to machine verhicle and robots. so thats additional 10% damage on the striker route.


so yeah they are brilliant at stripping and killing armour. because they have a bit more ad, for a tiny tiny cost than all other armour damagers. so they look awsome.

(lets assume it takes 3rpg to kill striker/apache) assume you have 9m rpg incoming. can probably kill 2m striker and 1m apache without a problem. no losses to the 9mrpg

but if you flak your troops like you have been advised with say 2m striker 500k apache and 4m privates

sudenly that 70% targetting pure armour and getting a bonus and absoloutly raping it, now only targets less of your armour based machine vehicle/expensive units.

now 61.5% target the privates only. so the remainder targets the armour. so only 3.5 mill fire directly at your striker/apache. and you waste the other5.5 mil hitting the cheap privates, so sure the privates die. but only 930k strikers die (leaving over 1m alive) and only 230k apache die (267k alive) i promise you no one here is lying this is how the targetting works. the bonus to the units does not affect the targetting.

suddenly with flak more of your units fire. and that clean kill is no longer clean. and the fact is both route set ups cost the SAME...the only problem is you are allied so people will over send to kill you. but this IS how it works. please test it out. you have nothing to lose? if you test it out you will see for yourself.