Suggestions. Command and comquer rivals

[awesomestgamer76]

The bases should take 3 nukes before destruction OR make the time to launch longer.

[obifett · Accepted solution]

Right now the game is essentially the best 2 out of 3 rounds, with the nuke timer being a single round. It can last a good amount of time if you split the first 2 "rounds". Even with just 2 nukes needed, I have seen a good balance of rushers and late game strats, with both being successful. Late game strats almost always give up that first nuke so they can build up and hopefully dominate the 2nd and 3rd rounds. Rush strats have no chance once a late game strat takes hold of the field. As a result, rush strats try to end the game before that 3rd round else they will likely lose.

If it took 3 nukes to kill a base, then it basically becomes best 3 of 5 rounds. Late game strats could actually give up the first two nukes, which would practically guarantee that rushing would go out the window. Rushers couldn't take the first three nukes, since even in the current state, late game strats can start contesting and take the second. So then the meta would develop to purely late game strats, meaning game would take soooo much longer.

TLDR: The balance and speed of the game is very well balanced for 2 nuke win condition. Changing it to 3 would ensure rush decks have no chance and make most games take way too long.

[mrbunny1007]

I'm new to rivals , takes a bit to get used to . but 3 hits to a base from a nuke would be better in my mind then 2. I'm still a low level going against mostly stronger opponents .

[awesomestgamer76]

Apparently you can build up your commander and thus the hp for the base with coin and resources found in crates.  So I guess it is ok.  Makes it harder for newbs to just waltz in and destroy long time players. 

[obifett · Accepted solution]

Right now the game is essentially the best 2 out of 3 rounds, with the nuke timer being a single round. It can last a good amount of time if you split the first 2 "rounds". Even with just 2 nukes needed, I have seen a good balance of rushers and late game strats, with both being successful. Late game strats almost always give up that first nuke so they can build up and hopefully dominate the 2nd and 3rd rounds. Rush strats have no chance once a late game strat takes hold of the field. As a result, rush strats try to end the game before that 3rd round else they will likely lose.

If it took 3 nukes to kill a base, then it basically becomes best 3 of 5 rounds. Late game strats could actually give up the first two nukes, which would practically guarantee that rushing would go out the window. Rushers couldn't take the first three nukes, since even in the current state, late game strats can start contesting and take the second. So then the meta would develop to purely late game strats, meaning game would take soooo much longer.

TLDR: The balance and speed of the game is very well balanced for 2 nuke win condition. Changing it to 3 would ensure rush decks have no chance and make most games take way too long.

[Odigitria5]

Obifett is right. Early on I wanted my base to have more health, but as I went forward I realized that the game is finely tuned for the two-nuke setup.

[FANGSKOS]

Game's 2/3 for the win is fine as it is. I like the ability to base Rush and not wait around for another Nuke. Saves time when I am trying to knock out Bounty or Cloning too. I've literally ended a base with a Rush while the Nuke was about to land on My head. 

[BattaIia]

this thread is 8 month old FYI =p

[9j2x1spz0uhl]

Comand and con.. Rivals bozguncu alev tankı basililisk 250 olmalı 120 değil