Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Discuss the future of Warzone 2100 with us.
User avatar
alfred007
Regular
Regular
Posts: 619
Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 06:25
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by alfred007 »

I also tested alpha 03 again and agree that alpha 03 is good. I defined an assembly for the factory in alpha 03, the files are attached.
What shall we do with alpha 02? I'm still of the opinion that we should replace all scavengers with the twin machine gun variant. If you add a repair unit to every combat unit the scavengers shouldn't be a problem, even with the twin machine gun variant. If you two think it's too much, it's also ok for me.
Since the player got the third damage upgrade in alpha 03, we should give this upgrade also to the scavengers in alpha 04. Because the first scavenger factory can be destroyed relatively quickly the player should be able to deal with all other scavengers.
Attachments
alpha 03 with assembly.zip
(1.89 KiB) Downloaded 113 times
Bethrezen
Regular
Regular
Posts: 661
Joined: 25 Sep 2009, 02:05

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by Bethrezen »

What shall we do with alpha 02? I'm still of the opinion that we should replace all scavengers with the twin machine gun variant. If you add a repair unit to every combat unit the scavengers shouldn't be a problem, even with the twin machine gun variant. If you two think it's too much, it's also ok for me.
Personally, I'm of the opinion alpha 02 is fine the way it is, more over it makes sense that you would be facing a mix of units, for one simple reason like the Taliban and other such forces around the word such as Somali pirates for example the Scav's are not a professional army they are a militia therefore much of what they use are repurposed civilian vehicles or what ever else they can get there hands on, since they lack the sort of sophisticated engineering capabilities that the project has, it's probably analogous to the United Nations vs the Taliban in terms of the availability, quality and sophistication of equipment.

Therefore the Scav's wouldn't be recycling, rebuilding and upgrading there units and the availability of stronger units for the scav's would be limited to what ever they can acquire when they are out scavenging, or what they are supplied with by the New Paradigm.

Having said that there are more practical reasons for this as well, as far as balancing goes, the scav's are not supposed to be as powerful as the project although for the sake of keeping them relevant up till the end of alpha then they do need to be upgraded as the player gets stronger, so that they remain a valid and relevant threat to the player.
Since the player got the third damage upgrade in alpha 03, we should give this upgrade also to the scavengers in alpha 04. Because the first scavenger factory can be destroyed relatively quickly the player should be able to deal with all other scavengers.
As for as alpha 04 goes I'd hold off adding the third damage upgrade for there machineguns temporarily, till we can see how things play out with them having 2 damage upgrades, because 2 may well prove to be tough enough as is.

What I would say though is since the player gets half tracks on alpha 04 and would very likely recycle and upgrade there units to half tracks before taking off to do alpha 05 it might be ok to add the third damage upgrade on alpha 5 as heavy machinegun halftracks actually have a reasonable amount of durability, the problem with that could come in if you are using weaker units like flamers, against the scav's twin machineguns with 3 damage upgrades flamers don’t stand a chance due to them being more lightly armoured, so that’s something we may be need to address, although having said that in order for flamers to be useful against the new paradigm, they are probably going to need upgrading some on alpha 04 anyway, now granted flamers are not going to be much help against the heavier new paradigm units since the new paradigm units have a fair amount of fire resistance, though I do think they should still remain effective against there structures, so that you have an alternative to mortars.

[edit1]
Oh wow ok so I just took a shot as alpha 04 and my landing party can't even get past the first set of turrets, I get butcher in a matter of seconds, due to the combination of fire from there turrets and the small group of scav's that attack you as you approach the turrets, now admittedly i was still using my landing party from the previous mission 4 flamers and 4 twin machine-guns and 2 mobile repair units as i only had time on the previous mission to upgrade 1 squad to heavy machine-guns, so I'm going to try again using heavy machine-guns instead and see how that is but I suspect that the result is probably going to be similar, so 2 damage upgrade may well actually be enough for the now.

[edit2]
Ahh ok so that's why I got butchered the problem isn't the turrets it's the scav's units, they still have heavy machine-guns and against scav units that have heavy machine-guns and 2 damage upgrades, only heavy machine-guns are armoured enough to stand up to that so that's going to need adjusting.

I supposed we could maybe add an armour upgrade for twin machine-guns and flamers to make them a bit tougher if you wanted to keep the scav's using heavy machine-guns and 2 damage upgrades, but if you are going to add the third damage upgrade on alpha 04 then the heavy machine-guns should be downgrade to twin machine-guns.
Bethrezen
Regular
Regular
Posts: 661
Joined: 25 Sep 2009, 02:05

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by Bethrezen »

@pastdue

Just took a look at the new WZ portable from

https://ci.appveyor.com/api/projects/Wa ... elease_x86

and while the issue with the installer failing to download the runtimes seems to be fixed now the game is no longer loading when I try I get the following error.
untitled.PNG
untitled.PNG (7.09 KiB) Viewed 3921 times
which is odd because the game loaded previously when it wasn't downloading the runtime files, so might be an idea to double check make sure the installer is downloading the correct runtime files for xp because typically errors like that are caused when you install the wrong version of files and then it bugs because its looking for something that isn't available on older systems.
User avatar
alfred007
Regular
Regular
Posts: 619
Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 06:25
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by alfred007 »

Bethrezen wrote:Ahh ok so that's why I got butchered the problem isn't the turrets it's the scav's units, they still have heavy machine-guns and against scav units that have heavy machine-guns and 2 damage upgrades, only heavy machine-guns are armoured enough to stand up to that so that's going to need adjusting.

I supposed we could maybe add an armour upgrade for twin machine-guns and flamers to make them a bit tougher if you wanted to keep the scav's using heavy machine-guns and 2 damage upgrades, but if you are going to add the third damage upgrade on alpha 04 then the heavy machine-guns should be downgrade to twin machine-guns.
I made a test with alpha 04 giving the scavengers the third damage upgrade. So I don't waste time I recycled 10 of my combat units at the end of alpha 02 so that I can produce 10 heavy machine gun tanks during alpha 03. Thereby all my needed units for alpha 04 were ready when I finished alpha 03.

I brought 10 heavy machine gun tanks in with my first transport and moved west to destroy the first two towers. Then I went the eastern way north and destroyed the scavengers there. In the meantime, I brought 10 repair units in. Then I moved west to the mg bunkers and the cannon tower. After I destroyed them I moved more west and destroyed the scavengers at the pits and the western scavenger factory. During this action, I placed my repair units at the point where the cannon tower was so that they don't move between the fire lines and took care to move heavy damaged units in time to the repair units. Then I destroyed the pits and moved north to the research facility and destroyed it. Needed time: 4 minutes. Then I placed my repair units at the place where the research facility was and moved north with my combat units. I used the same tactic as in alpha 03. Moving forward, destroying a few scavengers and/or buildings and moving back for repair, again and again. After I captured the halftrack artifact I moved my repair units a bit north so that they are closer to my combat units. So I could survive the massive attack of the scavengers by building a line of combat units to face the attack and place the repair units close behind the combat units so that they get repaired instantly. After I survived this attack I destroyed the rest of the base, moved the eastern way south and destroyed the rest of the scavenger buildings. Win by total annihilation in 8 minutes. Usually, I play the level in a different way so that I can gain more experience for my units but I wanted to see how fast you can win alpha 04.

I don't think we need some adjustments in the level, you can win it "easily" (if you move your units careful) even with giving the scavengers the third damage upgrade and heavy machine guns. And I didn't bring in a third transport, I played the whole level with 10 heavy machine gun tanks and 10 repair units without losing one.
Bethrezen
Regular
Regular
Posts: 661
Joined: 25 Sep 2009, 02:05

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by Bethrezen »

I don't think we need some adjustments in the level, you can win it "easily" (if you move your units careful) even with giving the scavengers the third damage upgrade and heavy machine guns. And I didn't bring in a third transport, I played the whole level with 10 heavy machine gun tanks and 10 repair units without losing one.
don't you think using 10 repair vehicles is a bit excessive and unrealistic, while undoubtedly some player might use ridicules amounts of repair vehicles like that most probably wont, and the fact that you are using so many repair vehicles is skewing your experience.

I'd like to see you try and complete alpha 4 in 8 minutes when the computer has 3 damage upgrades and heavy machine-guns when you are not using ridicules amounts of repair vehicles and nothing but heavy machine-guns.

try again using 4 repair vehicles and 9 twin MGs and 9 Flamers for a more realistic experience, and you will find that you get a very different result, in the form of getting mercilessly crushed and taking massive casualties, yes its possible to win but not without in ornate difficulty.

yes I could massively out gear the level by using huge numbers of units and stupid amounts of repair vehicles but that's not going to provide realistic feedback, and an accurate sense of just how difficult the level really is and requiring the play to over gear a level in order to be able to complete it is not good balancing.
User avatar
alfred007
Regular
Regular
Posts: 619
Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 06:25
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by alfred007 »

Bethrezen wrote:
I don't think we need some adjustments in the level, you can win it "easily" (if you move your units careful) even with giving the scavengers the third damage upgrade and heavy machine guns. And I didn't bring in a third transport, I played the whole level with 10 heavy machine gun tanks and 10 repair units without losing one.
don't you think using 10 repair vehicles is a bit excessive and unrealistic, while undoubtedly some player might use ridicules amounts of repair vehicles like that most probably wont, and the fact that you are using so many repair vehicles is skewing your experience.

I'd like to see you try and complete alpha 4 in 8 minutes when the computer has 3 damage upgrades and heavy machine-guns when you are not using ridicules amounts of repair vehicles and nothing but heavy machine-guns.

try again using 4 repair vehicles and 9 twin MGs and 9 Flamers for a more realistic experience, and you will find that you get a very different result, in the form of getting mercilessly crushed and taking massive casualties, yes its possible to win but not without in ornate difficulty.

yes I could massively out gear the level by using huge numbers of units and stupid amounts of repair vehicles but that's not going to provide realistic feedback, and an accurate sense of just how difficult the level really is and requiring the play to over gear a level in order to be able to complete it is not good balancing.
I understand what you mean, I admit this was a radical way to win alpha 04 and of course not "the only" or "the right" one. I have a more pragmatic sight. The goal of a war is to survive and to win. I don't understand why it should be a more realistic experience if you use less powerful tanks than you have and/or not any resources you have.
You wrote about the conflict between the United Nations and the Taliban. I don't believe that the United Nations would use less powerful weapons to become a more realistic experience. They use the most powerful weapons they have to prevent losing own soldiers and with the goal to win. I admit I 'm being sarcastic.
Back to topic. If I try to think like a new player and I would find out that I get crushed with using 4 repair units, 9 twin machine gun tanks and 9 flamer tanks I would change my strategy and the units I use. That's what you already did. You used the same units you used in alpha 03 and get butchered in alpha 04. Because of that, you changed the units you use in alpha 04.
It would be indeed no good balancing if the way I won alpha 04 would be the only one you can win the level. And with my win, the testing and rebalancing of alpha 04 are of course not complete or finished. My idea is to make the levels as tough as possible but as easy as necessary. It makes no sense if the only way to win a level is to send an endless amount of units against the enemy. But this idea is the reason why I say we should start testing a level as tough as possible and if we find out it is too tough getting one step easier. And as tough as possible doesn't mean that we should give the scavengers rail guns but also in a realistic way that fits into the story. And after the player got the third damage upgrade it's logical to give the scavengers also the third upgrade. If the final result is that you and Berserk Cyborg are of the opinion that the third upgrade is too much I'm fine with that. But we should first give the scavengers the third upgrade and just step down if we think it's too tough.
User avatar
alfred007
Regular
Regular
Posts: 619
Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 06:25
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by alfred007 »

Bethrezen wrote:I'd like to see you try and complete alpha 4 in 8 minutes when the computer has 3 damage upgrades and heavy machine-guns when you are not using ridicules amounts of repair vehicles and nothing but heavy machine-guns.
I did alpha 04 again and used 10 heavy machine gun tanks and only 4 repair units. With the same strategy as before, I needed now 9 minutes and lost one repair unit because I became careless at the end.
Bethrezen
Regular
Regular
Posts: 661
Joined: 25 Sep 2009, 02:05

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by Bethrezen »

I don't understand why it should be a more realistic experience if you use less powerful tanks than you have and/or not any resources you have.
Well the answer to that is simple enough you have to try and put your self in the position of what other players would do, and not would you would do personally, because otherwise you end up with bad balancing.

This is simply one of the fundamentals of good game design, yes over gearing a level is one way to go about beating a level and there are some difficult levels like beta 01 where I will in fact do just that.

But from a balancing perspective in order to accurately gauge how difficult other players might find the level you have to try and put your self in there position and play the level like they would now I will grant you there is some guess work involved in this, but a good way to get a decent sense of how difficult a level may be to others is to use your weaker units instead of your stronger ones, because obviously given the number of times we have played these levels we know what to expect so we are far less likely to make common mistakes like neglecting to upgrade units, neglecting to do research, neglecting to support are units with mobile repair vehicles etc.

To put this into context imagine that you are a less experienced player and as such you neglected to research heavy machineguns on alpha 3 and as a consequence you didn’t upgrade your units, with your proposed changes this puts you in a tough spot because you don’t want to redo the previous level but you don’t really have the time to research heavy machineguns and then upgrade your units and then take off to do alpha 04, but you simply aren't going to be able to do the level with what you have because you made the enemy to strong and only heavy machineguns are tough enough to stand up to there incoming fire.

Now I'm sure you would agree that such a scenario is a problem so in order to avoid a scenario like this and the subsequent complaints that would no doubt result you have to assume that the other player is not using heavy machineguns, and you have to adjust the balancing such that the level is still possible to complete even using your weakest units, and without having to massively over gear the level.

which is the point that I was making, about using your weaker units being a more realistic experience then what you where doing to beat the level, which in turn provides better feedback which results in us being able to make better decisions which results in better overall balance.
You wrote about the conflict between the United Nations and the Taliban. I don't believe that the United Nations would use less powerful weapons to become a more realistic experience. They use the most powerful weapons they have to prevent losing own soldiers and with the goal to win. I admit I 'm being sarcastic.
True enough but you missed the point I was making I was not trying to illustrate that the United Nations would use less powerful weapons rather I was illustrating that the Taliban by comparison to the forces of the United Nations would be weaker and would be using weaker weapons because most of the gear that militias like the Taliban have has been captured, stolen, salvaged, and on some occasions provided by third parties that are hostile to western forces, or bought from arms dealers on the black market, and since the scav's function in WZ is that of a militia then looking at how groups like the Taliban operate militarily, is a good real world equivalent to base the scav's on if you see what I mean.
I did alpha 04 again and used 10 heavy machine gun tanks and only 4 repair units. With the same strategy as before, I needed now 9 minutes and lost one repair unit because I became careless at the end.
which is smilier to the result I see when using heavy machine guns, but that is kind of missing the point the idea is to try and do the level with your preposed changes without using heavy machine guns which would more accurately simulate what a less experienced player would do because we both know that less experienced players and not as diligent about doing research, upgrading units keeping there units alive etc, and the posts made WZ2100ModsFAn a couple of pages back illustrate this point nicely.

which is why i would advocate for either a slightly buffing the armour of flamers and twin machine-guns to make them more durable if you want to give the scav's heavy machine-guns and 3 damage upgrades or removing the heavy machine-guns, and possibly delaying giving the scav's the third machine-gun damage upgrade and heavy machine-guns till alpha 5 after the player has half tracks which will make flamers and twin machine-guns tougher.

The reason being that it's here where players would most likely upgrade there units, since you have time enough on alpha 05 to do this but also because wheeled twin machine-gunners and flamers should be tough enough handle the Alpha 04, but also because upgrading before this is kind of redundant as all your units will be getting recycled and upgraded to half tracks at the start of alpha 05 anyway as this is necessary to stop your units getting squashed by the new paradigm
User avatar
Berserk Cyborg
Code contributor
Code contributor
Posts: 938
Joined: 26 Sep 2016, 19:56

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by Berserk Cyborg »

I think Alpha 2 is fine as it is.

For Alpha 4 I reduced the upgraded on map units to twin MG (except scav soldiers who use the HMG). I tried both with 2 MG damage and with 3 MG damage. I think we can go up to the 3 MG damage option. For my test I used 5 flamers, 4 HMGs, and one repair unit for the entire mission with about 7 minutes to spare.
camBalance.wz
camBalance2.wz
Bethrezen
Regular
Regular
Posts: 661
Joined: 25 Sep 2009, 02:05

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by Bethrezen »

For Alpha 4 I reduced the upgraded on map units to twin MG (except scav soldiers who use the HMG). I tried both with 2 MG damage and with 3 MG damage. I think we can go up to the 3 MG damage option. For my test I used 5 flamers, 4 HMGs, and one repair unit for the entire mission with about 7 minutes to spare.
was it just the garrison units that got down graded to twin machine-guns, or where the units coming out the factories also so supposed to be downgraded ?
User avatar
Berserk Cyborg
Code contributor
Code contributor
Posts: 938
Joined: 26 Sep 2016, 19:56

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by Berserk Cyborg »

Bethrezen wrote: was it just the garrison units that got down graded to twin machine-guns, or where the units coming out the factories also so supposed to be downgraded ?
Just the garrison units (same setup as in Alpha 3). Although, not many scavenger vehicles exist on the map to begin with anyway. It prevents the first surprise attack from being a bit too overwhelming for new players at least.
Bethrezen
Regular
Regular
Posts: 661
Joined: 25 Sep 2009, 02:05

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by Bethrezen »

ok so just gave camBalance2 a go, when using 18 heavy machine-gunners and 2 mobile repair units the damage isn't bad, although it's somewhat slower due to taking longer to get past there turrets

When using 9 heavy machine-gunners, 9 flamers and 2 mobile repair units, getting past there turrets is somewhat easier and quicker though the damage is more difficult to handle due to flamers being more lightly armoured.

When using 9 flamers, 9 twin machine-guns and 2 mobile repair units, I'm struggling to keep up with the incoming damage, and I don't usually get much further then the where the research facility is before I start loosing units in some attempts I don't even get past the first set of turrets before I start loosing units due to the scav squad catching me while I'm trying to repair the damage from taking out the turrets.

I also tried camBalance using 9 twin machine-gunners, 9 flamers and 2 mobile repair units, and while it's still tricky made more so by the fact that there heavy machine gunners are troublesome to deal with because they out range twin machine-gunners and flamers the incoming damage is at least a bit more manageable as long as you are careful.

so from that point of view of using weaker units I don't think the scav's should have 3 damage upgrades and heavy machine-guns one or the other is enough for alpha 04, unless you want to buff the durability of twin machine-guns, flamers and mobile repair units a bit because with 3 damage upgrades and heavy machine-guns flamers and twin machine-guns basically be come useless because they don't have enough armour and go down to quickly.
User avatar
Berserk Cyborg
Code contributor
Code contributor
Posts: 938
Joined: 26 Sep 2016, 19:56

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by Berserk Cyborg »

Bethrezen wrote: so from that point of view of using weaker units I don't think the scav's should have 3 damage upgrades and heavy machine-guns one or the other is enough for alpha 04, unless you want to buff the durability of twin machine-guns, flamers and mobile repair units a bit because with 3 damage upgrades and heavy machine-guns flamers and twin machine-guns basically be come useless because they don't have enough armour and go down to quickly.
Set them at 2 MG damage upgrades for Alpha 4.

Jumping ahead a bit. For context, I currently have Alpha five research as:

Code: Select all

const NEW_PARADIGM_RES = [
	"R-Wpn-MG1Mk1", "R-Vehicle-Body01", "R-Sys-Spade1Mk1", "R-Vehicle-Prop-Wheels",
	"R-Sys-Engineering01", "R-Wpn-MG-Damage02", "R-Wpn-MG-ROF01",
	"R-Wpn-Flamer-Damage02", "R-Wpn-Flamer-Range01", "R-Wpn-Flamer-ROF01",
	"R-Defense-WallUpgrade01","R-Struc-Materials01", "R-Vehicle-Engine01",
	"R-Struc-RprFac-Upgrade01", "R-Wpn-Cannon-Damage01", "R-Wpn-Rocket-Damage02",
	"R-Wpn-Rocket-ROF01",
];
const SCAVENGER_RES = [
	"R-Wpn-Flamer-Damage02", "R-Wpn-Flamer-Range01", "R-Wpn-Flamer-ROF01",
	"R-Wpn-MG-Damage03", "R-Wpn-MG-ROF01", "R-Wpn-Cannon-Damage01", "R-Wpn-Rocket-Damage01",
];
For whenever one of you gets to that mission.
camBalance.wz
User avatar
alfred007
Regular
Regular
Posts: 619
Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 06:25
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by alfred007 »

I'm still of the opinion that we should give the scavengers three damage upgrades. Soon or later the player has to learn to take care of his researches. And the sooner the better. And I think it's better he starts to take care of his researches with such a short level like alpha 04 than with a long level like alpha 05. If you give him the chance to win alpha 04 with twin machine guns he will struggle in alpha 05 after maybe an hour he played the level. As we could see in the videos WZ2100ModsFAn posted before he failed in alpha 05 because he used the wrong units. If he would have learned this in alpha 04 (when also the hard way) he would have saved a lot of time. Even if unexperienced players forgot to research the heavy machine gun artifact during alpha 03 they have enough time at the beginning of alpha 04 to research it and produce HMG tanks. So I plead for three damage upgrades. If you give the garrison twin machine guns or heavy machine guns makes no big difference.
Bethrezen
Regular
Regular
Posts: 661
Joined: 25 Sep 2009, 02:05

Re: Help needed testing 3.2.x Campaign games!

Post by Bethrezen »

As a compromise why not add the third MG damage upgrade on alpha 05 because really all players regardless of there experience level should be upgrading all there units at that point since you will get squashed by the new paradigm if you don't because obviously the new paradigm are a good deal stronger and tougher then that scav's, another reason for waiting is because it's annoying enough having to recycle and rebuild all my units twice in a row once on alpha 05 and then again on alpha 06, and to be honest I can do without having to recycle and rebuild all my units for alpha 4 as well.

The reason I generally pick Alpha 05 as an upgrade point is just one of expediency, I have the time to recycle and rebuild all my units and I'm not having to divert my attention to other things, If I want a bit more time to do the research and I don't want it to be running over into alpha 06 then once I have rebuild 1 squad I can then load up start the level and while I'm taking care of the opening parts of the level the rest of my units are being rebuild and flown in, and even if I recycle and rebuild all my units before I even start alpha 05 I still have plenty of time to complete it, of course that will mean that the research will be running over into the start of alpha 06, but that's not an issue anyway because, once I have dealt with the new paradigms initial rush, I'll usually hold position so that I can get my units upgraded to medium bodies because obviously I can't do that on alpha 05 since I need to upgrade the factories first.

Talking of which what do you think to the idea of giving the factory module on alpha 04 instead of 05 that way your factory can be upgraded before you take off to do alpha 05, now obviously you still wont be able to do anything with it till the end of alpha 05 since you don't get medium bodies till the end of alpha 05, but what it would mean is that while you are sitting round waiting for your research to do on alpha 05 you could also be upgrading your units to medium bodies, which would save a bit of messing about at the start of alpha 06 and make the initial rush easier to deal with.

something worth thinking about perhaps because I figure if I'm going to be sitting round for like 20 minutes doing research on alpha 05 anyway I may as well spend that time also upgrading my units, so that as soon as alpha 06 start I can crack on and get striate to work and don't have to sit round for another 10 to 15 minutes while I wait for all my units to get upgraded to medium bodies, and then to compensates for the fact that the new paradigms initial rush is now facing medium body units instead of light body units, just adjust the composition of there initial rush and maybe give them a few extra units, or maybe some slightly stronger heavier units.

[edit]
Thinking about this some more in theory if you really wanted to streamline things a bit then you could also give medium bodies on alpha 04 so that you can upgrade your army at the start of alpha 05 although I'm not so sure about this one because while granting access to the factory module on alpha 04 isn't really going to affect anything to much giving access to medium bodies would so that would necessitate rebalancing alpha 05 because medium body units facing a stranded alpha 05 set up would be way way way to easy.
Post Reply