RIP Avre

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[Sachaztan]

Someone should get Winds essays in this thread peer reviewed and published in the scientific American.

[chefarzt]

"The Dangers of  abundancy of time and vocabulary, a journey into a twisted mind"

[TheWindCriesMary]

Stay on topic to AVRE or else Tank's gonna use it as an excuse to lock the thread.

Would you guys be interested in playing with some AVRE's and posting replays to Myst's thread? It would really help.

[pqumsieh]

Too bad his posts are premised on assumptions and misinderstanding of the facts as demonstrated within the first 3 pages.

I think I figured out the issue here, there is an expectation that the AVRE should be effective vs. moving targets. Well I can tell you that wasn't our intentions. It's meant to take out support teams and units in buildings.

If you don't think it's performing that role for cost, then we can considera cost reduction.

Knowing you, you are going to argue that it's not very good at taking out units in buildings based on the anecdote you noted above. That being your shot at a church. To be honest, I don't have the time to explain to you how damage is applied to units in buildings and why such occurances are difficult to avoid. You will just have to trust me
I suppose seeing as I have a better understanding of the game systems mechanics.

Tank, we should make a rule that posts have to be less than 250 words :p

[chefarzt]

Just make a song outta it. Stones` Angie comes to mind.
AVREEE, AVREEE, when will those clouds all disappear?
AVREEE, AVREEE, where will it lead us from here?
With no loving in our souls and no money in our coats
You can't say were satisfied
But AVREEE, AVREEE, you can't say we never tried
AVREE, you're beautiful, but ain't it time we said goodbye?
AVREE, I still love you, remember all those nights we cried?
All the dreams we held so close seemed to all go up in smoke
Let me whisper in your ear:
AVREE, AVREEE, where will it lead us from here?
Oh, AVREEE, don't you weep, all your kisses still taste sweet
I hate that sadness in your eyes
But AVREEE, AVREEE, ain't it time we said goodbye?
With no loving in our souls and no money in our coats
You can't say were satisfied
But AVREEE, I still love you, baby
Everywhere I look I see your eyes
There ain't a woman that comes close to you
Come on baby, dry your eyes
But AVREEE, AVREEE, ain't it good to be alive?
AVREEE, AVREEE, they can't say we never tried

[TheWindCriesMary]

Haha Alpha as long as you help that's good enough for me.

[420thStealthBrigade]

What you are saying here is in direct contradiction to the extensive in-game evidence compiled in the replays thread. You are trying to work out what sounds reasonable in your head, and if we didn't have a growing repository of replays that would suffice, but we do. There are extensive examples now readily available for viewing of the AVRE recharging for several minutes, conducting an accurate shot against a support weapon or infantry squad, and failing to kill it (sometimes failing to kill more than 1 man and take the pak crew's health below 2/3rds.  

funny hows you seem to be missing your "unbiased" data replay of the game were you and bolt took out 6 weapons crews with 6 avre shots last night, 6 for 6 hmm.... I accidentally erased the file or i would post it. All I have seen from your replays is (after a fail shot at a moving pak from around the corner) "oh look the avre sucks now" or, look, a fail shot on a church mg from med to long range... well its in a fucking church. there is nothing wrong with the avre, Wind is just trying to get a cooldown buff on the unit he uses too much.

If you get a direct hit (please dont get direct hit and barely missed confused) on any weapons crews they are dead. Thats the whole point of the tank right?. I have seen nothing pointing to anything other than the unit is working fine.

just my 2 cents.

[Mysthalin]

PS: Wind, despite me not having respect for you now, don't worry, I'll help you investigate AVRE's, and will contribute my part in getting this matter settled. Though, if you hammer on about BT I'll just have to pour Alkaline all over you and turn you into soap, then play with AVRE's all by myself :3

Somebody's clearly on the BT.

420 - if you think the unit's good - be sure to contribute to the data thread.

[TheWindCriesMary]

funny hows you seem to be missing your "unbiased" data replay of the game were you and bolt took out 6 weapons crews with 6 avre shots last night, 6 for 6 hmm.... I accidentally erased the file or i would post it. All I have seen from your replays is (after a fail shot at a moving pak from around the corner) "oh look the avre sucks now" or, look, a fail shot on a church mg from med to long range... well its in a fucking church. there is nothing wrong with the avre, Wind is just trying to get a cooldown buff on the unit he uses too much.

I used 3 avre's in that game and got 13 kills between them. None of them came close to earning their cost.

None of bolt's avre's earned back their cost in the game either. We both invited you to check their stats in the game which clearly showed this but for some reason you did not.


To reiterate Mysthalin's point: if you feel the AVRE is perfectly capable as is please play some games with them and post replays in the data collection thread.

Actual data, experience and evidence is what you should be depending on.

[TheWindCriesMary]

So long as you read and understood my big ass wall of text I posted before Chez's song where I hammered on about why you are a bafoon. It will really put everything into perspective for you.

Alpha I have read your post. While I disagree with its conclusions and its reasoning completely, I'm glad you will be submitting posts to the AVRE data collection thread because your submissions will really help.

Thanks for taking the time to do that, most people wouldn't bother and would just make up reasons why they think the AVRE is fine and get offended at the very idea of actually playtesting.

[Sachaztan]

"The Dangers of  abundancy of time and vocabulary, a journey into a twisted mind"

+9001

[Bolt]

The fact remains it is harder for the AVRE to make it's cost up then other tanks because it has 1 target and 1 target only. support weapons, as PQ has stated it is not mean't for moving targets. So if the AVRE is not charging paks and killing them it is no way going to make up it's cost with it's nifty damage reduction vs Tanks this makes it all the more apparent.

[TheWindCriesMary]

Well, do you understand the fact that what you think is a nerf was actually a buff? Otherwise uuuuuuuuurrrrrrrggggghhhh, learn game mechanics.

You are fundamentally wrong about the nerf being a buff. The AVRE's most important attribute (damage) was severely nerfed at mid range (dramatically harming its AOE), its pool was increased and its +5 range bonus was removed. In return it got increased accuracy (when "missing" was a minor nuisance and its modifier vs suppressed/pinned soldiers) I'm sorry but your math and your conclusions here are completely inaccurate.

Here is what the change to the AVRE constituted:

AVRE - Area Effect
- Accuracy from 0.5/0.75/1 to 1/1/1.25
- Damage from 0.1/0.4/1 to 0.1/0.15/1
- Damage Friendly from 0.2/0.35/1 to 0.05/0.1/1

- Removed the modifier AVRE has vs suppressed/pinned units; values set to 1.
- Vet 3 - Removed +5 Range
- Pool from 9 to 12

2 of these can be defined as "buffs": the increase in accuracy and the removal of the modifier to suppress/pinned units.

3 of these are nerfs: the +5 range removal, the pool increase and the mid range damage increase

1 is neutral: the damage to friendlies


Your understanding of game mechanics is deeply off if you are under the impression that a 67% damage reduction at mid range AOE distance, more pool and the loss of a +5 vet bonus is a less significant nerf than the 2 extremely minor buffs. One of the "buffs" is highly situational and doesn't even affect the AVRE's intended main role: taking out paks, and both have been pointed out by many in this thread to be almost trivial.

[420thStealthBrigade]

Somebody's clearly on the BT.

420 - if you think the unit's good - be sure to contribute to the data thread.

I will. i accidentaly deleted the rec file cause I just learned how to do the whole replay thing.. I will try and post a good replay next time i play avres.

"None of bolt's avre's earned back their cost in the game either."

6 weapons crews? It changed the momentum of the entire game.

" Actual data, experience and evidence is what you should be depending on."

which is why i found it odd  that you didnt post that replay...

[TheWindCriesMary]

I will. i accidentaly deleted the rec file cause I just learned how to do the whole replay thing.. I will try and post a good replay next time i play avres.

"None of bolt's avre's earned back their cost in the game either."

6 weapons crews? It changed the momentum of the entire game.

" Actual data, experience and evidence is what you should be depending on."

which is why i found it odd  that you didnt post that replay...

6 weapon crews spread across 4 avre's hurts your argument rather than helps it. You should be the last guy in the world trying to use that game as an example of anything.

The reason the game was not posted is because puddin crashed out about 20 minutes in and the rest of the game was you guys throwing away your units. Even still no AVRE earned its cost, but if we had posted it it would have unfairly aided my side of the argument (that AVRE's are underpowered) despite the fact that the game was non-typical: eg. 4 vs 3 and the 3 just sending in waves for the hell of it. I'm not interested in sending in replays that show non-typical game environments (when its 4v3 and my team is the 4) even if they help my case by featuring AVRE's that don't earn their cost.

As a member of the BT you should put a lot more stock in controlling for variables and for basic rigour.

[TheWindCriesMary]

Alpha, what you are not realizing is that DPS is not what the problem is. Nor is it relevant to analysing how this change dramatically has harmed the actual in-game role of the AVRE and its effectiveness at that role.

The problem with the AVRE is that it gets one shot to achieve its task: taking out a pak is typically the main function. So it is worse if an AVRE has a better chance to damage all 3 guys but do 67% less damage at medium range than it is if it is less likely to hit all 3 but does 67% more damage to those it does hit.

Why? Because the role of the AVRE is to take out that Pak. You wait a few minutes just for that opportunity. If it kills 0 or 1 of the pak's crew, it fails. It is an all-or nothing gambit.


Viewing DPS in a vacuum is a really, really, really bad idea given the very specific function of the AVRE.

[Mysthalin]

Which is the better unit? A unit which has the chance to install kill or do nothing. Or the unit which always does something?

I'd say it was AVRE 1.

Risk aversion, risk neutrality and risk seeking behaviour. From a risk-neutral, non-preferential perspective the AVREs are exactly equal.

However, the damage reduction, potential achievable cooldown nerfs and loss of potential range all handily outweigh the added stability of the unit's shots, so in this case from a risk-neutral perspective the AVRE has taken a nerf. It is only if you are ridiculously risk averse that you'll see this as a buff.

Your argument rests entirely on the perception bias of "less risk at almost any cost is worth it".

[chefarzt]

Mass lobotomy is in order.
Edit: Too late

[TheWindCriesMary]

You're talking to me about how statistics work? Really?

With your numbers AVRE 1 and AVRE 2 have the same expected return. And even then you'd be ignoring the factor of medikits, which ensure that AVRE 1s chance of flat out kill is worth more than AVRE 2s guaranteed damage (which can be healed back up).

Alpha has also completely taken the AVRE comparison into a weird vacuum EIR where medkits, medic bunkers, scout cars and WM vet 1 regenerative healing [only really applicable in snipers but still worth mentioning] all do not exist.

The original AVRE is unquestionably more effective at its one role: good potential to quickly and efficiently remove a single target.

Instead we have a "high potential to quickly damage all the crew of a single target".

In EIR gameplay, and especially in the case of a unit like the AVRE, it is almost always better to kill something than it is to just damage it. Even if the chance to damage it at all is higher in the latter case. It's why increasing kill crit chances on ACPR is so valuable, and why firestorm nebels are so much more effective than their regular counterparts.

[pqumsieh]

This thread has gotten its point across. We are looking at the AVRE.