@SpikeyNoob
I was saying that stuff in response to what you said... You keep being confused, so I keep trying to explain it more simply... it is not a hard concept... Things get balanced in comparison to other things. So, for example, how a t1 bomber performs per cost is relevant to balancing how a jester performs per cost. You argued about how good/bad t1 bombers are compared to jesters, basically saying that t1 bombers aren't great because they do less than their hypothetical damage if you don't micro them. I explained that even if t1 bombers do significantly less than their hypothetical firing rate, they are still quite good. I also explained that the capabilities of units, such as t1 bombers or auroras, often get factored in with FAF's balancing. So, when balancing, for example, a jester compared to a t1 bomber, we should theoretically factor in micro potential like we would when balancing, for example, a striker vs an aurora. Things like T1 bombers and auroras can relatively often achieve a very cost-efficient amount of damage with good micro. Even if t1 bombers don't normally get micro'ed to their full potential, they do often get used to a decent portion of that potential, especially early on in pro games. Thereby, they theoretically should be/are balanced with some expected level of micro'ing in mind on average, especially early on in pro games. With that logic, t1 bombers are quite good, as are t1 tanks, but jesters are notably worse per cost, by comparison, on average.