@spcr said in Increase T1 inties turn-rate:
having to micro air at such a level goes against the very notions of FA
Ok, then don't do it. I've personally never done it and I'm still top 0.01% in ratings
and no, 12 interceptors will not do very well versus 12 gunships, but maybe you should consider building more interceptors. they are a lot cheaper than gunships
you could also just build flak
@waffelznoob How is being in the top 0.01% relevant to the argument at hand?
Also yes 12 interceptors wont od well against 12 gunships, but their expected efficiency is otherwise reduced by a lot if not ordered to hover.
@spcr said in Increase T1 inties turn-rate:
@waffelznoob How is being in the top 0.01% relevant to the argument at hand?
that you don't need to do it to be good. just don't do it if you don't want to, and there is obviously no problem
@spcr said in Increase T1 inties turn-rate:
Also yes 12 interceptors wont od well against 12 gunships, but their expected efficiency is otherwise reduced by a lot if not ordered to hover.
Expected efficiency based on what?
@waffelznoob For the first point , balance is ever-evolving . Rating is not a constant that is relevant here at all, especially considering that i couldve been obtained whilst some things were unbalanced and kept up by just not playing.
Another reason it doesnt matter you're the 0.01% is that most of the 1600+ lobbies enact "bans" against "unbalanced" strategies like tele-mazer and kick people known to do them, leaving them "comfortable"
As for the second point , all land unit DPS is fully enacted upon a unit while its within its weapon range , whilst for interceptors , they have to spend 3-4 seconds to enact 2-3 seconds of their DPS, ASF's face the same issue ,however it is not as bad since they got the highest DPS to TOP any gunship , unlike T1 inties which got low DPS and low health combined with low speed and high turn rate(and are expected to be able to deal with T2 gunships)
Another reason it doesnt matter you're the 0.01% is that most of the 1600+ lobbies enact "bans" against "unbalanced" strategies like tele-mazer and kick people known to do them, leaving them "comfortable"
This is just false lol
The only "bans" I've experienced in higher rated lobbies are mutual agreements to not build game-enders and instead just have massive battle instead. And that's incredibly rare.
@snoog Then explain why players like telemazers and a few others are constantly kicked out of them ? they dont troll their team and use valid strategies.
Without knowing who you're even talking about, I couldn't begin to give you an answer. Besides that, there's 1000 other reasons to kick someone.
@snoog said in Increase T1 inties turn-rate:
Another reason it doesnt matter you're the 0.01% is that most of the 1600+ lobbies enact "bans" against "unbalanced" strategies like tele-mazer and kick people known to do them, leaving them "comfortable"
This is just false lol
The only "bans" I've experienced in higher rated lobbies are mutual agreements to not build game-enders and instead just have massive battle instead. And that's incredibly rare.
You’ll get banned from the next X games if you nuke rush
Nobody bans over gunship snipes, those are entirely possible to proactively play around as the victim. Nuke rush the optimal move is to nuke rush back.
