MMLs are terrible - Lack of competent T2 siege option contributes to turtling

0

@JusticeForMantis Are you for real or just to look stupid? Cuz sure those MMLs will look nice when they're dead or not ever built

1

Almost like this is why you were asked to post a replay of a real game situation.

1

@JusticeForMantis said in MMLs are terrible - Lack of competent T2 siege option contributes to turtling:

That's 5s to 10s change. Not important at all when I didn't even bother to micro MML properly.
I didn't bother to watch his replays nor care for cuz looking at his batshit crazy numbers is enough to say he fucked up.

"I didn't like his claims so I didn't look at his evidence" DansGame

0

When you see someone claim that it will take 12 minutes to break a single firebase then there is no need to look at the replay.
Even more when you see that certain someone go and nonchalantly rig the test by giving the attacker 1k less mass. I can be more than sure that he also didn't bother to micro or anything too.

There is literally no need to go and watch replay when it's enough to look at his post to see how fucking bad his claims are and how they have no ground.

@arma473

1

@FemtoZetta Replays do not back anything up. The game is multi-variate where hundreds of factors contribute to any specific successful action, not least the map and terrain.

Are we now going to claim that zooey need a huge speed and damage nerf because they destroy on small island maps?

@biass

I didn't start the thread, so why are you now making personal attacks on me?

I disagree with OP, so why are you saying I need to prove anything, and replays are not evidence. Spreadsheets are in fact better evidence than some random replay which is merely anecdotal.

From a clear mathematical standpoint MML are not overpowered. If mathematically they are not overpowered, then it really doesn't matter whether you have a replay with them stomping or not.

Next we'll have OP scout threads based on spurious replays where a 300 rated got his ACU swarmed by a smurf.~

The fact you have 2 replays showing completely different results proves my point.

What people need to do to properly test this anyway is to incorporate some MML under the shields, as counterplay, which is common.

1

Can you guys stop making new stupid threads with 40 posts a day? You are never going to convince each other of anything.

0

@ThomasHiatt
There is someone wrong in the internet syndrome. Can't be cured. 😧

I still hope to see replay with good use of MMLs. Actually only real reason to post in this thread for me. Probably I should ask in different place

0

@FunkOff

For what its worth, I build MMLs so rarely that I sometimes forget they exist.

"OMG, a com is T2 PD pushing me, and my T3 land factory hasn't been started so I can't get T3 mobile arty... I should make gunships!".

I don't think it could hurt to have a stronger T2 siege unit.

I build far, far more firebeetles than I build T2 MML.

0

MML are good, you forgetting they exist doesn't really change that. They easily destroy mass equivalent bases and can continue to basebreak once you defeat the critical mass buildup of TMD. The dude turtling in a firebase can't continue to turtle beyond the critical mass.

0

@FtXCommando

Its at least 2, you have factor in the opportunity cost of mass lost from choosing to build a TML rather than upgrading a mex.

Note that I'm not claiming they're not OP, just that its not as simple as you're portraying it.

1

@advena said in MMLs are terrible - Lack of competent T2 siege option contributes to turtling:

I still hope to see replay with good use of MMLs

Here is a ladder match with mass (more than 50) MMLs: #10225659

I did not have any success breaking the firebase in the south but I did pick off a lot of units in the north.

0

No I don't lol. You lose t2 mex and you lose t2 mex reclaim. There is nothing a dude gains from getting tml'd in any way. If you kill more mass than the attack cost you, then you have a relativist mass lead.

1 T2 mex kill is all a TML needs, the opportunity cost is irrelevant, it's always good ceterus paribus.

The only opportunity cost to worry yourself about is the cost of going t2 at an early stage in the game, but this is already common on many teamgame maps anyway and serves other uses than just simple tml abuse.

0

I would like to see MMLs used go good effect. As a previous postet noted, Vipers are quite good (due to rapid fire and split missiles) so a replay of another MML should be required.

@Biass I do not build MMLs because they are underpowered and are not effective at the basic task for which they are intended.

1

the amount of disrespect being given to beastmode spearhead in this thread....

0

@FunkOff So did you even watch my video? All MML performed nearly as good, with considerable differences only showing up if you are gonna micro the shit out of them. Which you won't.

And why the fuck would you even consider that replay when the attacking side have 1k mass less. 1K FUCKING MASS LESS THAN THE DEFENDING SIDE?

0

@JusticeForMantis If MMLs are to be an effective counter, they need to quickly and reliably defeat their intended target for lower cost. The equal mass vs equal mass argument is so stupid it need not be considered. Read the OP again to see why. T1 Arty is effective against T1 pd. T2 MML is ineffective against t2 pd/tmd/shield.

0

@FtXCommando Who is Beastmode spearhead?

0

@FunkOff said in MMLs are terrible - Lack of competent T2 siege option contributes to turtling:

As a previous postet noted, Vipers are quite good (due to rapid fire and split missiles)

Is your argument that all T2 MMLs are bad or that the other 3 should be brought in line with Vipers?

0

@FtXCommando said in MMLs are terrible - Lack of competent T2 siege option contributes to turtling:

No I don't lol. You lose t2 mex and you lose t2 mex reclaim. There is nothing a dude gains from getting tml'd in any way. If you kill more mass than the attack cost you, then you have a relativist mass lead.

1 T2 mex kill is all a TML needs, the opportunity cost is irrelevant, it's always good ceterus paribus.

Your critics are counting the cost of building the launcher itself (700-850 mass) and making missiles (250 mass each) but they are not counting the mass you can get if you ctrl-k the launcher and reclaim it (roughly: the cost of the launcher minus 150 mass).

So if you make the launcher, make 1 missile, launch it, ctrl-k the launcher, and scoop the reclaim, your total cost is around 400 mass. That is obviously a good price for killing 1 enemy T2 mex.

If your enemy makes a bunch of TMD, you should decide whether to keep the launcher, or just ctrl-k it and scoop the mass.

0

No, that is what I'm counting. That's how I got my numbers in my first post. You would need 3 more failed launches if you include the reclaim to make it not worth making the TML. Didn't include anything about enemy cost of building TMD, though.