Strategies

Please return the strategies back to how they used to be,before lao and his possy messed with them

?

作者： dinoscout, 19.03.2016 at 11:35

?

you dont remember those days you were to low rank to care....

Support. Return IMP and NC back to what they were.

作者： clovis1122, 19.03.2016 at 12:57

Support. Return IMP and NC back to what they were.

What did they change for Imp apart the def bonus for militias?

#Make_Ra_Great_Again

RA is worse in every way to imp except for +1 tank range and +1 tank attack and +1 inf attack.

RA is worse in every way to blitz except 1 extra def on militia. However, your militia so slow they never get anywhere important.

RA needs buff

You guys cry for balance. Saying "PD is too OP" or "Please nerf GW".

What you don't understand is, it's completely balanced if everyone uses it.
Here's what Mauzer would tell you.

作者： 1GodofWar1, 19.03.2016 at 12:12

作者： dinoscout, 19.03.2016 at 11:35

?

you dont remember those days you were to low rank to care....

he wasn't......
Dino,lao was crying to acqui telling him"Daddy Daddy,this strat is balanced to PD,pls nerf it!PD must be strongest!"
And then acqui happened.....

作者： PleaseMe, 19.03.2016 at 20:09

You guys cry for balance. Saying "PD is too OP" or "Please nerf GW".

What you don't understand is, it's completely balanced if everyone uses it.
Here's what Mauzer would tell you.

Here is what I would tell you:

Ra and blitz are suck stratigy, lb and hw is atroll stratigy

My god you people are so boring. The strategies are as balanced as theyve ever been. Theres competitive uses for almost all of them and it's reflected in how much more people are using other strats nowadays. Like really? i just saw a 3k/5k player ask why the militia defence was boosted for imperialist.

You've 2 types of players complaining.

1: Players who have not yet reached a level(nor in some cases will they ever) where they understand why the changes were made.
2. Selfish players who had their favourite strats nerfed.

Some players fall in to both categories.

You should be thanking me and mah possy and "daddy acqui"(lol i died).

GUYS THIS IS " PERFECT IMBALANCE " TYPE OF GAME.
That is when
b is stronger than a
but c is stronger than b
d is stronger than c
and a is stronger than d ( much variables in aw , but principle is the same )

In my opinion, RA is too weak to compete. As for the other strats, I have no complain in mind.

RA needs a buff. Making Infantry and/or Marines cheaper?

Ra and blitz were both nerfed and now the most used strategies in competitive games are pd pd pd pd gw sm nc

作者： Permamuted, 20.03.2016 at 15:17

My god you people are so boring. The strategies are as balanced as theyve ever been. Theres competitive uses for almost all of them and it's reflected in how much more people are using other strats nowadays. Like really? i just saw a 3k/5k player ask why the militia defence was boosted for imperialist.

You've 2 types of players complaining.

1: Players who have not yet reached a level(nor in some cases will they ever) where they understand why the changes were made.
2. Selfish players who had their favourite strats nerfed.

Some players fall in to both categories.

You should be thanking me and mah possy and "daddy acqui"(lol i died).

HW still sucks balls :S

oh and, in 3v3s its balanced, but GW in 1v1's, oh my, thats what you call op

作者： 1GodofWar1, 21.03.2016 at 15:37

Ra and blitz were both nerfed and now the most used strategies in competitive games are pd pd pd pd gw sm nc

stop playing europe 10k specifically west so much if you want to see less of it, it is THE pd niche.

作者： Tirpitz406, 21.03.2016 at 15:50

oh and, in 3v3s its balanced, but GW in 1v1's, oh my, thats what you call op

yea gw is a bit out of whack, but that one has nothing to do with me. And hw is broken. Nothing that can be done for that strat

作者： Permamuted, 21.03.2016 at 16:37

作者： 1GodofWar1, 21.03.2016 at 15:37

Ra and blitz were both nerfed and now the most used strategies in competitive games are pd pd pd pd gw sm nc

stop playing europe 10k specifically west so much if you want to see less of it, it is THE pd niche.

作者： Tirpitz406, 21.03.2016 at 15:50

oh and, in 3v3s its balanced, but GW in 1v1's, oh my, thats what you call op

yea gw is a bit out of whack, but that one has nothing to do with me. And hw is broken. Nothing that can be done for that strat

take away the bonus defence in city and in line for gw militia, that will return it to it's original state. Clovis was playing that type of gw before, before city bonus was actually implemented and fixed. And old gw was actually beatable until the city bonus was implemented which made gw stronger.

I think gw is fine as it is.

This thread wont accomplish anything anyway, so why even bother replying.

I for one did think they went a little to far, but how can we improve this simulation if we don't learn from are mistakes.

I might not play enough recently to probably have an opinion about this, but the times I played, I noticed GW became really OP. I am a fan of GW and its one of my favourite strats (if not changed), but I do agree GW is a bit OP compared with the other strats. RA and BLITZ needed the nerf too I agree, but they never needed the boost in the first place.

You guys can blame laochra all you want, but laochra atleast did someting against it, because PD was ruling over every other strat. Now I see more and more people using different strats, ofcourse we had that one big pile of players who went from boosted strat to boosted strat to get the best out of those mistakes, but atleast now there are different varities.

作者： Waffel, 22.03.2016 at 04:16

RA and BLITZ needed the nerf too I agree, but they never needed the boost in the first place.

Oh look at me guys, I avoided a war with the Nazi Germany. The world will be at Peace now!"

作者： clovis1122, 20.12.2015 at 08:47

作者： Permamuted, 20.12.2015 at 08:40

作者： The Tactician, 20.12.2015 at 02:13

blitz: Weak. In fact, pitiful slowrolling. One of the funnest strats, but can't hold anything. Was OP before and got nerfed, and I believe it would require a slight boost back.

just to nitpick, blitz was not nerfed. Ivan removed the city defence bonus on infantry, however only a few weeks ago we learned that that never existed in the first place

It has been always funny to me to see how they stopped after it. You made them believe that Blitz was weaker, and they did it.

Blitz Ukraine didn't die here, by the way. It dies after the -1 defense on cities.

I first wanted to be positive and though that it would encourage players to wall more (as old blitz was played), then I realized a game-play based purely on walls is impossible.

作者： clovis1122, 22.03.2016 at 05:06

作者： Waffel, 22.03.2016 at 04:16

RA and BLITZ needed the nerf too I agree, but they never needed the boost in the first place.

Oh look at me guys, I avoided a war with the Nazi Germany. The world will be at Peace now!"

Stop being smug. It doesn't suit you.

作者： Waffel, 22.03.2016 at 05:14

作者： clovis1122, 22.03.2016 at 05:06

作者： Waffel, 22.03.2016 at 04:16

RA and BLITZ needed the nerf too I agree, but they never needed the boost in the first place.

Oh look at me guys, I avoided a war with the Nazi Germany. The world will be at Peace now!"

Stop being smug. It doesn't suit you.

Oh come on it's a bit of satire ....

引句:

Blitz Ukraine didn't die here, by the way. It dies after the -1 defense on cities.

I first wanted to be positive and though that it would encourage players to wall more (as old blitz was played), then I realized a game-play based purely on walls is impossible.

it took one difference to change the game dramatically.

作者： ROYAL, 19.03.2016 at 14:58

#Make_Ra_Great_Again

RA is worse in every way to imp except for +1 tank range and +1 tank attack and +1 inf attack.

RA is worse in every way to blitz except 1 extra def on militia. However, your militia so slow they never get anywhere important.

RA needs buff

Support!
You can't play ra in 10k with out picking bad pick...
RA need's buff and the people that cry it's op are stupid.

+1 att -1 def

Taking it easy:

On all maps with not-so-big number of units such as world map there are 3 good choices: GW, imp and MoS, in that order. GW is simply the strategy that lets you use militias you get by expanding in the best way, meanwhile allowing you to spam cheap marines. Imperialist as a -30 cost strategy makes all its units -- mainly infantries (3/6 for 30 cost) and tanks (7/4 for 90 cost) -- the most cost-efficient after GW militia (4/5 for 30 cost) and GW marines (7/3 for 70 cost). MoS is the kind of strategy mainly used for the rich areas, dependable on transports so GW can't be used. Strategies such as PD, GC, RA, DS, SM and NC get beaten easily late game. Only HW looks like a strategy with a potential as it is somewhere between GC, imp and GW.

On scenarios, considering there are diverse units, imperialist is the only good lategame strategy.

作者： Guest, 06.04.2016 at 07:04

Taking it easy:

On all maps with not-so-big number of units such as world map there are 3 good choices: GW, imp and MoS, in that order. GW is simply the strategy that lets you use militias you get by expanding in the best way, meanwhile allowing you to spam cheap marines. Imperialist as a -30 cost strategy makes all its units -- mainly infantries (3/6 for 30 cost) and tanks (7/4 for 90 cost) -- the most cost-efficient after GW militia (4/5 for 30 cost) and GW marines (7/3 for 70 cost). MoS is the kind of strategy mainly used for the rich areas, dependable on transports so GW can't be used. Strategies such as PD, GC, RA, DS, SM and NC get beaten easily late game. Only HW looks like a strategy with a potential as it is somewhere between GC, imp and GW.

On scenarios, considering there are diverse units, imperialist is the only good lategame strategy.

Gw in world map looool

作者： Nations, 06.04.2016 at 07:09

"MoS is the kind of strategy mainly used for the rich areas, dependable on transports so GW can't be used."

k