| 1 |
[quote]Yes, that's half of the games being decided mostly by blind RPS.[/quote]
|
1 |
[quote]Yes, that's half of the games being decided mostly by blind RPS.[/quote]
|
| 2 |
I've only seen those of these games which i played. Of those, two were mirrors, and one was with different factories, with you complaining that my pick was "lucky". The one that ended in two minutes was a mirror and not necessarily blind RPS - but you deliberately delayed scouting in face of cheese. The other mirror "lasted longer than 10 minutes" but was realistically decided when i suicidally dove in 3 scorchers - first engagement! - failing to achieve anything (despite myself having scouted!)
|
2 |
I've only seen those of these games which i played. Of those, two were mirrors, and one was with different factories, with you complaining that my pick was "lucky". The one that ended in two minutes was a mirror and not necessarily blind RPS - but you deliberately delayed scouting in face of cheese. The other mirror "lasted longer than 10 minutes" but was realistically decided when i suicidally dove in 3 scorchers - first engagement! - failing to achieve anything (despite myself having scouted!)
|
| 3 |
\n
|
3 |
\n
|
| 4 |
I find this casts severe doubt on validity of your selection: it feels suspiciously cherry-picked. I do somewhat agree with the theoretising that follows ("games are often decided early"), even if i assume it naked and not supported by any evidence, tainted or not.
|
4 |
I find this casts severe doubt on validity of your selection: it feels suspiciously cherry-picked. I do somewhat agree with the theoretising that follows ("games are often decided early"), even if i assume it naked and not supported by any evidence, tainted or not.
|
| 5 |
\n
|
5 |
\n
|
| 6 |
However:
|
6 |
However:
|
| 7 |
\n
|
7 |
\n
|
| 8 |
[quote]boost the starting economy. This makes attacks on the base harder and early losses snowball less.[/quote]
|
8 |
[quote]boost the starting economy. This makes attacks on the base harder and early losses snowball less.[/quote]
|
| 9 |
The most straighforward ways to do this also lead to more expensive cheese availability. Which means more games decided early.
|
9 |
The most straighforward ways to do this also lead to more expensive cheese availability. Which means more games decided early.
|
| 10 |
\n
|
10 |
\n
|
| 11 |
[quote]Buff defenses. This slows down the game and allows it to progress into mid-game by requiring heavies/artillery. Alternatively nerf skirmishers as these are the usual early-game counter to defenses.[/quote]
|
11 |
[quote]Buff defenses. This slows down the game and allows it to progress into mid-game by requiring heavies/artillery. Alternatively nerf skirmishers as these are the usual early-game counter to defenses.[/quote]
|
| 12 |
"Nerf
skirmishers"
wins
here.
Skirm-K
should
burn.
|
12 |
"Nerf
skirmishers"
wins
here.
Mainly,
skirmishers
beat
defenses
by
either
outranging
them,
or
out-alphanig
and
out-lanchestering
the
simultaneously.
A
quant-ish
approach
would
be
to
nerf
their
health
across
the
board.
|
| 13 |
\n
|
13 |
\n
|
| 14 |
[quote]Play on bigger maps. This allows the game to progress further before each fight due to the increased travel times. It also magnifies the defender's shortened supply lane bonus.[/quote]
|
14 |
[quote]Play on bigger maps. This allows the game to progress further before each fight due to the increased travel times. It also magnifies the defender's shortened supply lane bonus.[/quote]
|
| 15 |
Bigger maps with [i]same metal density[/i] greatly reward exponential expansion and have higher incidence of runaway economic victories. Bigger maps with same metal [i]value[/i] - and thus lower density - barely exist. The practical way to implement this is to get mapping then and have enough new high-quality sparse-metal maps to fill out the MM pool.
|
15 |
Bigger maps with [i]same metal density[/i] greatly reward exponential expansion and have higher incidence of runaway economic victories. Bigger maps with same metal [i]value[/i] - and thus lower density - barely exist. The practical way to implement this is to get mapping then and have enough new high-quality sparse-metal maps to fill out the MM pool.
|
| 16 |
\n
|
16 |
\n
|
| 17 |
[quote]Make maps more defensible. Following Licho's idea of clustering metal more towards each starting position, this would make it easier for the metal income to remain balanced and lessen the impact of taking early map/mid control.[/quote]
|
17 |
[quote]Make maps more defensible. Following Licho's idea of clustering metal more towards each starting position, this would make it easier for the metal income to remain balanced and lessen the impact of taking early map/mid control.[/quote]
|
| 18 |
I don't think "make expansions defensible" was the point of Licho's idea. I think the sparseness ( described above) was, so that maneuver means more and lines solidify later. But some core expansions being defensible in this paradigm may be good. Again, this requires new maps.
|
18 |
I don't think "make expansions defensible" was the point of Licho's idea. I think the sparseness ( described above) was, so that maneuver means more and lines solidify later. But some core expansions being defensible in this paradigm may be good. Again, this requires new maps.
|
| 19 |
\n
|
19 |
\n
|
| 20 |
[quote]Although I'm not a fan of it, revealing the starting factory can simplify defense against some rushes. I think it nerfs some strategies much harder than others though.
|
20 |
[quote]Although I'm not a fan of it, revealing the starting factory can simplify defense against some rushes. I think it nerfs some strategies much harder than others though.
|
| 21 |
[/quote]
|
21 |
[/quote]
|
| 22 |
It is an ugly solution. You are now feeling an ugly feeling inside of you for having mentioned it.
|
22 |
It is an ugly solution. You are now feeling an ugly feeling inside of you for having mentioned it.
|
B483566 2 on Lonely Oasis v1.1 (Multiplayer)