| 1 |
Interesting watch. What struck me was the subtle difference between the two factories abilities to produce units that are A. Relevant at time of fielding and B. Remain relevant / useful.
|
1 |
Interesting watch. What struck me was the subtle difference between the two factories abilities to produce units that are A. Relevant at time of fielding and B. Remain relevant / useful.
|
| 2 |
\n
|
2 |
\n
|
| 3 |
It appears that shieldbot units are drastically cheaper than rover units on the whole, directly effective against the rovers, and a shieldbot user can make cost simply through the passage of time.
|
3 |
It appears that shieldbot units are drastically cheaper than rover units on the whole, directly effective against the rovers, and a shieldbot user can make cost simply through the passage of time.
|
| 4 |
\n
|
4 |
\n
|
| 5 |
Bandits are massable, mobile and cost for cost offer a lot more options than scorchers.
|
5 |
Bandits are massable, mobile and cost for cost offer a lot more options than scorchers.
|
| 6 |
\n
|
6 |
\n
|
| 7 |
The 175 cost Thug's durability seems on par with the 250 cost ravager, who's only seeming benefit is more speed, which doesn't strike me as a desirable statistic for that unit. If rover's inherent boon is the mobility of their units, why does it come at such additional cost to the base offering? Or is the thug still simply too cheap? Also consider that the thug virtually "self repairs" without any additional logistical effort from the player, a stealth lazyboy advantage against a manually repairing opponent.
|
7 |
The 175 cost Thug's durability seems on par with the 250 cost ravager, who's only seeming benefit is more speed, which doesn't strike me as a desirable statistic for that unit. If rover's inherent boon is the mobility of their units, why does it come at such additional cost to the base offering? Or is the thug still simply too cheap? Also consider that the thug virtually "self repairs" without any additional logistical effort from the player, a stealth lazyboy advantage against a manually repairing opponent.
|
| 8 |
\n
|
8 |
\n
|
| 9 |
Rogues
seem
to
remain
relevant
when
fencers
have
fallen
off
in
meaning.
A
single
rogue
missile
is
easy
to
dip
in,
fire
and
retreat,
and
if
it
hits,
it
has
serious
consequences.
Meanwhile,
a
fencer
has
mobility
logistics
and
doesn't
have
a
meaningful
payload
for
juking
combat.
For
that
reason,
Rogues
will
always
be
a
smart
investment
and
fencers
will
always
deprecate
in
value.
Sometimes
it's
best
just
not
picking
a
unit
in
certain
matchups
and
this
could
be
the
case
here,
but
rovers
will
feel
the
lack
of
a
skirmisher
here,
especially
with
the
cost
of
badger
and
thug's
ability
to
deny
it
the
chance
to
fulfill
that
role.
|
9 |
Rogues
seem
to
remain
relevant
when
fencers
have
fallen
off
in
meaning.
A
single
rogue
missile
is
easy
to
dip
in,
fire
and
retreat,
and
if
it
hits,
has
serious
consequences.
Meanwhile,
a
fencer
has
mobility
jank
and
doesn't
have
a
meaningful
payload
for
juking
combat.
For
that
reason,
Rogues
will
always
be
a
smart
investment
and
fencers
will
always
deprecate
in
value.
Sometimes
it's
best
just
not
picking
a
unit
in
certain
matchups
and
this
could
be
the
case
here,
but
rovers
will
feel
the
lack
of
a
skirmisher
here,
especially
with
the
cost
of
badger
and
thug's
ability
to
deny
it
the
chance
to
fulfill
that
role.
|
| 10 |
\n
|
10 |
\n
|
| 11 |
Impaler always good to see and often proves to be very useful.
|
11 |
Impaler always good to see and often proves to be very useful.
|
| 12 |
\n
|
12 |
\n
|
| 13 |
All in all, shieldbots scale a little too well over time, rovers not so much.
|
13 |
All in all, shieldbots scale a little too well over time, rovers not so much.
|
B928142 2 on Red Comet v1.3 (Multiplayer)