2009-06-10, 17:26:50
I'll chop your post to answer:
As far as i know you, you know quite well that every time an infernal hits more than 1 player with his stun there has been made a huge mistake, so that argument is rather bad.
It is bad, becouse there are 2 ways to get into this situation:
-Someone was saving or allready upgrading quite long ago. You can notice that and react by going straight sky fort/inf yourself, push cps with porters as a team, or get demons/frosts (mostly air ship/similar players can do that without suffering too much)
-Someone sold items. That player loses quite some gold, which makes it rather easy for you to change to a tank with stun without getting a bigger gold loss than the opponents.
btw: With a teleporter you can defend against infs+2ice as sky+gold hull+more weapons quite well i guess (if you move well). An inf has nearly no chance to stun you.
Well at first: The "30 BT pros" argument is kinda weak. I really don't know at whom you're refering to, as I don't know 30 players worth the title "pro". It's a bit between mass and authority argumentation, not the way to go in my opinion, stay 'ad rem'.
Ad saving for inf: If the only way to go is saving for infernal, why do in all intern games i play people tend to play less infernals and more frost/sky fort/straight titan? (even the best bt players (in my opinion) do that, but that shouldn't be seen as any good argument) Playing worse on purpose even in clanwars (in the last Btnk vs BuG there were 4 infs total as far as i remember, rest were sky fort (4 at peak) and titans) seems a bad answer to me.
Regarding the saving problem in general: Imagine playing in the first ~15 minutes and you play 1v1 on side lane light tank vs light tank. Now one of both light tanks buys himself everytime he has enough money an item, the other one saves for heavy (for example). Now when he reaches heavy tank, he kills the light tank easily. How should he defend himself? "saving early enough for big tanks is the only way to defend against". Who's calling "imba" there? - I doubt you do. You know very well that you can't play starting tanks well after x minutes (even the heli->inf strats are at that time really hard to play), but why should you be able to play midgame tanks well in the late game then?
Gammagulp Wrote:Well, the Skyfortress was imbalacedI don't think so and defended my view in the various threads, which shouldn't be read as kind of dogmatism of course, but it should point out that a statement like "x is/was imbalanced" is very hard to maintain, as there is no way of empirically decide such questions. The only way is to argue by reasons, where the factor of truth is not the deciding one in general.
Quote:Otherwise the infernal got a 2 seconds area effect stun before ultimate and can stop multiple enmies fom stunning you - the SF got no second stun.
As far as i know you, you know quite well that every time an infernal hits more than 1 player with his stun there has been made a huge mistake, so that argument is rather bad.
Quote:To the bad strategy. I think what i mentioned is not so bad if you add a teleporter to the Skytanks inventory it could be good equipped. The thing with the inernal and the ice canons is just an example. When infernal got better in the past i saw guys selling a lot shit like hulls and some weapons just to rush for infernal - and they own with nearly nothing in the inventory.
It is bad, becouse there are 2 ways to get into this situation:
-Someone was saving or allready upgrading quite long ago. You can notice that and react by going straight sky fort/inf yourself, push cps with porters as a team, or get demons/frosts (mostly air ship/similar players can do that without suffering too much)
-Someone sold items. That player loses quite some gold, which makes it rather easy for you to change to a tank with stun without getting a bigger gold loss than the opponents.
btw: With a teleporter you can defend against infs+2ice as sky+gold hull+more weapons quite well i guess (if you move well). An inf has nearly no chance to stun you.
Quote:Well Prog, you´re right in the following case. You loose 2 times to such gameplay and then ... start to save for infernal at the right time, that means you try to reach infernal money at 1:00h or 1:05, latest point 1:10h mark to stop being owned by infernals. But you just do that, because you know very well, that you loose if you buy a hull and a 10k weapon before you do saving. Its just the infernal[And I think there are at least 30 BT pro´s out there who know that upgrading armor and saving early enough for big tanks is the only way to defend against]
Well at first: The "30 BT pros" argument is kinda weak. I really don't know at whom you're refering to, as I don't know 30 players worth the title "pro". It's a bit between mass and authority argumentation, not the way to go in my opinion, stay 'ad rem'.
Ad saving for inf: If the only way to go is saving for infernal, why do in all intern games i play people tend to play less infernals and more frost/sky fort/straight titan? (even the best bt players (in my opinion) do that, but that shouldn't be seen as any good argument) Playing worse on purpose even in clanwars (in the last Btnk vs BuG there were 4 infs total as far as i remember, rest were sky fort (4 at peak) and titans) seems a bad answer to me.
Regarding the saving problem in general: Imagine playing in the first ~15 minutes and you play 1v1 on side lane light tank vs light tank. Now one of both light tanks buys himself everytime he has enough money an item, the other one saves for heavy (for example). Now when he reaches heavy tank, he kills the light tank easily. How should he defend himself? "saving early enough for big tanks is the only way to defend against". Who's calling "imba" there? - I doubt you do. You know very well that you can't play starting tanks well after x minutes (even the heli->inf strats are at that time really hard to play), but why should you be able to play midgame tanks well in the late game then?