If that combo works for you and brings back the fun, then kudos. ![]() If a new combo restores a measure of fun that is currently lacking then I would say that it is worth the price. While nobody wants to spend oil on troops, they do want to have fun playing the game. In the past my answer would have been to add more artillery, but now bazookas are the way to go. They can defend themselves, help wipe out infantry, and with less troop space per unit there can be a greater number of them spreading damage flexibly over a wider area.Īs for the proposed troop substitution, upon trying it I found that shooters are too weak against buildings for the army to clear bases in time. While not a perfect troop, their versatility makes them a better fit for an army where every unit heads its own way. I find that mortars are superior to artillery in that role. Heavy tanks and bazookas do the necessary damage but need help from something that can hit buildings over walls with range. The advantage of mortars arises out of the specific support niche that they fill. For example, by trading poorly-designed Global and Atomic bases that you would have previously attacked but would now be wise to avoid, for well-designed Industrial bases that you would have previously avoided but now are free to attack, you can expand your opportunities contra the rebalance. But that could be countered by composing an army with enough tough units to cut through bases irrespective of layouts that would have thwarted traditional ranged armies. ![]() Meanwhile, the massive buff to defense reduced the number of bases that could be attacked feasibly with any combo. Using artillery now is like wading through wet cement. Without the ability to capitalize on its power, artillery lost its advantage but kept its disadvantage. It also enabled the army to hang together and compensated for artillery’s countervailing disadvantage: the need to pull troops together occasionally to re-concentrate force and keep artillery safe. That made a huge cumulative difference over the course of a battle. Da Vinci’s research was highly valuable because it actually made that power more effective-every building that could be killed in one shot instead of two, or two shots instead of three meant a massive temporary increase in attack speed not only for the artillery unit itself but for nearby units too. The problem seems to stem from the need for artillery to enter an area and eliminate buildings in a few shots rather than chipping away at them with many shots. ![]() My impression is that the rebalance altered battlefield dynamics in such a way as to specifically neuter artillery. The tactics are for situational use, although using betrayal on defending HT’s is more common.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |