You know this is a forum right? You cant just change what you said from post to post. Nobody ever said that you can't kill the base. It is that UNSC can't win the game against shield stacking and that it gives too much defenders advantage. It is almost like you aren't reading anybodie's responses.So half his army being outside the shield and dieing, while he has 10 units under it and those keep trying to run out and suicide. Thus my point. Turning to insults because i dont agree that its impossible to beat is kinda funny.Here's some evidence for you scholars. Let me know if you need help counting past 5.iOxygen xYz wrote:So trueI would love to see you fit that many units under a shield when the base has max buildings, and then keep them microed underneath it without loseing any. I tested shield stacking in a 2v1 schenario against heroic ai and that precise army shreded my choppers while they did doughnuts, and i tried to keep them under the shields. i know how rough it is to keep your units from leaveing the bubble anytime they have to engage an enemy unless its blisterbacks. If you wipe out their army you can easily spawn kill their troops while you destroy the base. shield or not. A condor actually make a perfect unit to snipe as long as you keep vision/decloak.No. Stop parroting that BS number. You can put way more than 5-6 units under shields easily.They can hide at maximum like 5-6 units that will almost require constant supervision to not run outside the shield and die. So them haveing a full army at their base is no excuse. If you have a decent army a base with a single shield generator will not last long. with multiple it will allow them to pull their forces from where ever they are to try to defend. The only unit that can consistently works well under a shield.cloak are blisterbacks which cant shoot air units while locked down. Unless people are just makeing a base with not buildings except for shields and a cloak then they wont have the units to repel a full assault. However if they are doing that to turtle their units you just avoid that base and attack ones that they actually need to keep makeing troops. If 8 JR's and 8 jump brutes can takeout a base with 3 shield gens and a cloak thats also defended by roughly 8 choppers then its not the "invincible" fortress you make it out to be.First, bases don't die in 5 seconds or even close. If anyone has weak bases to complain about, it's the UNSC and not Banished. You shouldn't be able to rely on shields to protect your base by itself. It's a delay, not it's own impregnable barrier. Oh wait, that's damn near what shield stacking does as-is.If they have any sort or army to attack your base a single shield lasts no time at all. If your attacking their bases when they have a full army on the loose you are doing something wrong yourself. base's shouldnt die in 5 seconds unless its in the weakened mode when its being placed.Not true. A single shield provides significant defense. Also, you should have to defend your bases, not just throw up shields and forget about them.also Because if you dont shield stack your base's die in seconds.CUSTARDP00DLETK wrote:I agree. Thing is, if you DONT shield stack, you are straight away at a disadvantage, because pretty much all banished players who know about it are going to do it.
I'm definitely not going to message people about it.
Try playing as UNSC against Banished, especially Atriox. You need to fully engage Banished bases to do any damage, while Banished can walk all over you doing quick smash attacks and whittle down your econ without suffering significant losses.
If you attack their bases with their army present - and hiding under their shields - you will receive tremendous losses so yes, people do try to attack bases when the enemy forces aren't present.
The point you seem to miss is that Banished can defend their bases with a partial force against a full UNSC force, allowing Banished to be on the offensive while defending simultaneously. If they choose to defend with all their forces against an UNSC attack, they will easily repel the attack and come out of the engagement ready to press onto the UNSC who will no longer be in a position to attack at all let alone defend.
UNSC bases have no shield and no cloak so they instantly receive game-changing damage. But UNSC must spend time pounding through 1 or more shields that may also be cloaked and then specifically target X number of generators before even bothering attempting to damage the base. By this time their forces will have been drastically reduced by a competent banished player.
If Banished is ever losing an engagement they can just fall back to one of their impenetrable shield-havens and swing the tide there. They can also grab bases quickly, throw up shields and watch as UNSC slams their head against a brickwall trying to take them down.
You should not be able to always save your base. If you are too far away, then rightly so you should be punished and lose it. Shield stacking removes that. You could be anywhere on the map and still come back and save your base because of shield stacking.
Obviously 1 shield will not sustain an undefended base indefinitely. That's not what it's supposed to do. You have armies for a purpose. To fight AND defend.
" If 8 JR's and 8 jump brutes can takeout a base with 3 shield gens and a cloak thats also defended by roughly 8 choppers then its not the "invincible" fortress you make it out to be."
I don't even understand where this is coming from. This most certainly can't happen as JR's have minimal damage and a small force like 8 JR's and 8 JB's aren't going to take down a 3 shielded base unless their opponent has no troops and is AFK.
You don't understand the issue for what it is.
You can't simply take out the base that makes troops as it is also going to be shielded and then additionally defended. The whole point is that destroying Banished bases becomes extremely difficult. Nearly impossible.
Edit: I watched the video and there were way more than 10 units under shield. I don't know why I took you word for it.