Forums / Games / Halo Wars Series

[Locked] My Review/Reaction of The Patch Notes HW2

OP Tengu5349

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 6
  4. 7
  5. 8
  6. ...
  7. 9
Tengu5349 wrote:
Just curious, what happens if 12 of the top 50 are Anders players, but previous Anders main champions can't even make the onyx division... does that still mean that Anders got nerfed to hell?
what if i won the lottery. What then?
Then buy 343 and make it C&C KW! Hell yeah!
Tengu5349 wrote:
Tengu5349 wrote:
DarylJ FTW wrote:
Kodiak rate of fire decreased but damage adjusted to compensate means that the it fires a second slower but hits harder. Depending on the damage you don't even know if that's a nerf or not.
Huh?

The damage is the same, you just wrote that yourself. It's obviously a nerf then because you spawn less sentinels and they don't last as long, easier to block with shroud, etc, etc.
A nerf to ONE aspect of her kit. When she received buffs in multiple other areas, it's your fault if you choose to tunnel vision on that one aspect.

Anders was broken in HW1 simply because her unit upgrades were reduced cost and faster to research. Now she has that back PLUS sentinels and you guys want to say shes now bad?

I mean, I am willing to admit I'm wrong if it turns out these buffs are insignificant. But I'm not willing to simply dismiss this massive economic boost like many others are readily doing before we even see anything.
This is not the same as hw1 where everyone rushed for the hog upgrades in 1v1s and there was only 1 type of resource and anders got a 50% discount. She gets less than half that discount and its not nearly as significant because the 2 type resource system. She got a cool new toy for 12 minutes into the game. It doesnt matter. Anders players will never make it that far. She didnt get any meaningful buffs. The fact that ur even arguing with me on this is almost laughable
You can say it's laughable all you want. Im not the one abandoning my main leader because of some changes. Your ability to be objective about this is non-existent. You haven't even TRIED or SEEN any of these changes. You don't know how significant or insignificant her RD will be. You're assuming. Based off what evidence? The fact you can put 3 points into it. That's literally it. Again, haven't seen a single thing yet.

As someone else said, there will be more anders players now.

The only thing you were correct on in your video is heat of battle being a problem first point and the fact they didn't fix or mention any of the quality of life issues. The only other thing I took away from your rant was "any buff to anything I don't use is bad." And when you're called out on this you just say it's "laughable" That someone would dare debate you on this.
ive already confirmed the number with a dev. R/d wont be noticeable until 2 points and wont be any good in high level games until 3 points. and if ur putting 3 points into r/d uve already lost and ur behind. But ur right. what do I know. Im just the only top level player that used anders. How about this. Someone else can have an opinion when they start beating the best players with her? ill wait for a video link. Good luck.
This response makes you sound like a disrespectful person. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, regardless of how they choose to spend their time. Just because someone is not ranked as high as you on the leaderboards does not mean that you are automatically right and they are wrong. Congrats on you being the highest ranked Anders main /s. Is that really a thing that puts down people's arguments?

I for one will give Anders a shot now... I main Cutter, but now that Anders' super sentinel actually can do some work, she seems worth another try. And her upgrades on individual units being cheaper may be fun too... sounds to me like they made it so she can be used in wider varieties of strats... not just the artillery/wolvs or artillery/air combo that most Anders I have come across seem to rely on. That strat still may be viable, but it won't be a map full of sentinals anymore with artillery everywhere (I hope). Either way, I believe it opens a wider variety of usable tactics with her, and I am really excited about the super sentinel buff. I am sure if you are as good as advertised, Anders will still be extremely viable for you. I think this change will actually increase people's interest in playing her since it opens up different strats.
DA Cleric wrote:
Tengu5349 wrote:
Tengu5349 wrote:
DarylJ FTW wrote:
Kodiak rate of fire decreased but damage adjusted to compensate means that the it fires a second slower but hits harder. Depending on the damage you don't even know if that's a nerf or not.
Huh?

The damage is the same, you just wrote that yourself. It's obviously a nerf then because you spawn less sentinels and they don't last as long, easier to block with shroud, etc, etc.
A nerf to ONE aspect of her kit. When she received buffs in multiple other areas, it's your fault if you choose to tunnel vision on that one aspect.

Anders was broken in HW1 simply because her unit upgrades were reduced cost and faster to research. Now she has that back PLUS sentinels and you guys want to say shes now bad?

I mean, I am willing to admit I'm wrong if it turns out these buffs are insignificant. But I'm not willing to simply dismiss this massive economic boost like many others are readily doing before we even see anything.
This is not the same as hw1 where everyone rushed for the hog upgrades in 1v1s and there was only 1 type of resource and anders got a 50% discount. She gets less than half that discount and its not nearly as significant because the 2 type resource system. She got a cool new toy for 12 minutes into the game. It doesnt matter. Anders players will never make it that far. She didnt get any meaningful buffs. The fact that ur even arguing with me on this is almost laughable
You can say it's laughable all you want. Im not the one abandoning my main leader because of some changes. Your ability to be objective about this is non-existent. You haven't even TRIED or SEEN any of these changes. You don't know how significant or insignificant her RD will be. You're assuming. Based off what evidence? The fact you can put 3 points into it. That's literally it. Again, haven't seen a single thing yet.

As someone else said, there will be more anders players now.

The only thing you were correct on in your video is heat of battle being a problem first point and the fact they didn't fix or mention any of the quality of life issues. The only other thing I took away from your rant was "any buff to anything I don't use is bad." And when you're called out on this you just say it's "laughable" That someone would dare debate you on this.
ive already confirmed the number with a dev. R/d wont be noticeable until 2 points and wont be any good in high level games until 3 points. and if ur putting 3 points into r/d uve already lost and ur behind. But ur right. what do I know. Im just the only top level player that used anders. How about this. Someone else can have an opinion when they start beating the best players with her? ill wait for a video link. Good luck.
This response makes you sound like a disrespectful person. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, regardless of how they choose to spend their time. Just because someone is not ranked as high as you on the leaderboards does not mean that you are automatically right and they are wrong. Congrats on you being the highest ranked Anders main /s. Is that really a thing that puts down people's arguments?

I for one will give Anders a shot now... I main Cutter, but now that Anders' super sentinel actually can do some work, she seems worth another try. And her upgrades on individual units being cheaper may be fun too... sounds to me like they made it so she can be used in wider varieties of strats... not just the artillery/wolvs or artillery/air combo that most Anders I have come across seem to rely on. That strat still may be viable, but it won't be a map full of sentinals anymore with artillery everywhere (I hope). Either way, I believe it opens a wider variety of usable tactics with her, and I am really excited about the super sentinel buff. I am sure if you are as good as advertised, Anders will still be extremely viable for you. I think this change will actually increase people's interest in playing her since it opens up different strats.
A bunch of bad strats doesnt make up for 1 good one. Just because you can lose games in many different ways now doesnt make it any better. And FYI a condor is still better than the sentinel in every regard. (confirmed by a dev) so please tell me more. And your post about me sounding disrespectful. Maybe we should have kids who flip burgers pilot the shuttles in the space program because.. ya know everyone deserves a shot
ALXBRAMI wrote:
How? A diamond trying to school a champion isn't necessarily a "rekt".

Numot15 wrote:
Buddy, not only champion players know what they are talking about, you have to include all ranks.
No. It's been explained a dozen times why.Hell for all you know there are people sitting unranked that could kick your smug -Yoink- up and down the map.
No. Legendary AI is a joke, there's no way an unranked person can understand the game and the meta. And if by unranked you mean people playing the social playlists then why would anyone do that? specially since there's no 1v1 unranked.You claim they should be excluded from balance discussion?
Yes. And as I said, it's been explained why.If anyone should be excluded from balance discussion it's guys like you that are too biased to see the big picture.
He can't be biased when he's showing evidence. You don't seem to know what bias means.
Answers inside the quote.

ALXBRAMI wrote:
I agree that with balancing issues experienced players should have the priority over casual players.
unfortunatly we have yet to see one that s not unbelivably biased about it.
You don't seem to be reading the forums actually. And as every other person like you, you are again claiming we're bias without anything to back you up. I might even say you have a personal issue against Yoda lol.

Now, please provide me with links to forum posts from High Level players (I consider anything high Onyx to be high level) that claim stupid bias stuff, I'm possitive you won't find anything. But I can tell you (and I will do it if you so wish) I can find posts from lower ranked players claiming all sorts of non-proven, bias, false stuff regarding balance. These people who don't even grasp a simple basic element like scouting. The likes that'll swear Jump Brutes are OP, the ones that claim Reavers are underpowered, the ones asking for a Condor Rush nerf. These people come here everyday, AND THAT'S NOT A BAD THING, I'm actually all for it, these people should flood the forums! but LISTENING to them in regards to balance is A MISTAKE. What we should do with them is TEACH them, give them advice to better understand the game. The more people we have at high levels the more competitive the game becomes and thus a much more solid balance can be reached.
I agree with a lot of what you have said in these post. Also i have reached out to you in other post and you have taken the time to responed back to me and offer advice. Thanks, community needs more players like you.

The one thing I want to bring to light is OP showing evidence comment. He went through a list of top 300 players based on the picture considered that to be all those players main. Then went through that list of Anders and discounted a number of players by either telling us that's a 2nd account or not their main anymore. What is stopping anyone from saying the same thing about any of the other leaders in that list. He doesn't bring that up as a possibility. I think in this it showed bias and I'm hesitant to call that evidence without more information. Not to say he doesn'the have merit in what he is saying I think we need that info from 343 and not from a picture on izhere.

That being said I think both you and OP should be considered as a source to reach out to when they are reaching balance. I feel lower level players like myself need to have a voice but need to look at the bigger picture when it comes to calling for a nerf or buff and talking balance. We may not have the skill set to truly know and should look to Higher level players to validate.

OP will come out an even stronger player because of this. It will end up adding other strategies to his game to make him harder to deal with. At least I hope after the dust settles that how he looks at this. That usually how these things go for passionate high level players.
Tengu5349 wrote:
DA Cleric wrote:
Tengu5349 wrote:
Tengu5349 wrote:
DarylJ FTW wrote:
Kodiak rate of fire decreased but damage adjusted to compensate means that the it fires a second slower but hits harder. Depending on the damage you don't even know if that's a nerf or not.
Huh?

The damage is the same, you just wrote that yourself. It's obviously a nerf then because you spawn less sentinels and they don't last as long, easier to block with shroud, etc, etc.
A nerf to ONE aspect of her kit. When she received buffs in multiple other areas, it's your fault if you choose to tunnel vision on that one aspect.

Anders was broken in HW1 simply because her unit upgrades were reduced cost and faster to research. Now she has that back PLUS sentinels and you guys want to say shes now bad?

I mean, I am willing to admit I'm wrong if it turns out these buffs are insignificant. But I'm not willing to simply dismiss this massive economic boost like many others are readily doing before we even see anything.
This is not the same as hw1 where everyone rushed for the hog upgrades in 1v1s and there was only 1 type of resource and anders got a 50% discount. She gets less than half that discount and its not nearly as significant because the 2 type resource system. She got a cool new toy for 12 minutes into the game. It doesnt matter. Anders players will never make it that far. She didnt get any meaningful buffs. The fact that ur even arguing with me on this is almost laughable
You can say it's laughable all you want. Im not the one abandoning my main leader because of some changes. Your ability to be objective about this is non-existent. You haven't even TRIED or SEEN any of these changes. You don't know how significant or insignificant her RD will be. You're assuming. Based off what evidence? The fact you can put 3 points into it. That's literally it. Again, haven't seen a single thing yet.

As someone else said, there will be more anders players now.

The only thing you were correct on in your video is heat of battle being a problem first point and the fact they didn't fix or mention any of the quality of life issues. The only other thing I took away from your rant was "any buff to anything I don't use is bad." And when you're called out on this you just say it's "laughable" That someone would dare debate you on this.
A bunch of bad strats doesnt make up for 1 good one. Just because you can lose games in many different ways now doesnt make it any better. And FYI a condor is still better than the sentinel in every regard. (confirmed by a dev) so please tell me more. And your post about me sounding disrespectful. Maybe we should have kids who flip burgers pilot the shuttles in the space program because.. ya know everyone deserves a shot
Bro. You have a serious superiority complex going, and it needs to be checked. Basically, all your arguments are "I'm the best", and any of your shortcomings you blame on external factors. This doesn't make you look good. This doesn't make you respected. It makes you look like a jerk. Literally nobody else in the top 10 pulls rank, almost ever, on other players. You just seem really stuck up in all your posts, with an "i know better than everyone" mentality.

The changes being made aren't being made because of "bad" players complaining. If that was the case, you'd see a much harsher nerf to jackrabbits, locusts, and anything else along those lines, as well as another increase in turret damage. It is very evident that the devs have gone about this balance patch using data available to the devs (and the devs only) when balancing things. Stop blaming a nerf to a strategy that was, frankly, very OP on "noobs".

Anders will still be solid. She's got a good lategame with a buffed instant super unit to reinforce, and R&D will be genuinely useful now that it can be applied to fast marine upgrades, etc. Get off your high horse and look objectively at what is happening in this nerf/ buff, it's all got solid reasoning. Stop pretending you're the most valuable voice in the game. You're not.
omg 20:00 and 26:00 minute marks are best parts ahhhhhahaha😆👏
Tengu5349 wrote:
DA Cleric wrote:
Tengu5349 wrote:
Tengu5349 wrote:
DarylJ FTW wrote:
Kodiak rate of fire decreased but damage adjusted to compensate means that the it fires a second slower but hits harder. Depending on the damage you don't even know if that's a nerf or not.
Huh?

The damage is the same, you just wrote that yourself. It's obviously a nerf then because you spawn less sentinels and they don't last as long, easier to block with shroud, etc, etc.
A nerf to ONE aspect of her kit. When she received buffs in multiple other areas, it's your fault if you choose to tunnel vision on that one aspect.

Anders was broken in HW1 simply because her unit upgrades were reduced cost and faster to research. Now she has that back PLUS sentinels and you guys want to say shes now bad?

I mean, I am willing to admit I'm wrong if it turns out these buffs are insignificant. But I'm not willing to simply dismiss this massive economic boost like many others are readily doing before we even see anything.
This is not the same as hw1 where everyone rushed for the hog upgrades in 1v1s and there was only 1 type of resource and anders got a 50% discount. She gets less than half that discount and its not nearly as significant because the 2 type resource system. She got a cool new toy for 12 minutes into the game. It doesnt matter. Anders players will never make it that far. She didnt get any meaningful buffs. The fact that ur even arguing with me on this is almost laughable
You can say it's laughable all you want. Im not the one abandoning my main leader because of some changes. Your ability to be objective about this is non-existent. You haven't even TRIED or SEEN any of these changes. You don't know how significant or insignificant her RD will be. You're assuming. Based off what evidence? The fact you can put 3 points into it. That's literally it. Again, haven't seen a single thing yet.

As someone else said, there will be more anders players now.

The only thing you were correct on in your video is heat of battle being a problem first point and the fact they didn't fix or mention any of the quality of life issues. The only other thing I took away from your rant was "any buff to anything I don't use is bad." And when you're called out on this you just say it's "laughable" That someone would dare debate you on this.
A bunch of bad strats doesnt make up for 1 good one. Just because you can lose games in many different ways now doesnt make it any better. And FYI a condor is still better than the sentinel in every regard. (confirmed by a dev) so please tell me more. And your post about me sounding disrespectful. Maybe we should have kids who flip burgers pilot the shuttles in the space program because.. ya know everyone deserves a shot
Bro. You have a serious superiority complex going, and it needs to be checked. Basically, all your arguments are "I'm the best", and any of your shortcomings you blame on external factors. This doesn't make you look good. This doesn't make you respected. It makes you look like a jerk. Literally nobody else in the top 10 pulls rank, almost ever, on other players. You just seem really stuck up in all your posts, with an "i know better than everyone" mentality.

The changes being made aren't being made because of "bad" players complaining. If that was the case, you'd see a much harsher nerf to jackrabbits, locusts, and anything else along those lines, as well as another increase in turret damage. It is very evident that the devs have gone about this balance patch using data available to the devs (and the devs only) when balancing things. Stop blaming a nerf to a strategy that was, frankly, very OP on "noobs".

Anders will still be solid. She's got a good lategame with a buffed instant super unit to reinforce, and R&D will be genuinely useful now that it can be applied to fast marine upgrades, etc. Get off your high horse and look objectively at what is happening in this nerf/ buff, it's all got solid reasoning. Stop pretending you're the most valuable voice in the game. You're not.
Ive had 50 other posts where I clearly state I dont car if im listened to or not. As long as they listen to the rest of the good players. But nice try coming at me though
Damn this discussion got heated fast! XD

Personally I've mixed feeling about this patch note (who wrote it anyway? It's fairly bad written to be franc, but details I guess), but the balance overall was changed dramatically so the nerfs and other changes made to the Banished and Andersen might not be as harsh as they might seem on paper. I wanna try it before bashing it! I just hope they made "Colony" a valid alternative and build them in nicely into the new meta. Can't wait until they get released, that's a really nice birthday present right there CA/343i! \m/-
Tengu5349 wrote:
DA Cleric wrote:
Tengu5349 wrote:
Tengu5349 wrote:
DarylJ FTW wrote:
Kodiak rate of fire decreased but damage adjusted to compensate means that the it fires a second slower but hits harder. Depending on the damage you don't even know if that's a nerf or not.
Huh?

The damage is the same, you just wrote that yourself. It's obviously a nerf then because you spawn less sentinels and they don't last as long, easier to block with shroud, etc, etc.
A nerf to ONE aspect of her kit. When she received buffs in multiple other areas, it's your fault if you choose to tunnel vision on that one aspect.

Anders was broken in HW1 simply because her unit upgrades were reduced cost and faster to research. Now she has that back PLUS sentinels and you guys want to say shes now bad?

I mean, I am willing to admit I'm wrong if it turns out these buffs are insignificant. But I'm not willing to simply dismiss this massive economic boost like many others are readily doing before we even see anything.
This is not the same as hw1 where everyone rushed for the hog upgrades in 1v1s and there was only 1 type of resource and anders got a 50% discount. She gets less than half that discount and its not nearly as significant because the 2 type resource system. She got a cool new toy for 12 minutes into the game. It doesnt matter. Anders players will never make it that far. She didnt get any meaningful buffs. The fact that ur even arguing with me on this is almost laughable
You can say it's laughable all you want. Im not the one abandoning my main leader because of some changes. Your ability to be objective about this is non-existent. You haven't even TRIED or SEEN any of these changes. You don't know how significant or insignificant her RD will be. You're assuming. Based off what evidence? The fact you can put 3 points into it. That's literally it. Again, haven't seen a single thing yet.

As someone else said, there will be more anders players now.

The only thing you were correct on in your video is heat of battle being a problem first point and the fact they didn't fix or mention any of the quality of life issues. The only other thing I took away from your rant was "any buff to anything I don't use is bad." And when you're called out on this you just say it's "laughable" That someone would dare debate you on this.
A bunch of bad strats doesnt make up for 1 good one. Just because you can lose games in many different ways now doesnt make it any better. And FYI a condor is still better than the sentinel in every regard. (confirmed by a dev) so please tell me more. And your post about me sounding disrespectful. Maybe we should have kids who flip burgers pilot the shuttles in the space program because.. ya know everyone deserves a shot
Bro. You have a serious superiority complex going, and it needs to be checked. Basically, all your arguments are "I'm the best", and any of your shortcomings you blame on external factors. This doesn't make you look good. This doesn't make you respected. It makes you look like a jerk. Literally nobody else in the top 10 pulls rank, almost ever, on other players. You just seem really stuck up in all your posts, with an "i know better than everyone" mentality.

The changes being made aren't being made because of "bad" players complaining. If that was the case, you'd see a much harsher nerf to jackrabbits, locusts, and anything else along those lines, as well as another increase in turret damage. It is very evident that the devs have gone about this balance patch using data available to the devs (and the devs only) when balancing things. Stop blaming a nerf to a strategy that was, frankly, very OP on "noobs".

Anders will still be solid. She's got a good lategame with a buffed instant super unit to reinforce, and R&D will be genuinely useful now that it can be applied to fast marine upgrades, etc. Get off your high horse and look objectively at what is happening in this nerf/ buff, it's all got solid reasoning. Stop pretending you're the most valuable voice in the game. You're not.
Im sorry to say but he is right, anders is completely terrible now. She will be ery bad late game due tk the fact that she cant drop multiple units kn the ground as well as having really good powers such as teleport, eradication, displacement, combst salvage etc. the only decent ability now is potentially that super u it but even then thats all she would have
Tengu5349 wrote:
Tengu5349 wrote:
DA Cleric wrote:
Tengu5349 wrote:
Tengu5349 wrote:
DarylJ FTW wrote:
Kodiak rate of fire decreased but damage adjusted to compensate means that the it fires a second slower but hits harder. Depending on the damage you don't even know if that's a nerf or not.
Huh?

The damage is the same, you just wrote that yourself. It's obviously a nerf then because you spawn less sentinels and they don't last as long, easier to block with shroud, etc, etc.
A nerf to ONE aspect of her kit. When she received buffs in multiple other areas, it's your fault if you choose to tunnel vision on that one aspect.

Anders was broken in HW1 simply because her unit upgrades were reduced cost and faster to research. Now she has that back PLUS sentinels and you guys want to say shes now bad?

I mean, I am willing to admit I'm wrong if it turns out these buffs are insignificant. But I'm not willing to simply dismiss this massive economic boost like many others are readily doing before we even see anything.
This is not the same as hw1 where everyone rushed for the hog upgrades in 1v1s and there was only 1 type of resource and anders got a 50% discount. She gets less than half that discount and its not nearly as significant because the 2 type resource system. She got a cool new toy for 12 minutes into the game. It doesnt matter. Anders players will never make it that far. She didnt get any meaningful buffs. The fact that ur even arguing with me on this is almost laughable
You can say it's laughable all you want. Im not the one abandoning my main leader because of some changes. Your ability to be objective about this is non-existent. You haven't even TRIED or SEEN any of these changes. You don't know how significant or insignificant her RD will be. You're assuming. Based off what evidence? The fact you can put 3 points into it. That's literally it. Again, haven't seen a single thing yet.

As someone else said, there will be more anders players now.

The only thing you were correct on in your video is heat of battle being a problem first point and the fact they didn't fix or mention any of the quality of life issues. The only other thing I took away from your rant was "any buff to anything I don't use is bad." And when you're called out on this you just say it's "laughable" That someone would dare debate you on this.
Ive had 50 other posts where I clearly state I dont car if im listened to or not. As long as they listen to the rest of the good players. But nice try coming at me though
Actions speak louder than words. This thread, and many others, contradict whatever you've said quite a few times.
TeamCarter wrote:
I agree with a lot of what you have said in these post. Also i have reached out to you in other post and you have taken the time to responed back to me and offer advice. Thanks, community needs more players like you.

-Thanks that's is very kind, I appreciate it.The one thing I want to bring to light is OP showing evidence comment. He went through a list of top 300 players based on the picture considered that to be all those players main. Then went through that list of Anders and discounted a number of players by either telling us that's a 2nd account or not their main anymore. What is stopping anyone from saying the same thing about any of the other leaders in that list. He doesn't bring that up as a possibility. I think in this it showed bias and I'm hesitant to call that evidence without more information. Not to say he doesn'the have merit in what he is saying I think we need that info from 343 and not from a picture on izhere.

-You bring up a fair point. However, even if that was a possibility it wouldn't bring his argument down, why? because having 3 or 4 more Ander players in a top 300 list wouldn't change anything. Three Anders make up 1% of the top 300, up that by 3 or 4, hell let's increase that by 5 and you would have 8 Anders in the top 300. That's still less than 3%. Having a leader show up less than 3% on the top is worrisome and in fact it does confirm his claim, Anders is just not viable (on 1v1 scenarios).

Anders is an interesting case, because even though she's been nerfed she pops up quite occacionally (2v2 mostly), but I'd think people play her out of preference or they just grew acustomed to her playstyle. Not related to how effective or viable she might or might not be.
That being said I think both you and OP should be considered as a source to reach out to when they are reaching balance. I feel lower level players like myself need to have a voice but need to look at the bigger picture when it comes to calling for a nerf or buff and talking balance. We may not have the skill set to truly know and should look to Higher level players to validate.

I might have been very tough and close minded with Low Level Players, I apologize for that, as you mention we get really passionate (and that's not always a positive thing). I would like to correct my views in regard to Low Level Player Feedback, you're right, you too have a voice, and the devs also have Data, these two in conjuction can prove or disprove any balance claim, irregardless of a player's skill level. It is just my opinion that it would be very likely that High Level Player Feedback would be proven correct more frequently than Low Level Player Feedback.
Answers inside the quote in bold.EDIT: Sorry for the wall of text, I tried formating the quote but it won't let me.
Way to fail formatting 101 Blaky... Way to fail..
IxJeddeyxI wrote:
Tengu5349 wrote:
Yomado wrote:
IxJeddeyxI wrote:
Lol wow they ruined anders but didn't even touch kinsano.
flame hog drop wasn't touched?what?
flame hogs will beat gauss how is that fair?
Heat of battle how is that fair to any other unsc?
how does one counter heat of battle? oh wait you don't.
Also LOL only a handful of anders players that 'cheese' LOL how is a Kodiak defense cheese. cheese is when you eradicate or inferno a main base and leave the base stripped.
it makes me wonder if shipmaster will still be able to teleport an army into his turrets, and the turrets will still single handedly destroy an army. probably will because that's not cheese at all.
this
i am mad as well, i loved playing anders defensively. the fact that almost no one played anders defensively is complete -Yoink-. where is this cheese -Yoink- coming from
Its coming from kids who got beat by people trolling them with anders. Not because anders was good but because the person using her was just a superior player and now because of that shes getting nerfed yet again.
...
Balance changes aren't solely based on high level play. You only make up like 1% of the community. Get that through your head.
I couldn't disagree more. I think you knocked it out of the park.

Even if high level players made up 1% of the community (that number must be a lot higher) they still provide the most accurate feedback due to the sole reason that THEY UNDERSTAND the game. We talked about this in another thread, there's just no other way to balance the game, data + high level feedback are the driving tools to balance the game out.

I'm pretty sure 1% is a hyperbole, and even if that was the case the 1% should have the priority. Not to please high level players but to balance the game out.

Now, I know people in here are generally mad at Yoda, I know he can be pretty obnoxious, but that his personality. I think he's been pretty reasonable all along and providing proof or at least evidence that suggests Anders is dead.

There are many people in this thread talking all sorts of none sense without anything to back them out other than mentioning how Yoda is being overly dramatic.
There's a definitive difference between high level players, and those who simply think they are high level. I've seen onyx/champion level players say things like "Forge doesn't need eco nerfs, Sentienels are fine, Inferno is fine, jackrabbits are fine." Should I automatically agree with them because of an emblem next to their name? I don't think so. Most of the time they consider it fine because it's what they use to win. It wasn't too long ago I saw a thread the opposite of this one, that demanded the Kodiak sentinels be nerfed, posted by yet another champion ranked player. I believe it was from one of the iZ Here guys. So who should I side with on that one?

Casual players can have an understanding of the game as well. Not ever 'casual' is someone who just picked up the game yesterday. I would consider myself a casual simply because I'm an old man now pushing 30 and I don't have the time to dedicate to the competitive scene. But I still play nearly every day since launch and know the ins and out of just about every leader.

I'd personally value the opinion of someone who has experience under their belt of every leader than that of someone who just mains whatever the FOTM happens to be at the time because it's the easiest way to grind MMR. But maybe that's just my bias, apparently everyone has one according to this thread.
There's a definitive difference between high level players, and those who simply think they are high level.
This is all anyone really needs to know, just go watch certain Champion player streams, lol.
So we're just gonna act like OP isn't putting on a farce and won't be the 1st Anders player on this forum to brag about how good she is tomorrow?
DarylJ FTW wrote:
There's a definitive difference between high level players, and those who simply think they are high level.
This is all anyone really needs to know, just go watch certain Champion player streams, lol.
Not enough Kodiaks.
IxJeddeyxI wrote:
Tengu5349 wrote:
Yomado wrote:
IxJeddeyxI wrote:
Lol wow they ruined anders but didn't even touch kinsano.
flame hog drop wasn't touched?what?
flame hogs will beat gauss how is that fair?
Heat of battle how is that fair to any other unsc?
how does one counter heat of battle? oh wait you don't.
Also LOL only a handful of anders players that 'cheese' LOL how is a Kodiak defense cheese. cheese is when you eradicate or inferno a main base and leave the base stripped.
it makes me wonder if shipmaster will still be able to teleport an army into his turrets, and the turrets will still single handedly destroy an army. probably will because that's not cheese at all.
this
i am mad as well, i loved playing anders defensively. the fact that almost no one played anders defensively is complete -Yoink-. where is this cheese -Yoink- coming from
Its coming from kids who got beat by people trolling them with anders. Not because anders was good but because the person using her was just a superior player and now because of that shes getting nerfed yet again.
...
Balance changes aren't solely based on high level play. You only make up like 1% of the community. Get that through your head.
I couldn't disagree more. I think you knocked it out of the park.

Even if high level players made up 1% of the community (that number must be a lot higher) they still provide the most accurate feedback due to the sole reason that THEY UNDERSTAND the game. We talked about this in another thread, there's just no other way to balance the game, data + high level feedback are the driving tools to balance the game out.

I'm pretty sure 1% is a hyperbole, and even if that was the case the 1% should have the priority. Not to please high level players but to balance the game out.

Now, I know people in here are generally mad at Yoda, I know he can be pretty obnoxious, but that his personality. I think he's been pretty reasonable all along and providing proof or at least evidence that suggests Anders is dead.

There are many people in this thread talking all sorts of none sense without anything to back them out other than mentioning how Yoda is being overly dramatic.
There's a definitive difference between high level players, and those who simply think they are high level. I've seen onyx/champion level players say things like "Forge doesn't need eco nerfs, Sentienels are fine, Inferno is fine, jackrabbits are fine." Should I automatically agree with them because of an emblem next to their name? I don't think so. Most of the time they consider it fine because it's what they use to win. It wasn't too long ago I saw a thread the opposite of this one, that demanded the Kodiak sentinels be nerfed, posted by yet another champion ranked player. I believe it was from one of the iZ Here guys. So who should I side with on that one?

Casual players can have an understanding of the game as well. Not ever 'casual' is someone who just picked up the game yesterday. I would consider myself a casual simply because I'm an old man now pushing 30 and I don't have the time to dedicate to the competitive scene. But I still play nearly every day since launch and know the ins and out of just about every leader.

I'd personally value the opinion of someone who has experience under their belt of every leader than that of someone who just mains whatever the FOTM happens to be at the time because it's the easiest way to grind MMR. But maybe that's just my bias, apparently everyone has one according to this thread.
Can you point me out to posts claiming "Forge doesn't need eco nerfs, Sentienels are fine, Inferno is fine, jackrabbits are fine." because I read this forum every day and I swear I've not seen those around. I would understand that if it was just the first week after a patch, I even once thought Locust were balanced. I haven't lost yet any game against Locust Spam, but they've helped me win a lot of games and I see them being spammed more often than any other unit, so something must be wrong, so I changed my mind, but again, the meta was shifting.

The meta can be quite funny, because before Flayerr started spamming Locusts I saw no one doing it, and if you think about it they became more dominant AFTER they were nerfed.

Now regarding the Kodiak change. I was actually in favor of a nerf to the sentinels spawned by Kodiaks (I even made a rant thread about it) however, I don't think that nerfing the Kodiak is particularly a good approach. And I think the issue is that Ander's kodiaks were pretty much the last tool she had to defend herself, take that away and she's at a worst position. She got 2 nerfs and 2 buffs. But the buffs don't exactly pay off for the nerfs in my opinion.

Some people might claim Anders Kodiaks were fine because that's all she has left, and others might claim they're ridiculous. If high level players make these two claims it is easy to figure out who is right. My guess? both are RIGHT! you can adjust the leader in ways that can address both sides of the discussion.

I do agree with you on appreciating people that play every leader. Sadly not everyone does it. I don't do it, I've played Decimus and Atriox mainly, so I provide feedback regarding those two and feedback on other leaders from a defending point of view, which is also important.
ALXBRAMI wrote:
How? A diamond trying to school a champion isn't necessarily a "rekt".

Numot15 wrote:
Buddy, not only champion players know what they are talking about, you have to include all ranks.
No. It's been explained a dozen times why.Hell for all you know there are people sitting unranked that could kick your smug -Yoink- up and down the map.
No. Legendary AI is a joke, there's no way an unranked person can understand the game and the meta. And if by unranked you mean people playing the social playlists then why would anyone do that? specially since there's no 1v1 unranked.You claim they should be excluded from balance discussion?
Yes. And as I said, it's been explained why.If anyone should be excluded from balance discussion it's guys like you that are too biased to see the big picture.
He can't be biased when he's showing evidence. You don't seem to know what bias means.
Answers inside the quote.

ALXBRAMI wrote:
I agree that with balancing issues experienced players should have the priority over casual players.
unfortunatly we have yet to see one that s not unbelivably biased about it.
You don't seem to be reading the forums actually. And as every other person like you, you are again claiming we're bias without anything to back you up. I might even say you have a personal issue against Yoda lol.

Now, please provide me with links to forum posts from High Level players (I consider anything high Onyx to be high level) that claim stupid bias stuff, I'm possitive you won't find anything. But I can tell you (and I will do it if you so wish) I can find posts from lower ranked players claiming all sorts of non-proven, bias, false stuff regarding balance. These people who don't even grasp a simple basic element like scouting. The likes that'll swear Jump Brutes are OP, the ones that claim Reavers are underpowered, the ones asking for a Condor Rush nerf. These people come here everyday, AND THAT'S NOT A BAD THING, I'm actually all for it, these people should flood the forums! but LISTENING to them in regards to balance is A MISTAKE. What we should do with them is TEACH them, give them advice to better understand the game. The more people we have at high levels the more competitive the game becomes and thus a much more solid balance can be reached.
Blacky get your nose out of yoda's behind! I know the guy since before u were able to walk... i have nothing against yoda, on the contrary! Go back at making your unit invincible. Just stop putting too much effort in it... it s getting ridiculous.
ALXBRAMI wrote:
ALXBRAMI wrote:
Blacky get your nose out of yoda's behind! I know the guy since before u were able to walk... i have nothing against yoda, on the contrary! Go back at making your unit invincible. Just stop putting too much effort in it... it s getting ridiculous.
What sort of non sense is this, are you proving my point once again? I literally sighed just now lol.

I don't care about Yoda, I don't care who types any posts, I care about the things they say. If they come across a point that represents my thoughts it is only natural that I would join up. And when people try to bring down arguments with no proof and personal attacks I feel obliged to point out how ridiculous they are. I'm in favor of reason, if you don't use reason when arguing then I can't take you seriously.

"I know the guy since before u were able to walk" What is that even suppose to mean anyways? Are you implying I'm a kid? or that you're Yoda's best buddy or what? I fail to see how is that any relevant. And if you say that because I suggested you might have a personal issue with him, you might agree that I had every reason to think of it (lack of arguments, name calling, failure to provide evidence when requested), if that is not the case then you must be trolling this thread, which I hope you're not.

"Go back at making your unit invincible. Just stop putting too much effort in it... it s getting ridiculous." English is not my native language so I confess I'm having trouble figuring out what you mean by this.
ALXBRAMI wrote:
ALXBRAMI wrote:
Blacky get your nose out of yoda's behind! I know the guy since before u were able to walk... i have nothing against yoda, on the contrary! Go back at making your unit invincible. Just stop putting too much effort in it... it s getting ridiculous.
What sort of non sense is this, are you proving my point once again? I literally sighed just now lol.

I don't care about Yoda, I don't care who types any posts, I care about the things they say. If they come across a point that represents my thoughts it is only natural that I would join up. And when people try to bring down arguments with no proof and personal attacks I feel obliged to point out how ridiculous they are. I'm in favor of reason, if you don't use reason when arguing then I can't take you seriously.

"I know the guy since before u were able to walk" What is that even suppose to mean anyways? Are you implying I'm a kid? or that you're Yoda's best buddy or what? I fail to see how is that any relevant. And if you say that because I suggested you might have a personal issue with him, you might agree that I had every reason to think of it (lack of arguments, name calling, failure to provide evidence when requested), if that is not the case then you must be trolling this thread, which I hope you're not.

"Go back at making your unit invincible. Just stop putting too much effort in it... it s getting ridiculous." English is not my native language so I confess I'm having trouble figuring out what you mean by this.
U must be a kid... otherwise its just sad. Have a good night blacky...
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 6
  4. 7
  5. 8
  6. ...
  7. 9