This last patch was brilliant

I see many people seeing things they didnt expect in the patch, mostly the AA buff. However, as part of the vehicle nerf for tier 2, this had to happen. As the anti-vehicle is buffed it will make air units very enticing, as cyclops and hunters cannot hit air. So to ensure a meta of massed air is avoided, the radius of the AA had to be increased to keep it in check.
In reality, this patch did brilliantly with what many of us were asking for, a game where you cannot spam one kind of unit and must properly diversify your army.
I am very happy with the many options for strategies that this patch has given us. But thats just me.

You never really could spam air in the first place. The only way that is kind of effective in 3s.

Besides AV will only be good against vehicles so hypothetically someone could just same anti-infantry and till them that way, don’t need air.

That said I am happier with this patch them most, but there is still some issues that need to be addressed.

I was hoping Forge would at least get that Defensive Aura a bit nerfed.

> 2533274927740213;2:
> You never really could spam air in the first place. The only way that is kind of effective in 3s.
>
> Besides AV will only be good against vehicles so hypothetically someone could just same anti-infantry and till them that way, don’t need air.
>
> That said I am happier with this patch them most, but there is still some issues that need to be addressed.

Spamming is nasty in 3s. A Decimus with mass banshees is an automatic GG.

the AA buff was very much needed, I keep seeing people complain about it, but It was honestly needed.

Hmmm… the OP sounded like it made sense to me.

> 2535471149170617;4:
> > 2533274927740213;2:
> > You never really could spam air in the first place. The only way that is kind of effective in 3s.
> >
> > Besides AV will only be good against vehicles so hypothetically someone could just same anti-infantry and till them that way, don’t need air.
> >
> > That said I am happier with this patch them most, but there is still some issues that need to be addressed.
>
> Spamming is nasty in 3s. A Decimus with mass banshees is an automatic GG.

A Arbiter with Phantoms and Grunts is an automatic win.

I said it before in the “official patch notes discissusion” thread. I really like what I see from this patch. Not everything is there, but I think it’s a really good direction.

> 2535471149170617;4:
> > 2533274927740213;2:
> > You never really could spam air in the first place. The only way that is kind of effective in 3s.
> >
> > Besides AV will only be good against vehicles so hypothetically someone could just same anti-infantry and till them that way, don’t need air.
> >
> > That said I am happier with this patch them most, but there is still some issues that need to be addressed.
>
> Spamming is nasty in 3s. A Decimus with mass banshees is an automatic GG.

It’s hardly automatic, but is a viable strategy

> 2533274927740213;2:
> You never really could spam air in the first place. The only way that is kind of effective in 3s.
>
> Besides AV will only be good against vehicles so hypothetically someone could just same anti-infantry and till them that way, don’t need air.
>
> That said I am happier with this patch them most, but there is still some issues that need to be addressed.

I play 3s and it would be effective sometimes

> 2535450481958118;1:
> I am very happy with the many options for strategies that this patch has given us. But thats just me.

I’m a fan of your positivity, but I sense some snarky sarcasm that may not be warranted or earned.

I get your message here, that limiting air and vehicle spam will cause more diverse armies. But, what people are saying about AA not needing to be buffed is not some crazy fabrication. Look at the play history of the people saying this. I’m not saying “look at their rank,” but to look at how many games they’ve played. The players saying AA shouldn’t be buffed often have around 700-1k games under their belts. They probably know what they’re talking about, as they have A LOT of experience with the game.

The truth is that air is not a problem. It’s expensive and hard to mass. When it gets massed, yes it can be tough. No one has ever doubted that, but if you read the fine print you’ll see players say “dont let air get massed.” It takes a long time to mass air.

Honestly, veteran players probably do abuse it against new players, because they can upgrade and mass units quicker than newbies. That’s just the result of poor match-ups, which is the result of a small player bases, seasons of imbalance, crime in the streets, and smerf accounts.
BUT, when players of equal skill play, air is rarely (if ever) the gg move.

Also, the whole “But Deci Banshees!” thing needs to be put down, because that’s not supporting your claim that air is a problem, that’s saying Deci has a problem.

> 2533274796391115;11:
> > 2535450481958118;1:
> > I am very happy with the many options for strategies that this patch has given us. But thats just me.
>
> I’m a fan of your positivity, but I sense some snarky sarcasm that may not be warranted or earned.
>
> I get your message here, that limiting air and vehicle spam will cause more diverse armies. But, what people are saying about AA not needing to be buffed is not some crazy fabrication. Look at the play history of the people saying this. I’m not saying “look at their rank,” but to look at how many games they’ve played. The players saying AA shouldn’t be buffed often have around 700-1k games under their belts. They probably know what they’re talking about, as they have A LOT of experience with the game.
>
> The truth is that air is not a problem. It’s expensive and hard to mass. When it gets massed, yes it can be tough. No one has ever doubted that, but if you read the fine print you’ll see players say “dont let air get massed.” It takes a long time to mass air.
>
> Honestly, veteran players probably do abuse it against new players, because they can upgrade and mass units quicker than newbies. That’s just the result of poor match-ups, which is the result of a small player bases, seasons of imbalance, crime in the streets, and smerf accounts.
> BUT, when players of equal skill play, air is rarely (if ever) the gg move.
>
> Also, the whole “But Deci Banshees!” thing needs to be put down, because that’s not supporting your claim that air is a problem, that’s saying Deci has a problem.

I am a fan of fungus

I think the tank meta could be good for Shippy, with all those slow tanks moving to a base he could teleport base killers and kick away AA to use cammo vs the tanks

> 2533274796391115;11:
> > 2535450481958118;1:
> > I am very happy with the many options for strategies that this patch has given us. But thats just me.
>
> I get your message here, that limiting air and vehicle spam will cause more diverse armies. But, what people are saying about AA not needing to be buffed is not some crazy fabrication. Look at the play history of the people saying this. I’m not saying “look at their rank,” but to look at how many games they’ve played. The players saying AA shouldn’t be buffed often have around 700-1k games under their belts. They probably know what they’re talking about, as they have A LOT of experience with the game.

There are exceptions to every rule. I must be one of them, as I support buffs to AA.

In addition, the distinction between 1v1 and 3v3 is always essential in these discussions.

All of my experience is 2v2 or 3v3 - most being 3’s. As such, I would say I am personally well placed to offer an opinion on the power of air in random 3’s. Whether or not others agree with me due to my terrible w/l ratio or rank is another matter.

Still, these players with the 700-1000 games who’s opinion you consider more valid than that of others - I would be interested to see how many of each game type they have played.

I’ve always thought that, realistically, we should be having two different discussions around this topic - as the two game modes appear to play very differently, especially random team games.

Back on point - I too am glad for the changes and the absence of any knee jerk reactive change. I am a fervent supporter of anything to counter what I consider a boring and repetitve “tactic”. Would be great to see what data the changes are made on though!

> 2533274793819841;14:
> > 2533274796391115;11:
> > > 2535450481958118;1:
> > >
>
> All of my experience is 2v2 or 3v3 - most being 3’s. As such, I would say I am personally well placed to offer an opinion on the power of air in random 3’s. Whether or not others agree with me due to my terrible w/l ratio or rank is another matter.
>
> Still, these players with the 700-1000 games who’s opinion you consider more valid than that of others - I would be interested to see how many of each game type they have played.

A fair amount of those that are against AA buffs are career team players, it’s not only the 1s crowd that isn’t happy with the buff.

> 2533274927740213;15:
> > 2533274793819841;14:
> > > 2533274796391115;11:
> > > > 2535450481958118;1:
> > > >
> >
> > All of my experience is 2v2 or 3v3 - most being 3’s. As such, I would say I am personally well placed to offer an opinion on the power of air in random 3’s. Whether or not others agree with me due to my terrible w/l ratio or rank is another matter.
> >
> > Still, these players with the 700-1000 games who’s opinion you consider more valid than that of others - I would be interested to see how many of each game type they have played.
>
> A fair amount of those that are against AA buffs are career team players, it’s not only the 1s crowd that isn’t happy with the buff.

Thats agreeable. buffing AA is not the best call as air is bad enough if you are not using Decimus air, Protector Sentinels, and Phantoms. These strats need to be debuffed, buffing AA is not the answers. Banished air is already weak as is with seige counters and a little AA will kill their Shrouds and Engineers. Hell, I never build Banshees as is as they suck and are exspensives.