Bomber double/triple drop

[Coffee nut]

@Coffee Nut, i can explain why your comment is wrong (not that its facts are wrong, but that the same can be argued in reverse i.e. the interceptor can't follow behind the bomber and shoot it repeatedly, etc.) but ill leave it to errorblankfield.

Hi, thanks for engaging with the post.

I'm not convinced that the argument works as well in reverse. Granted you may be right about the interceptor following the bomber, but in the case where the bomber hovers, AA is much more effective (I don't know the exact speeds but trying to chase a moving bomber with aa to take it down is such a nightmare) and you know where the bomber is for sure. In the case of interceptors, I think the issue is more that you have to find the bomber as opposed to shooting it down quick enough when you do see it; given that one of the previous points made is that

They are a frail crafts

Is it really the case that when one bomber is stationary you can't shoot it down quick enough with a combination of air and aa?

[Wakke]

Also a good test to see if a mechanic is bullsh*t/unintuitive or not:

1) Imagine the game wihout this mechanic
2) Imagine that someone would suggest adding said mechanic. Would it make sense? Would a lot of people support it?

If the answer to 2) is "No", you're dealing with a bad mechanic.

To apply this to the topic at hand:
1) Imagine the game engine does not allow and never has allowed multi-dropping. Imagine that the consensus is that bombers are somewhat underpowered
2) Image someone making the following suggestion:
"What about allowing players to rigorously spam move commands to override the natural flight path of bombers, so that they effectively hover like gunships? Wouldn't that be a good boost for the bombers?"

-> I would hope the community would answer "NO" to the second question. I would hope they would suggest more elegant stat changes to boost bombers' performance instead.
-> Multi-dropping is a bad mechanic

[ColonelSheppard]

i.e. the interceptor can't follow behind the bomber and shoot it repeatedly, etc.) but ill leave it to errorblankfield.

this sounds good in theory but effectivly it has no real use, you can press s to stop the bomber and let the int pass, that may work or not, depends on if enemy pays attention and if the bomber had full hp, and the angle the int came from, whatsoever you do this by pressing "s" for "stop" not by hovering, you cant go from fullspeed into hovermode because bomber would fly curves uncontrollable (if you would know that if you had tried it yourself)

Is it really the case that when one bomber is stationary you can't shoot it down quick enough with a combination of air and aa?

no this is bullshit

[Wild_Green]

If no one complains, thats how it usually ends.

You start to understand how a balance community works...

So now im gonna complain a bit.

Yes, i use bomber micro. Why? becouse it is fun. And i dont agree to take that experience from me, just becouse some people are frustrated to see something they cannot do.

Im observing this topic for quite a time, not really saying anything, becouse i found it ridiculous. People crying about something, cus lost to something, got mad so now it is IMBA-OP-EXPLOITING-STRATEGY-KILLING-ALL-THE-GAME.

And now im gonna mention something That Sheppard is doing during all the conversation.

Please show me 1 (one) replay, that actually proves that the bomber is super-iba-op. ONE.

As far as i see all the discuss here it looks like:

- Kill the double bombing ability
- Why?
- Its imba, kills the game, its bad
- Why?
- This is bad, this is wrong, this breaks the game.
- Ok but how exactly, please show me.

To all people, that are actually fighting against this: Please, think few minute before commenting this.

How often do u actually see this?

But seriously, this is question that ive read here like 20 times, without a single answer.

Have u ever tryed it?

Yes, im saying this to you, Anaryl, im saying this to all of You, that are fighting it off. Have u ever tryed to do this? Have u ever failed this? Have u ever seen what is the cost of such micro, how much time does it consume, and how much skill does it need to work. Have u ever feel, how painfully it is when it fails, while its easy to counter?

Have u ever tryed to actually counter this?

I guess no. So how can u make opinion on such thing? For now ure someone, who just got mad facing this. Yes, it is innoying, becous it forces to change ur plans. It forces u to do something diffrent than u usually do. It forces to forget your habits and improvise. It forces changes. And people doesnt like changes.

When i make my opinion on something, i listen carefully both sides. I at lest try to take look at both of them. For now, i can only see planety of people that want to take away from me something becouse they simply doesnt like it.

Non of them showed a smallest amount of interest how expensive is that, or simply how to counter and face it. "I dont like this, so this is bad, so this must be removed. End of story."

First, i found this coversation hilarious. Now it just makes me sad.

[Wakke]

@Wild_Green

If it was indeed totally useless to use multi-dropping, I would agree that removing this mechanic would be low priority, as no one would use it (except to joke/troll). However, basing myself on several of Gyle's replays, this seems not to be the case (ie, it can and is being used to gain advantage).

[ColonelSheppard]

hell dude
where are those replays???


This feels like IceSomething's:
"But pro player X said"
argument.

[Wild_Green]

@Wild_Green

If it was indeed totally useless to use multi-dropping, I would agree that removing this mechanic would be low priority, as no one would use it (except to joke/troll). However, basing myself on several of Gyle's replays, this seems not to be the case (ie, it can and is being used to gain advantage).

I feel, like u dont really read, or dont really understand, what am i saying there.

[Coffee nut]

@Wild_Green
However, basing myself on several of Gyle's replays, this seems not to be the case (ie, it can and is being used to gain advantage).

(I highlighted for emphasis)

The debate surely shouldn't be centred around whether it "could" (i.e. whether using this strategy has the probability of gaining an advantage over your opponent) but whether it "would" (i.e. someone sufficiently skilled and can triple bomb automatically get an advantage from using first bomber). It is quite easy to argue the first, in that a lot of things "can" give you an advantage, such as first jester, first lab, map specific bo, etc, but to convince us of the latter it's a lot harder; it's not the case that every time first bomber is used by a skilled player, that person will automatically get a comfortable win.

[Reaper Zwei]

@Wakke
you realize that Gyle gets who knows how many replays and picks what he thinks are the most exciting right?

[ColonelSheppard]

@Wakke
you realize that Gyle gets who knows how many replays and picks what he thinks are the most exciting right?

and even given that he hasn't even showed the one he's thinking off (because i cant remember one personally, and i probably have seen most of them despite the 1h + ones