Forged Alliance Forever

Re: How soon to build air lab.

2014-01-29T14:41:58+02:00

Ok, so you fail to build radar or land scouts to get more intel on your enemy and you choose to build airfac + inties instead. Im not gonna question cost effectiveness of that right now, no. Basically what you do is just scout with air units and you dont care if its an actual scout or an intie. The only thing that kills me here is... maybe its too complicated or what... but cant you just... just... scout with bombers? You lose nothing anyway, its same air unit that can fly over enemy base but!!! it can do damage and has radar too, wow!

Statistics: Posted by Mad`Mozart — 29 Jan 2014, 14:41

Re: How soon to build air lab.

2014-01-29T14:26:26+02:00

I see suggestions of overcharge and point defence to make up for lack of early tanks. That is a really bad idea it just means that you will have *even less* tanks because energy storage and power and point defence cost a lot of mass. Generally you will have way more success with straight up t1 tank spam and building NOTHING else. This is the basic strategy. If you build something else then you will most likely lose map control so that better be an investment that is going to pay off soon and allow you to take back map control.

Statistics: Posted by Vee — 29 Jan 2014, 14:26

Re: How soon to build air lab.

2014-01-29T13:50:08+02:00

You had no air to ground, and you already had vision from radar. The only thing provided from air was direct vision which was simply useless. You only needed to know where his units were positioned which the radar showed (and if it didn't show you were doing something very wrong with your radar positioning!).

Statistics: Posted by Blodir — 29 Jan 2014, 13:50

Re: How soon to build air lab.

2014-01-29T12:43:04+02:00

Blodir wrote:
I fail to see how this proves anything. Second game you showed him your tech before you had any bombers out, effectively countering yourself. At that point air factory was a huge waste of money already. There's really not that much intel that can be gained on this map. You just put down a radar, if you see him making no units you march into his base and kill him since he's teching or ecoing. You really don't need to know what he is doing exactly.

The play I made between 7 min and 8 min game time. He was building tanks, and he had more. Yet, Baited his ACU and his forces with my ACU as a decoy. Out manoeuvred his army with two smaller ones and achieved kills on mexes, expansion engineers, power, e-storage and units in his home base. With better information, I was able to achieve a better combat outcome against a numerically superior opponent.

Your assertion that my air tech, when revealed, was useless misses the point. The purpose of the air overhead was to achieve better outcomes in the land battle, and that was really my point.

Statistics: Posted by Hawkei — 29 Jan 2014, 12:43

Re: How soon to build air lab.

2014-01-29T10:02:05+02:00

Hawkei wrote:
Hi Guys,

In general I do agree with the concept that if a higher rated player says not to do something, you probably shouldn't. However, when they say not to do something - which is central to my play style and has accounted for me winning many games. That is where I fundamentally disagree.

I believe I could best illustrate my point with replays. I will attach a some replays to this post when I am able.

As for the 2 scout + 4 inty suggestion. This was the bare minimum I would recommend. I would typically build a bomber or transport. But my point was intended to illustrate that the Intel gained from those planes will easily account for the deficiency in tanks. 2 air scouts + 4 interceptors patrolling over enemy territory = full battlefield intel. It allows you to avoid his strength and find his weakness. Which in the end is worth much more than the 10 tanks which you now don't have.

The only way that a land only build would be superior would be if the opponent had such an innate knowledge of the meta-game that they knew, by instinct, exactly what you were going to do. This only happens at the professional level.

I fail to see how this proves anything. Second game you showed him your tech before you had any bombers out, effectively countering yourself. At that point air factory was a huge waste of money already. There's really not that much intel that can be gained on this map. You just put down a radar, if you see him making no units you march into his base and kill him since he's teching or ecoing. You really don't need to know what he is doing exactly.

Statistics: Posted by Blodir — 29 Jan 2014, 10:02

Re: How soon to build air lab.

2014-01-29T03:09:44+02:00

Aulex wrote:
Or you know, build a radar

Radar only tells you half the story, and only when within range. A radar tells you where and how many. It doesn't tell you what or who.

I also did say that I'd support my assertions with replays. Which, I note, you have not yet viewed. These replays demonstrate the kind of mastery which can be achieved with full battlefield intel. I don't believe they are achievable with radar alone.

Statistics: Posted by Hawkei — 29 Jan 2014, 03:09

Re: How soon to build air lab.

2014-01-28T05:25:52+02:00

Hawkei wrote:
Hi Guys,

In general I do agree with the concept that if a higher rated player says not to do something, you probably shouldn't. However, when they say not to do something - which is central to my play style and has accounted for me winning many games. That is where I fundamentally disagree.

I believe I could best illustrate my point with replays. I will attach a some replays to this post when I am able.

As for the 2 scout + 4 inty suggestion. This was the bare minimum I would recommend. I would typically build a bomber or transport. But my point was intended to illustrate that the Intel gained from those planes will easily account for the deficiency in tanks. 2 air scouts + 4 interceptors patrolling over enemy territory = full battlefield intel. It allows you to avoid his strength and find his weakness. Which in the end is worth much more than the 10 tanks which you now don't have.

The only way that a land only build would be superior would be if the opponent had such an innate knowledge of the meta-game that they knew, by instinct, exactly what you were going to do. This only happens at the professional level.

Or you know, build a radar

Statistics: Posted by Aulex — 28 Jan 2014, 05:25

Re: How soon to build air lab.

2014-01-28T07:57:38+02:00

Hi Guys,

In general I do agree with the concept that if a higher rated player says not to do something, you probably shouldn't. However, when they say not to do something - which is central to my play style and has accounted for me winning many games. That is where I fundamentally disagree.

I believe I could best illustrate my point with replays. I will attach a some replays to this post when I am able.

As for the 2 scout + 4 inty suggestion. This was the bare minimum I would recommend. I would typically build a bomber or transport. But my point was intended to illustrate that the Intel gained from those planes will easily account for the deficiency in tanks. 2 air scouts + 4 interceptors patrolling over enemy territory = full battlefield intel. It allows you to avoid his strength and find his weakness. Which in the end is worth much more than the 10 tanks which you now don't have.

The only way that a land only build would be superior would be if the opponent had such an innate knowledge of the meta-game that they knew, by instinct, exactly what you were going to do. This only happens at the professional level.

Statistics: Posted by Hawkei — 28 Jan 2014, 04:55

Re: How soon to build air lab.

2014-01-27T01:51:14+02:00

Thanks for all the advice guys, some of it has really helped alot. On a map like theta if im playing cybran I have been going air 2nd or 3rd but if by the time my lab is done I havnt seen any opponents air I will make bombers and use the lab aggressively rather than making a few interceptors that may well not be needed and they would be wasted.

Air has single handedly won me a few ladder matches since I carried out the advice here, so I thank you all for that.

Also as a further note, I have left building air against any other faction than cybran till ive seen they actually have air themselves.

Statistics: Posted by TEA_Downside — 27 Jan 2014, 01:51

Re: How soon to build air lab.

2014-01-26T15:55:39+02:00

I'm just loving this thread..
Error: Not "hung up" on theta.. my point about scouting with a t1 landscout can be done easily on any 5x5 map.
And if I was on any 5x5 map and I went second air, there are two things I would build: bomber then scout, or transport and scout.(Transport is for ghetto). If I build an interceptor it's just a useless unit for however long it takes for my opponent to build air, and worse than that, the second the enemy sees my first scout, they will start to build aa, if they saw the inti they will build aa aswell. As a rule, I don't want my enemy to build aa before I have actually damaged him with air....that just gets my bomber/ghetto killed and useless.
The disadvantage you get from second air is pretty hefty on 5x5 maps in my experience. I don't think any high level player would disagree here. The only way to mitigate it is to do enough damage to your opponent, killing radars, killing armies, engineers- and like I said, interceptor is useless for this.

Statistics: Posted by Gorton — 26 Jan 2014, 15:55

Re: How soon to build air lab.

2014-01-26T13:26:14+02:00

Mad`Mozart wrote:
Its just not about having air fac like meta tells you, but using the units you can get from it.

This is what sums it up. You can basicly on any map go, first air, second air,third air, or late air like 7th air. The important thing, is that you have a plan on what to do with it. Second air is meta, because it's relatively save, and requires less planning than for example triple land first or air first. Yet if you use totally non-airbuilds or mroe air heavy builds and this tactic proofs itself to be effective, then the meta will change, just like it did when second air came up.

Inties first is a fail in 80%+ of all cases. Because even if enemy goes bomber first, there is no garuantee that he will send it the direct way and that you can intercept it before it deals serious damage to your base.

Statistics: Posted by ColonelSheppard — 26 Jan 2014, 13:26

Re: How soon to build air lab.

2014-01-26T13:15:06+02:00

errorblankfield wrote:
Nope, that's not at all what I was saying.

Nope, Blodir right, its exactly what you were saying.
Maybe you didnt mean it, but thats another story

And whats wrong with your attitude? You are overreacting a whole lot.
As soon as someone critisized Firewall's post you kicked in and started violently trying to prove their point wrong. And the thread was just about asking advice. Got some problems there or what?

Statistics: Posted by Mad`Mozart — 26 Jan 2014, 13:15

Re: How soon to build air lab.

2014-01-26T11:50:17+02:00

Nope, that's not at all what I was saying.

Thanks for playing.

Statistics: Posted by errorblankfield — 26 Jan 2014, 11:50

Re: How soon to build air lab.

2014-01-26T10:25:42+02:00

The OP was quite obviously asking for a more experienced opinion on when they build their first air factory. He was provided with information most (if not all) of the high level playerbase disagrees with, so he got corrected. This has nothing to do with playstyles and everything to do with just answering a simple question, you are making an assumption on how OP will use this information.

...and you are basically saying that you should intentionally play bad so that you can improve...

Statistics: Posted by Blodir — 26 Jan 2014, 10:25

Re: How soon to build air lab.

2014-01-26T05:49:39+02:00

Really hung up on that theta example vee/gorton -which isn't surpise, both of you are sticklers to the minor details. Which when you get down to it, if you are on the low levels throwing 20 tanks into intel semi-early on isn't going to be detrimental on theta specifically.

That's recovered by a few OCs and building a bomber at some point. (Or the reactionary need for the other guy to build AA. Or considering the questionable quote of having 20+ tanks on you in the first place cause of a wee thing call build capacity which is nonexistent in the early game, we can be more honest and say like a handful of tanks that died to the PD you where able to construct in a good spot due to intel. There are a million moves from this point, losing cause you have a slight land deficient is throwing the game cause you lost the first pawn.) Heck... even in the high levels such an advantage isn't an instant loss. There are very few things in this game that don't boil down to skill. I've seen pros recover from worse. Only in the middle of the pack where both people are doing the same exact thing will 20 tanks break you.

But that's beside the point.

Mad's hitting the nail on the head (if opening with a sentence I fundamentally disagree with). You learn the damn game by experimenting. Maybe the first iteration for 6 inties was too much for theta, so next time you build 4. Or maybe you do go with a jester first followed by inties. Then jester + scout and let it die naturally... you evolve your play. As a general tip, saying build air early is valid and that was the entire point. You can't go wrong with Fire's suggestion from a first try base. It's a starting point. Something you need to play with to suite yourself.

Now the only other thing I care to input is the whole 'if the top players shun it, don't do it' to which I say to hell with top players. Yes they got there for a reason, no should that affect your play style significantly in any way. You have to find your niche. Figure out what you are good at and do that over and over until you prefect it. It might look similar to pro's in the end -cause that's how they became who they are. They didn't just start copying the same guy for the get go.
Again, you evolve your play. And that requires doing odd stuff you would never get away with latter in your career. But if you can learn from it now, there might be some odd tactic buried in there that no one currently knows how to counter right and by unearthing it you just hotlined your way up. Or maybe you notice that if the other guy goes X, you can do that normally too risky tactic with improved success. W/e. Point being doing what the 'top players' do gets you to the middle of the stack with all the other guys trying to prefect imitation. In this game, repeating the same thing won't actually teach you how to play. You'll be decent, but you'll never be able to transfer from decent to good cause in your quest for mediocrity, you forgot how to innovate mid-match which is how pros win their games all the time.

You can learn the millions of situations in the game and just spit back out the right answer. Or you can learn the game and counter each intuitively.

Statistics: Posted by errorblankfield — 26 Jan 2014, 05:49