Yolona Oss

[Snakeb1te]

Can I just ask why the yolona costs more than the mavor and the... damn what was the other game ender?

As far as I know, it builds a nuke every minute, and requires 4 anti nukes to shoot down (which themselves take 2.5 minutes to build.) I don't see this as inferior to the mavor. Can anyone enlighten me?

[Supreme321]

number 1 it takes 2 nukes and the mavor can only destroy so much at once, while the yolona oss destroys everything in one blast. So the Yolona should cost more in theory.

[Plasma_Wolf]

Can I just ask why the yolona costs more than the mavor and the... damn what was the other game ender?

The Ylona Oss costs less...

You need 2 missiles for each Ylona nuke, the anti-missiles take 4 minutes to build, so you need 8 SMDs to hold the Ylona off indefinitely.
While this is a hard thing to do, it is not impossible, certainly not because 8 SMDs and their first missiles cost 88800 mass to build, leaving you with the mass of 47 Strategic bombers more than the enemy has when you fill in this potential mass expenditure. All in all, I don't think the Ylona oss has become too cheap.

On the subject of having it cheaper than the Mavor and the Salvation. All Game enders had a price reduction of 25% (the Ylona was cheaper before the change) and all have the ability to destroy an enemy base, but all can easily be destroyed (if found!) because of the huge amount of mass they still cost. As a result, it is almost impossible to compare them with one another, more so because we haven't got a single replay of anyone in action, let alone while players were evenly matched.

Because of this, the only thing we can actually conclude, is that the old mavor is too expensive for Winter's Duel (Lu Xun tried that as a joke but his opponent recovered and managed to win)

[Supreme321]

Also they have another, almost completely useless experimental which is the t4 bomber and a 2 in one experimental that can be good and bad at the same time. So they kind of need a good one, while the UEF are almost good in every situation, so their biggest one should be more expensive.

[Plasma_Wolf]

It depends. The mavor is not really accurate when the target is futher away (over 30km), so how are you going to make it useful at that point? It can't be done by price because if you put it at close range targets, the price has to be compared to T3 artillery, with effectiveness as key.

Pip mentioned that you have to find out how many T3 artillery you need to kill a base and see if a mavor can kill that base to. If you need two artilleries, the mavor has to be twice the price. Do you need just more than 2, but will 3 kill the enemy base with complete ease? Then the mavor has to have the price of 2.5 T3 artilleries.

Then you can discuss the effectiveness at its maximum range. For that, the accuracy is key, not the price.

[A_vehicle]

Also they have another, almost completely useless experimental which is the t4 bomber and a 2 in one experimental that can be good and bad at the same time. So they kind of need a good one, while the UEF are almost good in every situation, so their biggest one should be more expensive.

Why you hattin' on the Ahwassa? It seems pretty good to me.
You must not be using it right.

It may be off topic, but I think the Mavor needs its damage doubled and its ROF cut in half at least to make it feel more "strategic", because right now it fires faster than a Heavy artiller instillation (one shot every ten seconds vs one shot every eight), which is ridiculous.

Anyway I think that if the Yolona Oss needs a price cut, it should be small. If 81x81 maps were more useable it might be an issue, (Mavor cannot be blocked by anything, but Oss can, and on a giagantic map where a T3 bomber fleet can take minutes to respond to shelling, this makes a difference), but since most map games are never on 81x81 maps, this point is moot.

[ColonelSheppard]

the yolona is only worth it after 36 nukes if your enemy has defence
(at least that is whats written in the fun facts of our team speak sever )