Bomber double/triple drop

[snuffles]

SO, we should remove micro of tanks and bots? Remove micro of naval? Remove micro of inties/asf in circles?
Remove micro of acu? Remove micro of flak?
Where do you draw the line on making units more effective with micro?

I say, remove the player.

[IceDreamer]

1st: you cant proof that
2nd: it doesnt matter

1: We don't need to, we're still right

2: Correct. Much as my mojo is offended by this being around if it's going to cause THIS BIG A SHITSTORM it's not worth it.

It's up to PilOt now IMO because he has the ability, the guts, and the 'I don't give a flying pig's shit what you think' to just DO it and tell everyone to STFU about something.

[Ceneraii]

Bit of a noob perhaps but I think that the more ways you can ''manually'' impact the performance of your units, the better. On tourny replays and such I see even pro's mess it up now and then so isn't it a risk/reward kinda thing? I just don't understand why you would ever want to remove a gameplay element like that :S

[errorblankfield]

It's up to PilOt now IMO because he has the ability, the guts, and the 'I don't give a flying pig's shit what you think' to just DO it and tell everyone to STFU about something.

That's one take on it...

Or we could be adults for five seconds and handle this ourselves.

At this point, it's clearly an opinion for which side of the fence you stand. Grant those for keeping the extra bombing can't seem to agree to basic facts -but end result is easy enough to decide on.

Keep the behavior or remove it.

A simple client poll would be ideal.

[errorblankfield]

Bit of a noob perhaps but I think that the more ways you can ''manually'' impact the performance of your units, the better. On tourny replays and such I see even pro's mess it up now and then so isn't it a risk/reward kinda thing? I just don't understand why you would ever want to remove a gameplay element like that :S

To keep it simple, it's not really that risky but very rewardy.

As far as execution goes, it's just clicking behind a unit -not hard once you learn how. In fact, you can que up the order to remove the need to babysit a bit as well.

And the reward is self-evident to be your own judge. But basically, a lot more DPS on a target than without.

The rest is opinion on if it should be.

That said, the general goal if this game is the opposite of your intro. The less manual things in the game, the better (in my book and others). It's about the macro game, not the mirco game. There are plenty of alternatives that let to mirco the shift out of everything to win. This isn't one of those games.

Welcome to the fun grey area of balancing!

[ColonelSheppard]

To keep it simple, it's not really that risky but very rewardy.

Only the fear of the hypnotoad is preventing me from raging right now.

[Swkoll]

To keep it simple, it's not really that risky but very rewardy.

Only the fear of the hypnotoad is preventing me from raging right now.

Thanks sheppard I needed something new for my signature.

But otherwise, sheppard is right about this, bomber micro is fine and its effectiveness is reduced by 1st inti out of 2nd air or by dodging with your engis (which requires less apm than bomber micro)

[Bartok]

in terms of logic double drop is dumb to me. (planes cant stop moving) but it terms of gameplay my main issue is ill have to space pgens, so much work

[errorblankfield]

To keep it simple, it's not really that risky but very rewardy.

Only the fear of the hypnotoad is preventing me from raging right now.

Rage all you want, doesn't make it less true.

The risk of a bomber in general doesn't increase that much when you double bomb.

Bombers are risky themselves because of their behavior. But if you choose to stack bombs, you don't increase your marginal risk that much. The only increases would come from t1* AA. But this is offset some by the fact you decrease your risk vs an inti.

Moreover, this isn't the risk/reward of a FIRST bomber. This is just the added risk of doing the thing mentioned in the title of this thread. Of which, there is little.

In very short words, if you are already bombing something, there is very, very few cases where you want to wouldn't mirco more in.

Now I said the same thing five times in a row -to rid all confusion. I don't see how you can argue this tactic is risky but I'm sure you will find a way.

*T2 murderizes either way. Only t1's shots are slow enough for a non-moving bomber to take more hits.

[sasin]

1st: you cant proof that
2nd: it doesnt matter

EDIT: Fixed a few grammatical mistakes, initially wrote this in a hurry.

This is to all the people saying that whether or not it looks right like is "just an opinion," asking "where to draw the line between this and auroras," etc.

Obviously, you can't know exactly what Chris Taylor thought. But, there are clear differences between this and aurora micro. These are pretty intuitive, which is part of why people who are pointing it out may be surprised its not self-evident and not explain further.

1.) When many people begin playing this game, they immediately understand the idea of moving tanks back to take advantage of their range. It's very intuitive. You don't learn about double bombing until you see someone do it or read about it. When one does hear about it, it seems weird. I remember when I started playing, I used to try to use bombers by assigning a series of attack targets. I have friends who did the same. I believe many others do, too. Sheppard basically acknowledged this by saying that people will see it and then understand it and to help noobs you have to teach them how it works.

2.) This is perhaps in part because tanks function in a similar way in real life. Furthermore, while issuing orders throughout the game, we see tanks moving in one direction and firing in another. There is no click spamming trick required to make them do it. So, the movement is similar to how they behave ordinarily.

3.) Another reason bomber micro is unintuitive is, in general, an attack order in sup com involves a unit moving towards its target and attacking it with its maximal DPS, at least maximal DPS without spending additional resources (TML and OC). Units move away from their target only when you command them to. Bombers, on the other hand, drop their bomb and then fly away. Why do they fly away when any other unit sticks around to continue attacking its target?

4.) Perhaps for these reasons and others that I may not have listed, there is clearly a sizeable group of people that think this behavior is unnatural. The very fact that these people think it isn't natural kind of is a self-validating point. It shows that the behavior isn't intuitive and doesn't make sense to people. Rocket Bots firing while running away does.

So, it's not "just an opinion" that there is a difference between this and aurora micro. There are clear reasons that make it different. And it's not an issue of balance. As Gorton said, it's an issue of gameplay. The current micro is unintuitive to people. We can't know exactly what Chris Taylor thought, you're right, we don't know that he didn't have a secret plan to put in this behavior. But, we can decide whether or not this is better than the alternative. There has been an alternative proposal put forward that suggests that bomber micro should consist of moving between targets and setting up a good bomber run. This would be quite skillful, and more intuitive. The above reasons are a few why this might make more sense. What reason is there not to do this?