Page 11 of 41

Posted: 12 Oct 2007, 12:07
by Neddie
Day, you've always been blameless.

Posted: 12 Oct 2007, 14:32
by DemO
Blame me. I was the one (or perhaps one of a couple?) that suggested to NOiZE that Berthas were more or less useless in a testing session with him with some of the changes for 5.8 which at that time had no mention of berthas.

I had suggested that catalysts were perhaps OP in mid-late game situations because they were so easy to spam and impossible to defend against besides outright destroying them, which led me to compare them with Berthas, which previously were almost uselessly unaccurate and had more or less 100% legitimate counter in the form of shields.

In the end, Catalyst got nerfed and Bertha got buffed and TBH there is better balance between these 2 long range statics now than there ever was before.

From the few games I've played in BA 5.8 I believe berthas are an improvement and couldn't find a single circumstance where Berthas had enough impact to change the flow of the game (losing side becomes winning side or vice versa).

I never saw anyone complaining that Catalyst was OP when it had enough range to hit enemy bases from almost full map distance with no plausible counter other than to destroy them before the missiles fire.

This is all just E-DRAMA. Someone got owned by berthas in a game they were likely already losing.

Posted: 12 Oct 2007, 14:34
by Hellspawn
DemO wrote:
From the few games I've played in BA 5.8 I believe berthas are an improvement and couldn't find a single circumstance where Berthas had enough impact to change the flow of the game (losing side becomes winning side or vice versa).
Yup, I am still waiting on replays showing different <_<.

Posted: 12 Oct 2007, 16:10
by Day
Demo to the rescue!

Posted: 12 Oct 2007, 16:58
by ginekolog
Hellspawn wrote:
DemO wrote:
From the few games I've played in BA 5.8 I believe berthas are an improvement and couldn't find a single circumstance where Berthas had enough impact to change the flow of the game (losing side becomes winning side or vice versa).
Yup, I am still waiting on replays showing different <_<.
I agree. Even in some 8v8 games on DSD etc berthas were not game ender. Ussauly mass bombers or nuke bombers were, or nukes. BB are nice now not OP. I like 5.8 tbh.. talking about big games though.

Posted: 12 Oct 2007, 17:05
by Saktoth
Meh, Bertha is fine, its shields that suck.

Posted: 12 Oct 2007, 17:20
by [Krogoth86]
ginekolog wrote:I agree. Even in some 8v8 games on DSD etc berthas were not game ender. Ussauly mass bombers or nuke bombers were, or nukes. BB are nice now not OP. I like 5.8 tbh.. talking about big games though.
Well Deltasiege is no good example as the BBs mostly are built on the owner's hill in north and from there you cannot reach the very back of the enemy...
Saktoth wrote:Meh, Bertha is fine, its shields that suck.
Agreed! :-)

Posted: 12 Oct 2007, 18:09
by RavingManiac
On your average 16 x 16 map, a single bertha with a little intel becomes a precision fusion killer. It happens a lot, trust me.

Posted: 12 Oct 2007, 18:50
by Hellspawn
RavingManiac wrote:On your average 16 x 16 map, a single bertha with a little intel becomes a precision fusion killer. It happens a lot, trust me.
Noone said it doesn't happen. The question is if it happens due lack of skill or due OP.

Posted: 12 Oct 2007, 19:13
by 1v0ry_k1ng
if the precision accuracy is its problem then increase its fire rate or AOE instead of accuracy?

Posted: 12 Oct 2007, 20:04
by DemO
Then perhaps finally people should start making use of cloaked fusions. I think the precision accuracy is pretty good tbh.

Posted: 12 Oct 2007, 20:26
by Neddie
Actually, Dem0, I had issues with the Catalyst, and I expressed them.

Posted: 12 Oct 2007, 21:32
by MR.D
Core no longer has Cloaked fusions, so what are they soposed to do? eh?

Posted: 12 Oct 2007, 21:35
by Day

Posted: 12 Oct 2007, 21:46
by Hellspawn
Yup, definatly OP ^^.

How couldn't I see that before :S.

Posted: 12 Oct 2007, 22:16
by NOiZE
In a other game it was proved that Bertha is OP when its combined with Atlas.


Image

Posted: 12 Oct 2007, 22:27
by Neddie
That is just hilarious.

Posted: 12 Oct 2007, 23:25
by ZellSF
Is it intentional that CORE radar vehicles have less line of sight than a raider, while ARM radar vehicles have almost twice the line of sight as a samson?

Posted: 12 Oct 2007, 23:36
by DemO
Probably not:D

Posted: 13 Oct 2007, 00:06
by LordMatt
DemO wrote:Blame me. I was the one (or perhaps one of a couple?) that suggested to NOiZE that Berthas were more or less useless in a testing session with him with some of the changes for 5.8 which at that time had no mention of berthas.
I suggested they be improved twice in AA and once in BA before. I'm happy Noize at least listened to you. :-)