The days of embargo rushing are long over... TEC now leads marza/akkan 99.9% of the time. As for advent, I see marauder or revelation more than halcyon these days... Skirantra is always useful due to repair cloud...
I was tagging along a statement made by uncrustable in regards to carrier caps and diplomacy...it was simply an example used to demonstrate a point...
Not even going to bother responding to this flame bait...
You are welcome to think whatever you like, but my statement was simply an observation of reality, not a jab at you and your unique playing style...regardless of what strategies you personally advocate, flak are NOT used in large quantities by skilled players in the late game...fighter spam is MUCH more common in rebellion than it was in diplomacy, and this is in large part because flak always made fighters pointless in diplomacy fleets...
Christ, you can't even stay consistent with your trolling. Just last month you were arguing Ragnarov was one of the worst titans, now you're saying it helps TEC trump advent? I recall you stating even LFs (!!!) could counter it. Also, you do know that Ragnarov is the worst titan to face guardians with, right? All of its abilities require it to face its target directly, something you can't do when its stuck against repulsion...
I still think it is one of the worst titans...
I also specifically acknowledged in that very thread the single greatest advantage of the ragnarov, which is its range...this gives it a unique advantage when facing repulsion that no other faction has...it is by no means a perfect counter for the very reason you mentioned, but your enemy is not always repulsing your ragnarov from behind and thus you sometimes are facing your target while being repulsed...certainly the ragnarov has a better chance of doing something against repulsion than all the titans other than the Vorastra (which really can only get out of repulsion, not attack the protected fleet)...
As for LFs being effective or ineffective against the Ragnarov, that really has no bearing on its effectiveness against repulsion...
Wrong, TEC bombers are superior to advent's. I believe someone did a test on this.
I believe you are referring to the tests done by Aresiv...in his tests, he compared bombers by seeing which fleet of SC would destroy the other light carriers first...as discussed in that very thread, this was seen as a poor method of comparing bombers...
The test really ended up being about which carriers had the most HP per fleet supply since a side "lost" once all of its carriers were destroyed by the enemy bombers...you rarely use bombers to focus fire on carriers, instead using them to focus fire on caps, titans, SBs, HCs, or other key targets...thus, the test really did not apply to typical scenarios encountered in-game...obviously, Advent are at a huge disadvantage in this setup since the aeria has noticeably less HP per fleet supply than lasuraks or percherons...
If you want to discuss which faction has the better carrier, that's a different discussion, but as far as which faction has the better bomber, Advent bombers do more DPS per squadron than TEC do, and thus are superior in most cases...the only noteworthy advantage TEC bombers have over Advent is when it comes to HP per individual ship...this gives TEC a slight advantage when facing flak burst or TK push, though that only applies to certain late game scenarios...90% of the time, I'd rather have the Advent bombers...
This is just a massive fail. Vasari bombers haven't been nerfed in forever, and you were crying about them being OP in countless balance threads a couple months back. All of a sudden you think PMs are no longer common, viable, or problematic? All of a sudden late game advent vs vasari is even? Man, Sel you really are losing your trolling touch...
Quoted from the v1.80 change log (https://forums.sinsofasolarempire.com/449882/page/2/#3418314):
Vasari bomber strike craft damage decreased from 76.9 to 73.055.[/quote]
But that's not the main point...the important part is that bombers in general, not just Vasari, are less viable because fighters are more viable...this is specifically because all frigates including flak get quickly crushed by titans mid and late game...without flak to counter fighters, there is really nothing to counter them other than more fighters...thus, bomber spam is not nearly as common...
Leading up to that change log, I was one among many that pushed for nerfing the base damage of bombers...we believed (and I still do) that such a change was all that was needed since bombers already were not the end-all be-all of late game fleets...there was no need to nerf PMs since fighter spam was on the rise and kanraks were not a big player in rebellion games...
I've actually had this discussion with other skilled players about the Vasari late game, and the end conclusion is that Advent and TEC have AoEs that help deal with corvettes while Vasari do not...this gives Vasari a unique handicap in the late game that is only frustrated more with the necessity to use less bombers (their best item) and more fighters...Advent can do very well against Vasari late game, certainly much better in rebellion than they could in diplomacy...
Nope, ever since I posted my flak thread all I've been seeing are mass flak rushes. Since they counter all early game ships (vette, LF, LRF), people are forced to build SB or tech up to HCs. The old mass LF/LRF is no longer viable due to the new metagame.
I have yet to see a single player do flak spam in the manner that you suggest...not once...I've even asked lobbies if anyone was willing to try it, no takers...ever...
Wrong. Advent are the worst against Vasari out of the three races early game due to weakness in killing SBs.
I've held off quar on the frontline twice, once as TEC and once as Advent...despite him being a superior player, I was able to hold him off for quite a while simply by using LF spam...I actually faired better as Advent because of their earlier access to bombers, but before that stage I found both factions equally capable at doing the job...this was against a superior player who is regarded as one of the best Vasari players of all time...Advent can counter Vasari, they can do it, and they do it well...in fact, most Vasari players I talk to after games complain when they started close to Advent because of how brutal the Advent LF spam is....
It took a titan for Quar to finally make headway against me, and by that point the game was almost over...
Lol wut? Are we even playing the same game? 99% of all frontliners lead prog/egg/marza/akkan... the 1% include Sleeper trolling with marauder and players leading revelation when there's alot of TEC... As for discordias and rankulases, I have never seen leads with them in a non-troll game... In addition, the glory days of the halycon are long gone, people don't even build them late game anymore.
Clearly we don't play the same game, because in your game everyone is spamming flak...
Lmao? You can't even stay consistent in one bloody post... in the above paragraph you said bombers are no longer viable... suddenly there is this great dynamic between fighters, vettes and bombers? And you can't brute force SB with heavy cruisers, not unless you want to lose your fleet due to red button or disorientation...
For posterity, I will quote myself:
[quote who="Seleuceia" reply="18" id="3449858"]since bomber spam is no longer as common or as viable, phase missiles are not as problematic...
I did NOT say bombers aren't viable...I said bomber spam is not as viable...spam, as in building only that ship, as opposed to having 2 or 3 different ships....
I stand by my statement...bomber SPAM is not as viable in rebellion, and that is NOT the same as saying bombers are obsolete or should never be built...the late game has extra diversity compared to diplomacy...in diplomacy, it was almost always bomber spam, while in rebellion it is some combination of fighters, bombers, and corvettes...even if the builds are fighter heavy, the situation certainly sees more diversity than in diplomacy which was almost exclusively bomber spam...
