XRMs

Gappy · Post by **Gappy** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 4:30 am

XRMs seem like such a crucial part of Sup in getting TP2 drops to work these days that sup is hobbled in comparison to tac and especially exp (which can stop SRM-range tp2 drops much more easily than tac) when SY is off.

SY being off was never meant to hobble one tech path with regard to other techpaths, but that's the end result today. XRMs have been around so long they're pretty much a staple of the Allegiance diet, lets get it taken off the SY-only novelty dependancy.

Paradigm2 · Post by **Paradigm2** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 4:35 am

I'd rather get rid of XRMs and require teamwork on sup bombing runs. (lest we forget they still have hvy bombers and ac3... etc.)

CronoDroid · Post by **CronoDroid** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 4:59 am

A mere camp generally negates any bonuses AC3 and Hvy Bombers provide, and Res isn't all that difficult to dodge. Provided you don't mistake a Res3 for a Res1.

Tis why we scream at the aspiring commanders to never ever command on DN without SY on. But yeah, TP2 runs aren't nearly as sweet without XRM. Taking it off SY would ensure Sup isn't hurt badly if a commander should forget to turn it on.

Paradigm2 · Post by **Paradigm2** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 5:08 am

A mere camp? Seriously have people forgotten that it used to take teamwork to deprobe, use distractions, and other tactics to get a base killed? The deal is that if you aren't making the effort to get a run to work, you shouldn't have a free pass with dropping a tp2 3.5k from a base and being unstoppable.

I have seen sup win without SY on twice in the last 2 days vs expansion, in the late game.

Guess what, we used multiple runs from multiple places, deprobed, nanned, and no it wasn't a "my team is dominating their team" type game. And yes, Sup won before XRM existed. I'd say you have a point if people remembered how to attack bomb runs in groups, but that level of skill in int defense is gone (besides camps).

CronoDroid · Post by **CronoDroid** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 5:10 am

I suppose you have that factor but I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make. XRMs are too cheesey? XRMs suck? Your second paragraph kinda contradicts your last sentence in your opening paragraph.

IB_ · Post by **IB_** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 6:30 am

Paradigm2 wrote:QUOTE (Paradigm2 @ Jun 11 2007, 10:08 PM) A mere camp? Seriously have people forgotten that it used to take teamwork to deprobe, use distractions, and other tactics to get a base killed?

Yes, just look at the quality of pickup game teams.

Gappy · Post by **Gappy** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 6:39 am

Paradigm2 wrote:QUOTE (Paradigm2 @ Jun 11 2007, 09:35 PM) I'd rather get rid of XRMs and require teamwork on sup bombing runs. (lest we forget they still have hvy bombers and ac3... etc.)

This argument makes no sense. XRMs are about making TP2 drops more reliable against (usually) exp and sup. TP2 drops almost by definition require almost no coordination to set up the drop.

XRMs aren't about making a successful run require teamwork, it's about making TP2 drops more effective. Basically you're arguing that not only shouldn't sup be using XRMs, but also TP2.

Paradigm2 · Post by **Paradigm2** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 12:32 pm

Tp2 works without XRM just fine, it still can kill a base almost every time without it. It is plenty effective. Rip in nans with bombers, try different tactics.

Just because people don't remember how to win games without XRM doesn't mean it isn't possible.

Bios TP2 was considered unstoppable long before the days of XRM... but now if you're on DN playing bios sup and SY is off, people act like its impossible to win with TP2.