perk htts

[guitarism]

HTT's are less used because not alot of people use them right. Why is that? Because HTT's require you to think. An int-bomb run is just that - you get ints in the sector, they shoot things and a few nans push the bomber and base goes boom. HTT's require you to think.

You have to deprobe the aleph, Make sure it's not camped. Get a few others who can think as well to nan you, push you, kill things that come close. They have to be low sig. You have to get in sector, avoid eye, line up on the base. THEN you have to wait for the moment to come, which means staging some type of distraction elsewhere and THEN you have to go.

There are so many MORE steps for HTT's, and they require thought, as opposed to int bombing, no wonder why comm's get bbrs.

[Death3D]

Main problem with HTTs are that the other team is Exp and you're trying to cap vs. Hvy ints; or that you didn't kill a Sup team's miners enough so they got to Adv Sup and you're trying to cap vs. Hvy boost Figs that have already killed all the galvable bases you could've launched to diminish out-time some.

That or Tac was effective against you that you can't even get HTTs and again, you have been SBd down to your Exp and maybe garr.



In other words, HTT is fine when you've EXPANDED effectively against tac, or when you're using your momentary tech advantage vs. Sup.

[Adaven]

The other problem with HTT's is that even if you know what you are doing, a decent chance of success takes a serious investment of players that have to spend a fairly long time setting up the run. Meanwhile the other team is killing your miners or bombing mulitiple bases in the time it takes you to do 1 proper sneaky htt run.

HTT's are also easier to hunt down than say, tp2 scouts or sb's. tp2/sb's can be hiding in any direction from a base, which is a lot of area to cover. But if you think an htt is in your sector you just have to worry about checking the green door side.

[Valiance]

QUOTE (guitarism @ Nov 11 2009, 08:23 AM) HTT's are less used because not alot of people use them right. Why is that? Because HTT's require you to think. An int-bomb run is just that - you get ints in the sector, they shoot things and a few nans push the bomber and base goes boom. HTT's require you to think.

You have to deprobe the aleph, Make sure it's not camped. Get a few others who can think as well to nan you, push you, kill things that come close. They have to be low sig. You have to get in sector, avoid eye, line up on the base. THEN you have to wait for the moment to come, which means staging some type of distraction elsewhere and THEN you have to go.

There are so many MORE steps for HTT's, and they require thought, as opposed to int bombing, no wonder why comm's get bbrs.

And it ties up a lot of manpower that then can't do anything else in that time. Unless you are rix.

[lexaal]

In addition htts cost also 22.5k+1k per ship while bbrs cost 10k + 500. (=50% cheaper).

[Jimen]

It's not like HTTs are the only strategy that ties up a lot of manpower - proper bombing runs require many of the same preparation steps as HTT runs. True, bombers tend to be a bit more tolerant of skipping or failing certain tasks off that list than HTTs are, which makes HTTs more difficult to use than bombers...but considering the results they bring about (capturing rather than just destroying), shouldn't that be the case? HTTs are used less often in PUGs because in PUGs, just about everything has a decent chance of failure and it's common to see a team botch runs that really shouldn't have failed, so people prefer quickly obliterating a base with a high chance of success compared to capturing with a slower and more organized (and therefore more difficult) run. Of course, I've hardly ever seen the well-planned HTT runs people are talking about here - usually, PUG teams use them in the same way they'd use a bomber (and still manage to somehow succeed).

Of course, the money thing is the other issue - more often than not, by the time a team's reached advanced tech, they've bought bombers anyway for one reason or another, so unless the other team's disorganized enough that the comm thinks he can get away with capping the enemy techbase, might as well just stick to bombing and start a second techpath for tp2 or SBs rather than wasting cash on research HTTs.

[Broodwich]

for the amount of money spent on htts, i almost always just go for a second tech (mainly sup) and get the upgrades for my ints, then mine to fbs. Htts can be used effectively but normally i dont actually trust me team because they are idiots and i go for the more foolproof fb/sb. Also like ada mentioned it ties up a lot of manpower for no immediate gain unless you are forcecapping, while the enemy can get another miner and get a couple rocks down because you have your more intelligent players doing to flying instead of killing miners.

[juckto]

How about giving TTs EMP missiles and giving HTTs some version of a nerve gas missile?

[Andarvi]

I would say give htts the ability to mounts ABs (it still costs 2x as much as a bomber and as it is now it's useless vs teles and refs) as well, but all the rix lovers will throw a fit.

[Icky]

QUOTE (juckto @ Nov 11 2009, 04:00 PM) How about giving TTs EMP missiles and giving HTTs some version of a nerve gas missile?

This.