Ripcord GA
Tac's not very good at defending things, so against an enemy with a strong offense, Tac needs all the help it can get! It's hilarious to suggest that it's not useful to be able to spend $2k on a significant buff to con/miner survivability, pushes or no pushes!
Besides, I've heard that Tacspansion teams push a con every now and then!
Besides, I've heard that Tacspansion teams push a con every now and then!
Last edited by Jimen on Mon May 17, 2010 5:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
TurkeyXIII
- Posts: 1460
- Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:18 am
- Location: Melbourne, Aus
If you want to buff tac by giving them a generalized GA that's more useful than shield GA (not hard) you can, as long as you're aware it's not going to compliment your primary tech terribly well.
QUOTE (Randall Munroe)14.2: Turkey consumption rate of the average American in milligrams per minute[/quote]
As I see it there's two ways to approach GAs generally.
1: Move all GAs to Garr/SB. Personally I think that this would be an interesting experiment as it would provide comms with the maximum choice possible and create more diversity. It'd also promote investing in SB. If you're going to put GAs in Garr then it needs to be all GAs.
2: Rearrange the GAs within the techpaths. This again goes two ways:
2a) Arrange the GAs so that they compliment the tech path that they're in. The problem is that some GAs compliment more than one tech and some don't specifically compliment any. You also have no brainer GAs which effectively reduce choice and diversity because they'll always be bought.
2b) Arrange the GAs to compliment other techs to benefit multiteching. Many of the same problems as above.
Personally I'd lump the whole lot in Garr and just accept that some will get bought more than others. If nothing that radical is acceptable then I'd go with Drizzo's suggestion.
1: Move all GAs to Garr/SB. Personally I think that this would be an interesting experiment as it would provide comms with the maximum choice possible and create more diversity. It'd also promote investing in SB. If you're going to put GAs in Garr then it needs to be all GAs.
2: Rearrange the GAs within the techpaths. This again goes two ways:
2a) Arrange the GAs so that they compliment the tech path that they're in. The problem is that some GAs compliment more than one tech and some don't specifically compliment any. You also have no brainer GAs which effectively reduce choice and diversity because they'll always be bought.
2b) Arrange the GAs to compliment other techs to benefit multiteching. Many of the same problems as above.
Personally I'd lump the whole lot in Garr and just accept that some will get bought more than others. If nothing that radical is acceptable then I'd go with Drizzo's suggestion.
Spidey: Can't think of a reason I'd need to know anything
Giga tac can, to keep enemy bbrs busy.DasSmiter wrote:QUOTE (DasSmiter @ May 16 2010, 10:32 PM) Since when is Tac pushing cons around?
Don't find fault, find a remedy; anybody can complain.
Cookie Monster wrote:QUOTE (Cookie Monster @ Apr 1 2009, 09:35 PM) But I don't read the forums I only post.
-
NightRychune
- Posts: 3065
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 8:00 am