PD nerf: -1 defense to militias.

Is a simply proposal and it was made in the past. It got many support and I don't know why it didn't happened.

The main argument is that 6 def unit for 20 cost is way too much.

To add up, you are getting 3 def for 10 cost, but according to my tests the PD militias are one of the strongest militias of AW, even bypassing the unmovable IF Militias (+2 def +2 crit perform better than +2 HP) and matching the GW militia (difference is +1 attack to gw, and -10 cost to PD).

Also, it won't make PD "Unplayable".

No

No

Prispeval Croat, 05.07.2015 at 16:00

post the ss we have

Clovis u fking retarded cunt stop making dumb thread NOOOO NERFING

Prispeval Waffel, 05.07.2015 at 16:03

''You can't beat it so you cry about it now!?''
''Go cry!!!'''

I thought it was time to take the roll of victimized person for once!

I, love it when u cryyyyyyyyy, it makes you come alive! I, love it when u cryyyyyyyy, it shows all of your lies!

*insert beat drop here*

Im of 2 minds about this, i supported it in the past but... now we have 90 cost ra tanks.

Considering that wherever you take you get militia for free the boost for militia in pd is too much.
I have said this is needed for a long time, but I dunno with the non playing and new strategy changes it might not be needed

BTW this should only be for in cities

Prispeval Permamuted, 05.07.2015 at 16:43

Im of 2 minds about this, i supported it in the past but... now we have 90 cost ra tanks.

100% spot on. in the past this militia def wouldve been op and has been suggested to be nerfed, but instead of nerfing pd they just boosted ra...

No support

Are you fucking retarded all who support this fucking shit of not nerfing PD, i am bored of your acting like you drank all the mind of the world.... fuck you and fuck your pd nerf boost theories

Ok i was nervous, but still u are dumb

I would support this, but 90 cost tanks.

So no support... for now.

Support, ra is ok with 90 cost, pd more cost effiecient in the long run by 3 unit

Prispeval Htin, 05.07.2015 at 19:25

Support, ra is ok with 90 cost, pd more cost effiecient in the long run by 3 unit

Cost-efficiency is not the only metric for judging a strategy.

Reinforcement-efficiency is critical in the early game rushing and expansion, and RA has some awesome reinforcement efficiency in terms of attack (i.e. expansion and rushing) power.

Prispeval International, 05.07.2015 at 19:28

Prispeval Htin, 05.07.2015 at 19:25

Support, ra is ok with 90 cost, pd more cost effiecient in the long run by 3 unit

Cost-efficiency is not the only metric for judging a strategy.

Reinforcement-efficiency is critical in the early game rushing and expansion, and RA has some awesome reinforcement efficiency in terms of attack (i.e. expansion and rushing) power.

but they lose in the long run

Prispeval b0nker2, 05.07.2015 at 16:55

and new strategy changes it might not be needed

Prispeval International, 05.07.2015 at 19:10

I would support this, but 90 cost tanks.

You're only comparing PD with RA. Try, for example, to compare it with another strategy.

Prispeval International, 05.07.2015 at 19:28

Cost-efficiency is not the only metric for judging a strategy.

Reinforcement-efficiency is critical in the early game rushing and expansion, and RA has some awesome reinforcement efficiency in terms of attack (i.e. expansion and rushing) power.

That's right as long as you have the funds to do so. Try, for example, to make a RA UK Turn 1 expansion, then a PD one. The cheaper cost and efficiency of PD infantries will allow you to take more countries than with RA. You know what they say.... "Turn 1 expansion usually decides the game".

Prispeval Croat, 05.07.2015 at 18:38

Ok i was nervous, but still u are dumb

And?

Prispeval AlBoZzZ, 05.07.2015 at 17:57

No support

Why?

Prispeval Eagle, 05.07.2015 at 16:09

No

Why?

Prispeval Batman.., 05.07.2015 at 16:11

Clovis u fking retarded cunt stop making dumb thread NOOOO NERFING

Feel free to ignore me and my threads if you don't like them.

Prispeval Waffel, 05.07.2015 at 16:03

That's not fun. Please stop posting if you will only go off topic.

No support, even though I used to be preacher of all the PDfagging and stacking, it's "rival" strat RA was boosted. If you pit PD against other strategies I'd say they've got there pros and cons; however the main focus should be against RA, as this tank-spamming strategy can easily rip through PD infs.

Prispeval Croat, 05.07.2015 at 18:38

Ok i was nervous, but still u are dumb

10 min later...

Prispeval Guest, 05.07.2015 at 20:55

If you pit PD against other strategies I'd say they've got there pros and cons

PD pros are far better than any other strategy pros, specially since PD can be played all-around. Anyway, do you agree 6 def for 20 cost to a unit you get for free by expanding through neutrals is good? Because it almost match the neutral inf, and is far stronger than the infantries of many other strategies.

That was a fact ^^

Prispeval Guest, 05.07.2015 at 20:55

however the main focus should be against RA, as this tank-spamming strategy can easily rip through PD infs.

Prispeval clovis1122, 05.07.2015 at 19:52

Prispeval b0nker2, 05.07.2015 at 16:55

and new strategy changes it might not be needed

Prispeval International, 05.07.2015 at 19:10

I would support this, but 90 cost tanks.

You're only comparing PD with RA. Try, for example, to compare it with another strategy.

Prispeval clovis1122, 05.07.2015 at 21:27

PD pros are far better than any other strategy pros, specially since PD can be played all-around. Anyway, do you agree 6 def for 20 cost to a unit you get for free by expanding through neutrals is good? Because it almost match the neutral inf, and is far stronger than the infantries of many other strategies.

That was a fact ^^

You're only comparing PD with RA. Try, for example, to compare it with another strategy.

let's not ignore the fact that ALL strategies get militia when expanding, and many of them use this advantage too. The difference with PD is that they have Perfect Defence, yes statistically 6def for 20 cost seems a lot, but in practice we all know that there are such things called rolls in the world of AW risk.

I think you are judging PD only on Europe+ now, I bet all these "PD pros" cannot outsmart any MoS marine spamming or SM bomber spamming on a World level. Heck even in Europe+ the boosted RA can slice through PD infs, idk what it would do with their militia!

Also I'm not sure why this is coming up NOW when most of the other strategies have been boosted. It seems more like you want to nerf PD for PD sake, not for it's militias. It's militias are usually either left in cities for poor defence or moved to important cities. They don't seem much of a game changer, in my opinion.

Prispeval Guest, 05.07.2015 at 21:42

----

I've bough this back after I saw Croat's thread. It is a very simply proposal and I don't really see why it shouldn't happen. As I said, PD is all-around strategy so it basically works well everywhere, probably not against an strategy on his own niche, of course. Just want to say that my comparison is purely based on the unit's stats and usage.

Your example of PD/MoS is relative. The first time I even though about PD as an strategy was when I was rank 6. I got defeat by PD europe. Somehow, he managed to get 203 units going on, and by the time I get the 203 marines he already have another hundreds of infantries to back himself. His main unit can also form walls and he did had a nest of them so I could do nothing but go straight up. To sum up, we see this with different eyes.

Actually, if rally point was implemented I would not play anything but PD, everywhere, anywhere. 9 def for 50 cost is strong, specially when you have THE MONEY to cover your range weaken.

Returning to militias, we cannot ignore the fact that the militias are more or less useful depending of the strategy. So yes, all the strategies get militias. Where is your point? PD also get militias, but not weak blitz militias, not unmovable IF militias, not nerfed <Insert strategy here> militias, but PD militias. As I stated at the start they can match GW militias.

No support.
Fucking R.A is Op now and u want to nerf militia? Then enjoy when a lot of narbs allyfag and spam tanks vs u....

My god will you people never be happy? You got your Blitz and RA boosts now you want to nerf PD. I wonder will people say next that GW and IF need to be nerfed? It's like the plan is boost all the offensive rushy expansion stealing strats and nerf all the strats that require micromanagement and defensive play. Just let the strategies be. Believe it or not save LB and HW (and arguably RA) the strats are finally well balanced.

Prispeval Acquiesce, 05.07.2015 at 22:05

that require micromanagement and defensive play.

Yup, Capstack and Move big stack of infantries from A to B requires intense micromanagement!

Prispeval Acquiesce, 05.07.2015 at 22:05

(and arguably RA)

Not arguable, sorry. I've already grave screenshots proving that RA is weak against PD, but if it would make you happy then after HTML I can re-make the test...

Next will be nerf Sky menance and nerf ukraine and nerf IF gw , then boost hw

Doesn't this defeat the point of "Perfect Defense"

You know, if people insist on weakening PD, -1 attack to infantry would absolutely cripple Perfect Defense as a viable strategy, would it not?