AW/FE by Web

AWBW/FEBW Forum
It is currently Sat Nov 01, 2014 2:20 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Official AWBW CO Tier List

This is where you can talk Advance Wars or Fire Emblem strategy

Moderator: Forum Mods

Official AWBW CO Tier List

Postby Hellraider » Tue Jul 26, 2011 11:50 am

Official AWBW CO Tier List

This Tier List will, or at least should, serve as template for all future events on AWBW.

Introduction


CO Tier List


Explanation
Last edited by Hellraider on Fri Jun 22, 2012 4:37 pm, edited 5 times in total.
User avatar
Hellraider
Rocket
Rocket
 
Posts: 1635
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 6:39 am

Re: Official AWBW CO Tier List

Postby headphone » Tue Jul 26, 2011 3:55 pm

WOW, this is really great! It has fair description of each CO and why they are tiered the way they are.
Its very informative for players like me.
Good Job and thanks!
Mr Clean wrote:im curious as to why anybody would know what a gynacologist does off the top of their head
User avatar
headphone
Map Committee
Map Committee
 
Posts: 634
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 8:12 pm
Location: Here?

Re: Official AWBW CO Tier List

Postby Walker » Thu Jul 28, 2011 11:30 am

Yeah, this is a really nice-looking tier list. What's especially nice is how it deals with the map dependency issue that always plays a huge role in how good a CO is. So for example Sami might indeed be top tier on a standard map, but as the map gets bigger and bigger, she turns more into a high tier CO. The only thing missing is specific guidelines for just how much these map features affect each CO, but that's a much bigger project of course.

My only real problem with the tier list itself is Jake being in low tier. I understand that his d2d ability is relatively useless (much as Koal's is). But if he has a tower, it does allow him to be able to 2HKO a tank on a city. And that is incredibly dangerous, so his d2d is actually pretty decent in that situation. Also, his d2d is at the very least better than mid-tier COs like Andy and Olaf.

As far as powers, Jake's COP is semi-useful since the threat of extra artillery range can be handy. It's better than (once again) either Andy or Olaf's COP, and Rachel too for that matter. And his SCOP is also incredibly useful, as he gets the +1 arty range in addition to +2 movement with all vehicles. This means his SCOP is a huge threat, and can also reduce walls to scrap. This is more in keeping with mid-tier COs, rather than low-tier COs, I think.
Image
User avatar
Walker
Map Committee
Map Committee
 
Posts: 2408
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:02 am
Location: US

Re: Official AWBW CO Tier List

Postby headphone » Thu Jul 28, 2011 1:26 pm

also, a little tip about the spoilers:
Code: Select all
[spoiler="Title of the spoiler"]Makes it look more streamlined[/spoiler]


Title of the spoiler
Mr Clean wrote:im curious as to why anybody would know what a gynacologist does off the top of their head
User avatar
headphone
Map Committee
Map Committee
 
Posts: 634
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 8:12 pm
Location: Here?

Re: Official AWBW CO Tier List

Postby ichbinsehselber » Tue Aug 02, 2011 5:31 pm

A great tier compilation! It helps a lot to see how you assess the relative power of a CO.

I do not agree with every tier choice but I am unsure if this is due to personal preference or my noobness or something else.

Since you asked in a different thread here is my personal view of what I would change:
Drake and Jake should move up a tier. So that is not very much of a change. I personally like Olaf and Drake a lot so I would even consider putting them in the high tier. But that relies a lot on them being able to use their SCOP to the full advantage.

Anyway, it is not important that everyone agrees to all tier choices.
It is nice to have this compilation especially since it is applied to the new league.
ichbinsehselber
Tank
Tank
 
Posts: 385
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 7:28 pm

Re: Official AWBW CO Tier List

Postby Walker » Wed Aug 03, 2011 3:10 am

Olaf and Drake are placed where they are, rather than higher up on the tier list (near Hawke for instance) because they are worse at what they do than those other COs. Assuming clear weather and a non-naval map, both Olaf and Drake have no d2d. This automatically hurts them a lot in comparison to high tier COs like Hawke, Kindle, Lash, and Sasha. Similarly, their CO powers are a step below these COs too. While Drake and Olaf's SCOPs are both pretty damaging, they cost 7 stars. So between the d2d disadvantage and the length of time it takes for them to get to SCOP, chances are that Drake and Olaf are fighting a losing battle against high tier COs.

This is why mid tier is a better fit. Andy and Rachel also have no d2d (Rachel's extra 1 hp of repairs is pretty negligible), while Max and Grimm have d2d penalties in addition to advantages. Like Olaf and Drake, Andy and Rachel have much better SCOPs than COPs. This means that in an evenly played match, Olaf or Drake will not be at a disadvantage before they get to SCOP. So Olaf and Drake are a better matchup with these COs, whereas they are at a disadvantage against high tier COs. But then why is Drake low tier instead of mid tier, you ask?

On maps that do not have airports, Drake and Olaf are basically the same. But on maps with airports, Olaf is a better choice than Drake since Drake is useless with copters. On maps with heavy naval use, Drake is better than Olaf for obvious reasons. Most maps are no naval and have airports though, meaning that they play to Drake's weaknesses. Rain is also a lot less useful than snow, and cutting a unit's fuel is not very useful in general either. So if you add it all up, that is enough for Drake to land a tier below Olaf in general.
Image
User avatar
Walker
Map Committee
Map Committee
 
Posts: 2408
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:02 am
Location: US

Re: Official AWBW CO Tier List

Postby Hellraider » Tue Aug 09, 2011 3:55 pm

The list is still open to change, of course, and I'm very willing to look at arguments/games that prove that this tierlist has flaws. What I'd personally see as at least test-relevant would be the following things:

- Sami into high tier

Sami being one of the best non-broken COs is kind of a relict from old times. First was mech play, later inf/arty play as well as maps with a lot of contested properties or even bases. Nowadays people are a lot more careful with their infantry with a lot less allout inf on inf battles. Furthermore, -10/0 on all direct is a very big handicap, seeing that tanks are the backbone of any army. To emphasize the huge problems she has in top tier:
Von Bolt reverses tank on tank first strike on roads. Sami can't reliably 2HKO VB tanks on roads. Even Sami with 1T has a miniscule chance of failing the 2HKO against Javier1T/VB on roads.
Unless I see some games where Sami does well against these COs, she will probably be rearranged into high tier soon.

- Sasha into top tier

Sasha used to be used together with VB/Javier1T actually, and it is hard to say why her popularity fell after that even though she never suffered from any crushing defeats. She suffers less from having less firepower/defence than other COs because the increased income generally allows her to have the slightly vehicle advantage. The problem she has is that for instance +10/+10 is better once enough units have entered the field so that the additional vehicles she has don't actually do anything. Still, she can tech up fast and it is surely worth a try.

- Kindle into mid tier

And the fall from grace continues. Her d2d is (apart from Eagle) the pretty much worst out of current high tier because attacking from properties is already great by itself. Her SCOP is not particularly good for it's price (as far as we know), so she relies on Urban Blight to win her games.

- Olaf into high tier

Long story short, his SCOP is awesome. And if Eagle can get into high tier by having an I-win-button, there is no reason why Olaf shouldn't be either. Current maps favour a lot of plains/forests, and with reinforcements coming a turn later and 8HP tanks barely covering anything, Winter Fury is really strong. Unless you are up against Hawke.

- Drake into mid tier

Similar reasoning as above, but I think 80/100 copters are too shitty. I mean, they are really bad.

- Jake into mid tier

Yea, maybe. Maybe not, because his powers never actually seem to do anything.
User avatar
Hellraider
Rocket
Rocket
 
Posts: 1635
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 6:39 am

Re: Official AWBW CO Tier List

Postby Walker » Tue Aug 09, 2011 5:52 pm

Olaf into high tier


One thing I have to say in favor of this, is that although Olaf's SCOP is 7 stars, he can usually get it off first against COs with 6 stars. Olaf's SCOP is actually useful at the end of his turn because of the snow, and because mass damage isn't wasted if he doesn't attack. That means that Olaf can launch a full assault, SCOP at the end of his turn, and be extremely effective. So it's really like his SCOP is 6 stars in my opinion.

That being said, his SCOP still isn't quite the I-Win-Button that Eagle's is, and his lack of d2d would still be troublesome against those other high tier COs. For instance, can he keep up with Lash and Hawke d2d long enough for his SCOP to make a big difference? Also, all of the high tier COs actually kind of hard counter him. Lash SCOP makes her unaffected by snow, Hawke SCOP heals the mass damage, Sasha can prevent Olaf from using it for a long time, and Eagle's SCOP is even better. Kindle is the only current high tier CO that I'd say Olaf has decent chances at taking on.
Image
User avatar
Walker
Map Committee
Map Committee
 
Posts: 2408
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:02 am
Location: US

Re: Official AWBW CO Tier List

Postby Kamuscha » Tue Aug 09, 2011 7:49 pm

I can see the reasoning behind making Olaf one of the higher tiers. Given the massive numbers of maps that involve plains, forests and mountains, I think it is perfectly reasonable to make him a tier or two higher than Drake. Even though Drake gets bonuses in movement and sea prominence, engaging in sea battles is all but a rare situation on AWBW, making him a much more situational CO than Olaf. Olaf is much more playable given his bland d2d with a debilitating SCOP. I am still not sure about placing him with the likes of Lash, Hawke, Rachel, etc, though he has the potential to defeat them in the hands of a smart player. When used correctly, Olaf is essentially pseudo-eagle for 7 stars. That in itself is nothing to scoff at.

Jake too, is a situational CO, relying on plains to have some sort of an advantage. He can make do with a turn of +1 indirect range, but that is overshadowed by the prevalence of direct battles and open maps. He'd be better off going with Drake or 1 tier above him, given his SCOP abilities.
Image

I still love you! Tonight, your true love will realize they truly miss you. You will get a shock of a lifetime tomorrow. If you break the chain, you will be cursed with relationship problems for the next 2 years. Karma's a bitch, I know. If there is someone you love, and can't get them out of your mind, repost this paragraph as "I still Love you"
User avatar
Kamuscha
CO
CO
 
Posts: 3573
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 10:41 pm

Re: Official AWBW CO Tier List

Postby ichbinsehselber » Wed Aug 10, 2011 5:25 pm

I agree with Hellraider's last post.

It is not sure that Hawke can counter Olaf's SCOP with his own SCOP in terms of healing. 1.) After Dealing the mass damage Olaf can attack and cash in the damage by attacking or even destroying units. 2.) Some Hawke units will have been freshly built and will just pay the repair cost from Olaf's damage.
And if Hawke (can) SCOP immediately after Olaf, he must SCOP in snow.
Hawke might still be slightly better due to his D2D. But probably not a tier.

Also Eagle might likely have to SCOP with 8hp units and in snow against Olaf. Is his SCOP button still a win button?

It is ridiculous to put Drake in the same tier as Javier0T. Drake's rain is very useful. The loss of gas is useful against stealths against which Drake would otherwise suck.
80 Attack for copters is not so problematic since the copters are still cost effective in attacking many units. Also they are still useful in blocking. And the rain slows down the enemy-AAs
ichbinsehselber
Tank
Tank
 
Posts: 385
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 7:28 pm

Re: Official AWBW CO Tier List

Postby Walker » Wed Aug 10, 2011 6:01 pm

The only advantages Olaf has over Hawke are that his SCOP is faster, and that the snow is pretty annoying. But Hawke's SCOP does to Olaf what Olaf's SCOP does to other COs, minus the snow, and he has the 10% d2d attack boost on top of that.

I think Hawke's healing does completely undo the mass damage that Olaf does. It's true that Olaf can attack and do damage to Hawke's units, etc. But Hawke has stronger d2d attack anyways, meaning that it is harder for Olaf to really be in a prime attacking situation. Then, Hawke is able to heal all of the damage that Olaf does to his units that weren't attacked, in addition to damaging all of Olaf's units. That's a 4hp swing, which is devastating. Then Hawke can attack with his own fresh units against Olaf's now weakened units, with the advantage of a boosted attack.

In our recently completed Hawke vs. Olaf game, I was in a poor enough position just due to d2d advantages that I had to use Olaf's COP just to stay in the game (also you outplayed me a bit :) ). I don't think I had a reasonable chance of even holding on until Olaf's SCOP, which I think would happen relatively frequently in a Hawke/Olaf match.

Eagle vs. Olaf would be very interesting. I think Olaf might have the upperhand on that one.

Also, technically Javier 0T is a tier below Drake. Hellraider mentions that Tier 4 used to be a Tier 4 (Low Tier) and Tier 5 (Worthless Tier). Tier 5 was Javier 0T, Sonja, and Jess. But since no one is ever going to make a ban list where only those 3 COs are allowed (I hope), Hellraider just included them in Tier 4.

I think Drake is definitely a tier below Olaf, simply because snow >> rain and because building copters with Drake is not well-adivsed.
Image
User avatar
Walker
Map Committee
Map Committee
 
Posts: 2408
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:02 am
Location: US

Re: Official AWBW CO Tier List

Postby blanci1 » Sat Aug 13, 2011 8:48 am

Im a bit surprised that an "official" list has been drawn up rather suddenly and without much debate. But then again, i guess if a debate was started it would probably never finish. :)
If it wants to be an officially good reference it could do with a few links to previous debate (including the previous biggy started by hellraider) and others and to the topic which collects the CO statistics from actual league games.. the only analysis done which is free of human opinion.

Firstly, Of course, any tiering is going to be very map dependant and only some kind of average effect can be achieved. However the concept of an average map is going to be highly dependant on the group of maps that we use. And if you included one or two extra sea maps (for example), the results could swing considerably... or if we included more or less mixed-up-bases maps again the average could swing quite a bit one way or another. Also the inclusion of what proportion of fog-games is another difficulty. And what proportion of 1 tower maps ..etc, etc.

Too much emphasis on a pre-ordained tier list for tourneys might have some unforseen consequences.. people might start avoiding certain kinds of maps, and map makers might be given the inquisition for making maps which violate the official CO tiering!

Furthermore a CO tiering will depend somewhat on player skill level too. For example newbs dont know how to use certain COs properly and so for a newb league the tiering will be effectively different from top players or intermediate level players.

Also any tier list would have to be considerably altered for any number of proposed tournaments which may use non-typical group of maps (for example red11s tourney says its on nontypical maps).. and also say for new kinds of games on high fund maps...etc etc.

The main problem may simply be that the "typical map" is simply evolving in time as new kinds of maps and gamefeatures are explored. As with the recent introduction of numerous mixed base maps the previous ideas of tiering should now be out of date.

I have read a lot of previous arguments in many forum topics about tiering and i dont think the community is anywhere near agreeing a definitive tiering even on standard maps. I am constantly changing/reversing my own opinions of CO strength all the time. It is a fascinating topic nontheless.


EDIT -- the new global league does need a tier list as it chooses COs from tiers. So for that league this list is required immediately .. and any debate must thus be ongoing.
Last edited by blanci1 on Wed Sep 28, 2011 10:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
blanci1
Artillery
Artillery
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 6:30 am
Location: spain

Re: Official AWBW CO Tier List

Postby Heartless » Sat Aug 13, 2011 1:50 pm

blanci1 wrote:Im a bit surprised that an "official" list has been drawn up rather suddenly and without much debate.


This tier list doesn't bring many new things to the table compared to the previous ones really. It's pretty much "take old tier list take into account new meta". Hellraider is easily one of the best guys you could ask for something like that, and since the list is open for input, you can always just point out something else and have it taken into account. Tier lists are never definitive (unless the metagame dies)

Firstly, Of course, any tiering is going to be very map dependant and only some kind of average effect can be achieved. However the concept of an average map is going to be highly dependant on the group of maps that we use. And if you included one or two extra sea maps (for example), the results could swing considerably... or if we included more or less mixed-up-bases maps again the average could swing quite a bit one way or another. Also the inclusion of what proportion of fog-games is another difficulty. And what proportion of 1 tower maps ..etc, etc.

Too much emphasis on a pre-ordained tier list for tourneys might have some unforseen consequences.. people might start avoiding certain kinds of maps, and map makers might be given the inquisition for making maps which violate the official CO tiering!


I'm pretty sure that fear is pulled out of your ass, considering there are plans to expand the metagame (high funds maps, gimmick maps) that could completely change some co matchups.

Furthermore a CO tiering will depend somewhat on player skill level too. For example newbs dont know how to use certain COs properly and so for a newb league the tiering will be effectively different from top players or intermediate level players.


this is completely wrong. Skill level is not taken into account when making a tier list. A tier list compares the advantages and disadvantages of each COs while taking into account results from high level games to get some basis in practice. A tier list is completely seperate from skill levels and it would be a mistake to assume the two are related.

Also any tier list would have to be considerably altered for any number of proposed tournaments which may use non-typical group of maps (for example red11s tourney says its on nontypical maps).. and also say for new kinds of games on high fund maps...etc etc.


This is not a problem. If the metagame evolves, the list will evolve with it.

The main problem may simply be that the "typical map" is simply evolving in time as new kinds of maps and gamefeatures are explored. As with the recent introduction of numerous mixed base maps the previous ideas of tiering should now be out of date.


AW is not a balanced game, there will always be a tier list.

I have read a lot of previous arguments in many forum topics about tiering and i dont think the community is anywhere near agreeing a definitive tiering even on standard maps. I am constantly changing/reversing my own opinions of CO strength all the time. It is a fascinating topic nontheless.


Again, a tier list isn't definitive. This list is the result of compiling previous data and the new metagame.

I suggest you learn what a tier list is before making arguments that would get laughed out of many debates.
User avatar
Heartless
Md. Tank
Md. Tank
 
Posts: 1083
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:32 pm

Re: Official AWBW CO Tier List

Postby blanci1 » Sat Aug 13, 2011 3:25 pm

@heartless. Ok i ll just address your first comment here.

It's pretty much "take old tier list take into account new meta". Hellraider is easily one of the best guys you could ask for something like that, and since the list is open for input, you can always just point out something else and have it taken into account. Tier lists are never definitive (unless the metagame dies)


"This tier list doesn't bring many new things to the table compared to the previous ones really."
Well, it is different in that it is trying to be definitive by calling it "official", and there never was any definitive consensus, and I am sure that the list hellraider proposes has many highly debatable points. I dont mind having a tier list for the global champions league, because as with other tournaments it is handy to have a tier list. But suddenly to pretend it has all been worked out and use the name "official" and suggest it should be generally used in all tourneys is something very different and i am quite sure, incorrect.

"Hellraider is easily one of the best guys you could ask for something like that"
Everyone already knows hellraiders opinion on tiering will be one of the best ! I dont understand what is your counterargument. I was clearly saying that it would have been good to have some open debate in the forum as there are also other good players who will have different ideas.

"and since the list is open for input"
again im not questioning whether the list could be changed. Hellraider did explain that. What im doing is questioning the validity of ANY kind of attempt at an official list. I think its clear from all debate over the forums that there is no decent consensus as yet.
Also , recalling recent comments by various people about how strange the fashionable mixed base maps are, i am quite sure that hellraider would not say that his list would be valid for such new maps. Has hellraider even played any games on these new maps ? These mixed base maps have become very popular recently and cannot be simply ignored.

Later on im really surprised by these comments of heartless

"I'm pretty sure that fear is pulled out of your ass"
i think we should play a game or you should talk to some of the top players that i have beaten recently and i think they might explain that i play completely without fear. Even with an inferior CO i really like to play to win. To learn more. That is why i dont take draws with bad CO matchups as I always think I can win regardless. At least with fog it is often possible.

Also I am very interested to truly learn about the possibilities of attack in AW which i am quite sure are totally underestimated in the present age. The game of chess took centuries and theory underwent many revolutions and it is almost certain that present day Advance Wars gameplay has barely scratched the surface as regards strategical and tactical thinking. This is not belittling present day top players who are , well doing great things, like say Captain Evans or Lucena did in past times. But Evans would be beaten easily by any present day lesser master with much deeper modern understanding. And Advance Wars is much much more complex a game than chess, and so we can be sure there is a long, long way to go in the evolution of AW gameplay theory.
I think everyone needs to be aware that AW has much uncertainty in theory and I think an "official" list hides the mystery that continues in AW.

And later more surprise
" I suggest you learn what a tier list is before making arguments that would get laughed out of many debates. "
Ha ! How can you seriously think i dont understand a tier list? i think you are merely attempting to insult me.
And I feel that you are challenging me ! So to show you how well i understand tiering i will allow you to choose a map ... a standard map .. and then i will give you one of the official tier 1 COs and i will have one of the 2 nd tier COs. And im not doing that to give you a chance. I ll be doing it to show a 2nd tier is better than a 1st tier on a standard map. Because that is what the debate is about.
blanci1
Artillery
Artillery
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 6:30 am
Location: spain

Re: Official AWBW CO Tier List

Postby Hellraider » Sat Aug 13, 2011 4:12 pm

@heartless. Ok i ll just address your first comment here.

It's pretty much "take old tier list take into account new meta". Hellraider is easily one of the best guys you could ask for something like that, and since the list is open for input, you can always just point out something else and have it taken into account. Tier lists are never definitive (unless the metagame dies)


"This tier list doesn't bring many new things to the table compared to the previous ones really."
Well, it is different in that it is trying to be definitive by calling it "official", and there never was any definitive consensus, and I am sure that the list hellraider proposes has many highly debatable points. I dont mind having a tier list for the global champions league, because as with other tournaments it is handy to have a tier list. But suddenly to pretend it has all been worked out and use the name "official" and suggest it should be generally used in all tourneys is something very different and i am quite sure, incorrect.


The label official is mainly there because this list was used for the game settings in the league, of course with proper adjustments depending on the map. It is also there so that people who want to create tournaments have a list to fall back on and don't use bad bans. Although I doubt that there will be too many tournaments that I'm at least not partly involved in.
I already mentioned that I'm considering some changes, but I doubt that there are any "highly debatable points".

"Hellraider is easily one of the best guys you could ask for something like that"
Everyone already knows hellraiders opinion on tiering will be one of the best ! I dont understand what is your counterargument. I was clearly saying that it would have been good to have some open debate in the forum as there are also other good players who will have different ideas.


People are entitled to their opinions and have every possibility to voice any concerns, but unless people actually post about any problems they have with the list I can only assume that the tier list is generally accepted.

"and since the list is open for input"
again im not questioning whether the list could be changed. Hellraider did explain that. What im doing is questioning the validity of ANY kind of attempt at an official list. I think its clear from all debate over the forums that there is no decent consensus as yet.
Also , recalling recent comments by various people about how strange the fashionable mixed base maps are, i am quite sure that hellraider would not say that his list would be valid for such new maps. Has hellraider even played any games on these new maps ? These mixed base maps have become very popular recently and cannot be simply ignored.


The moment AWBW stops using tier lists is the moment competitive AW dies. Without an overall and official consensus on some kind of tier list, tournament and league bans become confusing and contradicting. An official list avoids unnecessary discussion in other threads as well as traces changes in CO strength perception, meaning that creators of tournaments can adjust earlier. Furthermore, these "mixed maps" are neither new (see Caustic Finale) nor do they change the tierlist by a whole lot. Apart from Eagle always falling into tier 3, the above tier list with adjustment to map details is generally applicable to these types of maps.

"I'm pretty sure that fear is pulled out of your ass"
i think we should play a game or you should talk to some of the top players that i have beaten recently and i think they might explain that i play completely without fear. Even with an inferior CO i really like to play to win. To learn more. That is why i dont take draws with bad CO matchups as I always think I can win regardless. At least with fog it is often possible.


That is ... not what he was talking about. He means the fear of "unforseen consequences" you mentioned, which, to quote Heartless, are indeed pulled out of your ass. In case you haven't realized, I tried to account for various map features in the tier list, there is no reason why people would suddenly avoid making some sorts of maps.

Also I am very interested to truly learn about the possibilities of attack in AW which i am quite sure are totally underestimated in the present age. The game of chess took centuries and theory underwent many revolutions and it is almost certain that present day Advance Wars gameplay has barely scratched the surface as regards strategical and tactical thinking. This is not belittling present day top players who are , well doing great things, like say Captain Evans or Lucena did in past times. But Evans would be beaten easily by any present day lesser master with much deeper modern understanding. And Advance Wars is much much more complex a game than chess, and so we can be sure there is a long, long way to go in the evolution of AW gameplay theory.
I think everyone needs to be aware that AW has much uncertainty in theory and I think an "official" list hides the mystery that continues in AW.


While AW has no significant backing of theory yet, I find it quite insulting of you to say that current top players barely scratch the surface of strategical and tactical thinking. That being said, that has absolutely nothing to do with an official tier list, which does not hinder gameplay evolution in any form. If anything, it adds more theory to the game by stating which CO attributes are generally more useful on which kind of games/maps.
User avatar
Hellraider
Rocket
Rocket
 
Posts: 1635
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 6:39 am

Next

Return to Strategy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group