1 |
I
think
it
is
unrealistic
to
expect
ship
to
defeat
amph
(
as
amph
is
currently
designed)
in
*all*
situations.
Specifically
as
a
game
becomes
more
and
more
congested,
being
underwater
just
inherently
becomes
a
better
place
to
be.
.
.
and
there
are
pretty
much
no
limits
to
how
congested
a
game
ZK
players
seem
to
be
willing
to
play.
Having
watched
a
handful
of
less-congested
teamgame
replays
it
does
not
seem
like
amph
dominates
the
meta
in
that
context.
|
1 |
I
think
it
is
unrealistic
to
expect
ship
to
defeat
amph
(
as
amph
is
currently
designed)
in
*all*
situations.
Specifically
as
a
game
becomes
more
and
more
congested,
being
underwater
just
inherently
becomes
a
better
place
to
be.
.
.
and
there
are
pretty
much
no
limits
to
how
congested
a
game
ZK
players
seem
to
be
willing
to
play.
Having
watched
a
handful
of
less-congested
teamgame
replays
it
does
not
seem
like
amph
dominates
the
meta
in
that
context.
Having
room
to
retreat
a
little
from
a
lobbed
ball
of
Scallops
without
losing
anything
you
can't
afford
to
lose
helps
a
lot.
|
2 |
\n
|
2 |
\n
|
3 |
Also remember that as a ship player, (a) switching for Claymore is a valid strategy and (b) if the amph player does not have surface support Urchin spam can pose a problem for them.
|
3 |
Also remember that as a ship player, (a) switching for Claymore is a valid strategy and (b) if the amph player does not have surface support Urchin spam can pose a problem for them.
|
4 |
\n
|
4 |
\n
|
5 |
That being said, perhaps Scallop should just not exist as it is. It has on-and-off been a problem for years, no matter how it's nerfed or what is added to the game to counter it.
|
5 |
That being said, perhaps Scallop should just not exist as it is. It has on-and-off been a problem for years, no matter how it's nerfed or what is added to the game to counter it.
|