melting pot turret

Discuss winning strategies to slaughter those enemy stickmen!

Moderators: bert_the_turtle, jelco

User avatar
xander
level5
level5
Posts: 16868
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Highland, CA, USA
Contact:

Postby xander » Tue Aug 25, 2009 3:34 am

The Daemons wrote:Getting back to the original topic, I just wanted to point out that even if the airstrike could go high enough to reach the turret up on the hill, (i think somebody already said this but i'm not sure) the markers would most likely just roll off the side of the hill, and so the airstrike wouldn't even go near the turret.

It depends on how steep the hill is, and where on the map it is. In Melting Pot, it is certainly possible to (a) setup turrets in places where the hills are steep enough that all markers will roll to the bottom and (b) actually make use of those turrets. On other many of the other maps, there are steep places to place turrets, but many of them are so far from where action might occur as to be useless. However, the tactic is useful near the center flag or near enemy bases in the Bleak Mountains, for instance. On the other hand, while there are some steep hills in Confrontation Point at each base, they are not steep enough that a well placed marker can't take out a turret that is guarding the base.

One must also consider where the space invaders will come from. I used to know where they would travel, but this applied only to Darwinia, and it has been a while. My recollection is that they travel in from one of the corners of the map (or maybe the center of one of the sides---I'm sure Jordy.. will chime in to tell me exactly how wrong I am), and travel to an adjacent side or corner, with the exact start- and end-points determined by where the markers are. Thus, by placing markers in slightly different places, it is sometimes possible hit even hard-to-hit objects by either taking advantage of different flight paths, or using the terrain to your advantage.


The Daemons wrote:As for the meteor shower, in my experience, it almost never covers the targeted area evenly, so for me hitting a turret head on with a meteor is kind of a 50/50 coin flip. (sometimes i almost think they're purposely avoiding any enemy units or spawn points in the targeted area) :wink:

Exactly. The total area of a meteor strike is quite large (larger than a nuke strike zone, maybe---about the same size, at any rate), and there are only a few objects that land (seven, in total, if I recall correctly). Even with a more powerful blast wave than just about any other weapon (I think that nukes are about equivalent), the area of effect is so large that it is physically impossible to kill everything in the area of effect. Basically, a meteor shower is like a weakened nuke strike, though it has the advantage of being almost immediate, rather than having to wait 30-60 seconds for the nukes to actually reach their target.

xander
User avatar
elexis
level5
level5
Posts: 1466
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:11 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Postby elexis » Tue Aug 25, 2009 4:12 am

It also has the advantage of coming from almost straight above, as opposes to some of the quite flat trajectories that nukes have.
User avatar
The Daemons
level2
level2
Posts: 183
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 7:33 am
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Contact:

Postby The Daemons » Wed Aug 26, 2009 10:31 pm

And that's exactly what makes the meteor strike one of my favorite power-ups, simply because they come in at an almost perfectly vertical trajectory, and because there's almost no delay. Even though a nuke strike takes far longer to take any sort of effect, it does have one immediate effect (providing that the players are all paying attention to ground zero), which is that it can strike fear in the other player (partly because of the music clip that plays when it's cast) and would likely cause that player to move his/her forces out of the target area (this is great for king of the hill). Then of course you have the highly damaging wave of destruction that ensues after about 30-45 seconds and pretty much vaporizes anything that's left standing at ground zero. :shock:
User avatar
elexis
level5
level5
Posts: 1466
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:11 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Postby elexis » Thu Aug 27, 2009 4:42 am

The only thing that makes Nukes better than Meteors is that they are very thorough in decimating the target area, especially f it's level ground
User avatar
xander
level5
level5
Posts: 16868
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Highland, CA, USA
Contact:

Postby xander » Thu Aug 27, 2009 7:21 am

elexis wrote:The only thing that makes Nukes better than Meteors is that they are very thorough in decimating the target area, especially f it's level ground

Exactly the point I was attempting to make above. Nukes and Meteors are basically the same weapon. Meteors are faster, but do not have the potential to do as much damage. Nukes are slower, and sometimes come in at a disadvantageous angle (though, to be honest, I have never had much trouble with this), but are much more damaging.

xander
User avatar
The Daemons
level2
level2
Posts: 183
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 7:33 am
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Contact:

Postby The Daemons » Fri Aug 28, 2009 12:33 am

xander wrote:
elexis wrote:The only thing that makes Nukes better than Meteors is that they are very thorough in decimating the target area, especially f it's level ground

Exactly the point I was attempting to make above. Nukes and Meteors are basically the same weapon. Meteors are faster, but do not have the potential to do as much damage. Nukes are slower, and sometimes come in at a disadvantageous angle (though, to be honest, I have never had much trouble with this), but are much more damaging.

xander


Yeah, I've never really noticed issues with the trajectory angle either. I assume it's probably programmed to do that.

It is kind of funny to watch the MW's shooting lasers at the nukes just before they hit, though. :P

Return to “Strategy and Tactics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest