Allow Stealths planes to carry marines-for MOS

MOS as such is good strategy but in low money country games its not a right fit(meaning all the OP units cost 120 and more ). Most people prefer GW to MOS in 10k EU+ games for this reason. If you allow to Stealth planes to carry Marines this might boost MOS a bit and make more players to take it.

Also realistically thinking if subs can carry 3 marines (after the upgrades) shouldn't Stealth planes be able to carry atleast 1 marine. In real world can stealth planes deliver marines ? I think so. So realistically this makes sense.

Will it make MOS to OP ? That's debatable. I personally don't think it would make any major difference in 3 v 3 or 10k EU games.
Not entirely sure about the 50 k world games. As such I don't think MOS is one of most played strategies in the game(this is my assumption don't think it is far off, people are welcome to post actually stats here). Most people usually prefer SM or DS and this change can bring more people back to try MOS.

Also I am fine with adding this a upgrade instead of a add on the strategy.

Not many players know this but I grew as a player with MoS. Whilst buffing MoS itself can be debatable, I don't think this is the right one.
Stealths alone have huge fire power AND range, allowing them to roam about with marines loaded onto them makes them extremely dangerous.
I do admit that I do like the sound of it, but I still think it would be too powerful.

Suport if you make it a upgrade . i have more than 200k of spare of sp

I've never heard of a stealth bomber that carries marines. Nor a stealth fighter. You're talking about stealth ships and stealth helis.

Helicopters can carry marines but they are expensive and quite useless because marines will attack first and then helicopters.So it isn't good. Also with MOS you don't need to buy marines,submarines and stealth airplanes only.Buy Infantry they have same attack nothing is changed.

MoS in a 3v3 10k EU++? No way! MoS is for WGs and Eurasia.Gtfo, please!

This would make MoS waaay too OP, only not so much in normal eu 3v3 but that is not the only thing that matters.

Napisano przez Leaf, 03.07.2014 at 07:11

Not many players know this but I grew as a player with MoS. Whilst buffing MoS itself can be debatable, I don't think this is the right one.
Stealths alone have huge fire power AND range, allowing them to roam about with marines loaded onto them makes them extremely dangerous.
I do admit that I do like the sound of it, but I still think it would be too powerful.

Disclaimer : In world games I am SM player.

Still can't quite agree. SM stealths have the same attack and range as MOS stealths while costing only 30 more. Most people don't realize it is possible do the very similar sneak up attack on enemies with SM as it is with MOS. But SM has lot of advantages in many other areas. I don't want to convert this post into a SM vs MOS but I hardly think this would make it very OP as you believe.

Napisano przez minusSeven, 03.07.2014 at 08:27

Disclaimer : In world games I am SM player.
Still can't quite agree. SM stealths have the same attack and range as MOS stealths while costing only 30 more. Most people don't realize it is possible do the very similar sneak up attack on enemies with SM as it is with MOS. But SM has lot of advantages in many other areas. I don't want to convert this post into a SM vs MOS but I hardly think this would make it very OP as you believe.

Stealth bombers (SM/MoS): Same attack but less crit. and less view range... and 30 bucks per unit can make a huge difference.
The question is: how would transport capability of stealth bombers (does it make sense to transport land units by BOMBERS?) affect the game, considering that it increases Marines transport capability from range 12 (subs) to range 17 (stealth bombers)?

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 03.07.2014 at 08:38

Napisano przez minusSeven, 03.07.2014 at 08:27

Disclaimer : In world games I am SM player.
Still can't quite agree. SM stealths have the same attack and range as MOS stealths while costing only 30 more. Most people don't realize it is possible do the very similar sneak up attack on enemies with SM as it is with MOS. But SM has lot of advantages in many other areas. I don't want to convert this post into a SM vs MOS but I hardly think this would make it very OP as you believe.

Stealth bombers (SM/MoS): Same attack but less crit. and less view range... and 30 bucks per unit can make a huge difference.
The question is: how would transport capability of stealth bombers (does it make sense to transport land units by BOMBERS?) affect the game, considering that it increases Marines transport capability from range 12 (subs) to range 17 (stealth bombers)?

Umm it would be just like with DS. And it would allow stealth bombers to sneak up and get other nations. With DS is just the same except the range is much lower with Helis but that short range is compensated by attack power on infs. The only OP thing is it would allow strong sneak up attacks on unwalled caps you could send 4 stealth bombers and 4 marines to take a country with only 8 units having 68 attack costing 1280 money. With almost the same amount of money it would be possible to attack 10 bombers with sm and it would have 80 attack. So it is MOS is not as monetarily cost effective as you would think.

Napisano przez minusSeven, 03.07.2014 at 08:57

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 03.07.2014 at 08:38

Napisano przez minusSeven, 03.07.2014 at 08:27

Disclaimer : In world games I am SM player.
Still can't quite agree. SM stealths have the same attack and range as MOS stealths while costing only 30 more. Most people don't realize it is possible do the very similar sneak up attack on enemies with SM as it is with MOS. But SM has lot of advantages in many other areas. I don't want to convert this post into a SM vs MOS but I hardly think this would make it very OP as you believe.

Stealth bombers (SM/MoS): Same attack but less crit. and less view range... and 30 bucks per unit can make a huge difference.
The question is: how would transport capability of stealth bombers (does it make sense to transport land units by BOMBERS?) affect the game, considering that it increases Marines transport capability from range 12 (subs) to range 17 (stealth bombers)?

Umm it would be just like with DS. And it would allow stealth bombers to sneak up and get other nations. With DS is just the same except the range is much lower with Helis but that short range is compensated by attack power on infs. The only OP thing is it would allow strong sneak up attacks on unwalled caps you could send 4 stealth bombers and 4 marines to take a country with only 8 units having 68 attack costing 1280 money. With almost the same amount of money it would be possible to attack 10 bombers with sm and it would have 80 attack. So it is MOS is not as monetarily cost effective as you would think.

The difference is stealth or not stealth and sending in bombers or bombers+units capable of taking cities.
In DS helicopters are not stealth, thus not comparable with scenario of stealth bombers+ marines. Sending in visible bombers with SM cannot be compared to sending in stealth bombers with MoS... plus, if you allow to send in city-taking capable units together with the stealth bombers, then it would really make THE difference.
Again, I would love to see marines joining stealth bombers, but it would change a lot the strategy and, after all, it does not make sense to have BOMBERS carrying troops.

MoS is fine as is. Sure it isn't used in EU+ games, but it is very strong in world games (played MoS world games all the way up to rank 8, so speaking from experience). Having stealth bombers able to carry marines would be overpowered. For example, say I am Europe and my next goal is to invade America. I can reach Washington in five turns from Madrid with stealth bombers, compared to seven turns with subs from bilbao. Also, subs can only attack ports compared to bombers which can attack any city. This would make MoS an overpowered strategy in larger maps.

Napisano przez minusSeven, 03.07.2014 at 08:27

Napisano przez Leaf, 03.07.2014 at 07:11

Not many players know this but I grew as a player with MoS. Whilst buffing MoS itself can be debatable, I don't think this is the right one.
Stealths alone have huge fire power AND range, allowing them to roam about with marines loaded onto them makes them extremely dangerous.
I do admit that I do like the sound of it, but I still think it would be too powerful.

Disclaimer : In world games I am SM player.

Still can't quite agree. SM stealths have the same attack and range as MOS stealths while costing only 30 more. Most people don't realize it is possible do the very similar sneak up attack on enemies with SM as it is with MOS. But SM has lot of advantages in many other areas. I don't want to convert this post into a SM vs MOS but I hardly think this would make it very OP as you believe.

You're forgetting the cost of air transport needed for SM players to drag along their ground units to actually take the city.

I think there's already been enough evidence from Columna Durruti and theriddler123 to oppose this.
Believe me, it's a nice idea, but a little too strong to make the cut. Do you have any other ideas regarding MoS? Or some sort of nerf in exchange for the proposed feature?

No, MoS is fine. Its usable in 3v3 if you know how to. This would make it far too strong.

Support this suggestion. Stealths already cost 200 for only 9 attack power, plus is mostly used by rank -6. There is a huge difference between spam 200 marines or 110 stealt, both at the cost of 22,000.

Give them 1-2 capacity would make them like DS,more usable and also wort more the 200 bucks.

Napisano przez The Tactician, 03.07.2014 at 10:12

No, MoS is fine. Its usable in 3v3 if you know how to. This would make it far too strong.

Yeah MOS ukraine. YOLO YOLO YOLO YOLO YOLO ►Capped turn 3.

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 03.07.2014 at 09:18

The difference is stealth or not stealth and sending in bombers or bombers+units capable of taking cities.
In DS helicopters are not stealth, thus not comparable with scenario of stealth bombers+ marines. Sending in visible bombers with SM cannot be compared to sending in stealth bombers with MoS... plus, if you allow to send in city-taking capable units together with the stealth bombers, then it would really make THE difference.
Again, I would love to see marines joining stealth bombers, but it would change a lot the strategy and, after all, it does not make sense to have BOMBERS carrying troops.

The problem is, THE COST. Is the same if you use stealths or submarines. But stealths cost 200 for 9 attack.... It aint used by any rank 8+ unless extremery chases, and if they are used I believe is less that 2% of his troop are stealths. Marine spam a lot more efficient... This type of suggestion is only for make them a bit more usable... Think about 1 submarine with 4 marines vs 4 stealt carrying 4 marines. Big cost difference.

Thinking about default map, the usage of Stealt and Submarines is the same, because you only need to be efficient for take coastal with submarines. Think about +3 capacity - 40 cost vs +5 range.

Napisano przez TheRiddler, 03.07.2014 at 09:36

MoS is fine as is. Sure it isn't used in EU+ games, but it is very strong in world games (played MoS world games all the way up to rank 8, so speaking from experience). Having stealth bombers able to carry marines would be overpowered. For example, say I am Europe and my next goal is to invade America. I can reach Washington in five turns from Madrid with stealth bombers, compared to seven turns with subs from bilbao. Also, subs can only attack ports compared to bombers which can attack any city. This would make MoS an overpowered strategy in larger maps.

LOL even full europe( near 9k economy) doesnt give you enough for make more that 50 stealths a turn. Again, The cost of stealths is very high and if you are a well experienced MOS then you should regonize the low usage of stealths. Marine spam more efficient.

The only way this type of suggestion would be OP, would be in a game like RP or infinite income XD XD XD

Napisano przez clovis1122, 03.07.2014 at 11:13

Support this suggestion. Stealths already cost 200 for only 9 attack power, plus is mostly used by rank -6. There is a huge difference between spam 200 marines or 110 stealt, both at the cost of 22,000.
Give them 1-2 capacity would make them like DS,more usable and also wort more the 200 bucks.

See any difference?

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 03.07.2014 at 11:44

Napisano przez clovis1122, 03.07.2014 at 11:13

Support this suggestion. Stealths already cost 200 for only 9 attack power, plus is mostly used by rank -6. There is a huge difference between spam 200 marines or 110 stealt, both at the cost of 22,000.
Give them 1-2 capacity would make them like DS,more usable and also wort more the 200 bucks.

See any difference?

The problem is the cost bro....

Napisano przez clovis1122, 03.07.2014 at 12:14

The problem is the cost bro....

MoS downside is the cost.

MoS would be god

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 03.07.2014 at 12:16

Napisano przez clovis1122, 03.07.2014 at 12:14

The problem is the cost bro....

MoS downside is the cost.

If I had the money I would spam Stealths as both MOS and SM, Destroyers as NC or None, Tanks, air trans, and a bunch of suff.

BUT stealths already cost 200 with MOS. They are only used by low ranks. The range doesnt compensate their cost. Helis have 1 capacity with DS... why no give stealths +1 capacity with MOS?

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 03.07.2014 at 14:20

This is lamest excuse of them all. Can't understand how it can't be possible. I can understand bombers can't carry marines or any other units but stealth would be capable of carrying specialized marines. If not same excuse would be given to subs. What is so wrong with stealth planes going undetected in enemy country and dropping of 1 specialized marine. You can't even say nothing like that already exists.

Napisano przez minusSeven, 03.07.2014 at 14:27

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 03.07.2014 at 14:20

Huehuehue image!

This is lamest excuse of them all. Can't understand how it can't be possible. I can understand bombers can't carry marines or any other units but stealth would be capable of carrying specialized marines. If not same excuse would be given to subs. What is so wrong with stealth planes going undetected in enemy country and dropping of 1 specialized marine. You can't even say nothing like that already exists.

Something like this?


But wouldn't be a bomber anymore!

Just mocking, sorry... cause I got this image on google and wanted to share it.



Arguments are above, about turning MoS into a 2 much OP strategy.

Napisano przez clovis1122, 03.07.2014 at 11:13

LOL even full europe( near 9k economy) doesnt give you enough for make more that 50 stealths a turn. Again, The cost of stealths is very high and if you are a well experienced MOS then you should regonize the low usage of stealths. Marine spam more efficient.

The only way this type of suggestion would be OP, would be in a game like RP or infinite income XD XD XD

You wouldn't need 50 stealths a turn unless you were playing RP XD XD XD.
Also, by the time you have full Europe, all of the countries you were holding (before you got full) would have increased income and you would have even more money.

The only downside to MoS is the cost, that's why management is important. I do agree that marine spam and subs are much better than stealths. However, whenever I need to reinforce my attacking marines I buy stealths. They have high range and attack and are currently very powerful when you have enough money to use them. If you want to increase the usage of stealths, decrease the cost.

Cytuj:

Napisano przez The Tactician, 03.07.2014 at 10:12

No, MoS is fine. Its usable in 3v3 if you know how to. This would make it far too strong.

Yeah MOS ukraine. YOLO YOLO YOLO YOLO YOLO ►Capped turn 3.

Sorry if someone is too narrow minded to play different strategies.

PS: Ive never been capped turn 3 as mos ukr. (turn 4 maybe) Your evidence is insufficient, therefore, its time to stfu and stop shitting on every thread lowering its quality.

Cytuj:

Napisano przez The Tactician, 03.07.2014 at 16:06

Napisano przez The Tactician, 03.07.2014 at 10:12

No, MoS is fine. Its usable in 3v3 if you know how to. This would make it far too strong.

Yeah MOS ukraine. YOLO YOLO YOLO YOLO YOLO ►Capped turn 3.

Sorry if someone is too narrow minded to play different strategies.

Yeah, that one is you . Sorry, not everyone is capable of regonize when a country+strategy is bad or no. You'l many learn in some time though, Mr.Rank7.

PS: I had played europe with more off standart strategys that your europe with standars on all your aw life.

Napisano przez TheRiddler, 03.07.2014 at 15:11

Napisano przez clovis1122, 03.07.2014 at 11:13

LOL even full europe( near 9k economy) doesnt give you enough for make more that 50 stealths a turn. Again, The cost of stealths is very high and if you are a well experienced MOS then you should regonize the low usage of stealths. Marine spam more efficient.

The only way this type of suggestion would be OP, would be in a game like RP or infinite income XD XD XD

If you want to increase the usage of stealths, decrease the cost.

You can choose between decrease the cost ( which would make another discussion) OR add the +1 marine capacity. It wont make them more usable, but let say, you are europe, and enemy have japan with 0 troop. It would be a good idea to jew his income a bit

Cytuj:

Napisano przez clovis1122, 03.07.2014 at 17:26

Sorry if someone is too narrow minded to play different strategies.

Yeah, that one is you . Sorry, not everyone is capable of regonize when a country+strategy is bad or no. You'l many learn in some time though, Mr.Rank7.

PS: I had played europe with more off standart strategys that your europe with standars on all your aw life.

Haha, nice one. Bringing up rank. Very mature and based on the hardest solid ground. When I'm rank 9 or 10 and I've perfected how to play these strategies you don't find viable make sure to quote you on this if I remember you.
Stop quoting me/referring to me/replying to me dammit I dont want to be shitting on good threads and polluting this forum arguing with a thing.

On topic: How about a little boost to MoS instead of this suggestion since its a bit too strong?

Say, another -10-20 cost to stealth planes or so.

This wouldnt even affect close quarters mos combat,ie 3v3s, but would be op on world maps, youre basically giving stealth planes the ability to cap cities.