I think the reason people mistake them for a bad unit is because they don't notice that light artillery (wolverines, hounds, sheldons, shellshockers) only does 15% of it's base damage at max blast radius, whereas heavy artillery (quaker, mauser, gauntlet/rattlesnake in high arc mode and to a lesser extent direct fire mode), get much higher multipliers to damage at max blast radius. So where a sheldon's 65% damage blast radius is basically nothing (under 15 units), the effective blast radius of T2 vehicle artillery is actually larger than a rattlesnake in direct fire mode, and only slightly worse than an ambassador rocket (about 70-75ish). It is very realistic to fire T2 vehicle artillery by radar, which you really can't do with T1 artillery. On a side note, I think you should put an omen far earlier in your build order. Omens are quarter of the price of an quaker, but can see further than a quaker can shoot. Also, you are misreading the hound weapon card. That bottom number, the 400, is the total of all the hounds weapons, but the hound cannot fire both it's weapons (direct fire gauss and arcing artillery) at the same time, so it is double counting the damage of the hound. In practice, the hound does 255 damage on a direct hit. (170 in gauss mode).
If the image links doesnt show you can google 'spring engine edge effectiveness' in that link there is a graph image which shows that 98% edge effectiveness does closer to 50% dmg at the 'edge' (95% ish of max range). At 60% edge effectiveness you would do roughly 50% of the dmg at 70% of max range. 0% edge effectiveness means linear falloff dmg. 100% edge flat dmg.
I always build an Omen (or equivalent) even if I'm not making artillery. The view and recon is worth it for such a cheap unit. Sometimes I walk them over to allies front lines so their static defences start hitting. Radar and recon is consistently underrated. If you love spy cams you should take radar units for the same reasons.
To do what? The thing is, you never want ambassadors if your opponent doesn't make you build them. They have ATROCIOUS dps per cost. half that of mausers, which are not a high dps unit. For just killing those rattlesnakes, it wouldn't be hard to just get up to say, 3 or so quakers, and then just omen push them. Spot them with an omen, blast them down. Rattlesnakes don't do very much dps. They rely on not being shot back to survive, and built on the absolute front line like that, it's not hard to just peck away at them. Frontally, that guy is actually building a rattle IN FRONT OF his scorpions. In this configuration, they provide absolutely no defense against even wolverines, let alone sheldons or quakers. My philosophy, firmly, is that' it's your OPPONENT'S job to make you build lower dps units. If he can't beat ticks, don't make maces. If he can't beat fiends, forget making sheldons. If he can't beat mausers, why bother with ambassadors? This is how you carry. You don't just win, you win quickly and efficiently. In my experience, basically no sub 20 OS players have the structure to their porc to even require you making high end artillery. Like look at jaws setup with the LLT's. His heavy laser is BEHIND his LLT's. That means that basically any unit can just walk up and range his LLT's, and then his mobile forces have to move out to engage, and all of this happens without his HLT even entering range. Basically, his entire front line can be engaged piecemeal in T1. And that's VERY high 20's OS. 7OS people? you don't need ambassadors. And for cost, ambassadors do like half the dps of mausers and have about 60% of the health. much less vulnerable, much higher impact unit.
@@timmietimmins3780 I think you are technically right and it'd be better to just invest into extra pushing units to help go win. I seem to find plenty of nice targets for my negotiators though. The psychological effect of the missiles coming in can nudge an opponent into making mistakes. It could be that I'm just a porc hater so I love my anti-porc tools too much.
20:36 metal overflow detected?
🤣🤣
I think the reason people mistake them for a bad unit is because they don't notice that light artillery (wolverines, hounds, sheldons, shellshockers) only does 15% of it's base damage at max blast radius, whereas heavy artillery (quaker, mauser, gauntlet/rattlesnake in high arc mode and to a lesser extent direct fire mode), get much higher multipliers to damage at max blast radius.
So where a sheldon's 65% damage blast radius is basically nothing (under 15 units), the effective blast radius of T2 vehicle artillery is actually larger than a rattlesnake in direct fire mode, and only slightly worse than an ambassador rocket (about 70-75ish). It is very realistic to fire T2 vehicle artillery by radar, which you really can't do with T1 artillery.
On a side note, I think you should put an omen far earlier in your build order. Omens are quarter of the price of an quaker, but can see further than a quaker can shoot.
Also, you are misreading the hound weapon card. That bottom number, the 400, is the total of all the hounds weapons, but the hound cannot fire both it's weapons (direct fire gauss and arcing artillery) at the same time, so it is double counting the damage of the hound. In practice, the hound does 255 damage on a direct hit. (170 in gauss mode).
If the image links doesnt show you can google 'spring engine edge effectiveness' in that link there is a graph image which shows that 98% edge effectiveness does closer to 50% dmg at the 'edge' (95% ish of max range).
At 60% edge effectiveness you would do roughly 50% of the dmg at 70% of max range.
0% edge effectiveness means linear falloff dmg.
100% edge flat dmg.
I always build an Omen (or equivalent) even if I'm not making artillery. The view and recon is worth it for such a cheap unit. Sometimes I walk them over to allies front lines so their static defences start hitting. Radar and recon is consistently underrated. If you love spy cams you should take radar units for the same reasons.
If you're going into t2 vehicles it's well worth getting a few ambassadors/negotiators.
To do what?
The thing is, you never want ambassadors if your opponent doesn't make you build them. They have ATROCIOUS dps per cost. half that of mausers, which are not a high dps unit.
For just killing those rattlesnakes, it wouldn't be hard to just get up to say, 3 or so quakers, and then just omen push them. Spot them with an omen, blast them down. Rattlesnakes don't do very much dps. They rely on not being shot back to survive, and built on the absolute front line like that, it's not hard to just peck away at them. Frontally, that guy is actually building a rattle IN FRONT OF his scorpions. In this configuration, they provide absolutely no defense against even wolverines, let alone sheldons or quakers.
My philosophy, firmly, is that' it's your OPPONENT'S job to make you build lower dps units. If he can't beat ticks, don't make maces. If he can't beat fiends, forget making sheldons. If he can't beat mausers, why bother with ambassadors? This is how you carry. You don't just win, you win quickly and efficiently.
In my experience, basically no sub 20 OS players have the structure to their porc to even require you making high end artillery. Like look at jaws setup with the LLT's. His heavy laser is BEHIND his LLT's. That means that basically any unit can just walk up and range his LLT's, and then his mobile forces have to move out to engage, and all of this happens without his HLT even entering range. Basically, his entire front line can be engaged piecemeal in T1.
And that's VERY high 20's OS. 7OS people? you don't need ambassadors. And for cost, ambassadors do like half the dps of mausers and have about 60% of the health. much less vulnerable, much higher impact unit.
@@timmietimmins3780 I think you are technically right and it'd be better to just invest into extra pushing units to help go win. I seem to find plenty of nice targets for my negotiators though. The psychological effect of the missiles coming in can nudge an opponent into making mistakes.
It could be that I'm just a porc hater so I love my anti-porc tools too much.
So does the camera have its own line of sight or does it extend the radar line of sight
It has extends line of sight from the camera. If you can get some early cams in the front line on good spots it gives you super good targeting