Un-Nerf bunkers

[timtadams]

They are sooo crap now

No-one goes them, not even a lonely solo. Only bunker I've seen this round is a bot.
They may as well be a striker. That way, they can attack, and can send out to save themselves.

Bunkers were never overpowered, they had their weaknesses, just like everything else. They were just a little harder to hit, especially with sentries. But they made up for this by being ineffective at attack, and being unable to save themselves from deadly inc. (I was zeroed a few times the time I was bunker

It was the only LET option for the few inactive solos who wanted to log on to some troops every now and then.

Might be worth returning them to their former glory, but making them NLD or NLT if people are too afraid of their immobile firepower. <-- I'd definitely go for this.

 

[Steve_God]

No-one goes them, not even a lonely solo. Only bunker I've seen this round is a bot.
They may as well be a striker. That way, they can attack, and can send out to save themselves.

There is a Bunker player in the Top 30 right now.

 

[tobapopalos]

Bunkers are fine. As units they are just as powerful as they have always been, only now they're harder to ninja flak because you're going to have twice as many of them. And that in itself is no bad thing since a lot of people are going to see 10 mil bunkers instead of 5 mil and be put off by that.

I've seen a few bunkers around this round, and I was bunkers the round before last and found them perfectly playable. Get yourself a strong stup with plenty of ninjas and most people won't dare attack you. Add to that a low land fat percentage and those who might dare to attack you won't bother because you're not worth it.

Bunkers/sentries being NLDs/NLTs just doesn't make sense. You would then have an immobiile army of cannon fodder. The whole point of the route is to make yourself as unattractive a target as possible. If you can't even kill your attackers then you're going to get attacked by all and sundry, since you can't kill and you can't send out. It just wouldn't work in any way.

 

[Max]

I agree that bunkers are easier to kill - but since they are cheaper, it turns out that statistically they are identical to before, but just harder to ninja flak as already mentioned.

Whilst I would LOVE to play solo bunker/sentry NLT, it wouldn't appeal to the majority of the playerbase, of that I am sure

Keep them as they are, they are still capable of doing a lot of damage I can assure you *licks wounds*

 

[alwaysnumb]

even before when they was harder to kill someone usually comes along and kills em.
i would also say that the nerfing of tractors made bunker route worse than the weakning of the bunkers/turrets

 

[LuckySports]

i would disagree.. Tractors was the best way to flak bunkers before.. now they are MUCH more difficult to land on.

 

[alwaysnumb]

I mean for bunkers attacking

 

[willymchilybily]

bunkers cant be nlt, else you dont discourage peoples flak losses. Losing a few hundred mil flak is not worth the fighting of the bunker/sentries. if a bunker masses sgt thinking it will help him keep land he is doing it wrong. its not the amount of flack you can theoretically stop. its the amount of people that are willing to try and steal your land.

there is a bunker/sentryin top 20. and he has 20m bunker/ 20m sentry. now if thats nlt/nld. you could kill 700mil flak a tick with that. (probably half that since the nerf, same fire power per cost, but half the cost, so half the damage) so even 350mil gardeners a tick dead is far more scary than being disabled/distracted. not really worth the effort to try and land. and if you consider the damage that will do to a striker. from memory when i tested the new bunkers, thats around 10m strikers dead. iirc. would you be willing to lose that much to kill the person and probably not land.

whats worse is as an rpg last round, people kept telling me to kill a particular bunker for the alliance... i kept telling them to f* right off. because from his stealth count he could have had enough ninja to flak 1:1 and it takes 2.9m rpg per bunker and 3.4m per sentry. with a 1:1 ratio of ninja you need to send 7* the amount of rpgs as bunkers and sentries they have for a clean kill, and with the squishy rpg troops not killing them all is unsatisfactory because its the sentries that survive best....and sending 7 per bunker sentry turret works out at around twice the maximum you can send if they have 0 % ar. so in affect with 0 AR a well flaked bunker and sentry turret player can only be half killed by the rpg, before being fired on.


so back to the first example.... 20m bunker 20m sentries.... i could probably send 130m rpg. (ignoring snipers!) and with 1:1 flaking with ninja id kill 11.5m bunkers and 10m sentry turrets on a very good day. do i fancy my odds of the 130m rpgs facing 8.5m bunkers and 10m sentries. maybe .. but with no snipers. i probably killed 8 of the 40m ninja.... and then 32m ninja fire. just doesnt apeal. as after that im not doing any better the next tick because the bunkers are even better flaked.


and every sniper i send is one less rpg.... Its not an easy route to kill in the way 99% of the playerbase assume you kill it.... it is easy if done right. but is it worth the losses, and effort. when you could all just pile on the rank 2 alliance with a 16man train? bagging a whopping 100 acres each!

 

[Max]

if a bunker masses sgt thinking it will help him keep land he is doing it wrong.

Shame on you willy! That's my favourite playstyle ;D

If you made bunker/sentry pure NLT it would play right into my hands and I could run the game from my base of unkillable, impenetrable fortress! MWAHAHAHA!

But on a serious note: it depends what you are going for. If you pay out for loads of bunkers and sentries, then you can still be killed if someone is committed / bored enough. Even better, you can get flakked past with the right mixture of troops (e.g. mass hippies... mass SDs...)

I've always found mass SGTs and yobs to sweep the more cost efficient way to keep land AND score myself. Keep those incs rolling in to keep the AR up I say

 

[willymchilybily]

if a bunker masses sgt thinking it will help him keep land he is doing it wrong.

Shame on you willy! That's my favourite playstyle ;D

If you made bunker/sentry pure NLT it would play right into my hands and I could run the game from my base of unkillable, impenetrable fortress! MWAHAHAHA!

But on a serious note: it depends what you are going for. If you pay out for loads of bunkers and sentries, then you can still be killed if someone is committed / bored enough. Even better, you can get flakked past with the right mixture of troops (e.g. mass hippies... mass SDs...)

I've always found mass SGTs and yobs to sweep the more cost efficient way to keep land AND score myself. Keep those incs rolling in to keep the AR up I say

well if you mass sgts i think imo its more attractive to land/easier...less score tied up to decent lethals. but yeah more likely people that try will fail. so does keep your ar high. but if they dont want to attack you in the first place i think its better. but i havent been bunker in so long maybe your right