Profile of Vaz

I get what you're saying, yea trying to hit an mg with explosive rounds is slow and a lot of players can avoid it. Smoke works though. You have to do it right, but it works. There is nothing an mg can do in a smoky environment. It literally becomes useless. If it backs up, you can just smoke it again. It becomes quite the micro burden.

If the puma comes in to hunt the aaht, it's done for. You do not send an aaht into enemy territory guns blazing and beat puma. Think about what off-gaurd means. Usually the puma is hunting something else and for some reason(like a shot blocker, as I mentioned) the player was not aware of the aaht and the encounter begins at close range. Puma does not even need to come into range of the canon to destroy the ht in like 2 shots.

I've seen 3 results from these situations.
1. player flees - result puma always wins, minimal if any damage to puma
2. player keeps still and fights - aaht CAN win, depending on situational factors
3. player keeps still and fights - aaht destroyed, puma severely damaged

Yes we know every USF has been nerfed to the ground...

On the other hand bazookas is not really relevant because using M20 to lay mine which was the original topic has become a lot cheaper (100mp /20mu/2 pop).

There was no mu savings in dropping a mine. It looks like you threw in the armored skirts change, but you don't need skirts for mines. Laying mines where the enemy can notice is dumb, so it should never be seen doing that.

It's performance has been pretty consistent. They made it build faster and reduce the costs associated with it, except the mine which is awesome(you guys need to campaign to nerf that next).

I think that's a pretty fair assessment. I think an overhaul of the matching system would actual make it easier for us to determine where there are balance issues.

The current system is making a lot of messed up matches(this can be proven and was recently when a user posted his matchups with user ranks). The system should not be mixing people with such disparity in rank. I understand how they can think it's fair on a mathematical level, where you make sure the sum of the ranks of each team are close and award points based on the disparity. However, there should be a limit in this disparity. The current allowance is way too great and makes impossible games. From the above formula, mixing a good player with a 3 people in the total noob category to go against a team of 4 in the mediocre category does not make a fair game. It makes for very frustrating experiences.

I would say up until level 10, players should not be matching outside their level by more than 1 point. So no putting a level 10 player with 3 level 8. Above 10 you can start allowing more disparity because we can be confident the players at least have a deep understanding of the game and an acceptable level of micro to be able to respond to multiple encounters.

This would also solve a lot of the stupid stuff that happens in games with players that like to play like crap and blame their allies. People that like to throw games by destroying their teamates bases. I still can't forget this game where this completely useless british player was carried the whole game, which we lost, and once he got to land mattress, he ONLY made land mattress. Everyone in the game had stolen his land mattresses, it was completely stupid. These joke/noob players should be permanently stuck in the lower ranks instead of randomly getting matched with people that are being competitive.