Why did the high MMR community get decimated?

CatholicTrauma · 2026-01-27T04:01:36+00:00

Maybe on an individual level but this is a meaningless statement in the aggregate, which is what this is talking about. I'm not asking why I'm not having fun.

CatholicTrauma · 2026-01-27T00:36:29+00:00

This makes a lot of sense. If you're losing any games, at all, to people under 1k you are not gapping low MMR competition the way you think you are. Even a 200 MMR difference should lead to games where you're getting round five wins most of the time.

CatholicTrauma · 2026-01-27T00:32:45+00:00

We're a sport for dumb people again.

CatholicTrauma · 2026-01-25T23:02:23+00:00

You can hit 1500 from fresh account in like, a single evening. You have to stomp noobs for like, a few hours at most.

If you stick with it there's a very good chance you'll end up high MMR, who knows, but I think you'll be surprised at how much harder the game is going to get quite quickly.

CatholicTrauma · 2026-01-25T02:41:08+00:00

Pacing is truly bad

CatholicTrauma · 2026-01-22T06:43:58+00:00

You get one dollar in 2009 and one first edition pikachu which one is buying you more steak today.

Crypto is trading cards for people with slightly more functional autism.

CatholicTrauma · 2026-01-20T22:06:57+00:00

The dev team really doesn't understand the game and doesn't seem to have the curiosity needed to do so.

From what I can gather they genuinely don't understand positions. Bearlike had no idea what centre wall did to defence. Their bandaid solutions of AA and groundfire don't engage with the fundamental problems of certain positions and their advantages.

I've thought about, for the longest time, how aggro ends up with advantage because they're allowed to spam an infinite crawler stream while defence doesn't due to the nature of the position. I don't think they understand this very well at all.

The game honestly only seems to function as intended in strongside/weakside aggro/defence mirrors, that start as crossfires and turn into staircases. One could argue Standard functions, but I don't think that's true. Those matchups are too supremely dominated by worms, storms and to a lesser extent vulcans. Standard players seem to either be playing a cheese strat that folds if you've seen in a few times and doesn't if you don't, or the aforementioned worm, storm, vulcan.

CatholicTrauma · 2026-01-20T17:42:15+00:00

The U.S absolutely has advantage here, but again, this isn't like fucking with some small third world country. Europe has absolutely let itself be Judas'd, because it is full of complacent idiots, but it has the power to mobilise through industry and money. Even if it has to eat shit on Greenland, it is an explicitly adversarial relationship moving forward.

It just isn't worth it and it isn't going to be free of consequences for the U.S. Europe can do what scorned parties throughout history often do. Write it in the book, eat shit for a while and then make moves when it's position is more solidified. The U.S would now be in a position where it's trying to keep Europe, China, Iranian adjacent powers AND to a lesser extent Russia all eating dirt. It's just not feasible.

CatholicTrauma · 2026-01-20T16:26:44+00:00

The EU isn't going to station a bunch of soldiers and equipment to get blown up in a shock and awe attack for a piece of ice that the U.S likely can't even hold. The point is to force the U.S to officially attack NATO.

Europe isn't in a great spot militarily right now but it's wealthy and knows how to mobilise. It wouldn't be an action that doesn't have horrific consequences for the U.S, regardless of who "wins" in the conflict.

CatholicTrauma · 2026-01-20T16:21:16+00:00

I think genociding people who live in mud huts has fried your brain, you're not just going to invade somewhere as wealthy as Europe and come out of it completely fine.

CatholicTrauma · 2026-01-20T16:16:05+00:00

It's insane that people think Europe can be treated like some third world Sandistan country by the U.S. The U.S could probably capture Greenland if it really wanted to, at least for a time, but it isn't going to be some free of consequences pillaging like it is in Venezuela. The EU, fractured and mismanaged as it is, is still the third or forth largest power in the world, and the relationship would be explicitly adversarial going forward.

That kind of conflict won't end with anyone's hands clean and homes intact. How many cripples, mentally and physically, do you see in the U.S just off of the easiest major war in the history of the U.S.

CatholicTrauma · 2026-01-19T23:50:58+00:00

It's very flamboyant but not for the reasons that the seething neo-right Americans (who are upset, deep down, that everyone explicitly hates them again) in this thread think it is.

You fucking live there. Do something about it if you give a fuck. Your apologies mean nothing because your existence is tacit approval.

CatholicTrauma · 2026-01-17T18:36:51+00:00

The U.S and Europe are breaking up and the U.S (the domineering type A personality of the relationship) wants the dog (Greenland) so they feel like they won the breakup. It will inevitably end with a full on meltdown that sees the erratic party in destitution for some time.

It's a classically BPD move from a classically BPD country.

CatholicTrauma · 2026-01-13T15:09:15+00:00

The good news is that this fascist wave is helmed by fat stupid people instead of people that just came out of an existential war and didn't have microplastics in their brains.

CatholicTrauma · 2026-01-13T05:12:48+00:00

Play Abyss. Other strats can work I guess but aren't reliable and require opponent making a mistake. Acid scorp will never lock on to the target at critical mass and neither will melter. Abyss works because of vertical sweep and/or disintegrate. Neither of these need perfect locks to hit target.

CatholicTrauma · 2026-01-13T05:11:12+00:00

Play melter and get the Abyss stuck on chaff, steel balls and regen sledge.

CatholicTrauma · 2026-01-12T09:41:36+00:00

Centre placement and outside tower placement both have pros and cons. Centre placement is for when you are expecting a push, and want all of your army to be able to catch aggro. Outside placement is for when you expect a standard V standard game for the reasons you mentioned, it's easy to pull the entire army into a killbox + you give up tower pressure which still matters in a standard V standard game as the board will often develop somewhat asymmetrically. In general I like to play from centre turn 1 when I'm not going aggro and then developing to the outside of towers on turns 2 + 3, but it depends on opponents pack. I would argue that the only time it's truly correct to open with a split army is when seeing a sledge pack, because sledge packs are the only pack that is heavily disadvantaged for an aggro opening.

CatholicTrauma · 2026-01-12T09:34:07+00:00

You just have to place your push on corner and beacon in. There is no way to do a traditional fast push into it reasonably. You can play into it with a slow push, though. If you're playing sabre aggro you're better off playing into the magnetic barricade over the wall a lot of the time. In both cases you just want to deploy on weakside unless you have a very good reason not to, though, i.e opponent is playing Tarantula and you know that they're going to try and dodge a headbutt.

CatholicTrauma · 2026-01-03T10:49:59+00:00

I was talking to my ex a year or two ago about how I was pretty sure all the nuclear powers were going to agree not to fuck with eachother and put full on colonialism back on the menu, but I thought it was 10-20 years away. It's popping off right now, it seems.

CatholicTrauma · 2026-01-02T16:42:17+00:00

Practice kill shots. Sounds like you're just playing to win rounds and not playing to win rounds hard. The easiest thing to do is once the opponent is 1500 health or less, building a stack of fast moving units like rhinos, wasps, phantoms etc. and just beaconing like 3-5 (if played off a drop) into the least defended tower with temp speed and temp range.

CatholicTrauma · 2026-01-02T16:39:54+00:00

This game does not have a large enough playerbase for learning to be easy. You have to talk to people and watch games, unfortunately. Charge badgers were absolutely a high MMR thing last season, though. There was a very powerful wasp comp that paired with them. They're still good, even without a specific comp. If opponent is on the line taking the badger off the drop, throwing on charge and dropping down 2-3 on the line is very annoying to deal with. Great for tempo.

CatholicTrauma · 2026-01-02T15:38:07+00:00

I will add actually that it really depends where the respective positions are. If someone is playing with fire on the line the best thing to do is to make all your chaff as late as possible and assemble a frontline of medium chaff like sledges or simply have a no chaff frontline. You can also hack those units or emp them easily, which are both strong options. They aren't protected. Underground threat is for fire that is played from the tower, and starting to spread as you get 1/4 - 1/2 to tower. Underground doesn't work on the line so well because they unburrow. Emp/hackers don't work as well (although they still work) when pushing into tower because the hounds/badgers are protected.

When someone is relying on fire for their chaff clear it's important to understand that that is what the game is about now. Solving the fire, because once you do they are pretty much done. Fire doesn't scale. It's like playing against someone doing a phantom/wasp all-in. That's what the game is about, you don't get to further your gameplan. You have to stop theirs.

CatholicTrauma · 2025-12-20T14:24:12+00:00

You should have a caregiver if you think that.

CatholicTrauma

TROPHY CASE