adv wrote:musketeer925 wrote:Sometimes identifying whats best by saying "the pros didnt do it in the tournaments" isnt the best indicator. Its risky to try something you dont have lots of practice doing when $1000 is on the table, so even if its good, it wont be risked as frequently by players who dont use it all the time.
Agree, but they could prepare a couple month in advance to win the tournament. They do that when they find a new BO that is superior, they prepare for tournament and they win.
Following my line of reasoning, here is an example :
Watching old recs of Japan, their meta was military oriented with tori gates, consulate isolation.
Then in around 2008 everybody realize how strong is the port consulate with shrine boom.
Everybody adapt their BO and change the way to play this civ.
And the changing is radical, the macro is much more complicated, you have to learn to defend your base, your shrines, etc...
But everybody switch to that because it was simply better.
Walls are the same since a decade now, only 3 players really use them at top levels, am I wrong?
Nobody changes their BO because they realize walls are op.
My average logic tells me, walls are not strong.