Finally a decent post with actual content that I can respond to. I watched all 14 and found that the conclusions you draw are at odds with what is actually in them. Objectively, the outcomes in basically every replay you listed were not determined in any way shape or form by repairing a commander. Some didn't even have any repairing at all let alone repairing at a material level. It's been stated very clearly that commander pushing is what is actually going on so i thank you for providing 14 replays that prove exactly what we have been saying all along. 60% of these are Qzipco exploit pushing his commander and the rest are t2 rushes off 1 or 2 t1 factories. It's no surprise to me that you find them to be troll games. They are cheesy as hell because of the strategies chosen, not because of any repairing that takes place. You seem to think that repair makes cheese inevitable - that logical connection that doesn't hold any water. You are confusing the effects of other totally different player actions as coming from repair for some reason. Probably because it's the most visible mechanic that you can knee jerk blame. I encourage everyone to also watch each and every replay that was listed and see how flawed the argument against True Economy is. If anything, all i see is True Economy adding meaningful decision making and dynamic engagements in line with one of the mod's goals. Summary Significant factors that influenced the end result in descending importance Commander push exploit Building T2 first and doing timing attack on pure T1 armies Building a pelter first Building unit counter. e.g. Levellers vs Slammers or Slammers vs Dox Uncontested naked expansion that isn't attacked by bombers or raiding dox. Significant portions of the replays featured idle bombers and idle dox, especially the games with Admiral. Wall and turret positioning Bad unit control and uber cannons An opponent who builds mathematically bad units like icarus and spark Baiting enemy units into mines All are well known factors and already present in current meta without True Economy. The effectiveness of some of these strategies is also greatly increased via exploit comm pushing. Detailed Definitions Consequential - Without repair, a different end result (win/loss) would have occurred Inconsequential - Without repair, a different end result (win/loss) would not have occurred e.g. Commander A has 50% hp and Commander B has 51% hp. When they fight, repairing Commander B is inconsequential to the end result. Commander hp repair None: 0% repaired Low: <10% repaired Medium: 10-30% repaired High: 30-80% repaired Results Frankly, I'm actually disappointed how inconsequential repair mattered in the scheme of things. One of the side aims of True Economy was to make Commander repair viable. Let's address that one consequential result. Admiral made the mistake of attacking the Commander with dox and uber cannon instead of attacking the combat fabricators. He also did not target the combat fabricators with his pelter. Admiral had that engagement dead to rights but made poor decisions in the execution. For the purposes of balance where theoretical players make reasonable moves and counter moves, repair would have been inconsequential. Nonetheless, the fight is back and forth and enjoyable. Metal spent on both sides is balanced and the decisive factor that contributed towards the end result was player control. Repair isn't free like you seem to think - notice metal efficiency drop off a cliff halfway through. If you read the article I wrote on this, you'd have seen the specific test that made sure repair effectiveness was inline with the rest of the game. These kind of engagements increase spectator enjoyment. The only troll worthy aspect of this particular match was Qzipco commander pushing over vast distances (650 radius) in order to put a teleporter right outside someone's base.