Login

russian armor

Locking OKW Tiger behind all SWS is super unfair

25 Jan 2020, 09:43 AM
#41
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Jan 2020, 02:21 AMGenMe


yes It is, also you are over looking the fact the IS2 is crap, cant even go toe to toe with a panther, plus Its stuck behind crap commander choices.

Really dude?
Possessed by spirit of ritter or something?
26 Jan 2020, 02:00 AM
#42
avatar of GenMe

Posts: 294



IS2 is so bad it wins tournament after tournament after tournament.

Yes so bad. Please buff IS2 armour to 400 and give 2 second reload.

Thank you balance team.


and which dream world did that happen?
26 Jan 2020, 03:08 AM
#44
avatar of mrgame2

Posts: 1794

Soo.. is this locking behind structure still real for OKW?

Totally unfair.

Unless okw Tiger comes with panzer commander default and can also upgrade to pintle mg. It is too costly. lol
26 Jan 2020, 06:44 AM
#45
avatar of ZeroZeroNi

Posts: 1563


Soviets for IS2= 10+15+80+90- 20 starting fuel = 175 fuel

I know this is just a nitpick but,
It's 10+10+85+90-20 = 175.
This change is DUM cus the IS 2 us 10cp not 9 so it is really doing is pushing it back 10f 1cp.
26 Jan 2020, 06:58 AM
#46
avatar of ZeroZeroNi

Posts: 1563



Yeah because manpower is the limiting factor in who can get a heavy tank earlier :facepalm:

Well sovs are the most no starved faction so it might take an effect on timing.
26 Jan 2020, 15:46 PM
#47
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Jan 2020, 03:08 AMmrgame2
Soo.. is this locking behind structure still real for OKW?

Totally unfair.

Unless okw Tiger comes with panzer commander default and can also upgrade to pintle mg. It is too costly. lol


Yes. It's a desperately needed tech barrier between medium and heavy armour.

The Soviet barrier is proportionally too small, but that just means it needs making bigger somehow.
26 Jan 2020, 17:36 PM
#48
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

Soviet could use a specific upgrade on T4 costing the relevant amount of fuel and manpower to hit the cost for other factions.
At the moment Soviet Tiers are correctly priced for what they deliver.
26 Jan 2020, 17:52 PM
#49
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2

I think both SOV and OST should need to pay extra for a heavy.
Corrent me if I'm wrong, but they both need to gain 205 fuel if I calculated correctly, while all other factions need to gain about 250 for full tech (including all side techs, medic etc)

EDIT: Just realized this is phrased ambiguously: What I mean is that SOV and OST should have an additional tech to unlock heavies as a call in, not to make the tanks themselves more expensive.
26 Jan 2020, 18:19 PM
#50
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289

I think both SOV and OST should need to pay extra for a heavy.
Corrent me if I'm wrong, but they both need to gain 205 fuel if I calculated correctly, while all other factions need to gain about 250 for full tech (including all side techs, medic etc)


Both ost and sov dont get extras with tech. No free units, forward retreat points, non doc superheavy or base arty pieces.

So i personaly dont see why they should pay the same to be able to go get a heavy.
26 Jan 2020, 18:28 PM
#51
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260



Both ost and sov dont get extras with tech. No free units, forward retreat points, non doc superheavy or base arty pieces.

So i personaly dont see why they should pay the same to be able to go get a heavy.


It's because the current heavies behave like they're a tier up from light vehicles. Without a tech barrier, they kill off the mediums they're sharing a tier with.

It's like sticking the Panzer IV in OKW Mechanized. It'd kill the Luchs stone dead.
26 Jan 2020, 18:54 PM
#52
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Jan 2020, 18:28 PMLago


It's because the current heavies behave like they're a tier up from light vehicles. Without a tech barrier, they kill off the mediums they're sharing a tier with.

It's like sticking the Panzer IV in OKW Mechanized. It'd kill the Luchs stone dead.


Then increase the price of the heavies for sov and ost a bit but still keep the total cost less the wfa and ukf.
26 Jan 2020, 18:57 PM
#53
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2



Both ost and sov dont get extras with tech. No free units, forward retreat points, non doc superheavy or base arty pieces.

So i personaly dont see why they should pay the same to be able to go get a heavy.


While I partially agree, your argument is way to simplified, but sometimes also wrong.

UKF base arty behaves like an offmap ability, not like a unit. The USF FRP costs constant POP and thereby MP income (although relatively less), both factions get a complete rooster of units already while teching up, but also lack no important role in the late game (UKF lacks mortar, UKF rocket arty, OKW a cheap and durable AI vehicle as some examples). SOV and OST medics don't cost fuel if you just look at fuel economy.

If we just count the tech structures, SOV and UKF slightly underpay, OKW slightly overpays. But then OST and OKW DO get "free stuff" for teching. Snares, grenades, weapon improvements. All the nice stuff that often is gated behind side techs for Allies (depending on the faction obviously). Not to say that the weapon rack unlock is identical to Grens being able to get LMGs (the racks are better and should cost more), but since you apparently oppose the fact that we should compare full techs, many factions would lack some vital parts.

The other point that Lago already mentioned is that heavies should be balanced against each other just like mediums. Giving some factions earlier access to heavies than others just creates more issues and solves none.
26 Jan 2020, 18:58 PM
#54
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2



Then increase the price of the heavies for sov and ost a bit but still keep the total cost less the wfa and ukf.

This would make the cost performance of their tanks worse than others. So if you want to replace your heavy, you would be punished more than other factions for losing the tank.

If you're fine with delaying heavy tanks for SOV and OST, why not just introduce an additional tech to gate them off?
26 Jan 2020, 19:08 PM
#55
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1


This would make the cost performance of their tanks worse than others. So if you want to replace your heavy, you would be punished more than other factions for losing the tank.

If you're fine with delaying heavy tanks for SOV and OST, why not just introduce an additional tech to gate them off?


Yes, Ost and Soviets would need an additional side-tech in their T4 building that allows them to call in a heavy tank. For Soviets it would cost around 50 fuel. Not sure what the numbers are for Ost, I guess something relatively similar.
26 Jan 2020, 19:19 PM
#56
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2



Yes, Ost and Soviets would need an additional side-tech in their T4 building that allows them to call in a heavy tank. For Soviets it would cost around 50 fuel. Not sure what the numbers are for Ost, I guess something relatively similar.

Well just counting fuel OST and SOV should both pay 45 fuel. But this also only works if SOV is forced to get molotovs and AT grenades, otherwise it should be more expensive.
26 Jan 2020, 20:33 PM
#57
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1


Well just counting fuel OST and SOV should both pay 45 fuel. But this also only works if SOV is forced to get molotovs and AT grenades, otherwise it should be more expensive.


Why? if you decide to not go molotov or atnade, that's a drawback you're assuming to take
26 Jan 2020, 20:42 PM
#58
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Jan 2020, 20:33 PMEsxile


Why? if you decide to not go molotov or atnade, that's a drawback you're assuming to take

If you go for Conscripts that is true, but SOV have two viable playstyles. If you go for a T1 build, you do not need molotovs and an AT package.
26 Jan 2020, 21:18 PM
#59
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Jan 2020, 20:33 PMEsxile


Why? if you decide to not go molotov or atnade, that's a drawback you're assuming to take

What if you go penals?
26 Jan 2020, 21:29 PM
#60
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289


This would make the cost performance of their tanks worse than others. So if you want to replace your heavy, you would be punished more than other factions for losing the tank.

If you're fine with delaying heavy tanks for SOV and OST, why not just introduce an additional tech to gate them off?


Yeah i get your point now. I would put all callin/doctrinal heavies behind heavy tank tech except kv1 and most likely kv8 as well. Kv1 is just a tankier t34 76. Kv8 while absolutly leathel to inf and teamweapons is no big threat vs tanks. It can fight a p4 but nothing bigger afik.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

498 users are online: 498 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49064
Welcome our newest member, cablingindfw
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM