Login

russian armor

Commandos are too good!

30 Oct 2020, 12:59 PM
#21
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



Stats can be very misleading.
Conscripts have a lot more EHP than grenadiers, but still have only a 50/50 chance of winning engagements.

That is because an engagement is decided by both EHP and DPS.

On the other hand the differences number of entities is balance by the difference in target size.
Grenadiers 351 EHP
Conscripts 440 EHP

It is far more misleading to take into account only target and completely ignoring number of entities.


Likewise, Commandos are a lot more squishy than Obers, despite having more 'EHP', because most weapons do more damage up close, which is the range where Commandos need to go to do any damage, often having to abondon any cover bonus along the way. Obers on the other hand can hapily shoot from max range where they will take a lot less damage from enemy rifles and they don't have to move out of cover.

Commandos are not shock troops they are ambush units and that is why they have camo and first strike bonuses.

If one moves commanods in open field out of cover and out of camo one is simply doing something wrong.
Pip
30 Oct 2020, 13:06 PM
#22
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1594

EHP of Obersoldaten when compared to Commandos is as misleading as comparing P4 EHP to the Panzerwerfer.

Obersoldaten are a direct combat squad, are intended to get into slugfests with other infantry. They are necessarily tanky. Commandos, and Stormtroopers are decidedly not "Direct combat squads". They are intended for infiltration and ambush.

The fact Commandos EHP is so close to Obers is obviously in Commandos favour. They are supposed to be getting the drop on enemy squads, deleting them, and then escaping. Their smoke on retreat is arguably better for them then a further decrease of RA would be. Comparing apples to oranges is really stupid.
30 Oct 2020, 13:09 PM
#23
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

Effective Hit-Points have been discussed to completely mislead discussions. It blows up numbers with a massive effect to higher proportions making units look as if they are OP while In fact, they're not.


I don't really see how these stats are misleading, or how they would blow up numbers. They are simply the only way to effectively compare units. In the case of infantry durability versus small arms, with wildly varying factors such as number of models and target size, effective hitpoints is the only way to compare their durability.

In this case, Commandos do have relatively high durability despite not having very high combat bonuses from veterancy, because most of their power comes from their base stats. Unlike other units that get +30-40% DPS or -20-30% target size from vet.

Of course there are certain nuances like that EHP is based on average RNG, but so are almost all stats.
Pip
30 Oct 2020, 13:13 PM
#24
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1594



I don't really see how these stats are misleading, or how they would blow up numbers. They are simply the only way to effectively compare units. In the case of infantry durability versus small arms, with wildly varying factors such as number of models and target size, effective hitpoints is the only way to compare their durability.


It ignores the role the unit is intended to perform, though.

Snipers, for example, have very poor EHP, and by merely looking at that you might be led to believe that they are beyond worthless, and would be killed immediately in a fight.

The fact that they're not intended for frontline duty, and in fact if they are being shot at all you are doing something entirely wrong, isn't reflected if you talk purely about "EHP". It's part of a bigger picture, but some people seem to think it's the only thing that matters for an unit. Snipers are an extreme example, of course, but I hope it serves to illustrate my argument.
30 Oct 2020, 13:13 PM
#25
avatar of JohnSmith

Posts: 1273



I don't really see how these stats are misleading, or how they would blow up numbers. They are simply the only way to effectively compare units. In the case of infantry durability versus small arms, with wildly varying factors such as number of models and target size, effective hitpoints is the only way to compare their durability.

Of course there are certain nuances like that EHP is based on average RNG, but so are almost all stats.


if you do a direct comparison in a particular setting and scenario with controlled entry and outputs, that works yeah. but ignoring everything and just saying "unit has 690 EHP and it's more than another unit EHP so it's OP" is just wrong and misleading.
30 Oct 2020, 13:15 PM
#26
avatar of Aerohank

Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Oct 2020, 12:59 PMVipper

That is because an engagement is decided by both EHP and DPS.


No sht Sherlock.

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Oct 2020, 12:59 PMVipper
Commandos are not shock troops they are ambush units and that is why they have camo and first strike bonuses.

If one moves commanods in open field out of cover and out of camo one is simply doing something wrong.


You are absolutely right, whenever you have ambushed one squad you should instantly retreat instead of moving in on other squad because otherwise you are simply doing something wrong.
30 Oct 2020, 13:17 PM
#27
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

if you do a direct comparison in a particular setting and scenario with controlled entry and outputs, that works yeah. but ignoring everything and just saying "unit has 690 EHP so it's OP" is just wrong and misleading.


That wasn't the case here though. Vipper only pointed out that despite a relatively low received accuracy bonus from veterancy the unit still has a high amount of effective HP because they have a very low base target size, which is all correct. He didn't claim this made Commandos OP as a unit, he claimed this makes Commandes durable and hard to wipe (in combination with other factors such as the smoke on retreat), which is also correct.
30 Oct 2020, 13:18 PM
#28
avatar of JohnSmith

Posts: 1273

I am not claiming against a given user, I'm pointing out that just looking at EHP and DPS and other stats are useless and misleading when not looking at the design and purpose of the unit. EHP goes down the drain when the commando faces its counter and forces retreat (+manpower drain on the player reinforcing) but EHP wll say OP but game will show its not. Another example WC51 has low EHP/DPS but works fabulous in the hands of a good player; an engagement is never won by EHP and DPS alone. It's very easy to inflate and manipulate stats to make things look better for the sake of it. Any unit can be made looking to have OP stats if used some weird combo of their EHP EFD DPS ABM or TTK. it's just totally wrong to only take parts of facts just to be right.
30 Oct 2020, 13:21 PM
#29
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


No sht Sherlock.

Glad that you agree. If you want argue EHP more I suggest you do it Sander93 since a sense a hostility toward me.


You are absolutely right,

Well it happens and I am ok with it, it is others that have problems with me being right.


whenever you have ambushed one squad you should instantly retreat instead of moving in on other squad because otherwise you are simply doing something wrong.

If ones has ambushed another squad with commandos one should make full use the nuke grenade and then finish the squad, taking advantage of the "first strikes" bonus when available and thus take minimal damage which can then auto-heal available at vet 1.
30 Oct 2020, 13:52 PM
#30
avatar of Aerohank

Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Oct 2020, 13:21 PMVipper

Glad that you agree. If you want argue EHP more I suggest you do it Sander93 since a sense a hostility toward me.


Well it happens and I am ok with it, it is others that have problems with me being right.


If ones has ambushed another squad with commandos one should make full use the nuke grenade and then finish the squad, taking advantage of the "first strikes" bonus when available and thus take minimal damage which can then auto-heal available at vet 1.


You are unironicly saying that commandos should take as little damage as possible otherwise you are playing them wrong in the same thread where you argue that commandos have "great EHP".
30 Oct 2020, 14:15 PM
#31
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



You are unironicly saying that commandos should take as little damage as possible otherwise you are playing them wrong in the same thread where you argue that commandos have "great EHP".

Commandos have great EHP that is a simple fact.

This is what I have said:

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Oct 2020, 12:59 PMVipper

Commandos are not shock troops they are ambush units and that is why they have camo and first strike bonuses.

If one moves commanods in open field out of cover and out of camo one is simply doing something wrong.


there is no contradiction between the two or anything "unironicly" about it.
30 Oct 2020, 15:25 PM
#32
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Oct 2020, 13:13 PMPip


It ignores the role the unit is intended to perform, though.

Snipers, for example, have very poor EHP, and by merely looking at that you might be led to believe that they are beyond worthless, and would be killed immediately in a fight.

The fact that they're not intended for frontline duty, and in fact if they are being shot at all you are doing something entirely wrong, isn't reflected if you talk purely about "EHP". It's part of a bigger picture, but some people seem to think it's the only thing that matters for an unit. Snipers are an extreme example, of course, but I hope it serves to illustrate my argument.


I don't think it illustrates it well.

Snipers ARE killed basically immediately in a fight. EHP shows effectively that they are squishy as intended. There are some other factors such as camouflage and extended sight that would allow a unit to have less EHP than an otherwise identical unit, but for comparisons within the same unit category they are an okay mark. If some stats are "too low" (whatever that means) for the price of the unit, you can deduce that they need to make up for it in utility. To stay with the snipers: They are very squishy and expensive compared to front line troops, therefore they make up for it with high range, sight, camouflage and insta kills. The EHP correctly shows that they would lose a 1v1 despite being more expensive.
The comparison of Obersoldaten and Commandos is quite off in most cases, but Stormtroopers fit quite nicely into the picture.
30 Oct 2020, 15:35 PM
#33
avatar of JohnSmith

Posts: 1273

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Oct 2020, 14:15 PMVipper

Commandos have great EHP that is a simple fact.



[..] There are some other factors such as camouflage and extended sight that would allow a unit to have less EHP than an otherwise identical unit, but for comparisons within the same unit category, they are an okay mark. If some stats are "too low" (whatever that means) for the price of the unit, you can deduct that they need to make up for it in utility. To stay with the snipers: They are very squishy and expensive compared to front line troops, therefore they make up for it with high range, sight, camouflage and insta kills. The EHP correctly shows that they would lose a 1v1 despite being more expensive.

The comparison of Obersoldaten and Commandos is quite off in most cases, but Stormtroopers fit quite nicely into the picture.


jump backJump back to quoted post30 Oct 2020, 13:13 PMPip


It ignores the role the unit is intended to perform, though.

[...]

The fact that they're not intended for frontline duty, and in fact if they are being shot at all you are doing something entirely wrong, isn't reflected if you talk purely about "EHP". It's part of a bigger picture, but some people seem to think it's the only thing that matters for an unit. Snipers are an extreme example, of course, but I hope it serves to illustrate my argument.


I would agree with the point that everyone on the side of the discussion that using EHP as a statistic is only viable if used directly to compare against other units in game-play situations, basically exactly as Hannibal and Pip say. EHP on its own doesn't make sense, e.g. Vipper says that commandos have great EHP overall presented as fact but he is generally wrong ; That number is as it is only valid within a very specific given context of play and compared directly against others within given limitations. The value only make sense when compared directly with something, and not just on its own - Otherwise it is a value which can be very misleading!
30 Oct 2020, 15:48 PM
#34
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


I would agree with the point that everyone on the side of the discussion that using EHP as a statistic is only viable if used directly to compare against other units in game-play situations, basically exactly as Hannibal and Pip say. EHP on its own doesn't make sense, e.g. Vipper says that commandos have great EHP overall presented as fact but he is generally wrong ; That number is as it is only valid within a very specific given context of play and compared directly against others within given limitations. The value only make sense when compared directly with something, and not just on its own - Otherwise it is a value which can be very misleading!

PLS provide specific number of proving me wrong and that Commandos EHP is bad instead of vague assumptions.

Else pls stop quoting me, commenting me or mentioning my name as you have promised once already do do.
30 Oct 2020, 15:51 PM
#35
avatar of JohnSmith

Posts: 1273

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Oct 2020, 15:48 PMVipper

PLS provide specific number of proving me wrong and that Commandos EHP is bad instead of vague assumptions.

Else pls stop quoting me, commenting me or mentioning my name as you have promised once already do do.


The reason why I say you are wrong is posted in the very same sentence.
30 Oct 2020, 15:56 PM
#37
avatar of JohnSmith

Posts: 1273

/sigh
I do not feel there's a need to reply to this choice of inappropriate words.
30 Oct 2020, 15:58 PM
#38
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



I don't think it illustrates it well.

Snipers ARE killed basically immediately in a fight. EHP shows effectively that they are squishy as intended. There are some other factors such as camouflage and extended sight that would allow a unit to have less EHP than an otherwise identical unit, but for comparisons within the same unit category they are an okay mark. If some stats are "too low" (whatever that means) for the price of the unit, you can deduce that they need to make up for it in utility. To stay with the snipers: They are very squishy and expensive compared to front line troops, therefore they make up for it with high range, sight, camouflage and insta kills. The EHP correctly shows that they would lose a 1v1 despite being more expensive.
The comparison of Obersoldaten and Commandos is quite off in most cases, but Stormtroopers fit quite nicely into the picture.


At this poitnt I have to point that I did not choose the units, others did but:
Commandos have 5 entities, start with target size 0.72 and at vet 3 have a target size of 0.65.

Their EHP are 555 are vet 0 and 615 at vet 3.

ST vet 0 426 ST vet 3 603

Commandos have simply superior EHP that ST both in vet 1 and vet3 even if the difference is small at vet 3.
30 Oct 2020, 18:05 PM
#39
avatar of Alphrum

Posts: 808







I would agree with the point that everyone on the side of the discussion that using EHP as a statistic is only viable if used directly to compare against other units in game-play situations, basically exactly as Hannibal and Pip say. EHP on its own doesn't make sense, e.g. Vipper says that commandos have great EHP overall presented as fact but he is generally wrong ; That number is as it is only valid within a very specific given context of play and compared directly against others within given limitations. The value only make sense when compared directly with something, and not just on its own - Otherwise it is a value which can be very misleading!


wtf are u talking about? commandos do generally have great EHP. honestly u seem to stalk and say the opposite of whatever vipper says and you keep playing around with words trying to sound smart, no u fked up and your wrong. Regarding commandos i really do like the smoke on retreat as it is unique and not necessarily OP, so nerfs needed regarding that
30 Oct 2020, 18:14 PM
#40
avatar of JohnSmith

Posts: 1273

Read the full sentence and full post and the points presented by other users. I said EHP is only good in relationship to another unit. EHP on its own isn't enough. Even Hannibal says something along the lines of. Of course if you only read and bold one part of a sentence taken out of context that it changes its meaning. Even Vipper agrees to it, as he then replied to contain another unit to compare the EHP with.
0 user is browsing this thread:

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

786 users are online: 786 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49065
Welcome our newest member, Huhmpal01
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM