Login

russian armor

Umm US Jeep?

8 Jul 2014, 03:49 AM
#41
avatar of Ginnungagap

Posts: 324 | Subs: 2


Why is it a bad thing that people are forced to build counters for units? Do you complain that your rifles don't penetrate a Tiger?


To take your example: Imagine the Tiger can only be damaged by AT guns. Not by tanks, not by bazookas, only one unit can damage it. And that one unit is less mobile, needs a setup time, has an arc of fire, only 50 range and is vulnerable to everything else.

The WC51 with Rifles in it can drive into a group of Volks and Sturmpios, hiding behind green cover, and force a retreat or kill squads faster than they can seriously damage the Jeep. You don't have 90 munitions for a Panzerschreck for a while, so you are forced to rely on the Raketenwerfer every time - and that means loss of map control because you only can defend so much territory at once.

There is a lack of soft counters for OKW, which may very well lead to a forced, predictable early game.
8 Jul 2014, 04:28 AM
#42
avatar of WhySooSerious

Posts: 1248

dem Relic Logic jeeps :P
8 Jul 2014, 04:41 AM
#43
avatar of JHeartless

Posts: 1637

It's a dodge not a Jeep. They are bigger heavier and slower than a Jeep. I haven't sacrificed a herd of goats to the war spoils god but I can imagine what a PITA this thing can be. Should make it alot slower than an M3.
8 Jul 2014, 04:53 AM
#44
avatar of Brachiaraidos

Posts: 627

It's a dodge not a Jeep. They are bigger heavier and slower than a Jeep. I haven't sacrificed a herd of goats to the war spoils god but I can imagine what a PITA this thing can be. Should make it alot slower than an M3.


It is.

It is slower. And less front armour. And less health. And 50MP/5Fu more. And accelerates slower. And decelerates slower.

Mostly marginally, though. No huge differences. It's just a more lumbering M3.
8 Jul 2014, 05:43 AM
#45
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

I hope i got the right stats.

M3 vs Dodge

MxSpd: 7.3 vs 7.0
Size: 18.0 vs 14.0
F.Arm: 5.4 vs 5.2
R.Arm: 4.2 vs 4.0
Hp: 200 vs 180
Acc: 2/5.0 vs 2.1/???
Rot: 45 vs 30

DPS:
7.63 6.412 4.029
16.132 7.573 3.98
Pen:
1.5/1.3/1.25
3.0/2.0/1.0
Range: 35 vs 40

Why i find it more annoying as OH rather than M3?

M3: requires CE to build T1, locking him to a heavy AI tier, and still have to wait till 4rd unit to build first M3 (you won´t have the fuel).

Dodge: 0 CP. I guess with the starting fuel you can get it as a 3rd unit. No tech investment.
Rifles long range high dps (in comparison to CE/Cons) will make you bleed even when in cover.

It´s lovely when they rush you because (on the same way it worked with M3 before nerf) they know you still don´t have munition for faust and deal close quarter damage for free.
8 Jul 2014, 05:54 AM
#46
avatar of wooof

Posts: 950 | Subs: 1

its acceleration is actually slightly higher (not sure what numbers you guys are looking at). its to speed is barely lower. as i said before, its front armor is insignificantly less.

but its damage and pen is much higher than that of the m3. it has 40 range. its high rear armor means getting behind it is barely rewarding, so people can just drive it into okw squads without fear.

not to mention theres an exploit for it in team games with soviets. not going to explain that further.
8 Jul 2014, 05:59 AM
#47
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Jul 2014, 05:54 AMwooof
its acceleration is actually slightly higher (not sure what numbers you guys are looking at). its to speed is barely lower. as i said before, its front armor is insignificantly less.

but its damage and pen is much higher than that of the m3. it has 40 range. its high rear armor means getting behind it is barely rewarding, so people can just drive it into okw squads without fear.

not to mention theres an exploit for it in team games with soviets. not going to explain that further.


Abandoning vehicle and giving it to your teammate is hardly an exploit as even devs said its encouraged mechanic.

If you want to be concerned with anything, try dodge truck with airborne pathfinders inside for mobile "sniper" unit.
8 Jul 2014, 06:07 AM
#48
avatar of wooof

Posts: 950 | Subs: 1



Abandoning vehicle and giving it to your teammate is hardly an exploit as even devs said its encouraged mechanic.


thats not the issue.
8 Jul 2014, 06:25 AM
#49
avatar of Brachiaraidos

Posts: 627

M3: requires CE to build T1, locking him to a heavy AI tier, and still have to wait till 4rd unit to build first M3 (you won´t have the fuel).

Dodge: 0 CP. I guess with the starting fuel you can get it as a 3rd unit. No tech investment.
Rifles long range high dps (in comparison to CE/Cons) will make you bleed even when in cover.

It´s lovely when they rush you because (on the same way it worked with M3 before nerf) they know you still don´t have munition for faust and deal close quarter damage for free.


Seems I had the acceleration the wrong way round. But still, most all very small differences.

The real damage of either comes from the squad inside. Flamers for the soviets and riflemen (and eventually BAR) for the USF.

For what it is, the stat differences seem pretty justified for an extra 50MP/5FU.

Regardless, the time between first M3 and dodge is entirely optional. USF need to get 5 more fuel to take them to 20, USSR need 5 more fuel to get them to 55.

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Jul 2014, 06:07 AMwooof
thats not the issue.


If you're talking about putting snipers into them, it's nothing new, nor some sort of ultra secret.

Most people don't do it because it involves team co-ordination, a lot of resources and T0 anti-tank is available for OKW. The glory days of the M3 being faster, tougher, and also having snipers in all from the T1 building aren't up for a resurgence any time soon.
8 Jul 2014, 15:23 PM
#50
avatar of Napalm

Posts: 1595 | Subs: 2

Rocketenwerfer anyone?


Could pretty much close the thread at this. A supported Rocktenwerfer will lower the Dodge to the point where a Strumpio group can finish it off.
8 Jul 2014, 15:41 PM
#51
avatar of Napalm

Posts: 1595 | Subs: 2


If you're talking about putting snipers into them, it's nothing new, nor some sort of ultra secret.

Most people don't do it because it involves team co-ordination, a lot of resources and T0 anti-tank is available for OKW. The glory days of the M3 being faster, tougher, and also having snipers in all from the T1 building aren't up for a resurgence any time soon.


This pleases me.

8 Jul 2014, 15:50 PM
#52
avatar of Aurgelwulf

Posts: 184

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Jul 2014, 15:23 PMNapalm


Could pretty much close the thread at this. A supported Rocktenwerfer will lower the Dodge to the point where a Strumpio group can finish it off.


Going Rocktenwerfer as one of your first three units in OKW is a death sentence anyway, the limiting capping power and combat effectiveness kills the early start for OKW, who are already having a nightmare of a time at the start of the game.
8 Jul 2014, 15:57 PM
#53
avatar of Napalm

Posts: 1595 | Subs: 2

Perhaps bumping this unit up to 1 CP would address the issue as it sounds like timing is the primary concern.
8 Jul 2014, 16:24 PM
#54
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8



Going Rocktenwerfer as one of your first three units in OKW is a death sentence anyway, the limiting capping power and combat effectiveness kills the early start for OKW, who are already having a nightmare of a time at the start of the game.

Then don't complain that light vehicles overrun you if you refuse to get a hardcounter for them.
8 Jul 2014, 17:12 PM
#55
avatar of wooof

Posts: 950 | Subs: 1


Then don't complain that light vehicles overrun you if you refuse to get a hardcounter for them.


yea, you should always gamble your early game on the chance they have a 0 cp vehicle. always build a rakatenwerfer as your first or second unit. the best part is its also able to retreat when you inevitably get overrun by rifles. this build never fails.


sincerely,
katitof
#1 1v1 okw player
8 Jul 2014, 17:19 PM
#56
avatar of sea peasant

Posts: 36

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Jul 2014, 17:12 PMwooof


yea, you should always gamble your early game on the chance they have a 0 cp vehicle. always build a rakatenwerfer as your first or second unit. the best part is its also able to retreat when you inevitably get overrun by rifles. this build never fails.


sincerely,
katitof
#1 1v1 okw player


rekt. All these players saying going rakatenwerfer second dont have a clue.
8 Jul 2014, 17:27 PM
#57
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

Move jeep to 1 CP
Move Mechanized groups to 2 CPs
Move US HT and SU HT to 4 CP
8 Jul 2014, 17:42 PM
#58
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Jul 2014, 17:12 PMwooof


yea, you should always gamble your early game on the chance they have a 0 cp vehicle. always build a rakatenwerfer as your first or second unit. the best part is its also able to retreat when you inevitably get overrun by rifles. this build never fails.


sincerely,
katitof
#1 1v1 okw player


And who is saying you should get it blindly?
You'll see dodge pretty early, so you'll be able to readjust your 4th unit.
8 Jul 2014, 17:45 PM
#59
avatar of Dayaveer

Posts: 69

Just make it 1CP and problem fixed.
8 Jul 2014, 17:48 PM
#60
avatar of Dayaveer

Posts: 69

And for anyone thinking rocketwerfer is valid, lights up. Even if you make rocketwerfer unit as second unit it does not guarantee a kill :D
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
2 posts in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
40 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49069
Welcome our newest member, octavia15
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM