Login

russian armor

What should Relic do to increase allies-players?

  • This thread is locked
PAGES (13)down
18 Aug 2014, 18:39 PM
#61
avatar of wooof

Posts: 950 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Aug 2014, 18:33 PMCruzz

If you seriously think a 160 penetration (same as faust) engine damage crit is useful for 310mp/100fuel, I have no words. The chance of a weapon crit AFTER PASSING THE PENETRATION CHECK is 5%.


its meant to be used with a t34 thats about to die. considering a t34 is significantly faster than infantry, it means you can hit vehicles that would otherwise kite your squads.

ram is still useful. it might not be able to take a heavy tank out of a game on its own anymore, but i think we can all agree that was ridiculous, especially with industry. relic wanted it to be used as a last resort and thats what it is now.

keep in mind, the t34 is also significantly better than the days when it was only useful for ram
18 Aug 2014, 19:14 PM
#63
avatar of Cruzz

Posts: 1221 | Subs: 41

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Aug 2014, 18:39 PMwooof


its meant to be used with a t34 thats about to die. considering a t34 is significantly faster than infantry, it means you can hit vehicles that would otherwise kite your squads.

ram is still useful. it might not be able to take a heavy tank out of a game on its own anymore, but i think we can all agree that was ridiculous, especially with industry. relic wanted it to be used as a last resort and thats what it is now.


The thing is, the reward for the current ram is so low, I'll take the ~20% RNG chance that opponent guns misses or crits my T34 instead of attempting a ram, every single time in every single situation. 20% chance of a T34 surviving is better than what Ram gives 95% of the time, and I'm not gonna bet on that 5% happening. And I'm giving Ram the benefit of doubt here by assuming it'll actually work, which it mostly doesn't. Even back when the reward for it was immense, targeting issues were a huge problem. And that hasn't been touched one bit in the stats nerfs of it.
18 Aug 2014, 19:25 PM
#64
avatar of Imagelessbean

Posts: 1585 | Subs: 1

You should not be using ram to get crits. You should be using ram to beat the injured tank because it has slightly better penetration than your T34.

The anger when you ram an injured P4 with an about to die t34 and trade, priceless. That is what it is good for now, and I like it that way.
18 Aug 2014, 19:49 PM
#65
avatar of Corp.Shephard

Posts: 359

Yeah, I don't think the Risk vs Reward for Ram is good at all in it's current state.

If your T34/76 is:
  • At a long enough range where it can ram
  • Doesn't have a damaged engine
  • Too hurt to continue fighting


These are the criteria you need to ram.

They're also the criteria you need to run away though.

Which basically means you should run. This not not a cheap tank anymore. You're better off trying to bait the enemy into button, a mine, an AT gun or other situation where you have the advantage. Throwing away a chance to keep your tank alive for some engine damage requires you to have follow up damage right then and there.

It's... just a bad and very niche ability these days.

To go back to the original point I don't think build diversity actually makes the difference for the population imbalance.

Ostheer has like one viable build in the game.

  • A hefty Tier 1 start
  • A fairly quick tech up to Tier 2. Heavy Tier 2 play.
  • (Optional) Tier 3 for a singular Panzer 4 if you're ahead on fuel.
  • CP 10: All fuel now relegated to Tigers.


... that's sort of it. Tier 4's expensive and hard to use. Tier 1 and Tier 2 can't be covered by call-ins so you can't skip them. There's just not a lot of options.

By comparison you can see a lot more diverse strategies from Soviets.

I don't know why the difference is there. It's a mysterious majority.
18 Aug 2014, 19:59 PM
#66
avatar of J1N6666

Posts: 306

Yeah, I don't think the Risk vs Reward for Ram is good at all in it's current state.

If your T34/76 is:
  • At a long enough range where it can ram
  • Doesn't have a damaged engine
  • Too hurt to continue fighting


These are the criteria you need to ram.

They're also the criteria you need to run away though.

Which basically means you should run. This not not a cheap tank anymore.


I miss the 70 Fuel T34.
18 Aug 2014, 20:35 PM
#67
avatar of Greeb

Posts: 971

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Aug 2014, 18:00 PMwooof


i dont get it. youve played a total of 7 games NOT as soviets. how would you know how fun okw and ostheer are?


Because I also play with them in custom games, and those games doesn't get registered in my playercard but are equally efective to make my impressions about a faction.

And you don't need too much imagination to see that being able to build only 2 buildings out of 4, as soviets do, is way more boring because you only can use half of the units the faction have.


jump backJump back to quoted post18 Aug 2014, 18:00 PMwooof
by the way, i really like how you consider placing okw trucks to be fun.

Because there's strategy involved in placing your trucks depending of how many risk do you want to take. You can be very aggressive or not. At least is a change of pace that soviets or usf doesn't have.
They are stuck in the same opening every game, being the only real choice if you go sniper+guards or maxim+shocks.

EDIT: But well, being more or less fun is a subjective opinion, that one can agree or not.

I play with soviets because I liked the infantry and medium tanks gameplay when conscripts and T70/T34 were viable. Now soviets are absolutely boring but I'm not in the mood to learn another faction. I prefer to wait for a balance patch
18 Aug 2014, 20:39 PM
#68
avatar of wooof

Posts: 950 | Subs: 1

ill just quote shephard since he already preempted your post.


Ostheer has like one viable build in the game.

  • A hefty Tier 1 start
  • A fairly quick tech up to Tier 2. Heavy Tier 2 play.
  • (Optional) Tier 3 for a singular Panzer 4 if you're ahead on fuel.
  • CP 10: All fuel now relegated to Tigers.


... that's sort of it. Tier 4's expensive and hard to use. Tier 1 and Tier 2 can't be covered by call-ins so you can't skip them. There's just not a lot of options.

By comparison you can see a lot more diverse strategies from Soviets.
18 Aug 2014, 20:44 PM
#69
avatar of Greeb

Posts: 971

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Aug 2014, 20:39 PMwooof
ill just quote shephard since he already preempted your post.



Opinions, dude. Each one has his.

I don't think soviets has to many options. There're maps were you can't do anything except maxim spam.
I find that at least, Ostheer can adapt if you did a bad tech choice. And OKW has good units en each tier.

Building the incorrect tier as soviet is the end of the game. 80% of the units you will use in the game will be doctrinal, roughly all your infantry and tanks.
Gambling all your game to tech and doctrine choices it's not fun.
18 Aug 2014, 20:49 PM
#70
avatar of J1N6666

Posts: 306

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Aug 2014, 20:39 PMwooof
ill just quote shephard since he already preempted your post.



Somehow I feel like these discussions should go on Napalm's Soviet discussion thread. =O

Anyways, I would say the amount of options those 3 tiers + their commanders offers a wide variety of playstyles.

For Soviets, if you see what their 1st tier is, you basically know what he's gonna do for the rest of the game (T1 / T4 , T2 / T3). Doctrines are more or less the only saving grace the soviets have. Although the faction might be balanced as of now, it still doesn't make it any more pleasing to play... COMPARED TO SOVIETS IN THE BETA!!!

70 FUEL T34 GTA RAMMERS YEAAAAHH!!!!
18 Aug 2014, 20:58 PM
#71
avatar of wooof

Posts: 950 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Aug 2014, 20:49 PMJ1N6666

Anyways, I would say the amount of options those 3 tiers + their commanders offers a wide variety of playstyles.

For Soviets, if you see what their 1st tier is, you basically know what he's gonna do for the rest of the game (T1 / T4 , T2 / T3). Doctrines are more or less the only saving grace the soviets have.


soviets are designed to rely on doctrines. even so, seeing the first tier doesnt mean anything. you listed two fairly common examples, but you can easily build t1/t2 and never tech. that means you might have to prepare for kv1/b4 or t34/85 or is2 or isu. people also build both t1 AND t2 thanks to not having to tech, then any of the end game units i just listed.

compare that to germans. t1, t2, maybe t3 for a p4, tiger.

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Aug 2014, 20:44 PMGreeb


Opinions, dude. Each one has his.

I don't think soviets has to many options. There're maps were you can't do anything except maxim spam.
I find that at least, Ostheer can adapt if you did a bad tech choice. And OKW has good units en each tier.

Building the incorrect tier as soviet is the end of the game. 80% of the units you will use in the game will be doctrinal, roughly all your infantry and tanks.
Gambling all your game to tech and doctrine choices it's not fun.


what can the germans do to make you have a bad tech choice? t1 or t2 are both perfectly viable against anything the germans build. besides, its not like there is going to be any surprise on what the german does. grens and mgs. possibly assault grens. i find the germans are the ones who have to react to the soviet build, not the other way around.
18 Aug 2014, 21:03 PM
#72
avatar of lanciano

Posts: 210



Katitof my good sir, you have proven my point, after 5mins you have issues using any unit other than maxims or snipers, your words not mine. Clearly you have a fundamental issue with using the units at your disposal, please learn how to use these units before demanding relic buff them for your own gratification........

I and 99% of all Soviet players actually have no issues with any soviet stock inf unit, and certainly not with any call in inf unit/inf package, please understand the design of the Soviet faction, understand the call in inf style that they have and always have had.

Please do us all a favour and stop with this UP soviet inf/no scaling madness, regards :)


I agree with katitof mate, soviets have had this poor design Issue from day one.
18 Aug 2014, 21:15 PM
#73
avatar of maskedmonkey2

Posts: 262

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Aug 2014, 20:58 PMwooof


soviets are designed to rely on doctrines.


You seem to be repeating this like it proves some sort of point... maybe I am just dense, but I fail to see what exactly that is.

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Aug 2014, 20:58 PMwooof

seeing the first tier doesnt mean anything. you listed two fairly common examples, but you can easily build t1/t2 and never tech. that means you might have to prepare for kv1/b4 or t34/85 or is2 or isu. people also build both t1 AND t2 thanks to not having to tech, then any of the end game units i just listed.


Soviets are realistically only going to build T1 OR T2, I can count the number of times I have seen both built on one hand. Also, a soviet player CAN not tech to T3 or T4, but if the Axis player(s) give them enough time to get the CPs required (un-aided by the construction of another tier) without making any notable gains for themselves, The game is clearly not exactly going in their favor
18 Aug 2014, 21:23 PM
#74
avatar of wooof

Posts: 950 | Subs: 1



You seem to be repeating this like it proves some sort of point... maybe I am just dense, but I fail to see what exactly that is.



i only say it in response every time someone says "but soviets rely on doctrines". would you like to give some evidence that contradicts what i said?


Soviets are realistically only going to build T1 OR T2, I can count the number of times I have seen both built on one hand. Also, a soviet player CAN not tech to T3 or T4, but if the Axis player(s) give them enough time to get the CPs required (un-aided by the construction of another tier) without making any notable gains for themselves, The game is clearly not exactly going in their favor


realistically only t1 or t2? why is that? because theyre so short on fuel?

and sorry, im not even sure what that last run on sentence means.
18 Aug 2014, 21:40 PM
#75
avatar of MajorBloodnok
Admin Red  Badge
Patrion 314

Posts: 10665 | Subs: 9

Post invised for unnecessary trolling.

If you have nothing meaningful to add, it is better to stay stumm. "Yah Boo Sucks: my epeen is better than yours" will not suffice as any type of meaningful post.
18 Aug 2014, 21:50 PM
#76
avatar of maskedmonkey2

Posts: 262

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Aug 2014, 21:23 PMwooof


i only say it in response every time someone says "but soviets rely on doctrines". would you like to give some evidence that contradicts what i said?


So it is an irrelevant (and affirming) counter-point to a factual statement?

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Aug 2014, 21:23 PMwooof

realistically only t1 or t2? why is that? because they're so short on fuel?


Not exactly, (though there is something to be said about delaying tech) I'm sure it has more to do with the fact that the initial MP investment required would nullify the purpose.

That MP is sorely needed to generate the greater numbers of INFERIOR units in the early game to prevent being pushed off the field in the first engagements.

If the soviet player waits to build T2 until later in the game, mortars and maxims are not giving you near the return on investment you would have gotten had you skipped T1 from the start. Also, I don't see any reason for me to go into the absurdity of building T2 then T1..

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Aug 2014, 21:23 PMwooof

and sorry, im not even sure what that last run on sentence means.


Apology accepted, I will try again.

I began by acknowledging the fact that a Soviet player does have the ability to NOT tech past the first building (NO T3 or T4).

However, if the opposing player(s) haven't made sizable gains (in terms of map/resource control) and allow the soviets (With their SINGLE tier) to hold points long enough to get the CPs necessary to unlock call-in armor (without the half-CP generated by teching up), I assure you that the game is already being lost.

Back to the matter at hand: Generalist units require less micro than specialized units, hence the imbalance in player base.

18 Aug 2014, 21:52 PM
#77
avatar of sevenfour

Posts: 222

Final victory has been achieved:

18 Aug 2014, 22:00 PM
#78
avatar of SUCKmyCLOCK

Posts: 207

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Aug 2014, 18:37 PMKatitof

Perhaps you should update your game as you seem to be stuck in a client few months old.

Current ram if it penetrates does engine damage 95% of the time.
If you believe 300mp/100fu AT nade is 'working' or 'dangerous' in any way, you must play in a extremely low level of skill(which actually is supported by your playercard).


I'd rather have infantry that can fight then infantry that is a limited 251 halftruck on foot that needs to go back to base after 2 entities get reinforced for 33% increased cost in case of weapon teams and small discount in case of guards.

I'm quite sure thou that you enjoy conscript complete inability to fight any infantry past 5 minute of the game.


Dont be calling out that chap on his player card Katitof when you wont even show your own, at least that guy has the courage to do so instead of hiding it sir............
18 Aug 2014, 22:08 PM
#79
avatar of wooof

Posts: 950 | Subs: 1



So it is an irrelevant (and affirming) counter-point to a factual statement?


its not irrelevant. i am merely pointing at that saying "soviets rely on doctrines" isnt some huge game breaking disadvantage. the soviets are meant to be played this way. since you know ive said this multiple times, im sure i dont have to give evidence to support that. ill ask again, do you have any evidence to show otherwise?

im not even going to bother with the rest. the fact you think soviets actually tech speaks for itself.
18 Aug 2014, 22:21 PM
#80
avatar of maskedmonkey2

Posts: 262

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Aug 2014, 22:08 PMwooof


its not irrelevant. i am merely pointing at that saying "soviets rely on doctrines" isnt some huge game breaking disadvantage. the soviets are meant to be played this way. since you know ive said this multiple times, im sure i dont have to give evidence to support that. ill ask again, do you have any evidence to show otherwise?


That's the thing, nobody is disputing that soviets rely on doctrines. I was merely inquiring as to the benefit you think your cries of "But they are supposed to be that way!" offer to the conversation.

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Aug 2014, 22:08 PMwooof

im not even going to bother with the rest. the fact you think soviets actually tech speaks for itself.


Good idea staying away from that one, (I was secretly lying). My builds always consist of spamming cons and shocks until ISU comes out.
PAGES (13)down
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

589 users are online: 589 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49062
Welcome our newest member, Mclatc16
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM