Login

russian armor

OKW Puma

PAGES (11)down
21 Aug 2014, 09:22 AM
#21
avatar of JohnnyB

Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Aug 2014, 09:16 AMBurts


Nerfing the puma would not make it useless.


Also, you can get all tiers, and it's actually a good idea to get all tiers as OKW, unlike for the soviets.


We are entering into details to much, but getting all tiers in a 1v1 for instance it's many times signing your own execution. OKW cannot counter several medium tanks just with raketen and infantry. It will loose, even if it manages to buld the KT. Wach Jesulin(USF) vs HelpingHans(OKW) match.
The fuel shortage is to important to think long-term.
Puma is a fast, efficient and in the same time easy killable vehicle because of it's thin armor with very low AI capabilities. These two downsides balance its advantages. Why mess it up, i realy don't get it (while not being an intensive user of OKW T3, I frankly prefer T2 + T4 but even so).
21 Aug 2014, 09:36 AM
#22
avatar of HFSzsoci

Posts: 119

Hmmm, if not the defense vs med tanks, i dont know, what the PUMAs real role then, in game system?... PUMA is a 70 F vehicle, who can beat with good micro, and proper-defensive play a t34, or maybe sherman yes. The t34/sherman, have better armor/more hp-->more staying power in frontline, and far more killing power vs infantry. In a toe to toe fight, on 40 range shoot range, med tanks own puma easy. Puma is a specialist glass cannon dedicated AT, who need good micro, maintain all time the 50 shoot range, and only solution while you get panther, but med tanks are jack of all trades, and easy spammable too, i dont see the problem, in pro games i see most of times vs OKW, spam the US or Rus player his med tanks, and WIN, why?...
21 Aug 2014, 09:41 AM
#23
avatar of Cabreza

Posts: 656

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Aug 2014, 09:20 AMSlaYoU


I agree.

Also, i think Puma could very well stand toe to toe with a Sherman, let's compare the costs:

Sherman 340 mp / 110 fu
Puma 320 mp / 105 fu (70 + 50%, OKW fuel income reduction).

Not that big of a difference, the result of such a fight should be determined by microgestion quality of the players involved. The two units are very different in their role and design, so it could very well be 50/50. Do you feel you destroy shermans more than 50% of the time Barton ?

(i used the numbers of the USF forces guide, i don't own the faction, thus can't check the prices of the sherman ingame).


I should point out that the OKW receive 66% of fuel income not 50%. As has been said before OKW also have comparably cheaper tech costs compared to all other factions.
21 Aug 2014, 09:44 AM
#24
avatar of SlaYoU

Posts: 400

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Aug 2014, 09:41 AMCabreza


I should point out that the OKW receive 66% of fuel income not 50%. As has been said before OKW also have comparably cheaper tech costs compared to all other factions.


Simple maths issue: you earn 66% of something, and the other player earns 100%, he earns 50% more than you. Therefore, OKW's Puma price is 105fu.
21 Aug 2014, 09:45 AM
#25
avatar of HFSzsoci

Posts: 119

This is not 50%, not 66%, is circa 70% in avarage 1v1 map, at 50-50% mapcontroll, HQ give the same value for everyone.
21 Aug 2014, 09:46 AM
#26
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Aug 2014, 09:20 AMSlaYoU


I agree.

Also, i think Puma could very well stand toe to toe with a Sherman, let's compare the costs:

Sherman 340 mp / 110 fu
Puma 320 mp / 105 fu (70 + 50%, OKW fuel income reduction).

Not that big of a difference, the result of such a fight should be determined by microgestion quality of the players involved. The two units are very different in their role and design, so it could very well be 50/50. Do you feel you destroy shermans more than 50% of the time Barton ?

(i used the numbers of the USF forces guide, i don't own the faction, thus can't check the prices of the sherman ingame).


This is true only if you don't converse fuel, conveniently puma gets out of conversion truck.

Also, you can't say it costs more, 70 fuel is 70 fuel regardless of income, because both sides don't sit on 50% of the map whole game, its much more dynamic then that.

There is also teching cost involved, which practically does not exist for the first truck due to starting fuel allowing almost immediate placement.

So yes, the difference is there and its significant.
Unless you want to argue that 5 min puma costs almost as much as 14 min sherman.
21 Aug 2014, 09:47 AM
#27
avatar of SlaYoU

Posts: 400

This is not 50%, not 66%, is circa 70% in avarage 1v1 map, at 50-50% mapcontroll, HQ give the same value for everyone.


?? Either i don't understand what u mean, or something has been changed (and i don't know about it). Do you mean OKW has no fuel income reduction ?
21 Aug 2014, 09:52 AM
#28
avatar of SlaYoU

Posts: 400

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Aug 2014, 09:46 AMKatitof


This is true only if you don't converse fuel, conveniently puma gets out of conversion truck.

Also, you can't say it costs more, 70 fuel is 70 fuel regardless of income, because both sides don't sit on 50% of the map whole game, its much more dynamic then that.

There is also teching cost involved, which practically does not exist for the first truck due to starting fuel allowing almost immediate placement.

So yes, the difference is there and its significant.
Unless you want to argue that 5 min puma costs almost as much as 14 min sherman.


You are right i didn't take teching costs into account (and munition conversion for that matter). But 70 fuel is more for OKW than for any other faction. This can't be denied, since by design every standard point and fuel point gives 66% of what it should give. It's just the same problem with Axis players claiming that their armor is too weak when compared to Soviets' one, when Soviets have overall weaker AT capability to oppose them. Assymetrical design in all it's glory.

PS: infact since you bring the mapcontrol dynamic changes, i also remind you that OKW has arguably the weaker early game out of the 4 factions currently featured, so early fuel means a lot more to the faction. Again, i don't rant about faction balance, i'm just comparing units costs (Sherman // Puma). That's why i ask Barton what's the usual winning % of Puma vs Sherman encounters in his games.
21 Aug 2014, 09:56 AM
#29
avatar of HFSzsoci

Posts: 119

Teching System cheaper as OKW, yes, while the fuel income cc. 70%, but after the 10-12 min mark, where expensiver tech BUILD in for the first t34/sherman price, after the 2.,3., 3+ T34 can build and SPAM easy, for 100 F each, PUMA same, 70F with 70% income, that is 100F for a normal race. T34 and PUMA is same Fuel Price. T34 can REALLY destroy your inf, your Puma dont.
21 Aug 2014, 10:04 AM
#30
avatar of HFSzsoci

Posts: 119

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Aug 2014, 09:47 AMSlaYoU


?? Either i don't understand what u mean, or something has been changed (and i don't know about it). Do you mean OKW has no fuel income reduction ?


OKW have fuel reduction for POINTS, sure, 66%. But all Race gain the same value for HQ territory, 6 muni, and 4 Fuel, so here no reduction, this make overall a circa 70% fuel income reduction for OKW. My English is very bad, sorry, i hope this help a bit, and you understand, what i want write.
21 Aug 2014, 10:16 AM
#31
avatar of BartonPL

Posts: 2807 | Subs: 6

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Aug 2014, 09:52 AMSlaYoU


You are right i didn't take teching costs into account (and munition conversion for that matter). But 70 fuel is more for OKW than for any other faction. This can't be denied, since by design every standard point and fuel point gives 66% of what it should give. It's just the same problem with Axis players claiming that their armor is too weak when compared to Soviets' one, when Soviets have overall weaker AT capability to oppose them. Assymetrical design in all it's glory.

PS: infact since you bring the mapcontrol dynamic changes, i also remind you that OKW has arguably the weaker early game out of the 4 factions currently featured, so early fuel means a lot more to the faction. Again, i don't rant about faction balance, i'm just comparing units costs (Sherman // Puma). That's why i ask Barton what's the usual winning % of Puma vs Sherman encounters in his games.


With puma I beat sherman in like 80% cases, depending on howe good opponent is or did i flanked him or he flanked me, but usually puma will fire few shots before it's near dead and then smoke pop out and back to base for repairs, it happened to me to lose puma when I flanked 2 sherman but even then i killed one and left another with 5% hp.


About economy... OKW has 100% muni and 66% fuel, when it transfers muni to fuel it's 66% muni and 100% fuel, while OKW doesnt need so much muni (only shrecks are expensive) then nearly everyone gets 100% fuel.
21 Aug 2014, 10:31 AM
#32
avatar of HFSzsoci

Posts: 119

The transfer is for every 4 muni you gain 1 fuel, for the amount of your half muni income, yes? This is 25% conversion rate, i dont like, Puma itself use smoke for 30muni, the target weak points(or some other named turret paralyzed skill) is 45 muni, mines, nades, schrecks, g43, flare, off map artys, buff abiltiys etc. comes with muni too, i dont think, everyone, everytime use this transfers...
21 Aug 2014, 10:33 AM
#33
avatar of ZombieRommel

Posts: 91

The Stuart "stun crew" ability or w/e gives it a decent edge against the Puma if you can close the range, but on the whole I agree. The range on the thing is insane and the smoke lets it escape easily from danger.
21 Aug 2014, 11:03 AM
#34
avatar of Kronosaur0s

Posts: 1701

It is the only AT vehicle OKW gets at Tier 3 and you want to nerf it?
21 Aug 2014, 11:09 AM
#35
avatar of sevenfour

Posts: 222

Puma is the only reliable OKW opening vs certain strategies like vehicle rushes, fighting position on cut-off etc. At the same time it is easily counterable, guards make it go away, ZiS obviously, US AT infantry, Stuart can ambush and kill it with its super long stun. I don`t really see the problem and if the puma gets nerfed I think it`s gonna make certain strategies too powerful against OKW. I don`t like free-get-out-of-jail abilities though so I could see smoke being moved to vet 1 so you have to earn it before you start cheating death.
21 Aug 2014, 11:12 AM
#36
avatar of StephennJF

Posts: 934

Yeah it does need to be addressed the puma. At the moment in 1v1 it is literally a no brainer AT unit choice for OKW, not to mention it has respectable AI capabilities as well.

Personally I would like to see it just haved its acceleration speed reduced and its coaxial MG damage reduced. The removal of smoke I think is a bit drastic as no other units can indirectly provide smoke cover in engagements for OKW.

The vet 1 ability annoying though. If you use it in an engagement where you have an advantage it can literally be a I win button. The duration of it is huge.
21 Aug 2014, 11:16 AM
#38
avatar of SlaYoU

Posts: 400

The transfer is for every 4 muni you gain 1 fuel, for the amount of your half muni income, yes? This is 25% conversion rate, i dont like, Puma itself use smoke for 30muni, the target weak points(or some other named turret paralyzed skill) is 45 muni, mines, nades, schrecks, g43, flare, off map artys, buff abiltiys etc. comes with muni too, i dont think, everyone, everytime use this transfers...


OK, now i get what you mean, i had trouble the first time :)



With puma I beat sherman in like 80% cases, depending on howe good opponent is or did i flanked him or he flanked me, but usually puma will fire few shots before it's near dead and then smoke pop out and back to base for repairs, it happened to me to lose puma when I flanked 2 sherman but even then i killed one and left another with 5% hp.


About economy... OKW has 100% muni and 66% fuel, when it transfers muni to fuel it's 66% muni and 100% fuel, while OKW doesnt need so much muni (only shrecks are expensive) then nearly everyone gets 100% fuel.


Ok if you feel Puma wins 80% of the time, then yes, something is wrong.

About conversion, again a few numbers problems:
After conversion, it is 50% ammo and for fuel it is 66% + 1/8 of the ammo production before conversion, which (depending on the map ressources) usually means around +7 fuel, and according to my estimations, makes ~80% fuel income when compared to other factions. That puts the Puma at (70 + 70*0,25 => 87 fuel). So ok it is cheaper than sherman, but still rather costly, if u consider that the Oberkommando players gives up 50% of his ammo.

PS: if you factor in teching costs, then the starting fuel of the Oberkommando player covers up for T3 tech, but the cost of the unit is still ~87-90 fuel afterwards, so only the first Puma may seem underpriced.

21 Aug 2014, 11:46 AM
#39
avatar of Warthrone

Posts: 205

Permanently Banned
Am i the only one that sees this unit overperforming too much? not only it has longer firing range than other common units like T34 but also has insta smoke ability and this "jammed turret" vet 1 ability which is win button, also it has super reload time, had game where with one Puma I killed Shermans with E.Z.


Any opinions? and pls dont tell me it's balanced cuz it costs moar than ostheer Puma


You are talking about OP and you use 3 sniper strategy vs OKW all the time? HA HA
21 Aug 2014, 11:54 AM
#40
avatar of Arclyte

Posts: 692

I think it's fine except for it's pen. It has a very real chance of beating medium tanks 1v1 if it stays at range, which isn't hard.

I don't understand why a 50mm cannon has superior pen to the t34 / sherman (25% more, 120 pen vs 160)
PAGES (11)down
0 user is browsing this thread:

Livestreams

unknown 22
United States 149
New Zealand 17

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

841 users are online: 841 guests
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49131
Welcome our newest member, Mcwowell05
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM