Login

russian armor

Munitions abilites GREATLY Allies Favour

  • This thread is locked
PAGES (6)down
5 Oct 2014, 10:00 AM
#1
avatar of taxman66

Posts: 276

Permanently Banned
So this is basically a comparison of munitions abilities from nades to mines and the like between Axis and Allies.

The problem is generally with the OKW and Soviets (and maybe to a lesser extent the USF). The Wehrmacht on the otherhand seem to be well balanced compared to Sovs and USF as they equally share competant abilities at a reasonable price.

The problem is that OKW abilities are a lot weaker and a lot more expensive because OKW only get 80% munitions.

For instance,

The Soviet mine is worth 30 munitions and is just as good as the Schu-mine. But realistically speaking the schu-mine costs 36 munitions if it was available to the soviets.

Other examples include the Guards' grenade, which has a better AoE than any other grenade in the game, has an incredibly quick throw, which is also the least noticeable by your opponent. Yet why does it cost just as much munitions as a bundled grenade - an inferior ability. Slightly off topic, but the bundled grenade has greater damage directly where it is thrown and has a lower AoE, but what point is this when allied troops spread out in large numbers and have low health anyway? If anything, the bundled grenade should have the better AoE and the guards' nades should get the damage buff.

So, how does Relic expect us to pay so much munitions for booby traps, mines, grenades, and the like if they're horrible against Allied troops, which are so much cheaper. If I use a Schu-mine, for example, what's the best possible target? 3 vet conscripts, guards, shocks? ALl of these units spread out like crazy and it's impossible to wipe them. Whereas the less expensive Soviet mine plays a more valuable role, even though it is cheaper - it can easily squad wipe a 4 vet volk squad with shrek - A HUGE loss.

Moreover, by design, OKW have less armour map presence than the other factions until much later in the game so even if a Schu-mine damages the engine of a t-70, t34 or the like, it usually gets away fairly safely (unless you already have a panther or a blob of volks nearby - fairly rare in the mid-early game). Compare this to taking out the engine of a luchs...It's probably going to get swept up by conscripts, t70, t34 or a zis gun comparatively easily.

There's a lot more i can mention in this post, such as the cheapness of molotovs, Zis gun barrage, Oorah, anti tank grenade compared to their effectiveness but I think i've summed this up fairly well.

The fact is, USF and Soviets can easily win a game with hundreds of floated munitions since their army is not munitions dependant like OKW, so they can easily spend those munitions throughout the game on mines etc. which make it almost impossible for the OKW to respond to.
5 Oct 2014, 10:12 AM
#2
avatar of Seeker

Posts: 83

I do agree on some mainly that it is easier to squad wipe axis squads, but some OKW abilities are too cheap like infiltration grenades. Also OKW need schrecks to deal with armour early on like M20 or M3 so regular grenades can't be used often, I don't get why some want OKW to pay for obersoldaten LMGs and fal FG42s when you can't get many mines or grenades even. This could be helped if they made raketenwerfers more appealing versus armoured cars.
5 Oct 2014, 10:13 AM
#3
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

God, everything after the 1st line is so wrong that it was painful to read.
5 Oct 2014, 10:16 AM
#4
avatar of QueenRatchet123

Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2

Permanently Banned
Some abilities can easily be too much...

like spamming zis barrages for example..

There is alot u can do

mines= minesweepers

u can also clear mortars and ATG guns with stuka easily.

I dont agree that okw abilitie are weaker. Okw get the best and cheapest spy plane in-game (flares) obers get lmg for free. Falls get 4 fg42's for free. Mg's on tanks are really cheap. invest in shreks and u can easily deny all allied armor flanks.

Basically l2p...
5 Oct 2014, 10:24 AM
#5
avatar of LemonJuice

Posts: 1144 | Subs: 7

you just need to be very selective of which munition abilities are important to you. priority #1 should be shreks, and after that it is up to your discretion and what the situation calls for. is a grenade necessary to win a fight? is it worth the munitions booby trap this point? am i likely to get a vehicle hit with this mine? do i have enough fuel where i can begin transferring to munitions?

5 Oct 2014, 10:26 AM
#6
avatar of Steiner500

Posts: 183

So this is basically a comparison of munitions abilities from nades to mines and the like between Axis and Allies.

The problem is generally with the OKW and Soviets (and maybe to a lesser extent the USF). The Wehrmacht on the otherhand seem to be well balanced compared to Sovs and USF as they equally share competant abilities at a reasonable price.

The problem is that OKW abilities are a lot weaker and a lot more expensive because OKW only get 80% munitions.

For instance,

The Soviet mine is worth 30 munitions and is just as good as the Schu-mine. But realistically speaking the schu-mine costs 36 munitions if it was available to the soviets.

Other examples include the Guards' grenade, which has a better AoE than any other grenade in the game, has an incredibly quick throw, which is also the least noticeable by your opponent. Yet why does it cost just as much munitions as a bundled grenade - an inferior ability. Slightly off topic, but the bundled grenade has greater damage directly where it is thrown and has a lower AoE, but what point is this when allied troops spread out in large numbers and have low health anyway? If anything, the bundled grenade should have the better AoE and the guards' nades should get the damage buff.

So, how does Relic expect us to pay so much munitions for booby traps, mines, grenades, and the like if they're horrible against Allied troops, which are so much cheaper. If I use a Schu-mine, for example, what's the best possible target? 3 vet conscripts, guards, shocks? ALl of these units spread out like crazy and it's impossible to wipe them. Whereas the less expensive Soviet mine plays a more valuable role, even though it is cheaper - it can easily squad wipe a 4 vet volk squad with shrek - A HUGE loss.

Moreover, by design, OKW have less armour map presence than the other factions until much later in the game so even if a Schu-mine damages the engine of a t-70, t34 or the like, it usually gets away fairly safely (unless you already have a panther or a blob of volks nearby - fairly rare in the mid-early game). Compare this to taking out the engine of a luchs...It's probably going to get swept up by conscripts, t70, t34 or a zis gun comparatively easily.

There's a lot more i can mention in this post, such as the cheapness of molotovs, Zis gun barrage, Oorah, anti tank grenade compared to their effectiveness but I think i've summed this up fairly well.

The fact is, USF and Soviets can easily win a game with hundreds of floated munitions since their army is not munitions dependant like OKW, so they can easily spend those munitions throughout the game on mines etc. which make it almost impossible for the OKW to respond to.

Not true.
5 Oct 2014, 10:44 AM
#7
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

USF have the biggest problem to spend ammo for other stuff than weapons upgrade.
USF AT nades are horrbile. Rifle can stand right next to Puma, use AT nade and even then they won't throw it cause Puma is already out of reach. Pfaust and Cons AT nades are homing ones so it's easy to hit.
No mines. You can plant with M20 but going for lieutenant just only to get mines is wrong...
Also doctrinal mines are stupid. Those mines should be planted in packs not individually.
How many ammo I must spend to use Rifles flare? How many for OKW flare? I think USF is more expensive.

So You say that Soviets and USF can spend ammo to mines.
As Soviets you can plant mines or use barrages, DP-28, Molotov, AT nades. You cant get everything but let's say I agree.
But as USF? What mines are you talkig about? USF dont have mines like others faction. You need to get M20 and if you lose it there is not none unit that can plant mines.
5 Oct 2014, 10:56 AM
#8
avatar of StephennJF

Posts: 934

I don't know. I've always found munition investment to have a more profound impact on the game for Axis than it has for Allies. Comparing the pair in a very general context:

  • Axis = Long term munition investments to further enhance units and has a very predictable influence on each engagement. These munition investments can be partially mitigated by good micromanagement from the Allies player.
  • Allies = Short term munition investments including grenades, off-map strikes and few weapon upgrades unless doctrine provides otherwise. These munition investments can be completely mitigated by good micromanagement from the Axis player.


Wehrmacht has as you say the most consistant or as I like to say 'easiest' munition expenses. All you really need to invest into is grenadier LMG upgrades and the rest of your munitions is just icing on the cake for everything else.

OKW base units already come with. The only thing that stands out as a must have upgrade is the panzershreck, but only if your opponent gets armour. Otherwise just keep investing it into well timed grenades. The comparison between the OKW and SOV mine is a bit illogical as well. Squad wiping with a single mine because squad size differences/pathing does not bare context to munition investment. Not to mention what a OKW/OST minefield can do to a single retreating USF/SOV squad.

Soviets have nothing to dump their munitions into asides from mines. Molotovs, AT nades and ability spam are only used when required and they can avoided by the Axis player anyway. Molotov can force predictable influences on the battlefield in the right positions but that is about it. Everything is high risk, high reward munition investments. I just float munitions as Soviets to burn on more reliable things including mines, recon runs, strafes and off-map strikes.

USF currently perhaps has the worst favoured munition investments in the game, not only because of their low performance but the fact they have a great influence on your future unit composition. Having anti-infantry or anti-tank capablilites in your army is a difficult thing to balance and mistake in judgement can be extremely punishing! Especially in the current meta, this option for USF versatility does more harm than good. USF grenades are high risk, high reward as well and are easily mitigated in high rank play. I just upgrade this for the smoke grenade upgrade and the 6-8 pineapple nades that I'll throw because I know my opponent will not have the time to react to simulatenous grenades.

In my eyes Axis upgrades are superior at the moment for their consistancy and reliance. I couldn't care less if I have to pay more for an upgrade that is less dependant on my opponents errors and can be used in almost every situation in the game.

Not to mention your also forgetting the MP/fuel cost associated with a lot of the SOV/USF upgrades when compared to OST/OKW for core infantry. That in itself compensates the OKW/OST player by having more units on the field compared to SOV/USF.
5 Oct 2014, 11:23 AM
#9
avatar of Kitahara

Posts: 96

God, everything after the 1st line is so wrong that it was painful to read.


What he said. Did you, dear op, even bother to think about, who has to pay mun for what?

Now do that, come back here and say your sorry for that waste of a bandwith post. And also feel sorry for yourself, having invested so much time writing, when a little thinking could have spared you the trouble. And read Stephens post and be thankfull, for he is beeing purely constructive and helps maybe with your thinking.
5 Oct 2014, 11:40 AM
#10
avatar of taxman66

Posts: 276

Permanently Banned


What he said. Did you, dear op, even bother to think about, who has to pay mun for what?

Now do that, come back here and say your sorry for that waste of a bandwith post. And also feel sorry for yourself, having invested so much time writing, when a little thinking could have spared you the trouble. And read Stephens post and be thankfull, for he is beeing purely constructive and helps maybe with your thinking.


Yes I did actually...I liked steph's post as it pretty much highlighted what I'm talking about. I disagreed with some of his points but generally it was a good post. Yours on the otherhand doesnt highlight why i am so wrong. You're so much of a devoted fanboy you don't want this game balanced.
5 Oct 2014, 11:45 AM
#12
avatar of Seeker

Posts: 83

What would people think of giving Volks an MP40 upgrade pack make them more flexible, instead of just AT infantry, plus it would give OKW players something to spend munition on other than spamming grenades.

It could be in a doctrine like conscript ppsh package
5 Oct 2014, 11:47 AM
#13
avatar of QueenRatchet123

Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post5 Oct 2014, 11:45 AMSeeker
What would people think of giving Volks an MP40 upgrade pack make them more flexible, instead of just AT infantry, plus it would give OKW players something to spend munition on other than spamming grenades.

It could be in a doctrine like conscript ppsh package


That would be an interesting commander
5 Oct 2014, 11:48 AM
#14
avatar of Hagen67483

Posts: 65

Soviets don`t have good upgrade options like both german factions, because of that they have better mines and abilitys. Soviets always were the faction that had to use abilitys and mines more than other factions.
5 Oct 2014, 11:48 AM
#15
avatar of Seeker

Posts: 83



That would be an interesting commander


Plus they would get vet slower for infantry kills. So they won't get vet 5 as easy as schreck ones.
5 Oct 2014, 12:31 PM
#16
avatar of Porygon

Posts: 2779

Relic just fuck up OKW more with this 80% munition FFS.

It does not only affect OKW munition invest, everyone would transfer muni into fuel anyway, making OKW suffering the handicap from 50% into 40%, fuel income also reduced because of less muni transfer into fuel.

I don't care shit how OP is OKW in 3v3, 4v4, but this lazy balancing method just FUCKED UP 1v1.
5 Oct 2014, 12:36 PM
#18
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Relic just fuck up OKW more with this 80% munition FFS.


Oh that poor underpowered OKW previously, with weak early game and weak late game. <444>_<444> :loco:
5 Oct 2014, 12:40 PM
#19
avatar of Porygon

Posts: 2779



Oh that poor underpowered OKW previously, with weak early game and weak late game. <444>_<444> :loco:


Go laddering OKW 1v1 into top 20 or GTFO. >:(

I have enough of Relic Flying Dutchman balancing, being forced to Kubel2Win make me start hating OKW like Soviet.
5 Oct 2014, 12:45 PM
#20
avatar of Seeker

Posts: 83

Relic just fuck up OKW more with this 80% munition FFS.

It does not only affect OKW munition invest, everyone would transfer muni into fuel anyway, making OKW suffering the handicap from 50% into 40%, fuel income also reduced because of less muni transfer into fuel.

I don't care shit how OP is OKW in 3v3, 4v4, but this lazy balancing method just FUCKED UP 1v1.


You think it would be better if they made raketenwerfers viable instead of schreck atm, they miss too much and take too long to aim.
PAGES (6)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

384 users are online: 384 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49063
Welcome our newest member, jennifermary
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM