Axis Comebacks

Note: I am primarily an Allied 4v4 AT player

Me and my teammates win most of our games, but some of the losses are particularly infuriating. This has been a pretty frustrating experience for me. I often feel like i'm defeating my enemy by inflicting casualties, squad wipes, destroying vehicles, etc. My team generally does very well in maintaining map control. We can hold VPs for a long time, and take control of the vital resources in most of our games. However, if we don't force our opponent to rage quit or break our opponent, it becomes a tremendous uphill battle

Even forceing a stalemate is dangerous for the Allies because once the first Panther rolls out, it can quickly turn the tide against the Allies. The game gets exponentially more difficult when Elefants, Tigers, KTs, and Jagdtigers roll into the battlefield.

When i play Axis, i feel that if i hold at least 40-50 percent of the map, i can still win in the late game. Once the first Panther rolls out, I can reverse most of the defeats and start pushing back my opponent. The game is a lot more fun, and less stressful. I can make some mistakes and still win, whereas making a mistake in the early and mid-game is costly when playing as Allies.

I wonder how many games are won by the Axis late game when they were "losing" most of the match. What do you guys think? I would love to hear everyone's opinions on this.

Too many variables to give a precise answer(Skill level of the players in question, map, unit composition and etc). I can say though that comebacks as the OKW are very rare for me. As the game progresses, I usually find myself in a position where fending off the hordes of Americans and Russians isn't possible and I lose solely because of the lack of bodies, AT and etc.

I imagine in lower skilled games, the Allied players make glaring mistakes, so combine that with bad micro and strategic insight, it's no surprise that a lot of Allied players lose during late game.

I get this all the time...

Allies need to get an overwhelming volume of fire, be it armour or indirect fire, to stop Axis late game.

A recent 2v2 Dane casted highlighted this where the allies won by the skin of their teeth (about 30-40 VPs or iirc) despite outrageous blobbing and losses by the axis players. It was only a unit of Obers and the like (which proved increasingly ridiculous as the game continued) that kept the Germans in the game at all.

usually if i have a huge advantage with allies. i prepare for anything. mines ATG's, tanks.

i rarely lose once i gain an advantage. but i do agree. axis is generally easier

Snipers, b-4, ISU, mines, demo charges - anything to counter German strength of excellent armor, deadly vetted infantry and insane repair speed. Generally you need to punish axis and punish them hard or play ultra-aggressive and inflict constant drain. If you lose pressure for amount of time axis need to stabilize, its gg.

Thing is, Initial loses doesn't matter that much for axis. You can wipe 2-3 squads in first ten minutes and until those squads were upgraded schreck volks or lmg grens, their loss will hardly impact game flow. But, in return, when late game comes, losing tanks and vetted infantry turns devastating. Losing Jagd or panthers early usually makes axis loss.

Just don't let any kind of advantage fool you, and always expect axis to comeback with their op late-game stuff.

It has been like this since launch...

For the allies player(s) this game is more like a tower-defence/rogue-like hybrid, with the caveat that losing isn't actually fun. Hey, once in a full moon the RNG aligns and you actually do win!

For the axis player(s) it is a point&click adventure where you can't really lose, but enjoy the scenery. N+1'ing all the way.

When i play Axis, i feel that if i hold at least 40-50 percent of the map, i can still win in the late game.

Sooo..... with at least 50% map control, axis should usually lose the game?

I can make some mistakes and still win, whereas making a mistake in the early and mid-game is costly when playing as Allies.

Sorry, but this sounds like a "the-grass-is-greener-on-the-other-side"-thread by a heavily biased allies player (and I thing you are aware that you are one )

I wonder how many games are won by the Axis late game when they were "losing" most of the match. What do you guys think? I would love to hear everyone's opinions on this.

Would you mind posting some replays? Maybe you were not "winning" the game and you only had the impression, while actually it was a close game / you were losing? Hard to give constructive feedback without it.

And btw: start playing all sides My rule of thumb: play an army until you lose, then play with the army (and maybe build/commander) you lost against

^^ replay showing Axis lategame power shown above, an exceptionally close game despite a ridiculous amount of axis losses and poor gameplay.

It has been like this since launch...

For the allies player(s) this game is more like a tower-defence/rogue-like hybrid, with the caveat that losing isn't actually fun. Hey, once in a full moon the RNG aligns and you actually do win!

For the axis player(s) it is a point&click adventure where you can't really lose, but enjoy the scenery. N+1'ing all the way.

I am curious, are you actually playing this game?

^^

And so it begins...

^^

And so it begins...

I'll take that back, but I was really astonished. To much nonsense.

I get this all the time...

Allies need to get an overwhelming volume of fire, be it armour or indirect fire, to stop Axis late game.

A recent 2v2 Dane casted highlighted this where the allies won by the skin of their teeth (about 30-40 VPs or iirc) despite outrageous blobbing and losses by the axis players. It was only a unit of Obers and the like (which proved increasingly ridiculous as the game continued) that kept the Germans in the game at all.

I just see some massive soviet failing there. They could ve pushed over the battlegroup HQ and panzer HQ with ease.

Furthermore the SU-76 spam is just idiotic once you know they have Tiger Ace on the field.

Also they could ve easily pursued the Tiger Ace with anything, the strafe was providing vision for them.

Besides that he should've just opted for Barrage on their retreat point just after a blob retreat instead of those in my opinion badly aimed barrages I keep seeing.

I'll take that back, but I was really astonished. To much nonsense.

Pardon me , I could just see the makings of yet another flame war of fanbois vs fanbois...

I just see some massive soviet failing there. They could ve pushed over the battlegroup HQ and panzer HQ with ease.

Furthermore the SU-76 spam is just idiotic once you know they have Tiger Ace on the field.

Also they could ve easily pursued the Tiger Ace with anything, the strafe was providing vision for them.

Besides that he should've just opted for Barrage on their retreat point just after a blob retreat instead of those in my opinion badly aimed barrages I keep seeing.

I think those are pretty minor compared to the amount of squads lost (predominantly by the axis) and those 3 command panthers...

Well obviously axis play terrible but the Soviet players should have crushed the axis way earlier and decided the game. It is their own fault they let the Axis coming back after so many losses.

I don't care how favored people say okw is. That low of a fuel income is such a late game hindrance. Maybe if allied players would stop having manpower battles with obs and instead having fuel battles against panthers they wouldn't complain about how shitty the match up is. Sorry this isn't vcoh where rifles with bars isn't a viable strategy against everything.

You allie fanboys are just cherry pickers. Here's likewise a replay where a ally team came back after only being left with 22 points. Against good players.

•  
  

  3

  VS

  .:PSG:. RedxWings Romeo

  L E M O N ? Dr.destynova

  Close 2v2 between pr0s

  by: Romeo map: Rails and Metal

  5

  -

Comebacks happen to both sides, it's what makes the game so interesting.

I once lost a game with 1 point left, I ticked down from 500.

If you allow comebacks, then only because you were overextending while forgetting to fortify your position with mines, healthy back up squads and the lack of counters.

Well I have to agree that Axis don't need to have mapcontrol to come back.
It's just a magical thing that happens in 4v4.

I agree that we have an allies comeback from time to time, but axis combacks are pretty standard. Fuel starvation and not that many mapcontrol? NP SON, I can still build 2 KT's!

Fuel starvation and not that many mapcontrol? NP SON, I can still build 2 KT's!

Now this is an exagerration.

Guess thats how Allies works. Use your advantage to the fullest while you can and try to compete in the lategame. It works in 1s and 2s, but you all know how 4v4 looks like.