Strategies based on "new" guards
Posts: 542 | Subs: 1
I didn't really use them since the vanilla match up.
Against okw, i found this build to be pretty good:
Commander: Guard Motor
1. t1 instantly
2. 2 cons
3. m3 flamer / alternativly 2 snipers (troll mode: get both. caution: mad oponent)
4. 2 guards against flak ht and anti inf (use them defensively in buildings when possible)
You should have most of the map control at this point and cut off the fuel when possible.
If you have the advantage: t3 plus t70 or t34/76. If you're lacking fuel/ don't dominate: t2+zis, wait for t34/85.
If you're floating mp, get a 120. Although its whiping potential has been decreased a little, its still pretty good.
How do you feel about the new guards, which "old" strategies have become viable again?
Posts: 1225
Eh, ja, should have read your post before commenting. What you described is/was one of my favourite builds, has limited staying/capping power, but great attritional potential and an insanely strong lategame.
Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1
Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2
Guards are at last what they should be. Long range elite infantry. I find them more effecvite vs elite inf like Obers than vs regular like Fusiliers. With less models we have higher chances that Guards with PTRSes will shot together at one model. This lead us something to win agasint Obers.
But they still are far behind Obers.
T1 (snipers) + T2 (ZiS) into T34/85 is just pure cheese. I prefer T2 (Maxim and Zis) it's still cheese but little less
Cons, Cons, Engi, T2, Maxim, Maxim, Guards, Guards, 120, Zis............. T34/85
Uh... remind me, why Guards are usable in this patch? I'm serious.
Because of PTRS acc buff.
With little RNG they can solo Obers.
Posts: 1225
Uh... remind me, why Guards are usable in this patch? I'm serious.
Slayer: They are strong vs infantry, in fact, at short range, every PTRS shot has a pretty substantial (66%? correct me if I am wrong) chance to snipe an entity, and they retain solid utility against light vehicles. They still lose weapons easily though. I've posted a replay using them against OH, see for yourself.
Will have to play a few more games before really passing judgement though, but it looks like they overdid it...
Posts: 612
Posts: 36
Slayer: They are strong vs infantry, in fact, at short range, every PTRS shot has a pretty substantial (66%? correct me if I am wrong) chance to snipe an entity, and they retain solid utility against light vehicles. They still lose weapons easily though. I've posted a replay using them against OH, see for yourself.
Will have to play a few more games before really passing judgement though, but it looks like they overdid it...
Well how do you think you would fare taking PTRS shot in close range. Probably not too good. It was the best sniper in CoD:WaW for a reason. Blow your goddamned butt right off your butt.
Posts: 1225
Well how do you think you would fare taking PTRS shot in close range. Probably not too good. It was the best sniper in CoD:WaW for a reason. Blow your goddamned butt right off your butt.
Eh, you know, with a hit to the torso its pretty academic from rifle calibers like 7,62x54R or .30-06 onwards, you'll be incapacitated at least, I would not want to get shot by a .22...
Reality and this game are two different things tho, and authenticity should be secondary when it comes to gameplay/balance.
Posts: 36
Eh, you know, with a hit to the torso its pretty academic from rifle calibers like 7,62x54R or .30-06 onwards, you'll be incapacitated at least, I would not want to get shot by a .22...
Reality and this game are two different things tho, and authenticity should be secondary when it comes to gameplay/balance.
Well at least it is a slight improvement from before, where guards would stand in front of a 222, miss every PTRS shot, drop the PTRS and get wiped on retreat. I haven't played with them yet so I have yet to see if they are as OP as people assume they are now. They probably still are weapon drop piñatas so there's that.
Posts: 742 | Subs: 1
Posts: 2053
*nerf bat goes flying and then destroys Guards*
Posts: 1225
Well at least it is a slight improvement from before, where guards would stand in front of a 222, miss every PTRS shot, drop the PTRS and get wiped on retreat. I haven't played with them yet so I have yet to see if they are as OP as people assume they are now. They probably still are weapon drop piñatas so there's that.
I don't think anybody (besides the usual suspects) would have disputed that Guards were in dire need of some love, but ye, gotta play some more before one can really comment.
Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2
No need to play with guards, just spam Conscripts with 2 PTRS (Tank hunter doctrine), better than LMG grens at distance, and rapes everybody at close range ;D
Sorry to dissapoint you but 2 Grens with LMGs will win without any problems vs 2 Cons with 4 PTRS
They will win at close range (when spawned next to) but during battle you have to get close through fire so before they reach Grens they will be highly damaged.
PTRS was pure shit. The biggest pudding in whole game. Now it's useful and people are losing their minds.
Posts: 742 | Subs: 1
Posts: 742 | Subs: 1
Edit : Sorry next time i will edit instead of double post ;(
Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2
No need to close range, mid range ( 50% accurancy ) cons will win
Mid range is equal battle. Cons are dead, 1 model per squad of Grens left so in fact 2 model left while all cons are dead but I still don't know what's the point...
2 grens with 2 LMGs cost less than 2 Cons and 4 PTRS and they still win at long range, are equal at mid and lose at close. It's balanced very well. Do you want cheaper unit to win every single engagement?
PTRS can reliably damage light vehicule, and less reliably medium armor, lmg can't
Edit : Sorry next time i will edit instead of double post ;(
but Grens have faust instead
Posts: 742 | Subs: 1
Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2
2 PTRS is not 50 ammo in tank hunter doctrine ?
I dont have TH doctrine but in SB someone said that 4 PTRSes cost 120 ammo?
But neverminde.. Point is Grens have long-range andvantge, mid range is equal and close range is for Cons. Perfect balance.
It's better to increase PTRS cost instead of making it the shitest weapon in game again.
Posts: 196
Now that the PTRS upgrade doesn't completely ruin the Anti-infantry firepower of Cons, it may be worth using actually (tho I'm not sure i'd use it primarily to fight infantry).
Posts: 36
Livestreams
34 | |||||
31 | |||||
13 | |||||
276 | |||||
2 | |||||
1 | |||||
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.842223.791+5
- 2.655231.739+15
- 3.943411.696-1
- 4.715.934+12
- 5.35659.858+2
- 6.274144.656+1
- 7.307114.729+3
- 8.527.881+18
- 9.10629.785+7
- 10.19365.748+6
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
9 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, makoonspreschool
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM