You cant begin an argument with the premise that CAS has a tradeoff.
CAS has zero tradeoff and very little risk
because 50 fuel for each conversion is no tradeoff
Posts: 2115 | Subs: 1
You cant begin an argument with the premise that CAS has a tradeoff.
CAS has zero tradeoff and very little risk
Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2
Posts: 172
ha! dodge AI strafe with infantry? you know the aoe suppression reaches out to units 30m away right? what kind of brain dead CAS user are we talking about?
Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1
Guess you better move it 31 meters
Posts: 172
It also only suppresses if it catches you on the edges of it's AoE, and you get unsuppressed fairly quickly if your not being shot at. It's pointless to use it unless your shooting at the army in question.
The only people who complain about it are blobbers who like to move their entire army across the map in one huge horde and are mad that they get pinned and wiped out when putting in the bare minimum amount of effort to spread across the map would have saved them.
Posts: 239
lol. one axis guy go CAS in 3v3+, you have to dodge strafes every 2 min from mid-late game on. two axis players, every 30 sec to a minute. you know, during the part of the game when you have most units and variety of units to micro.
but sorry. just because single pass CAS is technically dodgeable, whether you have 2 sec or 6 sec to dodge, so it is just fine.
Too hard and blind to see a single click-uncounterable abilities are cheese as shit. game needs to cater to my lazy play style where i click once in a while and the opponent, in order to counter, has to be constantly vigilant, be ready to move anything, predict where the plane might be called in, be ready to look away from the big fight that will decide the match etc etc. fail that for 2 sec, sorry. 480mp and 115fu gone because your tactful opponent managed to save 110 muni with commander that let you shit muni and click.
CAS is brainless due to the fact that it's user doesn't not have to interact with his opponent. Making the click-to-win mechanic unfair and unbalanced.
Id rather face armor, then at least I can counter it with mines or something else.
not in late game 3v3+ where both sides aren't losing stuffs. everybody stock up fuel and normally, the only way to spend them is when you need to replace your loses. but with amazing CAS commander, you can pin, at strafe, stuka bomb all day everyday baby.
ha! dodge AI strafe with infantry? you know the aoe suppression reaches out to units 30m away right? what kind of brain dead CAS user are we talking about?
My problem is that it is more effective than P47's from what I have seen if the axis players get a win button then the P47 should be annihilate any armour in this area as it costs more but from the track record 10 times out of 10 has failed to do significant damage without missing next to all the shots.
As with fighting axis armour and air the panther is still a far better choice than a tiger as it has superior bouncy armour and slightly more range than tanks, it is also one of the fastest vehicles in the game making it superb at dealing with tank destroyers as opposed to a tiger it's lower anti infantry doesn't matter against USSR as they don't have infantry based AT worthy of damaging the front armour and if a giant blob of conscripts rush you just hit the thruster button and shoot off and leave them in a dust storm, US AT is still a laughable matter but not as ridiculous and guess what both OKW and Ostheer can get panthers without doctrine it is arguably the strongest tank in the game especially for it's price, take a anti tank strike with a few panthers and the allies have no vehicles left on the map.
You cant begin an argument with the premise that CAS has a tradeoff.
CAS has zero tradeoff and very little risk
it allows your army value to go above and beyond that of others.
Posts: 559
Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2
1.
2.
3.
Posts: 55
Quite possibly it will be changed; I have not argued that everything is A-OK in current implementation, only that decisive off-maps are not inherently contrary to the design.
You say the game is "clearly" about cover, micro etc.; but as I've already pointed out you're ignoring the strategy element. Because if that was ALL the game was intended to be about, there is no reason that it could not occur on a plain map without any resource points. Quite clearly, the intent is ALSO that players should be motivated to contest specific territories, to choose to fight or not fight depending on how valuable a territory is, to split their micro between fighting and capping.
And the reward for that is BOTH fuel, used to bring in heavier units, AND munitions, to increase lethality. Those off-maps are clearly an intentional benefit from map control. They didn't build a game with three different resource currencies by accident.
Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1
You cant begin an argument with the premise that CAS has a tradeoff.
CAS has zero tradeoff and very little risk
Posts: 1653
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
Posts: 728
CAS strafes are easily dodgeable only if the Ostheer player is a complete noob not using combined arms.
Now dodging a CAS strafe supporting an attack isn't really possible, or its call full retreat and losing map control and probably the game. Same goes using strafe to counter an assault, you launch your strafe on your line and see all Allied infantry or retreating or being pinned and raped by MGs/LMGs.
It would be fine if strafe had a strong cost but it doesn't, in fact you can still build tanks as the fuel cost for conversion is really small and at the moment your army is fully equipped with LMG/Shreck and chock points mined, you can either decide to use strafe or to build tanks or a mix of both (imo the best option).
Now, the result isn't the same in every game mode, in 1sv1 since there are less resources, you can't use it as much as in any other game mode, but same goes for all abilities.
I think the problem is really the conversion, too cheap for what it provides in large game mode.
And it meet another idea I had around it, to reduce any resource incomes in large game mode.
Posts: 32
P47 rocket strafe is a whole separate beast than stuka AT strafe and therefore can't really be compared to it; when using the p47 properly there is very little your opponent can do to pull a heavy back to safety before it is destroyed, especially if you get engine damage on it before you call in the strafe. Placing the strafe to maximize the time the tank needs to spend inside the radius in order to get to safety as well as sending tank destroyers to corral it into the path you want it to take usually resorts in a dead tank, not to mention the planes don't need vision once called in (the call in itself however does require vision.). The p47s are considerably more expensive, and this is justified by the duration of the ability, the radius of effect and amount of firepower potentially brought to bear. This ability should never be used on axis mediums without engine damage, as they can usually just clear the area of effect due to their speed and smaller profile (p47s have a tendency to miss against smaller targets). There is arguably more potential for error when using the CAS strafe than the rocket strafe, considering how accurate you need to be with it, whereas with the rocket strafe as long as the tank sustains enough rocket hits while inside the radius it doesn't really matter how "off target" it is.
Posts: 1701
How is it too much? If in a 1v1 they choose it as a first heavier fuel unit, it's pretty much gg. If they get it later, just stalk it, flank everywhere, set up some tanks in a flanking position, and wait untill you hear it. Then rush it. Remember, the pathfinding on the thing is horrible, it will not get away xd
Posts: 192
Permanently Banned
erm..this is a perfect example of a guy who only reads titles , classic. XD!
Posts: 172
CAS strafes are easily dodgeable only if the Ostheer player is a complete noob not using combined arms.
Now dodging a CAS strafe supporting an attack isn't really possible
47 | |||||
4 |