Login

russian armor

More durability for light tanks

15 Aug 2015, 18:13 PM
#41
avatar of Basilone

Posts: 1944 | Subs: 2




Halftrucks are dirty cheap arrive too fast and are not LIGHT TANKS nor COST 70 FUEL (luchs cost the samre if we count penalty) + they can also reinforce on field and wipe retreating squads fairly well

USF halftruck is more supresion platform and becuase it move backwards it is easy to eskape with it (less pathing isues) nad also you wont to cover it with rifles

m20 will always beat unprotected pack due smoe and speed


And clow car or 222s are not meant lol rush paks in their firing zone :hansRNG:


I MUST :hansGASM: AGREE WITH QR :hansGASM: this is L2 issue light tanks and light vehilces are fine



#ADAPT :snfBarton:

I specifically said clown car and 222s are meant to be killed very easily, l2read issue again there. And halftracks (not counting Ost HT) cost more and come in specific light vehicle tech buildings, US HT Quad and OKW AA are shock mid game units. Getting hit twice is not a l2p issue unless you weren't paying attention and drove a vehicle in to a ATG you already knew was there. Drive in to a arc for a gun that wasn't spotted and it will get off two shots almost every time if, micro is completely irrelevant if the vehicle was already driving through the arc at full speed (said multiple times I am not taking any munition escape abilities in to consideration) so again reading fail. :romeoBANG:
15 Aug 2015, 18:43 PM
#42
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1


I specifically said clown car and 222s are meant to be killed very easily, l2read issue again there. And halftracks (not counting Ost HT) cost more and come in specific light vehicle tech buildings, US HT Quad and OKW AA are shock mid game units. Getting hit twice is not a l2p issue unless you weren't paying attention and drove a vehicle in to a ATG you already knew was there. Drive in to a arc for a gun that wasn't spotted and it will get off two shots almost every time if, micro is completely irrelevant if the vehicle was already driving through the arc at full speed (said multiple times I am not taking any munition escape abilities in to consideration) so again reading fail. :romeoBANG:


It happens a lot to me... when I'm not playing good. But that's a L2P issue. What are you doing with your half-track rushing in an unsafe area. Those units are mean to support your infantry, not the other way around, they have enough range to deal damage to everything between them and the ATgun range. If he moves his at gun in range, its usually at max range so you have time to retreat it if you pay attention. If not, he deserves the kill.

Now medium tanks need 3 shots because they are mean to be use more aggressively, but giving them more survivability will become a real problem with the balance. Imo they are in the right spot now.
15 Aug 2015, 20:24 PM
#43
avatar of Cabreza

Posts: 656

I would like to see something along the lines of:

Light Vehicles: 320 hp
Light Tanks: 400 hp
Medium Tanks: 640 hp

Light vehicles arrive early, typically cost 50FU or less, and often only face light AT when they arrive so it is fair they are 2 shot by dedicated AT guns.

Light tanks represent a larger investment than light vehicles. Outside of the Luchs (which is a bit of a special case) all light tanks cost 70-80 fuel and arrive at a time when the enemy can and should have at a minimum an AT gun on the field. That means these tanks have to be more survivable to really pay off hence why 400 hp makes sense.

Medium tanks cost even more than light vehicles (besides the lulz T34,) are frontline combat vehicles, and arrive when there are multiple strong AT threats on the field so being able to survive 3 AT gun hits with 640 hp is a must.

Overall I'd say only the 222 and the T70 could use a survivability boost for ease of use purposes. While it's true a T70 can survive 2 AT gun shots by using field repair doing so will slow the tank and by no means guarantee its survival. Furthermore it's fairly micro intensive to pull off. Increasing the T70's health to 400 combined with a slight price increase would help improve the usability of the unit across all skill levels. Likewise the 222 is a bit fragile for the time it arrives. A slight armor increase (9 to 11 armor) combined with a slight MP cost increase would help better protect it vs the small arms and MG fire it will face early on so that some form of soft AT would be needed to combat it.
15 Aug 2015, 20:41 PM
#44
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 1225

Entirely disagree. Stuart and T-70 already have enough of an impact and can win the game on their own if well microed. No need for any further buff.
16 Aug 2015, 15:38 PM
#45
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 830



are you seriously saying that the Stuart is OP?


No, you should have read the post I responded to. That one stated that USF would be totally hopeless if 222 would receive any kind of survivability buff. Thus I responded with the argument that stuart can still counter 222 and puma perfectly.

Unless someone literally claims 'op', it is wise to not rush to conclusions:foreveralone:
16 Aug 2015, 16:59 PM
#46
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1



No, you should have read the post I responded to. That one stated that USF would be totally hopeless if 222 would receive any kind of survivability buff. Thus I responded with the argument that stuart can still counter 222 and puma perfectly.

Unless someone literally claims 'op', it is wise to not rush to conclusions:foreveralone:


If you buff the 222, you simply make it countering entire USF T1. Assuming buffing it would place it at the M15A1 level.
M15A1 cost 60 fuel, not near to what cost the 222.
16 Aug 2015, 17:14 PM
#47
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 1225

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Aug 2015, 16:59 PMEsxile


If you buff the 222, you simply make it countering entire USF T1. Assuming buffing it would place it at the M15A1 level.
M15A1 cost 60 fuel, not near to what cost the 222.

222 is hardcountered by the M15...
16 Aug 2015, 17:31 PM
#48
avatar of QueenRatchet123

Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2

Permanently Banned

222 is hardcountered by the M15...


get 2
16 Aug 2015, 17:35 PM
#49
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1


222 is hardcountered by the M15...


Probably not anymore if you buff the 222.
16 Aug 2015, 17:37 PM
#50
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 1225



get 2

Dude. Lets stay serious. Thats a terribly, terribly bad idea.
16 Aug 2015, 17:44 PM
#51
avatar of QueenRatchet123

Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2

Permanently Banned

Dude. Lets stay serious. Thats a terribly, terribly bad idea.


No its not
16 Aug 2015, 17:53 PM
#52
avatar of Rollo

Posts: 738

OKW ostwind is cheaper MP wise than the Luch, not sure how they worked that one out.
16 Aug 2015, 18:01 PM
#53
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 1225



No its not

Before I am gonna address this, please tell me how many Ostheer games you've played this patch....
16 Aug 2015, 18:10 PM
#54
avatar of QueenRatchet123

Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2

Permanently Banned

Before I am gonna address this, please tell me how many Ostheer games you've played this patch....


16 Aug 2015, 18:34 PM
#55
avatar of Basilone

Posts: 1944 | Subs: 2

Entirely disagree. Stuart and T-70 already have enough of an impact and can win the game on their own if well microed. No need for any further buff.

Thats the whole point. They are too much of a glass cannon. Some of them die too easily but also kill full squads too fast. More of them need to have 330-400hp and less killing power for Quad and T70.
16 Aug 2015, 20:03 PM
#56
avatar of BrutusHR

Posts: 262


Drive in to a arc for a gun that wasn't spotted and it will get off two shots almost every time if, micro is completely irrelevant if the vehicle was already driving through the arc at full speed (said multiple times I am not taking any munition escape abilities in to consideration) so again reading fail. :romeoBANG:


Aha, so AT weapon was placed into good spot and ambushed your light tank, shot it twice and killed it, and you think its unfair??
You think it would be fair if the AT gun successfully managed to ambush your light tank and then light tank escaped arc of fire after taking two hits and then circled around and killing AT.

Only thing who failed here is you. L2P
16 Aug 2015, 20:55 PM
#57
avatar of Basilone

Posts: 1944 | Subs: 2



Aha, so AT weapon was placed into good spot and ambushed your light tank, shot it twice and killed it, and you think its unfair??
You think it would be fair if the AT gun successfully managed to ambush your light tank and then light tank escaped arc of fire after taking two hits and then circled around and killing AT.

Only thing who failed here is you. L2P

If anyone has a AT gun getting circled and killed by a light tank that got 2 hits, thats a l2p issue because tank has very low health and anything like a 20mm AA cannon or faust will finish it off at that point. Someone that relies on killing a mid game unit by 2 shotting it before the person has any opportunity to micro away and save it just isn't very good. Either it needs to take 3 hits or someone needs to get a unit that can chase it and finish it off. I said multiple times that in their current state, it is a good thing that Quad and T70 are getting 2 shotted or else they would shit on infantry even harder. What needs to happen is they need just a little bit more HP and not be broken offensively.

There is a reason the top vcoh players responsible for the last balance patch decided to get rid of the multiple cloaked shots on Paks w/ bonus damage, because M8s were getting 2 shotted by them. Top players agree with my logic, but here come all the average and below players complaining because they aren't very good at killing light vehicles in the hands of people that micro them and don't want attentive players to have the opportunity of escaping away when they realize they are taking AT fire.

Its the same reason highly skilled FPS players don't like it when games drastically reduce the TTK, because it gives someone a very high chance at killing someone that is much better than them if it isn't a head to head shootout. In the more standard competitive shooters (non realistic, like coh), if someone is extremely skilled they can take a shot or two in the side and react fast enough to still have a decent chance at killing the guy. This wasn't some kind of op-ed, I already knew what side the elite players take on this type of issue.
16 Aug 2015, 21:10 PM
#58
avatar of Lumpy
Patrion 27

Posts: 78



lmfao
16 Aug 2015, 21:54 PM
#59
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 830

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Aug 2015, 17:53 PMRollo
OKW ostwind is cheaper MP wise than the Luch, not sure how they worked that one out.


Because ostwind is pretty much a worhtless luchs that doesn't suppress or does any huge damage against blobs or units xd. It pretty much sucks, unless you keep it behind screening infantry and let it chip away bits of health.
16 Aug 2015, 21:56 PM
#60
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 830

0 user is browsing this thread:

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

589 users are online: 589 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49062
Welcome our newest member, Mclatc16
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM