Is the AVRE OP or do I just think it's OP because...
Posts: 836 | Subs: 5
I remember when my sturmtiger could rush into 3 or 4 hard counters and back away faster than old blitz
Oh wait....
DAE le axis OP le relic hates le allies ?!??!?!
Heads out boys. Stop ignoring the differences between the avre and sturmtiger. A turret and lack of a vulnerable manual reload are gigantic differences, and so is the synergy with hammer war speed.
But no le axis OpieOP
Posts: 133
...allies have awful late game units?
Serious question. I just played a 2v2 versus a well-known CoH1 player and beat him, and it was mostly thanks to the AVRE.
The thing is just so damn survivable. He had 3 Paks all firing at it, and I still had time to roll up, blow one away, and reverse back into safety with most of my HP.
Sturm is a bitch to play against, but for some reason I don't see him nearly as much, and he feels more fragile.
What is the answer to AVRE? Snares (faust)?
Because it seems like no amount of coordinated AT can kill it or scare it away until after it has delivered its doomsday mortar.
I concede it could just be the fact that I've been a USF player since they were released, and the idea of having a sturdy late game unit is completely foreign to me.
Why didn't he toggle on target weak point on his AT guns? the ARVE is a well known allied spearhead that is infamous hard to kill, there also super expensive. If he had 3 AT guns with 90 munitions he could easily stun lock it to death. Bad is bad, no matter how well known.
Posts: 742 | Subs: 1
Why didn't he toggle on target weak point on his AT guns? the ARVE is a well known allied spearhead that is infamous hard to kill, there also super expensive. If he had 3 AT guns with 90 munitions he could easily stun lock it to death. Bad is bad, no matter how well known.
Dead paks will not get to Vet 1
Posts: 1439
Are we protecting AVRE on this thread ?
Not really. Both units are BS.
Posts: 1124
Posts: 412
OKW gets 66% fuel income so the formula is 160/.66
No. You are deducting the fuel penalty, not the fuel they do get. It is definitely 160/.33
If they are receiving 33% less than the allies then to make costs proportional you have to add 33%, not 66%.
Posts: 657
...allies have awful late game units?
Serious question. I just played a 2v2 versus a well-known CoH1 player and beat him, and it was mostly thanks to the AVRE.
The thing is just so damn survivable. He had 3 Paks all firing at it, and I still had time to roll up, blow one away, and reverse back into safety with most of my HP.
Sturm is a bitch to play against, but for some reason I don't see him nearly as much, and he feels more fragile.
What is the answer to AVRE? Snares (faust)?
Because it seems like no amount of coordinated AT can kill it or scare it away until after it has delivered its doomsday mortar.
I concede it could just be the fact that I've been a USF player since they were released, and the idea of having a sturdy late game unit is completely foreign to me.
Before UKF allies had awful late game units.
Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1
No. You are deducting the fuel penalty, not the fuel they do get. It is definitely 160/.33
If they are receiving 33% less than the allies then to make costs proportional you have to add 33%, not 66%.
They receive .66 fuel for every 1 fuel Allies get. 160/.33 is not correct. 160/.66 is the correct equation to use because it shows you what 160 fuel looks like when you are only getting .66 fuel for every 1 fuel the enemy gets. Alternatively you can do 160 times 1.5 since compared to .66, Allies get 50% more.
Posts: 545
Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1
Lol whaaaat when does 33% become 50%?
1.5*.66=1
Posts: 545
Posts: 412
They receive .66 fuel for every 1 fuel Allies get. 160/.33 is not correct. 160/.66 is the correct equation to use because it shows you what 160 fuel looks like when you are only getting .66 fuel for every 1 fuel the enemy gets. Alternatively you can do 160 times 1.5 since compared to .66, Allies get 50% more.
yup. I can't math.
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2
ST is better.
Case closed.
Let's move to the next topic.
Remember times when ST did not have 45 range? Almost no one used it and even if, it was so easy to avoid that ST was completly useless.
Posts: 135
http://www.twitch.tv/dbmb_/v/15350562
Posts: 1026
so how is it allies get 50% more? When it's just for every one fuel you take off 33% so 1 not 1.5?
If OKW recieves 2/3 of the fuel that allies recieve, then allies receive 50% more fuel. It's maths.
2 fuel instead of 3
3 is 50% more than 2 (2 x 1.5 = 3)
2 is 66.66...% of 3 (2/3 = 0.666...)
In either case you could say OKW gets 2/3 of the fuel of the normal factions from strat points and fuel points, or that normal factions get 50% more fuel than OKW. Both are true.
Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1
Or you can just go with ±.71 which is a bit more accurate
You see, I used to think this but the game DOES actually times all fuel income by .66, it's just that the game can't show fractions of a fuel as income meaning that how much fuel it shows you have isn't actually how much your getting or you actually have. It's honestly crazy how much you have to dig through the files to figure all this out with certainty.
Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2
Permanently Banned
Heads out boys. Stop ignoring the differences between the avre and sturmtiger. A turret and lack of a vulnerable manual reload are gigantic differences, and so is the synergy with hammer war speed.
Lets not ignore the 45 range and ability to shoot outside the FOG
Both units are BS
Defending one over the other reaches a level of hypocrisy that i dont want to encounter or engage in. This isn't pointed at you dusty. More so at Alex and katitof.
Posts: 1439
If OKW recieves 2/3 of the fuel that allies recieve, then allies receive 50% more fuel. It's maths.
2 fuel instead of 3
3 is 50% more than 2 (2 x 1.5 = 3)
2 is 66.66...% of 3 (2/3 = 0.666...)
In either case you could say OKW gets 2/3 of the fuel of the normal factions from strat points and fuel points, or that normal factions get 50% more fuel than OKW. Both are true.
They don't get 50% more. Your logic is wrong. They get 50% more of whole OKW fuel because 2/3 + 1/3 = 1. Also its OKW who is getting less fuel so correct is to say that OKW is getting 1/3 less.
Posts: 1217
This doesn´t solve the whole squad wiping issue, but it´s a start.
Also the reload time on the AVRE is ridiculously short.
Livestreams
10 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.829222.789+35
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.587233.716+3
- 4.1095612.641+19
- 5.882398.689+4
- 6.280162.633+8
- 7.997646.607+1
- 8.379114.769+1
- 9.300113.726-1
- 10.717439.620+1
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
3 posts in the last week
23 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, vanyaclinic02
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM