AEC Armored Car
6 Oct 2015, 07:19 AM
#41
Posts: 334
It needs better accuracy against infantry. Its only has one use: hunting down 222s. For its cost alone its too expensive for just that. Give it some more utility against infantry and it will be much more useful.
6 Oct 2015, 08:44 AM
#42
Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1
It needs better accuracy against infantry. Its only has one use: hunting down 222s. For its cost alone its too expensive for just that. Give it some more utility against infantry and it will be much more useful.
So it can't kill Pumas, you imply. I see.
BeefSurge wrote:
A lot of people have an image of how they want a faction to play, leading to problems. This is why you have people complaining about lack of Soviet bunkers, why T34/76 sucks, why Cons don't scale, Grens don't get normal grenades, Muricans don't get heavy tank, OKW laser weapons and Die Glock Death Bell, etc.
A lot of people have an image of how they want a faction to play, leading to problems. This is why you have people complaining about lack of Soviet bunkers, why T34/76 sucks, why Cons don't scale, Grens don't get normal grenades, Muricans don't get heavy tank, OKW laser weapons and Die Glock Death Bell, etc.
6 Oct 2015, 08:57 AM
#43
Posts: 344
It think the model is to big same as with sdkfz 222. Don't know why Relic make amored cars big as tanks.
6 Oct 2015, 09:13 AM
#44
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
It think the model is to big same as with sdkfz 222. Don't know why Relic make amored cars big as tanks.
222 is oversized in game, AEC is not.
If there is anything AEC could get, first it would be improving its coax, not really sure why puma one is 100% stronger.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
6 Oct 2015, 09:13 AM
#45
Posts: 952 | Subs: 1
It think the model is to big same as with sdkfz 222. Don't know why Relic make amored cars big as tanks.
222 ingame is definitely too large, but the AEC MK III was tank-sized in reality.
6 Oct 2015, 09:43 AM
#46
Posts: 1593 | Subs: 1
because axis mg bullets are filled with pure nationalism
6 Oct 2015, 10:09 AM
#47
Posts: 1930
So it can't kill Pumas, you imply. I see.
the AEC can kill puma, but the puma is an superior vehicle due to the superior range and gun.
6 Oct 2015, 10:29 AM
#48
Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1
222 ingame is definitely too large, but the AEC MK III was tank-sized in reality.
Dat depends. If you tell to a Tiger that Shermann is a tank, you may make it laugh to death.
BeefSurge wrote:
A lot of people have an image of how they want a faction to play, leading to problems. This is why you have people complaining about lack of Soviet bunkers, why T34/76 sucks, why Cons don't scale, Grens don't get normal grenades, Muricans don't get heavy tank, OKW laser weapons and Die Glock Death Bell, etc.
A lot of people have an image of how they want a faction to play, leading to problems. This is why you have people complaining about lack of Soviet bunkers, why T34/76 sucks, why Cons don't scale, Grens don't get normal grenades, Muricans don't get heavy tank, OKW laser weapons and Die Glock Death Bell, etc.
6 Oct 2015, 10:42 AM
#49
Posts: 4928
222 is oversized in game, AEC is not.
If there is anything AEC could get, first it would be improving its coax, not really sure why puma one is 100% stronger.
Relic needs to scale down the 222 model, I don't care if they don't even remake it, as disproportionate as it is, just scale it down!
all you filthy hotchkiss lovers need to l2p #TeamPanzerIII
> Kriegsbeute Doctrine|Partisan Rework|British Infantry Rework|Soviet Assault Squad <
6 Oct 2015, 10:48 AM
#50
Posts: 91
At first I tried to use AEK, but gradually scored this. Now i'm just trying to survive until the Centaur arrives.
AEK has slowly turns housing and tower. He has no armor. Its effectiveness against infantry is low. The effectiveness cannon against medium tanks low too. TWP is triggered with a delay. Firing range usual.
Actually at AEK has two advantages - fast timing and smoke. It's not enough to spend a lot of resources on this armored car.
AEK like Puma but worse. More disadvantages and you need special tech for them.
Broken English aside, I agree with this man 100%. And also with others who have rightfully pointed out that it simply stalls the Centaur.
Centaur can chew through light vehicles and infantry like butter, which is usually what you want around the time it pops out.
The AEC is TERRIBLE against infantry and loses to or trades with most other light vehicles.
Its biggest drawback is that it offers no significant advantages to warrant getting it and stalling the Centaur.
Needs a buff against infantry and for its Vet 1 ability to work properly, and it will be viable.
Right now it's a waste of money.
6 Oct 2015, 10:49 AM
#51
Posts: 323
Dat depends. If you tell to a Tiger that Shermann is a tank, you may make it laugh to death.
The tiger would laugh till he got engine problems
Most of tiger were lost out of combat, such reliability
Sherman tank best tank
Anyways, the AEC need some love, i find it like it needs a clear role, it's too expensive to hunt 222 and early armor (after hunting, you just lose to stug and pak) , better mobility and maniability with better aim on the move could solve the problem of the AEC for me, with this buff the AEC could be like a puma with less range
6 Oct 2015, 11:13 AM
#52
Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1
The tiger would laugh till he got engine problems
Most of tiger were lost out of combat, such reliability
Sherman tank best tank
Great let's do 1v1 on open ground, I am in a Tiger you are in a shermann. Starting distance, 1000 m.
Bonus: I will not even start the engine because it will give me problems.
BeefSurge wrote:
A lot of people have an image of how they want a faction to play, leading to problems. This is why you have people complaining about lack of Soviet bunkers, why T34/76 sucks, why Cons don't scale, Grens don't get normal grenades, Muricans don't get heavy tank, OKW laser weapons and Die Glock Death Bell, etc.
A lot of people have an image of how they want a faction to play, leading to problems. This is why you have people complaining about lack of Soviet bunkers, why T34/76 sucks, why Cons don't scale, Grens don't get normal grenades, Muricans don't get heavy tank, OKW laser weapons and Die Glock Death Bell, etc.
6 Oct 2015, 11:17 AM
#53
Posts: 323
Great let's do 1v1 on open ground, I am in a Tiger you are in a shermann. Starting distance, 1000 km.
You win on open ground and this distance OFC the tiger even win every 1vs1 at any range but not close
But historically, shermans were in platton of 5, and they got smoke to close the distance
And a sherman was never alone(inf air and arty) , maybe if there was more tigers than shermans we will all speak german now
edit: some edits
6 Oct 2015, 11:55 AM
#54
Posts: 345
Great let's do 1v1 on open ground, I am in a Tiger you are in a shermann. Starting distance, 1000 m.
Bonus: I will not even start the engine because it will give me problems.
nahhh you will never reach the place where the 1v1 will take place....you know, beacuse of mechanical failures....soooooo Sherman win!
An already muni starved faction (OKW) is now more muni starved and still can't build caches.
6 Oct 2015, 14:24 PM
#55
Posts: 513
Great let's do 1v1 on open ground, I am in a Tiger you are in a shermann. Starting distance, 1000 m.
Bonus: I will not even start the engine because it will give me problems.
We're talking Sherman Firefly right ?
6 Oct 2015, 15:44 PM
#56
Posts: 1063
Great let's do 1v1 on open ground, I am in a Tiger you are in a shermann. Starting distance, 1000 m.
Bonus: I will not even start the engine because it will give me problems.
Sure the Sherman would just fire smoke and then P-47 says hi.
6 Oct 2015, 18:19 PM
#57
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Oh god, we got into historical arguments again.
Note: i think T3 (tanks tech) needs to be more expensive fuel wise for UKF.
-I'll start by removing the fuel cost for the upgrade.
-I don't want to make it a Puma clone, but realistically, it won't be able to soft counter medium tanks, without the extra 10 range. Adjust cost if necessary.
-Theres no need to improve AI.
-------------------
Note: i think T3 (tanks tech) needs to be more expensive fuel wise for UKF.
-I'll start by removing the fuel cost for the upgrade.
-I don't want to make it a Puma clone, but realistically, it won't be able to soft counter medium tanks, without the extra 10 range. Adjust cost if necessary.
-Theres no need to improve AI.
My controls weren't working
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
6 Oct 2015, 18:37 PM
#58
Posts: 67
Costs substantially more than puma
If it was an axis post, guaranteed Katitof or someone would be in here ranting about misinformation or something.
On topic though, I think even with a buff the unit would still be ineffective due to how good early centaurs are doing at the moment.
When I do get the AEC though, I find it a fairly effective unit that could possibly do with a slight buff to AI.
If allies had nukes, they would still be underpowered
6 Oct 2015, 19:21 PM
#59
Posts: 1930
Needs a buff against infantry and for its Vet 1 ability to work properly, and it will be viable.
Right now it's a waste of money.
the last thing the ost need is another anti-infantry vehicle to deal with. It's just going to replace the centaur rush with a AEC rush. Furthermore, the British already have the universal carrier for dealing with infantry.
Just give the AC 10 extra range so it can deal with tanks. Yes, it's going to be a Puma clone, but that's less disruptive to balance.
6 Oct 2015, 23:03 PM
#60
Posts: 32
the last thing the ost need is another anti-infantry vehicle to deal with. It's just going to replace the centaur rush with a AEC rush. Furthermore, the British already have the universal carrier for dealing with infantry.
Just give the AC 10 extra range so it can deal with tanks. Yes, it's going to be a Puma clone, but that's less disruptive to balance.
UC is trash past T1 and even then it isnt very good, they should give the AEC an 70 muni vickers on top or something AI related, make brits pay for it but make it atleast viable.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.655231.739+15
- 2.842223.791+5
- 3.940410.696+6
- 4.35459.857-1
- 5.599234.719+7
- 6.278108.720+29
- 7.307114.729+3
- 8.645.928+5
- 9.10629.785+7
- 10.527.881+18
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
11
Download
1265
Board Info
928 users are online:
928 guests
2 posts in the last 24h
10 posts in the last week
28 posts in the last month
10 posts in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50016
Welcome our newest member, GiovannidfRoach
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, GiovannidfRoach
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM