Login

russian armor

[Sov][1v1] Lend Lease: Exploitation of tech free tanks

14 Nov 2015, 03:53 AM
#21
avatar of WhySooSerious

Posts: 1248

the Lend Lease sherman is not that great of a tank. its an anti infantry tank and if you tie it to teching it would die overnight because its AT is not that great until it gets vet.
14 Nov 2015, 06:37 AM
#22
avatar of Junaid

Posts: 509

Guys for the love of the infantry, its not about the fuel. Its about the manpower!
14 Nov 2015, 06:52 AM
#23
avatar of Junaid

Posts: 509

I think it's fine.

If he foregoes teching, he gains minimal advantage. Sure, he saves a bit of manpower but he doesn't get the m4c sherman any quicker and he has much less tactical options available to him. Build a pair of stug's or a jagdpanzer or two and suddenly his epic strategy falls flat on its face with no back up plan.


(emphasis mine)

Lets see. He saves 160 + 240 + 240 = 765 mp (cost of tech buildings).

I have to spend, for teching, (T2 + BP2 + T3) = 575 mp. [Not counting T1 & BP1 as ill need them against his conspam anyway.]

End result: he gets, essentially, a 575+765 = 1340 mp resource advantage in terms of manpower. Spread it out over a 20 minute game, it becomes 67mp per minute. Which, I believe, is similar to the Soviet Industry penalty, only this is a bonus. I mention soviet industry here because we all know how crippling that mp penalty is, now just imagine a 70mp bonus to your income instead. (In my case it was ~50 cause the match was 27 minutes but still!)

If you can call that 'a bit' and a minimal advantage, well that's your standard of 'a bit' & minimal advantages sir. Not mine. Nor the majority of the community I'd wager.

The whole bloody point is that he used his superior numbers to attrit me into not having enough fuel for a StuG by continually pushing me off my territory. He was able to do so by being able to pump in fresh conscript squads even after his initial ones (and mine) had taken damage. Because of his advantage in manpower

And that he could do so risk free because of the M4C tanks not being tied to tech. If I knew that he won't get those M4Cs before teching, then I could have pumped out extra infantry to counter the spam. However, since I knew he'd get those M4Cs out tech-free eventually, I had to spend extra mp on teching up to T2 and then T3 just 'in case'. (Proof by contradiction).
14 Nov 2015, 08:57 AM
#24
avatar of Just easy

Posts: 110

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Nov 2015, 06:52 AMJunaid


End result: he gets, essentially, a 575+765 = 1340 mp resource advantage in terms of manpower.


Why are you adding these 2 numbers?
14 Nov 2015, 14:58 PM
#25
avatar of Junaid

Posts: 509



Why are you adding these 2 numbers?


because both factions are expected to spend over the course of a game. if he doesnt hes saved some mp (he gains some). at the same time since i have to spend I lose that amount. the net difference is the sum of the two.
14 Nov 2015, 16:41 PM
#26
avatar of kitekaze

Posts: 378

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Nov 2015, 14:58 PMJunaid


because both factions are expected to spend over the course of a game. if he doesnt hes saved some mp (he gains some). at the same time since i have to spend I lose that amount. the net difference is the sum of the two.


Sry, Junaid, I have watched the replay and I must say: he won fair and square.

While both of you made some mistakes, you lost map control to him 50 to 500. At that time, he's already floated 500 fuel reserving for M4C.

Meanwhile, you didn't have even a single Pak on the field. You could not hit T3 because you lose the map control to him while purchasing Halftrack and 222. You couldn't call the Tiger to counter because your fuel does not even reach 200. (Although you choose another doc).

Remember that he had to tech for Molotov and AT grenade as well to hold your force back. His halftrack+guard cost fuel also.



Tl;dr
Try to be better instead of accusing the game for making you lose.
14 Nov 2015, 16:54 PM
#27
14 Nov 2015, 17:07 PM
#28
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7

Go fast flamehalftruck into commad pnazer and he will loose his manpower advantage rather quickly
14 Nov 2015, 17:37 PM
#29
avatar of Dullahan

Posts: 1384

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Nov 2015, 06:52 AMJunaid


(emphasis mine)

Lets see. He saves 160 + 240 + 240 = 765 mp (cost of tech buildings).

I have to spend, for teching, (T2 + BP2 + T3) = 575 mp. [Not counting T1 & BP1 as ill need them against his conspam anyway.]

End result: he gets, essentially, a 575+765 = 1340 mp resource advantage in terms of manpower.


So what is he doing with that manpower that he "saved", since he can't build any units because he has no tech? Conscripts and Combat Engies?


14 Nov 2015, 17:47 PM
#30
avatar of bert69

Posts: 150

lend lease shermans already get their cost penalised for their call-in status. Currently, they take 135 fuel to call-in at 10 cps, but take only 2 volleys from double pak guns to kill.

If you lose to m4c sherman spam, then you obviously didn't play your cards right.
20 Nov 2015, 12:29 PM
#31
avatar of Junaid

Posts: 509



So what is he doing with that manpower that he "saved", since he can't build any units because he has no tech? Conscripts and Combat Engies?




spamming scripts. Which gave him the early game advantage. Through attrition
20 Nov 2015, 12:31 PM
#32
avatar of Junaid

Posts: 509

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Nov 2015, 17:47 PMbert69
lend lease shermans already get their cost penalised for their call-in status. Currently, they take 135 fuel to call-in at 10 cps, but take only 2 volleys from double pak guns to kill.

If you lose to m4c sherman spam, then you obviously didn't play your cards right.


It wasnt the sherman spam which got me. Tbh he did not spam shermans.

It was the con spam. Which I couldn't counter by building more infantry because I knew I had to tech and that he did not
20 Nov 2015, 12:39 PM
#33
avatar of Junaid

Posts: 509



Sry, Junaid, I have watched the replay and I must say: he won fair and square.

While both of you made some mistakes, you lost map control to him 50 to 500. At that time, he's already floated 500 fuel reserving for M4C.

Meanwhile, you didn't have even a single Pak on the field. You could not hit T3 because you lose the map control to him while purchasing Halftrack and 222. You couldn't call the Tiger to counter because your fuel does not even reach 200. (Although you choose another doc).

Remember that he had to tech for Molotov and AT grenade as well to hold your force back. His halftrack+guard cost fuel also.



Tl;dr
Try to be better instead of accusing the game for making you lose.


I thank you for your advice and I will try to play better from now on. I always am trying. And yes, I do realize now, in hindsight, that an mg bunker would have stopped him cold. And yes, another of my mistakes was that I did not see his strat for what it was early enough. I didn't realize that he was only spamming scripts and had not/was not going to tech at all. And that early sniper was a mistake.

However, I think you missed one of my crucial points. He did not defeat me due to sherman spam. Not at all. I never complained about fuel mismatches.

Yes he had me beat by the midgame by a 450 vp advantage. My point was that he could do it because he could safely spend (almost) all of his his mp toward combat infantry up to that point. As he had no teching to do.

I, otoh, could not
.

Its the same advantage that mechanized assault gives, and in my opinion its an imbalance. Both this doc, and mech assault.
20 Nov 2015, 12:39 PM
#34
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Nov 2015, 12:29 PMJunaid


spamming scripts. Which gave him the early game advantage. Through attrition


If he heavily invested in early game and you didn't, then I don't really know what did you expected.
You won't win if you have 2-3 squads of infantry less, unless you can hold your ground really well.
20 Nov 2015, 13:05 PM
#35
avatar of Junaid

Posts: 509

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Nov 2015, 12:39 PMKatitof


If he heavily invested in early game and you didn't, then I don't really know what did you expected.
You won't win if you have 2-3 squads of infantry less, unless you can hold your ground really well.


Well ofcourse I can't win outnumbered. I hope you read everything else which I also typed:

Namely: that I could not afford to keep spending on T1 units because I had to tech. Its ostheer's main flaw imo, you simply need that 222/Pak asap otherwise you leave yourself open.

Because I didn't know when the M5 etc would come out and couldn't let my guard down. Yes there were some simple strategies which I could have used e.g. mg bunker; but my second mistake was in not anticipating his playstyle. This is the second time I played against pure script spam in 1v1 (which I'm relatively new to) so it was unexpected and I did not adapt in time.

My point is that without LL, or say, mechanized assault, (if I was allied, he axis) that he couldn't have kept it up. The doctrines enable this.

And there is the other fact that t85s, easy8s etc were all restricted to tech. For the same reasons as outlined above (allowed tech skipping).

Why the exception for LL and mech assault
20 Nov 2015, 13:06 PM
#36
avatar of Junaid

Posts: 509

Btw can a mod change the title to add in mech assault in the title.
20 Nov 2015, 13:07 PM
#37
avatar of Junaid

Posts: 509

has OP encountered cpt.molo?


No I haven't. I gather, he pioneered and perfected this kind of play?
20 Nov 2015, 13:24 PM
#38
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Nov 2015, 13:05 PMJunaid


Well ofcourse I can't win outnumbered. I hope you read everything else which I also typed:

I did, but it doesn't put you in better light in any way.

Namely: that I could not afford to keep spending on T1 units because I had to tech. Its ostheer's main flaw imo, you simply need that 222/Pak asap otherwise you leave yourself open.

So you need early AT gun and light AT vehice vs no tech conspam why?

Because I didn't know when the M5 etc would come out and couldn't let my guard down. Yes there were some simple strategies which I could have used e.g. mg bunker; but my second mistake was in not anticipating his playstyle. This is the second time I played against pure script spam in 1v1 (which I'm relatively new to) so it was unexpected and I did not adapt in time.

That is another huge error you've made, not being able to identify opponents intentions and strat based on his loadout of commanders, bulletins and his early game choices puts you in equally disadvantaged situation as not having a pair of AT guns after 10th minute of the game. Glad you can see that yourself.

My point is that without LL, or say, mechanized assault, (if I was allied, he axis) that he couldn't have kept it up. The doctrines enable this.

Yes, that is how the doctrines are designed and intended to work.
They aren't unbeatable, lend-lease isn't even optimal doctrine and you're crippling yourself for ignoring teching with it as it can be easily anticipated and hardcountered.

And there is the other fact that t85s, easy8s etc were all restricted to tech. For the same reasons as outlined above (allowed tech skipping).

Both T34/85 and EZ8 are considerably better then their stock equivalents in both, firepower and durability.

M4C is better then T34/76, but then what isn't? Its the tier of call-in StuG, M10, dozer or command tanks, its not nearly as powerful or potent as 34/85 or EZ8, hence its not restricted.

Why the exception for LL and mech assault

Because, again, these doctrines are designed to be call-in doctrines. You're still hindering yourself if you won't tech using them, unless your opponent lost early game, which doesn't really impact late game in any way in this case, he'd picked no doctrine at all and rushed to T4 for T34 spam, you'd lost in exactly the same way, only difference being, with how much behind you were, you'd see armor on field much sooner then call-ins.

You didn't lost because of call-in doctrines, you lost because you were outplayed greatly in early game because you didn't read your opponents intentions and didn't reacted at all to his strat, call-ins had nothing to do with it.

In fact, had he teched instead, you'd be base pinned quickly by fast M5 which arrives incomparably faster then the call-in.
20 Nov 2015, 13:48 PM
#39
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1

Try Flame HT.

I had troubles against it with T1 opening (zero AT, just the same as conspam) even while going Tank Hunter to compensate. He was able to kite me, repair, kite again etc. I had terrible MP bleed until T-70 have arrived. In his case T-70 won't be there.

Oh, and watch out for mines. Don't be greedy.
20 Nov 2015, 14:14 PM
#40
avatar of vasa1719

Posts: 2635 | Subs: 4

Permanently Banned
Dude ostheer can do the same with StuG into tiger and pac wall :D.
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 guests

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

762 users are online: 762 guests
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49151
Welcome our newest member, pawlicmarg44
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM