The AEC needs a buff

Not really. The tech cost is for timing. Maybe relic think the AEC needs the T2+side upgrade to make this unit not come out too early because that will cause 222/251 has little time space.

So the tech cost should not be add to the unit cost. Another example, will you add the 200/50 to the comet cost? The comet will be 700/235 then. It's even more expensive than a tiger/IS2. But no, the 200/50 is just tech cost to make the comet not come out too early.

While you're right for general tech, it doesn't apply here the same way.

For all factions tech is a way of timing units to the field, but you can progress from that next battlephase, tier building or truck and transition into another one.

For brits it doesn't apply, because you're simply going for a side tech and hitting a dead end.
Inferiority of AEC to puma assures no one will ever spam them and for the very reason of dead end side tech we can easily add tech costs to the unit, we can't when we talk about its performance, but as long as all strats involving it pick no more then single one ever, then tech cost can be added to "to get" cost.

Your comet example is similar, but not the same as comet is end tech tank and you will want multiple of it, in addition you're getting abilities and passives with this tech, AEC side tech is just that, mandatory side tech that increases units cost.

If it was like it was in alpha, where the tech cost was bigger, but AEC was actually affordable and you could build a strat around getting 2-3 of them then it would be a different story, but it is how it is.

And ostheer gets a ~800Mp 250fuel medium tank that is worse than the cromwell in quite a few ways by the same logic.

The AEC does its job. Not a whole lot more than that, but if you use it right, its still useful. A whole slew of units fit that same category as a niche unit. The REAL problem is that brits pretty much never had to react to anything, and now people are butthurt because they cant just do whatever and win.

So why would a zis clone be bad? Worse pen? You how it can barrage and is pretty decent vs infantry? I think if you actually did this there'd be more allied fanbois complaining in here :-)

Also, you admitted that the AEC does its job in countering light vehicles... so how is it underperforming? I still havent seen a single argument other than "its not a puma" and "not good enough versus infantry" both of which are not its job.
If you feel the Aec is worthless, get 6pdrs instead and play around them until you get a cromwell or sth. similar (which doesnt come too much later).

95% of the time you won't get more than one AEC, therefore the sidetech cost can be applied, unlike the p4 which does not require sidetech and is often built in quantities of 2 or more.

A zis clone would be bad because it has 2/3 of the pak's fire rate. I'd take a pak vs a zis any day, since the barrage is worth 2 mines or 2/3 of a demo.

I repeat again: the AEC does a job, but it does too little for too much resources. Its intended role is identical to the puma's: light tank hunter, and it does not deliver.

"If the unit is UP then just don't build it" is not the way to balance or play. A given unit should be viable, and right now the AEC is not.

95% of the time you won't get more than one AEC, therefore the sidetech cost can be applied, unlike the p4 which does not require sidetech and is often built in quantities of 2 or more.

A zis clone would be bad because it has 2/3 of the pak's fire rate. I'd take a pak vs a zis any day, since the barrage is worth 2 mines or 2/3 of a demo.

I repeat again: the AEC does a job, but it does too little for too much resources. Its intended role is identical to the puma's: light tank hunter, and it does not deliver.

"If the unit is UP then just don't build it" is not the way to balance or play. A given unit should be viable, and right now the AEC is not.

and again... the AEC does it's job by countering the Luchs. you feel like you can deal with the luchs without an AEC? don't get it. your opponent is not OKW? don't get it. your opponent doesn't get the Luchs? don't get it.

the sideteching cost in that case is actually WAY better than anything ost has... you can simply elect to spend the 100/15 for the tech and NEVER EVEN BUILD the AEC. ostheer absolutely cannot just say "ah, well... skipping T2", because if you do you are absolutely screwed vs. pretty much any kind of vehicle (and building T2 is both more complicated, as in you need a pio in your base, and more expensive and it could potentially get killed and you will have to rebuild it to be able to build T2 units again).

i still didn't see a single argument that warrants a buff for the AEC.

the sideteching cost in that case is actually WAY better than anything ost has... you can simply elect to spend the 100/15 for the tech and NEVER EVEN BUILD the AEC. ostheer absolutely cannot just say "ah, well... skipping T2", because if you do you are absolutely screwed vs. pretty much any kind of vehicle (and building T2 is both more complicated, as in you need a pio in your base, and more expensive and it could potentially get killed and you will have to rebuild it to be able to build T2 units again).

Just as you can simply skip the StuG or the ostwind, or literally any other unit: you can just spend it on teching. I can't see what you are talking about.

i still didn't see a single argument that warrants a buff for the AEC.

This:

I repeat again: the AEC does a job, but it does too little for too much resources. Its intended role is identical to the puma's: light tank hunter, and it does not deliver.

Just as you can simply skip the StuG or the ostwind, or literally any other unit: you can just spend it on teching. I can't see what you are talking about.

you cannot skip T2 or you pretty much auto-lose.

...light tank hunter...

and which light tanks is it incapable of fighting against? the only tanks i can see getting mentioned in here that the aec is supposedly not able to counter are medium tanks. everything BUT medium tanks the AEC can take on handily (as in, doing its job). the bigger tanks it can't take on alone, but it's not like it cannot damage them/finish a damaged one off.

*schrecks

Kinda hard to do against a unit that can easily be spammed with their super low popcap

some people just have shitty micro

How about adding infantry sniping skill like LAT in COH1 have. gain more precision during 30s costs 40 munition maybe.

you cannot skip T2 or you pretty much auto-lose.

and which light tanks is it incapable of fighting against?

T2 is tech cost. AEC tech + unit cost is unit cost.

"light tank hunter" implies that the AEC is light, not the tanks it hunts. Should have worded it better, yeah.

everything BUT medium tanks the AEC can take on handily (as in, doing its job). the bigger tanks it can't take on alone, but it's not like it cannot damage them/finish a damaged one off.

Exactly, that's what a puma does except the "BUT mediums tanks" part.

what a load of bull. both units are basically flankers when it comes to medium tanks, their is no fucking way a puma can win against a t-34 even when kiting.

the puma have
superior penetration
superior sight
superior range
superior top speed
superior acceleration
superior DPS
superior coaxial (the one mg42 on the puma is better than the two mg on the t34 up until 0-10 meters)

the t34 have
better hp
better armor
better AOE

The puma is a unit made specifically to kite. It's fast with long line of sight and a gun to use that sight. Saying the Puma is purely a flanker is ignore the potential of its 50 meter sight and 50 meter range gun.

The puma can easily kit a t34 or sherman, assuming that's no zis or su85 nearby.

95% of the time you won't get more than one AEC, therefore the sidetech cost can be applied, unlike the p4 which does not require sidetech and is often built in quantities of 2 or more.

designing a unit that you would only consider get one of is a bit flawed. The AEC should be a unit that you would actually considering getting an extra one if the first one die.

This shit wrecks the ostwind, flank the stugs, and toy and tease with the PIV.


What's wrong here?

more bullshit

dude half the frigging shots will deflect on the t-34 dont even get started on the better class of medium tanks. minor advantages aside both units need to flank to properly kill the medium tanks.

This shit wrecks the ostwind, flank the stugs, and toy and tease with the PIV.

It loses to ostwind 1v1 and does not outrange the p4. And saying that it can flank a stug is akin to saying that cons can kill at guns, flanking is the thing that most vehicles do.

T2 is tech cost. AEC tech + unit cost is unit cost.

"light tank hunter" implies that the AEC is light, not the tanks it hunts. Should have worded it better, yeah.



Exactly, that's what a puma does except the "BUT mediums tanks" part.

Still no reasons for buffs. All i hear is "but puma is better, i want puma!". And i want rifle vet for grens... and 5 man squad upgrades, bars instead of lmg42s, a sniper that can counter light vehicles, emplacements that have a "can't kill me" button, forward retreat points with weapon racks and reinforcing, having to spend only 30 muni once to be able to heal all my squads all the time, cloakable infantry that is deployable everywhere on the map with insane dps, tanks that can survive roundabout 20 pak shots and throw grenades, indestructable artillery pieces in my base and so on and so forth.

Also: your tech cost thingie makes no sense.

dude half the frigging shots will deflect on the t-34 dont even get started on the better class of medium tanks. minor advantages aside both units need to flank to properly kill the medium tanks.

it's called having patient and good micro. Yes, about half of the shot at long range will bounce against the front of a regular medium, but all of the shot will be made in safety.

If we are talking about the advanced medium there's a big difference in price. Even then the Puma can still fire from safely (except against the comet).

As long as you don't get overly aggressive a puma can fire away at the target all day.

Aimed shot for guaranteed penetration and turret jam. That's how it always worked when kiting with a puma against medium armor.

At least puma can take on mediums/heavies properly; AEC will struggle against an ostwind if it comes down to it.

it's called having patient and good micro.

No, Its called brutal misuse of your units. if you believe the puma is capable of taking out tanks from the front then show. but i know you will not. your strategy requires you opponent to be complete idiot or is in a coma.

Aimed . That's how it always worked when kiting with a puma against medium armor.

? WTF!another person who doesnt know anything. aimed shot only cripples the rotation of the turret but the tank is still pretty much capable of firing back . in fact their are plenty of cases where i rotate the tank so that it can keep firing on a strafing puma .

No, Its called brutal misuse of your units. if you believe the puma is capable of taking out tanks from the front then show. but i know you will not. your strategy requires you opponent to be complete idiot or is in a coma.

Of course it is. Just use it with Elite Armor.

Still no reasons for buffs. All i hear is "but puma is better, i want puma!". And i want rifle vet for grens... and 5 man squad upgrades, bars instead of lmg42s, a sniper that can counter light vehicles, emplacements that have a "can't kill me" button, forward retreat points with weapon racks and reinforcing, having to spend only 30 muni once to be able to heal all my squads all the time, cloakable infantry that is deployable everywhere on the map with insane dps, tanks that can survive roundabout 20 pak shots and throw grenades, indestructable artillery pieces in my base and so on and so forth.

Also: your tech cost thingie makes no sense.

Why do I have to explain the basics of RTS to you?

All of your examples illustrate different units with different roles, having different strengths. That's called "asymmetrical balance". The puma and the AEC have the exact same roles, and their performance to cost ratios are radically different. That's not asymmetrical balance, that's an underperforming unit.

The explanation for the tech cost thingy is above in the thread, I don't want to write the same thing over and over again.

All of your examples illustrate different units with different roles, having different strengths. That's called "asymmetrical balance". The puma and the AEC have the exact same roles, and their performance to cost ratios are radically different. That's not asymmetrical balance, that's an underperforming unit.

it works both ways. ost sniper is same price as brit sniper, yet brit sniper can counter vehicles. thats not asymmetrical balance, that's an underperforming (or overperforming?) unit. MVGame.

...and again, because i haven't said it often enough: the AEC serves it's purpose, it doesn't need a buff. i even doubt very much it needs a cost reduction, for the points mentioned above.