The AEC needs a buff

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.

Those snipers actually have different roles, so this comparison is false if puma and AEC is supposed to fill the same role.

I don't play brits so I'm not trying to voice any opinion about the state of the AEC, only that your comparison with the snipers are incorrect.

I don't think it really needs a buff. It has its role and it does it well enough. It's also fairly cheap, considering.

It's a great harassment unit, solid enough against medium vehicles too. Does enough to scare off infantry without AT.


Comparing it to the Puma is silly. Different army, different tech, general trend of allied vehicles < german vehicles etc.

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 AEC hits the field about a minute sooner than an OKW puma and much sooner than the wehrmacht one. It's also cheaper on an individual basis, and thus building multiple AEC's is very cost effective to counter Puma's.

Those snipers actually have different roles, so this comparison is false if puma and AEC is supposed to fill the same role.

I don't play brits so I'm not trying to voice any opinion about the state of the AEC, only that your comparison with the snipers are incorrect.

i could have picked ANY unit combination and made the same point... but if the brit sniper is actually supposed to counter vehicles, then what DOESN'T he counter? or whats supposed to counter him?

but, alright, for the sake of the argument, let's take tommies vs. grens: comparable costs (tommies higher purchase cost, but lower reinforcement cost), yet tommies have way better vet, can get self healing upgrade (self healing for free after initial investment), can get nades, arty nades, have access to weapon racks (so different weapon combinations possible, as well as multiple upgrades), can get a 5 man upgrade, get boosted stats in cover... while having the same general role. but this, of course, is asymmetrical balance, because it fits the narrative, while the AEC is just underperforming. no hypocrisy here. amirite?

but if the brit sniper is actually supposed to counter vehicles, then what DOESN'T he counter? or whats supposed to counter him?

What he does or doesn't counter is irrelevant, both to the topic and to your argument. He simply have a double roles, while not excel in either of them.

but, alright, for the sake of the argument, let's take tommies vs. grens: comparable costs (tommies higher purchase cost, but lower reinforcement cost), yet tommies have way better vet, can get self healing upgrade (self healing for free after initial investment), can get nades, arty nades, have access to weapon racks (so different weapon combinations possible, as well as multiple upgrades), can get a 5 man upgrade, get boosted stats in cover... while having the same general role. but this, of course, is asymmetrical balance, because it fits the narrative, while the AEC is just underperforming. no hypocrisy here. amirite?

I agree that this comparison is better, although I don't agree with all the flavors you're attributing tommies and choose not to mention. But that is for another thread, I simply wanted to point out that your previous comparison regarding snipers and aec/puma was false, and I'm not really interested or have enough knowledge about AEC gameplay to join the discussion any deeper than this.

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.

yet ost sniper is more powerful vs infantry and other snipers, legit asymmetrical balance there.

No it doesn't serve its purpose, which is countering light vehicles and reliably fighting mediums. Also, if you change obers price to 600 MP, will they still serve their purpose? Yes. WIll they be a balanced unit? No.

I don't think it really needs a buff. It has its role and it does it well enough. It's also fairly cheap, considering.

It's a great harassment unit, solid enough against medium vehicles too. Does enough to scare off infantry without AT.

Comparing it to the Puma is silly. Different army, different tech, general trend of allied vehicles < german vehicles etc.

The AEC hits the field about a minute sooner than an OKW puma and much sooner than the wehrmacht one. It's also cheaper on an individual basis, and thus building multiple AEC's is very cost effective to counter Puma's.

It's definitely not good at all at harassing and anti-infantry and it can't fight mediums due to 40 range.

The time it hits the field is irrelevant as long as it can get there before light vehicles (luchs), because it is a reaction-type unit. See a luchs/flamer HT - build the AEC. It doesn't make sense to get more than 1 for the same reason - so the teching cost is a downside.

yet ost sniper is more powerful vs infantry and other snipers, legit asymmetrical balance there.

only that it isn't. both ost and brit sniper get oneshot by each other. even if it was legit asymmetrical balance, you are still cherrypicking here, because, like i mentioned above, there are multiple other instances where allied units are quite clearly and obviously stronger despite exact same role and similar costs. again, you only use the argument when it fits your narrative and not in general.

No it doesn't serve its purpose, which is countering light vehicles and reliably fighting mediums. Also, if you change obers price to 600 MP, will they still serve their purpose? Yes. WIll they be a balanced unit? No.

It does serve its purpose, because it IS countering light vehicles, it just cannot take on medium tanks on its own (and again, if it could, it would be OP, even by your definition). it very well can take on medium tanks if you have two or three of them, negating the argument that the unlock costs can be added to the price.

It does serve its purpose, because it IS countering light vehicles, it just cannot take on medium tanks on its own (and again, if it could, it would be OP, even by your definition). it very well can take on medium tanks if you have two or three of them, negating the argument that the unlock costs can be added to the price.

eh, i don't want to buy something as late and expensive as the AEC just to fight light vehicles. also, the puma fights mediums just fine because it out ranges them. same with the su-76. both are more expensive than the AEC but the AEC is in an awkward spot right now, just like the M-42; the m-42 is only useful against the lusch and lighter which makes it utterly useless 99% of the time (although probably more useful this patch with lusch rushing making a resurgence).

eh, i don't want to buy something as late and expensive as the AEC just to fight light vehicles. also, the puma fights mediums just fine because it out ranges them. same with the su-76. both are more expensive than the AEC but the AEC is in an awkward spot right now, just like the M-42; the m-42 is only useful against the lusch and lighter which makes it utterly useless 99% of the time (although probably more useful this patch with lusch rushing making a resurgence).

or you know, you build 6 pounders and/or the AT sniper and save your fuel for cromwells... if that stuff is too late, maybe you need to build an AEC after all... just like all other factions, you have to make a choice whether you want to have a safe early game and delay your strong units or risk getting overrun by light vehicles.

or you know, you build 6 pounders and/or the AT sniper and save your fuel for cromwells... if that stuff is too late, maybe you need to build an AEC after all... just like all other factions, you have to make a choice whether you want to have a safe early game and delay your strong units or risk getting overrun by light vehicles.

that's kind of the point though, the sniper and AT gun are not too late and it's not that hard to save my fuel for cromwells. all of them will preform nearly as well (or better for more) against the lusch and will be more useful later on.

i don't think the AEC is a bad unit in an of it self, i've seen people use it well, but its window of opportunity is a couple of minutes and then it's done. i can get more utility out of other units and save my fuel for better ones.

i find light vehicles in general to be one of the weaker points in this game because they either have a limited window of opportunity, perform a utility role, and/or have shock value. there aren't many light AT weapons and none of them are stock so light vehicles, by definition of being light, are also very vulnerable to all forms of damage.

that's kind of the point though, the sniper and AT gun are not too late and it's not that hard to save my fuel for cromwells. all of them will preform nearly as well (or better for more) against the lusch and will be more useful later on.

i don't think the AEC is a bad unit in an of it self, i've seen people use it well, but its window of opportunity is a couple of minutes and then it's done. i can get more utility out of other units and save my fuel for better ones.

i find light vehicles in general to be one of the weaker points in this game because they either have a limited window of opportunity, perform a utility role, and/or have shock value. there aren't many light AT weapons and none of them are stock so light vehicles, by definition of being light, are also very vulnerable to all forms of damage.

...and almost every faction has the same problem. the 222 wants to say hello and is asking for his window/role :-)

no reason (or even less of a reason) to buff the AEC.

I cannot think of a single instance in which building an AEC is actually useful. It's a fart in the wind and completely unreliable; much like the Universal Carrier. I think we can improve it alittle; or make it at least more worthwhile choice to unlock, if the AEC Unlock Tech didn't simply unlock AEC.

Perhaps if it also unlocked a infantry-based AT Snare? Can also tack on a bonus to the Bofors unlock. Remember, picking AEC locks out the Bofors. While its ok for the Axis Puma to be as strong as it is; Axis don't need to sacrifice a core unit/building just to build it.

The alternative is simply to remove the fuel cost associated with unlocking the AEC. In this new era of 4 minute Luchs rushes and intense Axis light vehicle play; alongside extreme Oberkommando West costless teching with Bastion-strength OKW Forward Bases...that this makes sense.

Funny how AEC is worse than su-76 before fix and still there are people here who argue that its fine. Bias is strong with them.

Btw guys, pls learn to use forums before doing so, multiquote option is there waitung for you, no need to spam a hundret posts one after another. Moderators should disallow such spam.

Funny how AEC is worse than su-76 before fix and still there are people here who argue that its fine. Bias is strong with them.

The AEC works because it's a timing unit. I wouldn't mind buffs, but I mostly just use it to harass capping squads, kill stuff like base bunkers/flak emplacements, medic bunkers and of course any sort of light vehicles (222, halftracks, kubel, luchs) Only SU76 didn't have nearly the same timing and came out much later in the game.

I use it pretty regularly in my games, about 50/50 with bofors depending on my strategy.

I cannot think of a single instance in which building an AEC is actually useful. It's a fart in the wind and completely unreliable; much like the Universal Carrier.

both units have a purpose and do well at what they're supposed to do. especially the AEC has a decent window where there are no "hard counters" possible (AEC can easily run away from anything that could seriously threaten it when it hits the field).
as i've mentioned before, if the AEC/UC are "bad", what is the 222 or the 251 (ost halftrack)?

both units have a purpose and do well at what they're supposed to do. especially the AEC has a decent window where there are no "hard counters" possible (AEC can easily run away from anything that could seriously threaten it when it hits the field).
as i've mentioned before, if the AEC/UC are "bad", what is the 222 or the 251 (ost halftrack)?

Some units being bad or having niche roles doesn't justify other units being bad or having too narrow a niche. The 222 does have a role as a soft AT target that can still hurt (and chase) infantry and is cheap as chips too boot, I build it in most of my games and I'd say it survives to get 6+ kills most of the time, and I,ve seen several vetted ones recently. The 221 could use a bit more speed or something but is a casualty of transports in this game just not being overly useful.

I've almost never seen an AEC amount to anything major, personally. At best they chase the Luchs off to another part of the map then run around doing nothing until forced off themselves by shrecks and P4s, because it has bad dmg against infantry and melts when facing mediums. I expect a bit more for a unit that requires its own specific tech and locks out the BOFORS.

Of course, I would have less issues with the AEC being mediocre if Brits had a reliable AT snare to keep the Luchs from happily running around. Say, on Sappers, if we need to avoid copying other factions. Or if the PIAT was actually worth something.

Some units being bad or having niche roles doesn't justify other units being bad or having too narrow a niche. The 222 does have a role as a soft AT target that can still hurt (and chase) infantry and is cheap as chips too boot, I build it in most of my games and I'd say it survives to get 6+ kills most of the time, and I,ve seen several vetted ones recently. The 221 could use a bit more speed or something but is a casualty of transports in this game just not being overly useful.

I've almost never seen an AEC amount to anything major, personally. At best they chase the Luchs off to another part of the map then run around doing nothing until forced off themselves by shrecks and P4s, because it has bad dmg against infantry and melts when facing mediums. I expect a bit more for a unit that requires its own specific tech and locks out the BOFORS.

Of course, I would have less issues with the AEC being mediocre if Brits had a reliable AT snare to keep the Luchs from happily running around. Say, on Sappers, if we need to avoid copying other factions. Or if the PIAT was actually worth something.

222 can kill nothing but UCs or halftracks vehicle wise, and is pretty bad vs. infantry as well (especially because everything more than a single squad will straight up kill it if you dont pull back. the only upside the 222 has over getting another gren/pgren is that it's not bleeding you MP as long as its alive (and it won't be for long, because it has no "window" unlike the AEC). 251 is bad because its a mobile reinforcement bunker without the flame upgrade, and a 120 muni sink with it, as it will go down to small arms as well (also no window). the russian clown cars are better because you don't have to upgrade the halftrack, but just put a flamer inside that you can save even if the vehicle dies. also quad.

problem with infantry snares for UKF is that you can have stuff like double piat on a squad that also has a snare. suddenly a single squad can solo even medium tanks just by snaring and then finishing off (piats are actually pretty devastating when they hit... stationary targets and snared tanks get eaten for lunch). imagine PGrens with snare, or Grens with double schreck. and yes, i see the same problem with USF, luckily so far i haven't seen anyone try to do it with zooks (which are admittedly a bit worse). you can btw. also attack ground with piats if the target is moving (also, brummbär is even more worthless than any piat squad could be, even with attack ground).

If the other player invests 100+ ammo on a snare and PIATs (not counting the weapon unlock cost, too) and you let your lone medium tank unsupported as they get snared and then pelted, you deserve to lose that tank if you ask me. Assuming of course the Panzer 4 doesn't cut the lone sapper squad to ribbons even when snared.

Snare into double PIATs was far from a problem back when UKF sniper had its critical shot as I remember it. I get and support them losing that ability out of the gate, but it leaves UKF too exposed to light vehicles unless they shell out previous fuel for an AEC that is going to do nothing else. On top of all their problems with Volks being able to fight back against Tommies now, it makes UKF early game quite hard vs OKW.

And yeah, the Brumbar sucks, but that doesn't justify any other unit sucking as I said. Two wrongs don't make a right.

When I play Brits I like using it. More like a harass unit instead of a front liner like the Stuart. Then again I'm a huge fan of using light vehicles.

If I had to pick any buff, I'd like it to be cheaper.

here's the problem

with a puma I would feel confident taking on a sherman, t34/76, or a cromwell one on one, provided it's a open area.

I can't say the same thing with the AEC. It's an inferior puma in everyway except for the scatter on its cannon. The AEC can't even take on an ostwind while the centuar is a sitting duck for the Puma.

The Puma is useful because it's an effective tank hunter as well as light vehicle hunter. Being merely a light vehicle hunter is too narrow of a role to be useful.

and the AEC shouldn't get a buff against infantry. The british have the bren carrier as an anti-infantry vehicle and the wehr doesn't need another stuart clone to deal with.

+1 this

Numerous times with dual pumas have I taken out big boy tanks. My fav was 2 ISU 152s in a single game without loosing either.

Try taking even a panther with 2 AEC. It is redundant in 7minutes of game. Pumas are worth keeping. Cost should be adjusted accordingly.

only that it isn't. both ost and brit sniper get oneshot by each other. even if it was legit asymmetrical balance, you are still cherrypicking here, because, like i mentioned above, there are multiple other instances where allied units are quite clearly and obviously stronger despite exact same role and similar costs. again, you only use the argument when it fits your narrative and not in general.

Ost sniper has a higher fire rate, therefore it is more effectvie vs infantry. Also, where do you see these "quite clearly stronger allied units"?

It does serve its purpose, because it IS countering light vehicles, it just cannot take on medium tanks on its own (and again, if it could, it would be OP, even by your definition). it very well can take on medium tanks if you have two or three of them, negating the argument that the unlock costs can be added to the price.

Refer to the 600 MP Obers that serve their purpose too. Making 2 or 3 AECs does not make sense by your own definition, you'll just be better off with a cromwell, because its single advantage over a cromwell is its arrival time.

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.

Rifles have stronger vet and combat effectiveness, grens are cheaper, and they get literally everything for free (lmg42, nades, faust). Why'd you want bars instead of lmg42 is beyond me since the lmg is clearly better. Ost doesn't need 5 man upgrades because their mainline infantry is cost-effective without them, emplacements with brace on have as much EHP as an okw truck, idk why you have trouble killing it, its so easy for allies after all . FRP with reinforce costs 450 manpower, I'd really love if that was also a tech structure... I also can't understand why you consider weapon racks as an upside, opposing to upgrading on the field. Commandos cost 500 MP, churchills can throw nade at about penal satchel range and have a bad gun, and don't get me started on the all-powerful 25pounders that cost 45 muni to fire and won't kill a bunker off of that.

The only thing that could be arguably strictly better is tommies' self-healing, but it is negated by the fact that it's the only source of healing, leading to awkward situations where the only tommy is on the other side of the map and you have 3 unhealed squads sitting in the base.