Login

russian armor

The AEC needs a buff

PAGES (7)down
8 Dec 2015, 10:25 AM
#121
avatar of Doggo

Posts: 148



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)?


There is no window of opportunity when Shrecks are on the field enmass. Shrecks come before the AEC.

Perhaps making the 6-Pounder into a quicker unit will allow it to efficiently counter Light Vehicles in absence of a useable Light Vehicle for the British Empire...
8 Dec 2015, 10:44 AM
#122
avatar of iTzDusty

Posts: 836 | Subs: 5

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Dec 2015, 10:25 AMDoggo


There is no window of opportunity when Shrecks are on the field enmass. Shrecks come before the AEC.

Perhaps making the 6-Pounder into a quicker unit will allow it to efficiently counter Light Vehicles in absence of a useable Light Vehicle for the British Empire...


Schrecks are an easily kited hard counter, schrecks do not immediately invalidate all vehicles on the field. This is what micro is for.

The 6 pounder is also stat for stat identical to the pak 43, with the addition of a 50% accuracy buff against vehicles (I still believe thats the case). What more does it possibly need when it is the strongest in the game?

8 Dec 2015, 10:46 AM
#123
avatar of iTzDusty

Posts: 836 | Subs: 5

The AEC either needs a good cost reduction (manpower especially, aint no way im spending the manpower on the requisition AND the damn car).

Otherwise, the vehicle is fairly decent. Good gun (surprisingly *ok* vs infantry too) but is quite squishy vs pumas. This is where it would benefit from being cheaper, where building two would be attractive.

Plus, the more accessible it is, the more accessible the few snares UKF has is.
8 Dec 2015, 11:37 AM
#124
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930

Being cheaper isn't going to make the AEC more useful. The british have the weakest anti-tank capabiliy in the early-mid game with their lack of easily accessed tank snare and the lack of tracking projectile inf ATW. Any axis player should know how easily an atg get flanked even with faust.

furthermore, being useful only against light vehicle is a very niche and limited role. The AEC needs to make puma level decent against tank to be worth the purchase. Raise the price if need be, but the AEC needs to have 50 range at the least. It is the same exact problem the PTRS have. Light vehicle is a very small subset of unit. A unit that's only decent against light vehicle is just not worth using.


Schrecks are an easily kited hard counter, schrecks do not immediately invalidate all vehicles on the field. This is what micro is for.


schreck can be kited if the vehicle in question is decent against infantry (sherman), or if the main gun have good range(jackson, puma). The AEC have neither the range or AOE. The AEC can technically kill infantry but it's far below the capability of the t70 or even the stuart.

The remote chance of sniping an infantry model is not worth the risk of using AEC against schreck.


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.


I will agree that the 222 is a bit crappy beside hunting m20, and the flamethrower upgrade on the 251 is severely overpriced. the 222 could use a small armor buff and an acceleration buff.

the flamethrower upgrade on the 251 should be 90 munition
8 Dec 2015, 13:26 PM
#125
avatar of cr4wler

Posts: 1164

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.


Missing the point entirely. AT and AT snare on same unit is a bad idea. It creates units that can single handedly kill everything vehicle based.
Also... if you think someone deserves to lose a tank when getting in snare range... what about uc in faust range?

Brummbär was an example of a unit that has been in a worse spot than the aec (along with both t2 vehicles) for ages, yet never got changed. Remember that the aec does fill its role.
jump backJump back to quoted post8 Dec 2015, 09:09 AMMuxsus


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"?

Do i really have to make a video of that as well? Because its not true. Brit sniper takes a bit longer to take the first shot (0.5s on average if i remember correctly) and has a longer reload along with less bullets in the magazine. HE FIRES FASTER. Even with a reload time twice as long and a magazine size less than half of what thebost sniper has, the brit sniper is quicker at killing 4 dudes than the ost sniper. Factor in reloading and they're just as fast at killing 6 dudes. Go on, test it.


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.


Why would making several aecs not make sense? I explicitly mentioned that as an alternative to rushing better vehicles? And again, this is a choice all factions have to make. If i try skipping t2 as ost and have no pak or pgrens with schrecks... well, guess what happens when a vehicle hits the field.


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.


Neither lmg nor faust or nade are for free... or if you are talking about unlocking the option, you have to tech t2... so while it is a tech that you will get in any case, it mught come later than you'll want.

I could make points for everything you mentioned, but in the end it was just an example for "asymmetrical balance" and how the allies were getting the best in almost every case, apart from the aec.
8 Dec 2015, 14:11 PM
#126
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930



that's a really bad attitude to have. This is about balancing the game not having some petty revenge.

Yes, some wehr unit are a bit crap atm, like the 222, the flamethrower ht, and the brummbar. Instead of dragging the AEC down in some sort of petty revenge, what should be done is to make all of them useful.
8 Dec 2015, 14:23 PM
#127
avatar of cr4wler

Posts: 1164



that's a really bad attitude to have. This is about balancing the game not having some petty revenge.

Yes, some wehr unit are a bit crap atm, like the 222, the flamethrower ht, and the brummbar. Instead of dragging the AEC down in some sort of petty revenge, what should be done is to make all of them useful.

I'm not dragging anything down. For the 1000th time, the aec does its job. I mentioned the brummbär as a unit that DOESN'T do its job. Or has no clear identity or whatever. UKF has all the tools to deal with light vehicles or medium tanks, the aec does not need a buff of any sort. It has a role which it is good at. It has other uses, at which it doesnt excel (AND IT SHOULDN'T). Just because the puma exists doesn't mean the aec needs to be anywhere close to it in performance.
8 Dec 2015, 14:26 PM
#128
avatar of Muxsus

Posts: 170


Do i really have to make a video of that as well? Because its not true. Brit sniper takes a bit longer to take the first shot (0.5s on average if i remember correctly) and has a longer reload along with less bullets in the magazine. HE FIRES FASTER. Even with a reload time twice as long and a magazine size less than half of what thebost sniper has, the brit sniper is quicker at killing 4 dudes than the ost sniper. Factor in reloading and they're just as fast at killing 6 dudes. Go on, test it.

Why would making several aecs not make sense? I explicitly mentioned that as an alternative to rushing better vehicles? And again, this is a choice all factions have to make. If i try skipping t2 as ost and have no pak or pgrens with schrecks... well, guess what happens when a vehicle hits the field.

Neither lmg nor faust or nade are for free... or if you are talking about unlocking the option, you have to tech t2... so while it is a tech that you will get in any case, it mught come later than you'll want.

I could make points for everything you mentioned, but in the end it was just an example for "asymmetrical balance" and how the allies were getting the best in almost every case, apart from the aec.


The snipers have very similar pure DPS, and yet I see the ost sniper superior vs infantry because it comes out earlier and has an semi-instant 100% accuracy shot (that means 100% wipe on any 2 man squad). It doesn't change anything, we can make arguments all day, that's just asymmetrical balance. Grass is usually greener on the other side.

You wrote something like "if you don't like AEC, get a cromwell". One makes the AEC in response to a fast luchs/FHT/whatever, and it's not like you'll need 2 AECs against them. They don't have any uses outside of that, that's why it doesn't make sense to make multiple.

If you tech BP1 when you have the fuel, I doubt you'll even have 60 muni for an lmg42. Since you'll make it anyways, you should just get it at the earliest possible time, so the gren upgrades will arrive even sooner than they can be used.

You are intentionally (or unintentionally?) ignoring every good aspect of axis and every bad aspect of allies in your posts. That way most allied units will indeed come out to be superior, but if you just play a significant quantity of games as every faction, you will come to realise that the game is, in fact, well-balanced, and for those few wrongly balanced units that you find, feel free to create a separate thread. This one is not axis vs allies, it's about the AEC.
8 Dec 2015, 14:34 PM
#129
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930


I'm not dragging anything down. For the 1000th time, the aec does its job. I mentioned the brummbär as a unit that DOESN'T do its job. Or has no clear identity or whatever. UKF has all the tools to deal with light vehicles or medium tanks, the aec does not need a buff of any sort. It has a role which it is good at. It has other uses, at which it doesnt excel (AND IT SHOULDN'T). Just because the puma exists doesn't mean the aec needs to be anywhere close to it in performance.


the job of "dealing with light vehicle" is a very small niche. saying that a vehicle is useful just against it can fight just light vehicles is ridiculous. In fact the AEC is bad precisely because it's only good for fighting light vehicle.

and the british does not have everything it need to fight vehicles or medium tank. The british infantry have no snare and their PIAT have trouble hitting any moving vehicle. The british are quite frank screwed if they can't get the cromwell out fast enough.

Mine is useful but by itself is not enough. The AEC is a poor investment that goes bad as soon as any medium tank hit the field.
8 Dec 2015, 14:49 PM
#130
avatar of cr4wler

Posts: 1164

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Dec 2015, 14:26 PMMuxsus


The snipers have very similar pure DPS, and yet I see the ost sniper superior vs infantry because it comes out earlier and has an semi-instant 100% accuracy shot (that means 100% wipe on any 2 man squad). It doesn't change anything, we can make arguments all day, that's just asymmetrical balance. Grass is usually greener on the other side.

You wrote something like "if you don't like AEC, get a cromwell". One makes the AEC in response to a fast luchs/FHT/whatever, and it's not like you'll need 2 AECs against them. They don't have any uses outside of that, that's why it doesn't make sense to make multiple.

If you tech BP1 when you have the fuel, I doubt you'll even have 60 muni for an lmg42. Since you'll make it anyways, you should just get it at the earliest possible time, so the gren upgrades will arrive even sooner than they can be used.

You are intentionally (or unintentionally?) ignoring every good aspect of axis and every bad aspect of allies in your posts. That way most allied units will indeed come out to be superior, but if you just play a significant quantity of games as every faction, you will come to realise that the game is, in fact, well-balanced, and for those few wrongly balanced units that you find, feel free to create a separate thread. This one is not axis vs allies, it's about the AEC.


and i'm telling you after having played the brits as well: the AEC does not need buffs.

if you need an AEC to deal with Luchs, get one. Your cromwell will be delayed, so you might need something as a stopgap, and since you already have an AEC, you can also elect to build a second one. together they'll arguably be as good as the cromwell at AT. if you don't need AT, you can simply rely on MP only units until you get the cromwell.

every other faction has to make choices like this as well. the brits never had to in previous patches, which is the only reason people complain about the AEC. it's not as ridiculously OP as all the other brit units were, so in comparison it feels weak. the AEC was never supposed to be a medium tank hunter or an anti infantry plattform. and, again, for the 10000th time: it has a role, just like the 222 for example, and it fulfills its role just fine without any buffs (like you said, counter a luchs, maybe a FHT or 222, though i'd claim that neither of the latter actually needs an AEC to get countered, but anyways...). the only real "problem" with the AEC is that against ostheer you pretty much never need it (no vehicles pose a threat until you can get something better than the AEC), against OKW right now you might need it vs the Luchs (because 6pdr/sniper/mines as a counter to the luchs force you to play way more defensive and give up map control, delaying your teching alternatives). it is, like you said, more of a reactionary, niche unit. and if you buff the AEC, it will most likely be too strong after the inevitable OKW nerfs. the unit IS fine.
8 Dec 2015, 15:22 PM
#131
avatar of The_Courier

Posts: 665



Missing the point entirely. AT and AT snare on same unit is a bad idea. It creates units that can single handedly kill everything vehicle based.
Also... if you think someone deserves to lose a tank when getting in snare range... what about uc in faust range?




Sure, because Guards and bazooka rifles have been OP for so long, have they? The point stands. If you let an infantry unit with AT snare then kill your vehicle, you deserve to lose it. And yes, that also works with the UC, or a Sherman dying to Grens who picked up a shreck, or any other vehicle. Not that anyone even builds the UC anymore since it handles like a pile of bricks with an engine strapped on but still.

I'd rather see brits get a snare than buff the AEC truth be told. But something has to be done. OKW can get away with having no snare on non-doctrinal units because all their mainline infantry can run around with shrecks very fast. Brits do not have that luxury, on top of their handheld AT being shit. Give Sappers an AT nade after the upgrade has been researched and voila, problem solved while not creating faction homogenization.
8 Dec 2015, 16:13 PM
#132
avatar of Muxsus

Posts: 170



and i'm telling you after having played the brits as well: the AEC does not need buffs.

if you need an AEC to deal with Luchs, get one. Your cromwell will be delayed, so you might need something as a stopgap, and since you already have an AEC, you can also elect to build a second one. together they'll arguably be as good as the cromwell at AT. if you don't need AT, you can simply rely on MP only units until you get the cromwell.

every other faction has to make choices like this as well. the brits never had to in previous patches, which is the only reason people complain about the AEC. it's not as ridiculously OP as all the other brit units were, so in comparison it feels weak. the AEC was never supposed to be a medium tank hunter or an anti infantry plattform. and, again, for the 10000th time: it has a role, just like the 222 for example, and it fulfills its role just fine without any buffs (like you said, counter a luchs, maybe a FHT or 222, though i'd claim that neither of the latter actually needs an AEC to get countered, but anyways...). the only real "problem" with the AEC is that against ostheer you pretty much never need it (no vehicles pose a threat until you can get something better than the AEC), against OKW right now you might need it vs the Luchs (because 6pdr/sniper/mines as a counter to the luchs force you to play way more defensive and give up map control, delaying your teching alternatives). it is, like you said, more of a reactionary, niche unit. and if you buff the AEC, it will most likely be too strong after the inevitable OKW nerfs. the unit IS fine.


For the 10000th time: 600 MP obers would fulfill their role too, but their cost would prohibit their use.

I also doubt we can really come to a consensus here when you believe that the puma has a different role than an AEC. Not that I disrespect your opinion, but this arguement will probably just come down to personal opinion, which is why that poll is there.
8 Dec 2015, 16:20 PM
#133
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

It's very simple.

AEC has no purpose on the field once he killed/kept at bay Luchs.

Luchs, Stuart, T70 and 222 can be used in late game as a scout unit (222, T70, and Luchs with camo) or to harras single squad capping your points. They can be used all the time.

I guess AEC is more like Puma, but even Puma has late-game utility. 50 range is enough to kite medium tanks, it can also flank SUs and kill them.
Add elite armor rounds and it can become your best AT unit.

Now AEC.
Once it counters Luchs, it has nothing to do. 40 range means it cannot kite tanks like Puma. Almost 0 AI means it cannot defend your flanks.
It can only scout while other light vehicles can scout and/or fight infantry/tank.

50 range, or give it some AI power.
8 Dec 2015, 17:29 PM
#134
avatar of cr4wler

Posts: 1164

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Dec 2015, 16:13 PMMuxsus


For the 10000th time: 600 MP obers would fulfill their role too, but their cost would prohibit their use.

I also doubt we can really come to a consensus here when you believe that the puma has a different role than an AEC. Not that I disrespect your opinion, but this arguement will probably just come down to personal opinion, which is why that poll is there.


only that the AEC is not overpriced, at least not as much as people make it out to be.

It's very simple.

AEC has no purpose on the field once he killed/kept at bay Luchs.

Luchs, Stuart, T70 and 222 can be used in late game as a scout unit (222, T70, and Luchs with camo) or to harras single squad capping your points. They can be used all the time.

I guess AEC is more like Puma, but even Puma has late-game utility. 50 range is enough to kite medium tanks, it can also flank SUs and kill them.
Add elite armor rounds and it can become your best AT unit.

Now AEC.
Once it counters Luchs, it has nothing to do. 40 range means it cannot kite tanks like Puma. Almost 0 AI means it cannot defend your flanks.
It can only scout while other light vehicles can scout and/or fight infantry/tank.

50 range, or give it some AI power.


i am still not sure if you are being serious with all the stuff you say, or if it's just your way of fanboyism.

especially the 222 is useless pretty much the entire game. there is no point where it is unopposed. it dies to everything more than 1 mainline infantry unit straight up. gets oneshot by almost every kind of vehicle/at. scoutcar as a scout unit lategame is a waste of ressources. the aec on the other hand does pretty well at what you say: it can harass everything but schrecked pgrens (ostheer) and schrecked volks (okw) from capping. and just like you say the puma can flank SUs, the AEC can flank stugs and kill them. i am seriously starting to doubt whether you've actually ever tried the AEC.
8 Dec 2015, 17:39 PM
#135
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2



only that the AEC is not overpriced, at least not as much as people make it out to be.



i am still not sure if you are being serious with all the stuff you say, or if it's just your way of fanboyism.

especially the 222 is useless pretty much the entire game. there is no point where it is unopposed. it dies to everything more than 1 mainline infantry unit straight up. gets oneshot by almost every kind of vehicle/at. scoutcar as a scout unit lategame is a waste of ressources. the aec on the other hand does pretty well at what you say: it can harass everything but schrecked pgrens (ostheer) and schrecked volks (okw) from capping. and just like you say the puma can flank SUs, the AEC can flank stugs and kill them. i am seriously starting to doubt whether you've actually ever tried the AEC.


LOL

I guess you've never used vetted 222 with scope.

PS
Puma is better than AEC in every way.
8 Dec 2015, 17:42 PM
#136
avatar of cr4wler

Posts: 1164



LOL

I guess you've never used vetted 222 with scope.


good luck getting it to vet :-) also thanks for ignoring everything else, further proves my point that you have no experience with the AEC, which is in fact decent.
8 Dec 2015, 17:45 PM
#137
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2



good luck getting it to vet :-) also thanks for ignoring everything else, further proves my point that you have no experience with the AEC, which is in fact decent.


No, I just stopped when I saw that 222 is useless. No need to read more pudding today.
8 Dec 2015, 20:24 PM
#138
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

The 6 pounder is also stat for stat identical to the pak 43, with the addition of a 50% accuracy buff against vehicles (I still believe thats the case). What more does it possibly need when it is the strongest in the game?



TWP :P
8 Dec 2015, 20:33 PM
#139
avatar of Nuclear Arbitor
Patrion 28

Posts: 2470



Schrecks are an easily kited hard counter, schrecks do not immediately invalidate all vehicles on the field. This is what micro is for.

The 6 pounder is also stat for stat identical to the pak 43, with the addition of a 50% accuracy buff against vehicles (I still believe thats the case). What more does it possibly need when it is the strongest in the game?



little bit late but i'm sure you mean pak 40 there.
8 Dec 2015, 23:04 PM
#140
avatar of The_Courier

Posts: 665

The 222 also costs 220/15 (a stipend) and is in a building that the Ostheer player will always build. Its opportunity cost is a fraction of the AEC's 440/75, counting tech. So I feel it is fine if it doesn't excel against anything. It is more of a stopgap AT measue and M3/UC killer than anything.
PAGES (7)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

unknown 28
New Zealand 1

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

896 users are online: 896 guests
3 posts in the last 24h
4 posts in the last week
23 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48724
Welcome our newest member, kubetstore
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM