Sim City
- This thread is locked
Posts: 14
Posts: 378
Unplayable and boring against simcitys. No actual counter to them as okw.
Where your LeiG?
The improve fortification increase emplacement armor tọ 45, while in fact, Leig has 75 penetration.
Posts: 14
Where your LeiG?
The improve fortification increase emplacement armor tọ 45, while in fact, Leig has 75 penetration.
I get an leig almost every game, doesn't do much except get counterbarraged
Posts: 378
I get an leig almost every game, doesn't do much except get counterbarraged
You need 2 leig firing in turn, or 1 leig and 1 streck. 2 Leig and 1 streck is best combination. Use Streck to force him to brace, wait 25s and start ordering leig to fire. No brit player like that.
And 2 leig don't cost too high. Mortar emplacement cost 400mp, and after 2 leig bust the emplacement, it can continue to support infantry.
Posts: 640 | Subs: 1
This is a non-argument. It is a unit that is not invulnerable. Therefore it can be destroyed. Therefore counters exist. I want a 90 manpower MG42 with 20% increased range, instant pin, and 4x the damage. Since molotovs, smoke, grenades and mortars exist I guess this would be balanced in your book, since existence of counters apparently immediately invalidates any discussions of a unit's effectiveness and gameplay impact.
2. "Just cap the rest of the map"
1v1 maps can be very small and some 2v2+ maps have an insane amount of chokepoints and good mortar pit spots. Try capping the rest of the map on Kharkov or Rails. This is more of a map design issue but ultimately since the game is played on these maps, and since it's unrealistic they will drastically change all the maps, then the units and abilities should be designed around the current map design, not for some hypothetical vacuum.
3. "Emplacements mean less map presence"
Absolute myth. Let that mortar kill 12 Grenadier models during its lifetime and it more or less paid off for itself through reinforcement costs. Everything after that is a NET POSITIVE, it means your mortar pit allows for MORE British squads on the field than German ones.
When you have an infantry squad that inflicted 20 casualties you must ask yourself how much reinforcement cost went into it to get there. Not so for the emplacements. There is some opportunity cost of having to dedicate engineer to repair ( a very cheap squad to create and reinforce. ) except the sim city commander now allows you to go without that as well. Whoops.
In fact, I would argue that emplacements can translate into more map presence having locked down a part of the map, the Brit player can afford to send their mobile elements farther out. If the Axis attacks the emplacements they can't do it piecemeal, they need to invest constant pressure involving significantly more micro and more units in well-timed combined arms attack. which means it is Axis whose map presence is impaired.
4. Emplacements are balanced.
Who gives a crap if they are or aren't? That is besides the point. The point is that a game that is ostensibly about positioning, maneuver, combined arms and flanking ends up being about two people lobbing shells in a parabolic curve at each other from across half the map, watching hit point bars slowly go up or down for minutes at a time.
Oh except you can't do that either because counterbattery. Whoops.
Posts: 721
In my first game testing out the sim city commander the opponent built four howitzers. It was annoying for sure, but didn't do shit. I just ploughed in there with a churchill and artilleried them. I lost one forward reinforce point, that's it.
Maybe they should've built two and then defenses for them for the other 1200 Manpower.
Posts: 526
Where your LeiG?
The improve fortification increase emplacement armor tọ 45, while in fact, Leig has 75 penetration.
HA! This is a GREAT joke. Just go and try and see how far you get with 2 Leigs with this emplacement commander. Your naivety is sweet.
Posts: 738
really it's not rocket science, 17pdr costs 20 pop cap alone. That's 1/5th of your army on immobile AT gun that you can just avoid while it drains your opponents MP income.
I played a good four/five 2vs2's today and our brit opponents just turtled emplacements with land matteress, one LefH with map hack spotting scope 222 utterly destroys such strats.
Posts: 578
1. "Counters exist"
This is a non-argument. It is a unit that is not invulnerable. Therefore it can be destroyed. Therefore counters exist. I want a 90 manpower MG42 with 20% increased range, instant pin, and 4x the damage. Since molotovs, smoke, grenades and mortars exist I guess this would be balanced in your book, since existence of counters apparently immediately invalidates any discussions of a unit's effectiveness and gameplay impact.
2. "Just cap the rest of the map"
1v1 maps can be very small and some 2v2+ maps have an insane amount of chokepoints and good mortar pit spots. Try capping the rest of the map on Kharkov or Rails. This is more of a map design issue but ultimately since the game is played on these maps, and since it's unrealistic they will drastically change all the maps, then the units and abilities should be designed around the current map design, not for some hypothetical vacuum.
3. "Emplacements mean less map presence"
Absolute myth. Let that mortar kill 12 Grenadier models during its lifetime and it more or less paid off for itself through reinforcement costs. Everything after that is a NET POSITIVE, it means your mortar pit allows for MORE British squads on the field than German ones.
When you have an infantry squad that inflicted 20 casualties you must ask yourself how much reinforcement cost went into it to get there. Not so for the emplacements. There is some opportunity cost of having to dedicate engineer to repair ( a very cheap squad to create and reinforce. ) except the sim city commander now allows you to go without that as well. Whoops.
In fact, I would argue that emplacements can translate into more map presence having locked down a part of the map, the Brit player can afford to send their mobile elements farther out. If the Axis attacks the emplacements they can't do it piecemeal, they need to invest constant pressure involving significantly more micro and more units in well-timed combined arms attack. which means it is Axis whose map presence is impaired.
4. Emplacements are balanced.
Who gives a crap if they are or aren't? That is besides the point. The point is that a game that is ostensibly about positioning, maneuver, combined arms and flanking ends up being about two people lobbing shells in a parabolic curve at each other from across half the map, watching hit point bars slowly go up or down for minutes at a time.
Oh except you can't do that either because counterbattery. Whoops.
This +1000
Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1
Posts: 1124
I agree. OKW should be the only faction to have sim-city! Remember, it's ok to have double standards as long as it benefits your favorite faction.
From now on, I won't take any of your post seriously....
Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2
From now on, I won't take any of your post seriously....
Said the guy who plays 99% Axis
Posts: 794
Learn the language god damn it.
Where your LeiG?
The improve fortification ...
Posts: 1124
Brace while able to self repair, no doubt the biggest joke of it all. Completely renders any attack unless by any unit in the game...
Being able to self repair while in combat should not be allowed...
Self repair timer itself is terrible, a simple click repairs your whole sim city for a ridicules amount of time. And relic thinks that's a tactic? Really?
Besides the countless bugs, and "added to our data base" my loyalty to this game has been stretched to its limit. Every patch introduces a new Balance or bug issue. I'm growing tired.
Posts: 1124
Said the guy who plays 99% Axis
I remember what it's like to be 12
Posts: 1653
1. "Counters exist"
This is a non-argument. It is a unit that is not invulnerable. Therefore it can be destroyed. Therefore counters exist. I want a 90 manpower MG42 with 20% increased range, instant pin, and 4x the damage. Since molotovs, smoke, grenades and mortars exist I guess this would be balanced in your book, since existence of counters apparently immediately invalidates any discussions of a unit's effectiveness and gameplay impact.
2. "Just cap the rest of the map"
1v1 maps can be very small and some 2v2+ maps have an insane amount of chokepoints and good mortar pit spots. Try capping the rest of the map on Kharkov or Rails. This is more of a map design issue but ultimately since the game is played on these maps, and since it's unrealistic they will drastically change all the maps, then the units and abilities should be designed around the current map design, not for some hypothetical vacuum.
3. "Emplacements mean less map presence"
Absolute myth. Let that mortar kill 12 Grenadier models during its lifetime and it more or less paid off for itself through reinforcement costs. Everything after that is a NET POSITIVE, it means your mortar pit allows for MORE British squads on the field than German ones.
When you have an infantry squad that inflicted 20 casualties you must ask yourself how much reinforcement cost went into it to get there. Not so for the emplacements. There is some opportunity cost of having to dedicate engineer to repair ( a very cheap squad to create and reinforce. ) except the sim city commander now allows you to go without that as well. Whoops.
In fact, I would argue that emplacements can translate into more map presence having locked down a part of the map, the Brit player can afford to send their mobile elements farther out. If the Axis attacks the emplacements they can't do it piecemeal, they need to invest constant pressure involving significantly more micro and more units in well-timed combined arms attack. which means it is Axis whose map presence is impaired.
4. Emplacements are balanced.
Who gives a crap if they are or aren't? That is besides the point. The point is that a game that is ostensibly about positioning, maneuver, combined arms and flanking ends up being about two people lobbing shells in a parabolic curve at each other from across half the map, watching hit point bars slowly go up or down for minutes at a time.
Oh except you can't do that either because counterbattery. Whoops.
Very well spoken and I totally agree with you
Posts: 14
Posts: 919
1. "Counters exist"
This is a non-argument. It is a unit that is not invulnerable. Therefore it can be destroyed. Therefore counters exist. I want a 90 manpower MG42 with 20% increased range, instant pin, and 4x the damage. Since molotovs, smoke, grenades and mortars exist I guess this would be balanced in your book, since existence of counters apparently immediately invalidates any discussions of a unit's effectiveness and gameplay impact.
2. "Just cap the rest of the map"
1v1 maps can be very small and some 2v2+ maps have an insane amount of chokepoints and good mortar pit spots. Try capping the rest of the map on Kharkov or Rails. This is more of a map design issue but ultimately since the game is played on these maps, and since it's unrealistic they will drastically change all the maps, then the units and abilities should be designed around the current map design, not for some hypothetical vacuum.
3. "Emplacements mean less map presence"
Absolute myth. Let that mortar kill 12 Grenadier models during its lifetime and it more or less paid off for itself through reinforcement costs. Everything after that is a NET POSITIVE, it means your mortar pit allows for MORE British squads on the field than German ones.
When you have an infantry squad that inflicted 20 casualties you must ask yourself how much reinforcement cost went into it to get there. Not so for the emplacements. There is some opportunity cost of having to dedicate engineer to repair ( a very cheap squad to create and reinforce. ) except the sim city commander now allows you to go without that as well. Whoops.
In fact, I would argue that emplacements can translate into more map presence having locked down a part of the map, the Brit player can afford to send their mobile elements farther out. If the Axis attacks the emplacements they can't do it piecemeal, they need to invest constant pressure involving significantly more micro and more units in well-timed combined arms attack. which means it is Axis whose map presence is impaired.
4. Emplacements are balanced.
Who gives a crap if they are or aren't? That is besides the point. The point is that a game that is ostensibly about positioning, maneuver, combined arms and flanking ends up being about two people lobbing shells in a parabolic curve at each other from across half the map, watching hit point bars slowly go up or down for minutes at a time.
Oh except you can't do that either because counterbattery. Whoops.
1. LeiG is a very good counter, you need 2-3 if he goes heavy for emplacements. You still have the upper hand manpower wise because emplacements cost more than LeiG and his infantry and AT is more expensive too. The one thing that is ruining it all atm is the counterbattery ability, this surely needs to be changed because it totally counters the counter of emplacements on smaller maps.
2. Some maps are just awful and giving an advantage to a certain type of unit. They really should work on this problem. Atm maps with a lot of important points in a small area favor emplacement play.
3. You can't just count the casualties (12 grenadiers) to calculate if a unit is worth it. Capping power is a valid aspect too for example. Furthermore if your mortar pit constantly keeps a sapper squad busy with repairing, this are another 210mp that could do other things like capping, fighting, laying down mines. To unlock the double fire of mortar pit you either have to spend manpower on a unit maning it (with the risk getting killed by counterfire) or build the Forward Assembly for more manpower (which is like a tent of paper). If you constantly use doctrinal repair ability, this are another 75 munition per use that you could have used for mines and brens or offmap attacks. And even if you use the new Forward Assembly and buy the repair upgrade, so what? FA is so vulnerable and has no brace, make it your primary target it goes down real fast.
So I don't want to say that you are totally wrong, but that calculating the efficience and presence of a unit is not that simple.
4. Artillery is a part of this game and I doubt the game will be better without it. Even in a game with many emplacements you'll need combined arms to win. It is not true that it comes down to only shelling at each other.
As I said Imo counterbattery ability has to be reworked.
Posts: 513
You always talk about UKF having been fucked vs OKW before this Sim City doctrine. But the stats show otherwise. I think you are living in a victim fantasy mate. I'll tune my violin for you.
notice the "if they played a certain way" comment. I had no trouble with OKW unless they played super defence and then as UKF its boring and very tedious to fight. LeiG spam supported by FlakHQ + Blob + auto reinforce from close med base is hard to damage without indirect fire.. very annoying.
Now I can be a cunt back while I design my little village of emplacements, its even more hilarious on smaller maps where counter barrage basically counters LeIG's on their own, I fucking love it.
Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1
Livestreams
26 | |||||
13 | |||||
8 | |||||
1 | |||||
1 | |||||
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.842223.791+5
- 2.655231.739+15
- 3.943411.696-1
- 4.715.934+12
- 5.35659.858+2
- 6.274144.656+1
- 7.307114.729+3
- 8.601237.717-2
- 9.10629.785+7
- 10.527.881+18
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger