Login

russian armor

The Stuart light tank needs a change.

30 Aug 2016, 00:18 AM
#21
avatar of Latch

Posts: 773

I love how noobs think the Raketen is actually good...


I'd take a rak over any allied AT gun any day. What you fail to sum up is just how broken an invisible at gun is, I'll say that again an INVISIBLE AT gun.

"But its ROF is crap and it's rotation is poor" + other bullshit people throw out, whilst ignoring the fact that when the AT gun is invisible you can position it in such a way it doesn't need to rotate for the second shot. The first shot is a fucking surprise, you can't see it coming, by the time you realise it, a second shot has hit.

Anyone that thinks the rak isn't good needs to watch/rewatch barton Vs Wada and learn how broken an invisible AT gun actually is.
30 Aug 2016, 00:22 AM
#22
avatar of Eloka
Benefactor 340

Posts: 13

jump backJump back to quoted post29 Aug 2016, 22:55 PMLatch


You mean even though you have a T0 AT gun, you only build it when you need it!? Shock horror. Problem is, you said you have no early game AT gun, completely fucking ignoring the, you know, T0 AT gun.


@ItsLatch Pull it off man - play OKW and get a goodish rank and walk the walk, but stop the talk.

Stuart scales to well into late game - it stays relevant and dangerous even late game mostly because of the really really good stun shot it has. An OKW Puma can counter it only if it stays at high range , as soon the stuart can use stun abitily start will win.

For 240 mp and 70 fuel its too good atm and the stun ability should maybe get changed to turretjam shot or sth, so it cant kill a disabled medium tank with little or or eveb no support on its own.

The whole light Vehicle Situation needs to be taken a look into imho- 222, T70, Stuart, AEC, Puma, and so on ... - needs to be looked on and tweaked.
30 Aug 2016, 00:37 AM
#23
avatar of VindicareX
Patrion 14

Posts: 312

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Aug 2016, 00:18 AMLatch


I'd take a rak over any allied AT gun any day. What you fail to sum up is just how broken an invisible at gun is, I'll say that again an INVISIBLE AT gun.

"But its ROF is crap and it's rotation is poor" + other bullshit people throw out, whilst ignoring the fact that when the AT gun is invisible you can position it in such a way it doesn't need to rotate for the second shot. The first shot is a fucking surprise, you can't see it coming, by the time you realise it, a second shot has hit.

Anyone that thinks the rak isn't good needs to watch/rewatch barton Vs Wada and learn how broken an invisible AT gun actually is.


Only good for people who don't micro squads and get of cheap shots. It may be useful to finish off almost dead tanks - but if your tank is so far forward that it gets 1-shot by rak, you deserve to lose the tank.
30 Aug 2016, 01:19 AM
#24
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

1- Repair critical taking only 1s (not the entire duration, just light tap) is completely BS. On top of been quite cheap.
IIRC it's 10muni and you just need to "tap" any vehicle. Increase cost to 60 (same as auto repair on T70) if it's gonna be a tap. 30/45 if you make it take a proper 5/10s

2- Stun abilities are BS in general. In the case of the Stuart, i think that extending the duration of the ability but replacing the stun with blind/slow debuff should be fine. Problem is it might make the match up against the Puma worst with the extended duration.

3- You got pretty screwed by RNG on that game. Getting main gun destroyed, abandoned, not been able to finish it off with schrecks neither the ISG.
Regarding penetration, it has already been explained before. If it was facing the frontal armor, there's practically no chance to pen.

30 Aug 2016, 02:41 AM
#25
avatar of FG127820

Posts: 101

Kryptic got bad luck in that scene, but it didn't lose him the game (if you don't count the psychological damage it did); it's too easy to entirely blame the loss on that.

During that engagement I was cringing at the p4 micro as it consistently showed its rear armour while the stuart missed plenty of times after the main gun crit.

However, I do feel the stun ability needs to decrease the rate of fire of the main gun as it's too easy to chain stun a vehicle to death, and the USF critical repair needs to be at least > 5 seconds especially when compared to the lackluster OKW variant.

The current state of the stuart forces a Puma to counter it, and every time I go Puma, the stuart never becomes a problem.
30 Aug 2016, 04:18 AM
#26
avatar of Smiling Tiger

Posts: 207

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Aug 2016, 00:18 AMLatch


I'd take a rak over any allied AT gun any day. What you fail to sum up is just how broken an invisible at gun is, I'll say that again an INVISIBLE AT gun.

"But its ROF is crap and it's rotation is poor" + other bullshit people throw out, whilst ignoring the fact that when the AT gun is invisible you can position it in such a way it doesn't need to rotate for the second shot. The first shot is a fucking surprise, you can't see it coming, by the time you realise it, a second shot has hit.

Anyone that thinks the rak isn't good needs to watch/rewatch barton Vs Wada and learn how broken an invisible AT gun actually is.


Most AT guns get their first shot in from the fog of war from spotters anyways so the camo doesn't have much of an impact and that first shot from the rak often just hits the ground or cover between the gun and the vehicle. I cant believe that people like you continue to say that the Rak is great and that its many "bullshit problems"(which are actually crippling flaws) are irrelevant just because of its dumb gimmicks that barley ever make a difference, the camo is mostly just useful for backcaping.

On topic:I would say that the stuart's abilities could use a nerf because the stuart's utility is insane compared to the other light tanks because of its ability to harm mediums and heavies for basically the same price.
30 Aug 2016, 06:33 AM
#27
avatar of tightrope
Senior Caster Badge
Patrion 39

Posts: 1194 | Subs: 29

Does anyone use point blank engine shot now that you can't use them both at once?

Maybe the stun should be moved to vet 1 so the puma has a larger advantage over it. Also so in the late game rebuilding one would be less appealing in situations where people have skipped going major for the Pershing.
30 Aug 2016, 06:39 AM
#28
avatar of Finndeed
Strategist Badge

Posts: 612 | Subs: 1

I think a stun ability should disable one aspect of a unit, ie movement or attack or vision. To disable all three is too much, and to any unit?! It is far too easy with this ability to turn the tide of battle.

30 Aug 2016, 06:54 AM
#29
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1



Only good for people who don't micro squads and get of cheap shots. It may be useful to finish off almost dead tanks - but if your tank is so far forward that it gets 1-shot by rak, you deserve to lose the tank.


And then you build 2 raketens. half of any medium tank life gone in 1 salvo. But I thought good players now how to bring raketen into medium range in camo so they can shot twice before their target get out of range.

Anyway, arguments based on "only good players or only bad players blablabla..." are stupid. following your argumentation, if you can't do it, you're a bad player.


Stuart Stun shot should be replace with turret jam. So it makes the Stuart mobility still relevant.
30 Aug 2016, 07:29 AM
#30
avatar of RealName

Posts: 276

The stun should not be applied instantly, only applying halfway through the duration. And maybe extend the duration a bit if that's going to happen.

Though, I'd agree with the others that this is more of OKW's terrible AT (lol at trashketen defenders), than the Stuart being OP.
30 Aug 2016, 07:48 AM
#31
avatar of DAZ187

Posts: 466

i say remove the crit repair from use 1st and see how it goes. before removing both abilities.

Stuart used to be better when it could stun shot and engine damage
30 Aug 2016, 08:01 AM
#32
avatar of steffenbk1

Posts: 139

I think they should remove the stun capability of the shock round. Having it only do vision block for a short amount of time. Having stuns, per.shot as the ability is activated is just crazy. No Axis light vehicle can fight against it. Only the puma with the rage, but if the stuart gets one stun round in, it is dead.
30 Aug 2016, 08:04 AM
#33
avatar of Kryptic

Posts: 61 | Subs: 2

I did a quick count. If my count is correct those were 3 deflects and 3 misses. The only reason the p4 died was because its front armour was facing the wrong way the whole time. A really well executed flank and severely overextended p4 killed the p4 as it should have.

I don't think there is anything wrong with this scene. That doesn't make the stuart okay but the prevailing consensus is that the performance against infantry not against vehicles is too good.


If that really is the way you see it, and ''don't think there is anything wrong with this scene'' i'm not even going in discussion with you.
30 Aug 2016, 08:13 AM
#34
avatar of Kryptic

Posts: 61 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Aug 2016, 00:18 AMLatch


I'd take a rak over any allied AT gun any day. What you fail to sum up is just how broken an invisible at gun is, I'll say that again an INVISIBLE AT gun.

"But its ROF is crap and it's rotation is poor" + other bullshit people throw out, whilst ignoring the fact that when the AT gun is invisible you can position it in such a way it doesn't need to rotate for the second shot. The first shot is a fucking surprise, you can't see it coming, by the time you realise it, a second shot has hit.

Anyone that thinks the rak isn't good needs to watch/rewatch barton Vs Wada and learn how broken an invisible AT gun actually is.


You're coming off very strong with your opinion latch, but i do not agree. You're saying a raketten is OP and easily deals with early armor, i don't think this is true at all. First of all a Stuart is always faster than the raketten, so it can just kite around the map without ever being shot.

Second reason is the Stuart needs (3!) shots of the raketten to die, even my grandmother would be fast enough to micro the stuart out of a engament before it takes 3 shots, providing all shots hit in the first place.

3rd reason is the raketten is very fragile, and under the enourmous pressure of the USF it's diffecult to keep it alive.
30 Aug 2016, 08:20 AM
#35
avatar of Frost

Posts: 1024 | Subs: 1

For sure, there is also bullshiet called T-70 which needs nerf for sure.

Generally stun is dumb ability, and should be removed from every unit from the game. What should be given to the PaK 40 then? I wish I had higher RoF at vet one then. TWP is also dumb on stug E and should be removed.

This game literally needs rebalance and one Stuart won't change a lot
30 Aug 2016, 09:40 AM
#36
avatar of sherlock
Patrion 14

Posts: 550 | Subs: 1

Does anyone use point blank engine shot now that you can't use them both at once?


I don't think so. The only way you could ever get close enough and hope to get out again to use the engine shot ability was by using stun. I haven't used the ability since then and even back when you could use them at the same time the point blank engine shot wasn't worth it most of the time since it was finicky and risky considering how close you had to be. It also is grossly overpriced for a snare that you can just as well get from a rifle for 30 munition.
30 Aug 2016, 09:42 AM
#37
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7

If we make raketen stats similar to other at gun - aiming time and other stuff, thats the main problem, okw could actually hold off lights without puma because all other things they have
30 Aug 2016, 12:10 PM
#38
avatar of Earth

Posts: 99

Don't take Latch's sayings seriously guys, he doesn't even play OKW... I mean how can you say something about a unit if you don't even play that in 1v1s...
30 Aug 2016, 12:41 PM
#39
avatar of Kryptic

Posts: 61 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Aug 2016, 12:10 PMEarth
Don't take Latch's sayings seriously guys, he doesn't even play OKW... I mean how can you say something about a unit if you don't even play that in 1v1s...


yeah no offense to latch, he is a nice guy, but i do agree with Earth on this one. I like opinions on this post but if you don't have much experiance and barely play the game and just hate on OKW, i think it's better to not say anything at all..
30 Aug 2016, 13:15 PM
#40
avatar of Latch

Posts: 773

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Aug 2016, 12:41 PMKryptic


yeah no offense to latch, he is a nice guy, but i do agree with Earth on this one. I like opinions on this post but if you don't have much experiance and barely play the game and just hate on OKW, i think it's better to not say anything at all..


On average 50% of my allied games are against OKW, having played thousands of games I can assure you that I have used the rak on several hundred occasions and never found it to be underwhelming against axis tanks, you know, better armour etc.

I don't have to play OKW and use a rak as OKW to understand how the rak plays, but, if anyone here would like to play me, Earth, ill give you the first shot. I'll go OKW you go USF, lets see how long the Stuart lasts with a faust + rak combo when used by someone that knows how to use them effectively.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

472 users are online: 472 guests
0 post in the last 24h
2 posts in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49389
Welcome our newest member, Haruta446
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM