Login

russian armor

Allied infantry vs Axis tanks

9 Oct 2016, 02:37 AM
#41
avatar of FG127820

Posts: 101



Are you serious? Then use infantry to kills his AT blobs, don't be a noob. Rifles with zooks or Piats cant do crap vs axis men with that. Don't fight anti tank with TANKS.......

Punish his AT blob with troops, rifles without BARS or 30 cals, are fucked


Hahahahahhahahahhaah. Says the guy who goes calliope every single game. Calliope >>> infantry. Just save the zooks and piats on pio squads for fast vet and repairs late game.
9 Oct 2016, 17:30 PM
#42
avatar of Intelligence209

Posts: 1124

I completely ignored skabinsk post due to him being one of the most cheesy players in the game, The ultimate LMG rifle blobber. And his infamous maximum spam.

Anyways, back on track..

THE PROBLEM IS ALLIED INFANTRY ABLE TO BLINDLY WALK UP TO AXIS LATE GAME ARMOUR WITH NO TRUE PUNISHMENT.

AXIS (especially OH) gets punished in same cause even by allied light tanks.

Purpose: buff axis late armour vs infantry. If its suppression via LMG.

Or panther has same AI roll as cromwell, whatever.

There is a reason why you dont see any gren LMG blobbing late game
Or even strum pios due to having shrecks.

9 Oct 2016, 18:39 PM
#43
avatar of The Red Zaku

Posts: 31

I completely ignored skabinsk post due to him being one of the most cheesy players in the game, The ultimate LMG rifle blobber. And his infamous maximum spam.

Anyways, back on track..

THE PROBLEM IS ALLIED INFANTRY ABLE TO BLINDLY WALK UP TO AXIS LATE GAME ARMOUR WITH NO TRUE PUNISHMENT.

AXIS (especially OH) gets punished in same cause even by allied light tanks.

Purpose: buff axis late armour vs infantry. If its suppression via LMG.

Or panther has same AI roll as cromwell, whatever.

There is a reason why you dont see any gren LMG blobbing late game
Or even strum pios due to having shrecks.



I don't think the issue is necessarily the poor AI on German tanks, but how beefy lategame Allied inf gets. The vet 3 buff makes Riflemen pretty ridiculous. Get rid of the flat terminator bonus or change it so that it only works in cover or when Riflemen are standing still.

Blobbing Sturmpios doesn't work because its a fragile 4 man sqaud, not because the shrek saps their firepower. Same deal with grens, they are fragile and are compounded by only being effective at range.

I do agree that the panther has issues, but I think thats more because it was never really adjusted to fit the meta. The JPIV is more effective in the panther's current role right now for OKW and I would argue that the stug fills it's role better for Wher, it simply does not do enough damage to tanks to be worth its high fuel costs in either case. Giving it better AI would make it more similar to a non-doctrinal Tiger tank (which I don't think anyone wants).
9 Oct 2016, 18:49 PM
#44
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1

I completely ignored skabinsk post due to him being one of the most cheesy players in the game, The ultimate LMG rifle blobber. And his infamous maximum spam.

Anyways, back on track..

THE PROBLEM IS ALLIED INFANTRY ABLE TO BLINDLY WALK UP TO AXIS LATE GAME ARMOUR WITH NO TRUE PUNISHMENT.

AXIS (especially OH) gets punished in same cause even by allied light tanks.

Purpose: buff axis late armour vs infantry. If its suppression via LMG.

Or panther has same AI roll as cromwell, whatever.

There is a reason why you dont see any gren LMG blobbing late game
Or even strum pios due to having shrecks.



By true punishment you mean instawipes or something? You'll bleed hard when trying to kill Heavy Armor with handheld AT, unless they are out of position and without any form of support, but then if you YOLO a tank, any tank, you deserve to lose it.

I say it's more like the Comet needs to be on Panther level.

I don't see that in my games because Axis losses their Sturmies and Grens like dummies, so they never last long enough to be seen in the lategame, at least no the upgrade versions.
9 Oct 2016, 19:05 PM
#45
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

Something that you don't realize that, IMO, is that while vet3 terminator vet is an issue, most units can safely roam in a blob against other small arm fire units late game due to abundant yellow cover. This affects all units and makes teamgames go into the realm of blobs of infantry, artillery and tank spam.

#Nerfcraterbonuses
9 Oct 2016, 19:39 PM
#46
avatar of The Red Zaku

Posts: 31

Something that you don't realize that, IMO, is that while vet3 terminator vet is an issue, most units can safely roam in a blob against other small arm fire units late game due to abundant yellow cover. This affects all units and makes teamgames go into the realm of blobs of infantry, artillery and tank spam.

#Nerfcraterbonuses


Teamgames aside, isn't the whole point of MG's to be able to handle inf blobs? Its part of the reason why giving USF a (non shit) mortar doesn't work, as it removes axis's only effective tool for dealing with massed inf. The issue right now with USF is that they can blob with no penalty and OKW/Ost don't really have an answer to that as they can't really use mg's with turbo mortar, their inf gets melted without supp, and the stuart kinda shits on anthing that they can bring out (444 and Puma aside).

So (for example) if the USF player goes 3 inf 1 mortar + cap + stuart, OKW/Ost doesn't really have a good answer to dealing with it. In particular OKW struggles because they don't have a good AT solution to deal with the Stuart outside of the Puma (which is quite fragile against the Stuart's stun rounds), and going Puma means that they will have a very difficult time dealing with USF's infantry (because Puma is forced to have shitty AI, lest it takes over the role of the Luchs in the same building). As the game matures into the lategame (of/c assuming it gets that far), regardless of whether OKW went for the Luchs (to deal with inf) or the Puma (to deal with the stuart), they still can't use support weapons to compensate ( MG is not that great and useless due to mortar, raketten is garbage, leig is ineffective at just about everything it does + its in the medic truck which has no at solution, or even that great of an AI solution since the Luchs was taken out of it forever ago). So in the endgame they are stuck with fragile expensive inf paired with impotent volks and sturms against a chunky inf army that they don't have the tools to deal with outside of scavenge doct (which is still only a patchwork solution).

Ost is stuck in a similarly poor position with their MG being useless and not really having a good light vehicle counter. However my ost play is significantly weaker than my OKW play so I don't feel as confident explaining their issues. In particular my sniper play is trash so I can't speak to its efficacy at higher levels of play.

Really the solution (to me atleast) seems to be to nerf one of the following components: USF lategame tankiness / USF mortar / Stuart. The USF mortar currently hard counters Ost and OKW's answers to inf blobs, and the general chubbiness of vetted USF inf allows them to deal with elite inf with relative ease when they enter the field. The stuart is borderline abusive in its role due to its excellent AT (due to abilities) and decent AI. By reducing the chubbiness of USF inf in the late game, it allows elite axis inf to be actually able to deal with USF blobs when used in conjunction with volks.

Now preferably the USF mortar should be nerfed into being a very niche unit (to deal with mg spam) or removed altogether, but that wont happen. Nerfing the Stuart only is a patchwork solution and it would be hard to make it as relevant in the future without just buffing it back closer to its current state. Truth to be told I'm not sure how one would effectively nerf USF vet 3 beyond just reducing its effects to certain circumstances (only works when standing still, or not in green/medium cover), but then again I'm not in the top 200 so I think I can get a little leeway there.
9 Oct 2016, 20:09 PM
#47
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

Snip


My post was mainly to OP as he is mostly a 2v2+ player. I think that as of lately, 2v2 has gone way further to be closer to 3v3+ spam than 1v1 (been that IMO it has always been a 50/50 between both modes).

Regarding your post, i don't think that what i say and the balance changes required are mutually exclusive. When there is little cover available early on, infantry/mg/mortar micro matters. While the game progress, this starts to lose value in favor or managing your blobs and vehicles mostly.

About nerfs needed (USF specifically), well this is my input.

Rifles: either reduce RA and/or make it only apply while in cover
Stuart: change stun to main gun disabled. MAIN GUN AI performance should be lower. The Stuart main gun isn't reliable against infantry, but when it does it hurts. You could limit number of models hit, aoe and/or damage to avoid 1 hit wipes.
Mortar: SU version. More work version: give it less AA range (60ish) but a barrage equal to SU/OH. Make it mobile and require player input.

Disclaimer: this is only a part of what should be include in a patch but i'm afraid this is what only would be seen on a future patch from Relic.

9 Oct 2016, 20:15 PM
#48
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1

Making so only Riflemen get their dodge bonuses when standing in cover is against the BAR optimal range, it would only lead to LMG Rifles become even more prominent than they are now, it would nerf them harder in 1vs1 than in the larger game modes this guy is complaining about.
9 Oct 2016, 20:21 PM
#49
avatar of The Red Zaku

Posts: 31

Yea, I missed that issue he had was 2v2s and up. LMGs need to be nerfed to 1 per squad at most. Or just limiting the number of LMGs to the number of rifle squads ingame.
9 Oct 2016, 20:31 PM
#50
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1

Yea, I missed that issue he had was 2v2s and up. LMGs need to be nerfed to 1 per squad at most. Or just limiting the number of LMGs to the number of rifle squads ingame.


Yeah I agree, so it's an option but not always the superior option, 2vs2 is where indirect fire is at it's best and LMG blobs need to stop to fire and you can punish them hard when they do so.
It just requires so little input that it's cost still offers too much pay off for no micro.
10 Oct 2016, 00:52 AM
#51
avatar of William Christensen

Posts: 401



Yeah I agree, so it's an option but not always the superior option, 2vs2 is where indirect fire is at it's best and LMG blobs need to stop to fire and you can punish them hard when they do so.



This, I agree. But at the same time, this basically sums up the reason why Allies reign supreme:

1. First of all, take all Axis and Allies indirect-fire weaponry out and compare, we can see that Allies have way more options and the Allies options, some of them, are more cost-efficent compare to the Axis counterparts. Examples are there, people with a good sense would notice this, Allies stuffs are just... better, not OP, but some are just better in an unnecessary way. This needs a look at. Either boost Axis' available weapons or give Axis more options or carefully nerf Allies' available weapons.‎

2. When indirect-fire weapons and LMGs dominance the battlefield, you would need your infantries to have some form of good survivabilities (Not the kind of standing still and literally take no dmg, but at least they should be able to hold ground for a while before retreat if you micro properly, not instant retreat when you heard Calliope/Land Mattress' barrage). However, that's not the case with Ostheer's infantries. Being so fragile, they won't be able to fight against duel-LMG-equipped 5-man squads under constant indirect-fire barrage. It's both sides' problems here. Ostheer' infantries need some form of survivability boost (It doesn't have to be a 5th man but anything, something!) while Allies infantries need some form of DMG output reduction (LMG limited to 1 and terminator vet need a look at). I would go as far to say that infantry warfare should be change to where Axis infantries, fragile but high DMG output, go toe-to-toe against Allies infantries, good survivability but lower DMG output (Somewhere near how it used to be during the EFA, before the WFA release); of course, indirect-fire should deal with to compensate for this infantry warfare overhaul, but then it would literally mean a massive overhaul accross the board.

10 Oct 2016, 01:29 AM
#52
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1



This, I agree. But at the same time, this basically sums up the reason why Allies reign supreme:

1. First of all, take all Axis and Allies indirect-fire weaponry out and compare, we can see that Allies have way more options and the Allies options, some of them, are more cost-efficent compare to the Axis counterparts. Examples are there, people with a good sense would notice this, Allies stuffs are just... better, not OP, but some are just better in an unnecessary way. This needs a look at. Either boost Axis' available weapons or give Axis more options or carefully nerf Allies' available weapons.‎

2. When indirect-fire weapons and LMGs dominance the battlefield, you would need your infantries to have some form of good survivabilities (Not the kind of standing still and literally take no dmg, but at least they should be able to hold ground for a while before retreat if you micro properly, not instant retreat when you heard Calliope/Land Mattress' barrage). However, that's not the case with Ostheer's infantries. Being so fragile, they won't be able to fight against duel-LMG-equipped 5-man squads under constant indirect-fire barrage. It's both sides' problems here. Ostheer' infantries need some form of survivability boost (It doesn't have to be a 5th man but anything, something!) while Allies infantries need some form of DMG output reduction (LMG limited to 1 and terminator vet need a look at). I would go as far to say that infantry warfare should be change to where Axis infantries, fragile but high DMG output, go toe-to-toe against Allies infantries, good survivability but lower DMG output (Somewhere near how it used to be during the EFA, before the WFA release); of course, indirect-fire should deal with to compensate for this infantry warfare overhaul, but then it would literally mean a massive overhaul accross the board.



Yeah, even indirect damage put aside, as mortar and rocket artillery have become extremely important in 2vs2, I dislike seeing Grenadiers, Obersoldaten or Riflemen just A moving and beating MGs wiht the LMGs, I wish CQC stuff like Thompsons and BARs were the big infantry damage, as it involves flanking most of the time to get there for those yummy wipes.
10 Oct 2016, 08:29 AM
#53
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

Meanwhile Land mattress and CalliOPs are no brainers since you can simply walk through their barrages with your friendly units since they have such low friendly fire values :snfPeter:
10 Oct 2016, 09:30 AM
#54
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

Meanwhile Land mattress and CalliOPs are no brainers since you can simply walk through their barrages with your friendly units since they have such low friendly fire values :snfPeter:


That's the thing which is incomprehensible for me. As allies you can walk in your rockets arty area but as axis, your PzWerfer will wipe you.

____
USF are currently true bullshit.

3x Rifles with 2x1919
2x RE with 2x Zooks.
Calliope

And that's all you need. Maybe add nades or mortar and gg.
11 Oct 2016, 20:02 PM
#55
avatar of Intelligence209

Posts: 1124

Panzerwerfers are non existant in 2v2s. Stukas are good, if the user knows how to use.

Landmattress/calliopes are in nearly every game, both more then capable of easy wipes for OH.

The commanders they come in are simply good.

Good enough to get nearly every game. Everyone knows it's infantry you need late game.

As to the main point, asked infantry "jack of all trade" units. Able to blobb with no real punishment or threat.



11 Oct 2016, 20:12 PM
#56
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1

Meanwhile Land mattress and CalliOPs are no brainers since you can simply walk through their barrages with your friendly units since they have such low friendly fire values :snfPeter:


Oh how I adore doing that, when they rush head along into your guys, STG style and the suddenly they are all dead.
Bless the Organ of Freedom!
11 Oct 2016, 20:23 PM
#57
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066



Oh how I adore doing that, when they rush head along into your guys, STG style and the suddenly they are all dead.
Bless the Organ of Freedom!


Yeah this game is broken lol
11 Oct 2016, 21:20 PM
#58
avatar of Mistah_S

Posts: 851 | Subs: 1

The only thing I would suggest is that be extremely aggressive early game as Axis. And by aggressive , I mean "throwing everything you have early game at them and pray you wipe a squad or take down USF mortar and manage to hold most of the map for a certain amount of time" kind of aggression. That's the only way to win the Allies right now! Basically we are literally Germans doing the Blitzkrieg tactic here! Through my experience, the longer the game lasts, the higher chance you gonna lose. Allies stuffs (USF/UKF) got stronger by minutes and they get very strong when they manage to get a tank + duel-equipped weapons (Not Soviet though, and I think the only balance match-up now is still Sov-Ost, the others are just bad!). 

If you play Ostheer, I think the Ostruppen Doctrine would help a lot since you don't have to worry too much about MP bleed (6-man durable squad with 16 MP/model needed to reinforce). 3 Ostruppens + 2 Panzergrens would ensure your foothold against Allies infantries (I see high level players do this, but haven't try out on my own since I don't have the Ostruppen Doctrine).‎


Holy Moly, spoken like a True Ostheer player!

This never used to be the case - the longer you held out as Ost the more powerful you became... Now it's a joke.
12 Oct 2016, 20:32 PM
#59
avatar of Bravus

Posts: 503

Permanently Banned
In this crap (not 1% realism) game, is better doo spam infantry bazooka or british robocops, better than armor...

As okw you need go for king tiger, the rest is crap armor...
13 Oct 2016, 12:29 PM
#60
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Oct 2016, 20:32 PMBravus
In this crap (not 1% realism) game, is better doo spam infantry bazooka or british robocops, better than armor...

As okw you need go for king tiger, the rest is crap armor...


Panther so good :snfPeter:
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

441 users are online: 441 guests
1 post in the last 24h
13 posts in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49966
Welcome our newest member, kukasi
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM