[1v1] Replay analysis

•  
  

  0

  VS

  Shadow Link

  attyhmcz

  Need an upper level player or analyst for play analysis.

  by: ShadowLinkX37 map: Arnhem Checkpoint

  1

  -

Need an upper level player or analyst to analyze my mistakes and see what I could've done better.

You played well in terms of map control and infantry preservation but your teching judgment was very poor (see below) and your opponent could've taken advantage of that and won the game if not for his vehicle play, which was phenomenally bad.

To follow events in the match:

* First ¬4 mins: you didn't defend your cutoffs even though it was clear they were the opponent's target. On Arnhem the cutoffs are dominated by buildings of the town, yet you didn't bring out an early mortar to flush his infantry out of those, and he was able to stall you from the first house out of your base and defend the cutoffs

* You recovered well and capped most of the map, but lost your MGMC to a cloaked Raketen. Leaving/repairing light vehicles without protection in open field is an invitation for OKW to set up an ambush like that

* You floated a lot of MP and F without upgrading to Captain or Major -- this was a theme all throughout the match. If you didn't want Cpt/Mj tech in early game, you could've at least invested in M20 to plant some mines, for which you also floated a ton of MN

* Lost HMG to a flanking squad, which was easy to predict because you had it garrison the same building for ¬5 minutes. Always reposition your HMGs after every engagement to ensure the opponent can't execute a successful flank on them

* Floating 700MP and 280F by minute 19, without any tech beyond the Lieutenant. You should know his armour is coming soon, so a single ATG and a Bazooka squad (and no snare upgrade) are very vulnerable. You had resources to go for a Sherman, which would've also helped you against infantry. Instead you only spent MP and F on Calliope, which can't counter tanks and which was not particularly needed when you had two mortars for indirect fire

* No sweeper upgrade during the match, even though you knew he was laying down mines

* Minute 24: your ATG gets flanked by a PzIV because it was unsupported and you didn't get an M20 to plant some mines, or snares to ensure your ATG was protected

* Minute 26: no snares meant you couldn't save your Calliope from getting destroyed by a PzIV. You had tons of resources for the nade upgrade starting from early game

* Minute 27: 250F float, still no Cpt/Mj tech. Going for another Calliope instead, which you need much less than armour (if you need it at all with two mortars on the field)

* Minute 28: HMG low on health and still camping in the same building as before. An invitation for a flanking Obersoldaten squad to throw a bundled nade in and clear it, which is what happened

In conclusion, you need to be aware that infantry+indirect fire only is not a solution to all threats. You need armour and you need mines, otherwise a better armour micro than what your opponent managed will overwhelm you in seconds and you'll throw away all the map control and VP lead gained during the match.

Thanks for the advice. I'm the OKW player though not the USF lol. At least I know my Panzer 4 vehicle play was bad

Lol, was sure I had to watch USF player for some reason. Let me look at it from your perspective and I'll post my thoughts shortly.

OK so I watched the entire match again from your perspective. FoW disabled and not taking into account any information on your opponent. Some of the things described above also concern your own play, so you can take clues from that post too.

There were two main weaknesses in your play that cost you the match. One was very poor vehicle play (see below) and the other was the lack of focus on town in mid- and late game. Essentially when you're facing more infantry, you need to shorten distances between your units and focus on two VPs next to one another so you can quickly move units to strengthen defence in an area facing enemy superiority. You went for the outermost VPs instead, meaning your forces were stretched thin and the opponent exploited his infantry numbers. Also if you had focused on one side VP and centre, you could've created opportunities for getting your advancing infantry close to the mortars in the town. Had that happened at least a couple of times, even clearing mortar crews without taking the weapons themselves would've helped you because that would've wiped their veterancy. Instead, you faced vet3 mortars throughout mid- and late game and lost a couple of squads to them.

Following events during the match:

Your early aggression was nice, and you stalled him for quite a long time by garrisoning forward buildings.

* Minute 5: very late Volksgrenadier retreat, with the squad getting wiped. The further you are from your HQ, the sooner you need to retreat your squad because there will be more opportunities for your opponent to attack it on retreat + there will be more negative cover areas for your unit to cross = receive increased damage

* Minute 9: Raketenwerfer capping w/o camouflage, meaning his Rear Echelon can spot it straight away and attack. Minor thing, but still something to keep in mind

* Minute 10: Very low health HMG kept in building while getting shelled by two mortars

* Once you gained vet1 with your Kubelwagen, you could've used its Detection ability -- it reveals enemy units in FoW, on minimap, even if they're camouflaged

* Minute 15: you attempted to pick up a cleared HMG while in incendiary fire and facing a BAR Riflemen squad. You did pull it off but it was very hairy -- in most cases you'll lose both the newly crewed HMG team and the remaining Volksgrenadier squad while retreating in red cover

* You needed some solution to superior infantry numbers -- usually that means going for two HMGs or for an HE weapon like Flak halftrack/Luchs/Stuka. You didn't go for vehicles and once you lost your HMG didn't deploy another one, leaving the Rifles free to move around and attack you

* Minute 19: lost your HMG by setting it up in town centre which was being shelled by two mortars

* Minute 21: Your initial PzIV turns its side armour to Bazookas and starts chilling like that. Bad idea

* You went for Special Operations Doctrine but didn't use the dirt cheap Infiltration Grenades -- when there are infantry engagements you can be sure your opponent is watching (because there are no other engagements on the map that can serve as distraction) you shouldn't waste MN on Bundled Grenades from Obersoldaten. Infiltration Grenades would've worked just as well and saved you MN in case he retreated

* Minute 24: PzIV rushing into the far end of the town without infantry support. You were lucky he didn't have snares, or that PzIV would've died right there to the ATG

* Minute 31: your PzIVs continued attacking after their supporting infantry was forced back by the strafing P-47, meaning Bazookas and ATG fire took out both

Overall, you need to improve your strategic focus when deciding how to easier control two VPs when you're facing superior infantry numbers. Also you need better vehicle micro (for better understanding of this you can watch top players on Twitch streams or YouTube casts from popular casters, if you don't already do that). Your infantry preservation is good apart from very late retreats, and your teching was sound too.

HelpingHans is streaming right now if you want to see some advanced vehicle micro in action.

Good tips. My panzer 4 micro was subpar that game. Think the most crucial mistake I made was going Spec ops com instead of scavenge. I went both p4s due needing Anti Infantry armor and p4s don't always cut it. An ostwind would have been nice. Plus I don't think I used spec ops com other than the arty flares once. Some other points I understood in my head at the time like how I didn't want another HMG because of the double mortars. Luckily I got his, unfortunatly it was for a breif time due to the 2 mortars. Stuka is a pretty large risk in 1v1s. could've actually paid off there though. It didn't even come to my mind. 1 AT gun, double mortars and an HMG + garrisons is a godsend for a stuka. Thanks for the review.

I went both p4s due needing Anti Infantry armor and p4s don't always cut it. An ostwind would have been nice.

Actually your PzIVs didn't work too bad against infantry, it's just that for them to do significant damage you need to try and extend the time they spend shooting at infantry, and you can only do that if you screen them with your infantry. Here you couldn't do that so had to escape with PzIVs on some occasions/lost them on others.

I don't think I used spec ops com other than the arty flares once.

Good point, forgot to point this out myself.

I didn't want another HMG because of the double mortars.

Actually if you keep your HMGs moving, two of them can be better in this case because the mortars will be focused on one while the other will be there if you need to cover your infantry/other HMG's retreat.

Stuka is a pretty large risk in 1v1s

True if your opponent has light vehicles roaming and you don't have enough fuel to also go for Puma/PzIV, but a Stuka covered by two Raketenwerfers in this match would've enabled you to wreck his mortars and infantry, thus get hold of VPs, drain him of MP and get more resources for later tanks.

You're welcome to post more replays for review in the future.