Login

russian armor

The American BAR

  • This thread is locked
PAGES (4)down
21 Mar 2017, 14:56 PM
#21
avatar of Vuther
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Mar 2017, 12:24 PMVipper
Double bar riflemen are only weaker then Pg in heavy cover and mid distance. They will beat them easily at far range.

In addition they probably have more vet by the time they run to Pgs.

In addition Pg have a higher cost and cost more.

What does that statement really indicate, though? The only thing PGs beat at far range are engineer and full-on SMG units.
21 Mar 2017, 15:06 PM
#22
avatar of Intelligence209

Posts: 1124

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Mar 2017, 14:10 PMGrumpy


Horseshit. Watch one of Thanatos or Theodosius's (sp?) replays. See them rack up 30-40 kills with and Ostwind or 50+ with a Panzerwerfer.


Calm down skipper
21 Mar 2017, 15:11 PM
#23
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

@OP

1. Against which faction, in which modes, using which doctrines?

2. Could you kindly provide WBP replays where:
- You have issues facing double-bar Riflemen
- You unfairly dominate the enemy using double-bar Riflemen

On behalf of the balance team, we not going to bother processing information that is obviously stale / doesn't take the changes of WBP into account.
21 Mar 2017, 15:23 PM
#24
avatar of Intelligence209

Posts: 1124

@OP

1. Against which faction, in which modes, using which doctrines?

2. Could you kindly provide WBP replays where:
- You have issues facing double-bar Riflemen
- You unfairly dominate the enemy using double-bar Riflemen

On behalf of the balance team, we not going to bother processing information that is obviously stale / doesn't take the changes of WBP into account.


OH vs USF

No not gonna do any of that sorry

Sounds good to me
21 Mar 2017, 15:29 PM
#25
avatar of vietnamabc

Posts: 1063

The thing is USF the riflemen simply need to scale into the late game given Jacksons and Shermans are too fragile to fight tanks 1v1.

BARs being double equipped are there to fight elite Axis infantry. I always play USF without mortar as I hate using broken units. A solution to this double BAR madness would be give a single upgrade ala CoH1 style and tweak vet accuracy bonus instead so mid game double BAR riflemen don't roflstomp all infantry. That way Rifles can still scale into late while giving chance for Axis to hold until elites come out.

If you guys still want to nerf vet 3 riflemen then give me non-doctrine Rangers instead for late game.

Hear hear man, of all USF units, only Rifles, Paras, Rangers, Pershing and Callies (4 of them are super-expensive call-ins) are worth keeping till late game. Anything else is only good for shock factor or trading.
21 Mar 2017, 16:07 PM
#26
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

On behalf of the balance team, we not going to bother processing information that is obviously stale / doesn't take the changes of WBP into account.


Mind you that this is an Oct 2016 post but still shares my current thought:

You could put more emphasis on reducing the long range DPS on some of the AR to differentiate them from LMGs. At first this should apply to BAR. Once some QoL changes are done to OKW, squad formation and unit call in, i could see the same treatment apply to IR STG and maybe FG42.

Reduce DPS from range 25-35 from (6.03/5.17/4.37) to something around (5/4/3)

Gren + LMG42 at (25-35): 17.99/17.03/15.98
Rifle + 2xBar at (25-35): 19.08/16.25/13.75
New Rifle 2xBar at (25-35): 17.02/13.91/11.01

If LMGs are limited to 1 from rack pick, i wouldn't mind BAR + 1919 as this requires teching and shouldn't be as effective with the new weapon profile (you are mixing a weapon which is better at close range and on the move vs something which needs to be static and at range).

Rifle + 1x1919: 18.04/16.89/15.84
Rifle + duo weapon: 20.07/18.92/17.17


IMO, reducing late game upgrades small arm fire DPS coming specially from WFA + UK is a good direction. The DLC factions were released overtuned compared to both OH + SU which lead to having to give buff across the board in order to compensate.
21 Mar 2017, 17:09 PM
#27
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Mar 2017, 14:56 PMVuther

What does that statement really indicate, though? The only thing PGs beat at far range are engineer and full-on SMG units.


That statement indicates, tha the fact that Pg can be beat double bar riflemen at specific circumstance is not an indication that double bar riflemen are weaker than Pgs, a claim that I Responded to.
21 Mar 2017, 17:18 PM
#28
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

USF infantry are all about their weapon racks.

It's why REs can be so viable with zooks or bars: their slot_items are what carry the unit, not the unit itself.

Rifles get an at snare with vet, which pretty much mitigates the cost of any investment into weapon racks.

I am more of the opinion that riflemen need to be more effective without weapon upgrades, and less effective with them, though not by much. USF isn't usually laying mines or getting flamethrowers and aren't spending munitions on grenades anymore so it's not like buying weapon racks items costs much strategic capability.

For the record i think the Soviet t2 mortar and and dp-28lmg are better templates for allied mortar and lmg capabilities.
21 Mar 2017, 19:27 PM
#29
avatar of Vuther
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Mar 2017, 17:09 PMVipper


That statement indicates, tha the fact that Pg can be beat double bar riflemen at specific circumstance is not an indication that double bar riflemen are weaker than Pgs, a claim that I Responded to.

Ah, I can see what you were responding to now, you didn't quote so I assumed it was a general statement.

USF infantry are all about their weapon racks.

It's why REs can be so viable with zooks or bars: their slot_items are what carry the unit, not the unit itself.

Rifles get an at snare with vet, which pretty much mitigates the cost of any investment into weapon racks.

I am more of the opinion that riflemen need to be more effective without weapon upgrades, and less effective with them, though not by much. USF isn't usually laying mines or getting flamethrowers and aren't spending munitions on grenades anymore so it's not like buying weapon racks items costs much strategic capability.

It's definitely a thing to consider (though I personally doubt Rifles need to be a lot better right now considering they're obviously the immediately-available versatile mainline infantry unit that can generally expect to win most engagements against any other ones without upgrades). The power spike from equipping BARs is very distinct.
21 Mar 2017, 19:35 PM
#30
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1


Hear hear man, of all USF units, only Rifles, Paras, Rangers, Pershing and Callies (4 of them are super-expensive call-ins) are worth keeping till late game. Anything else is only good for shock factor or trading.

you can add the scott and the Jackson. Scott is a beast vs full vet Axis infantry, you usually ends killing a lot of them at no cost until your opponent really decide to chase and kill the Scott. Jacksons kill everything except Super-Heavies tank destroyers. Those are the issues, not the jackson being underpowered.
21 Mar 2017, 19:44 PM
#31
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Mar 2017, 19:27 PMVuther

It's definitely a thing to consider (though I personally doubt Rifles need to be a lot better right now considering they're obviously the immediately-available versatile mainline infantry unit that can generally expect to win most engagements against any other ones without upgrades). The power spike from equipping BARs is very distinct.


I would've thought so too until running tests on infantry matchups. Volks actually beat rifles at long and mid range quite reliably if both are vet 0.

Volks are surprisingly equal matchups to rifles so long as they don't have weapons or vet. As long as the volks don't get caught out of cover they are quite formidable.

I haven't tested unupgraded rifles and volks with max vet though.

The fact that volks can lay sandbags is huge. But most importantly is the disparity in infantry healing. Ambulance keeps the entire USF infantry force in top shape. OKW needs to go medic truck and invest in medics, which, all costs aside, is time consuming.

Hurt squads lose engagements like nobodies business.
21 Mar 2017, 20:15 PM
#32
avatar of Intelligence209

Posts: 1124



I would've thought so too until running tests on infantry matchups. Volks actually beat rifles at long and mid range quite reliably if both are vet 0.

Volks are surprisingly equal matchups to rifles so long as they don't have weapons or vet. As long as the volks don't get caught out of cover they are quite formidable.

I haven't tested unupgraded rifles and volks with max vet though.

The fact that volks can lay sandbags is huge. But most importantly is the disparity in infantry healing. Ambulance keeps the entire USF infantry force in top shape. OKW needs to go medic truck and invest in medics, which, all costs aside, is time consuming.

Hurt squads lose engagements like nobodies business.


Yes I agree with you when it comes to vet 0 engagements, it can and does go anyway. It comes down to positioning and skill.

My point is, is that rifles (imo) are good enough not to want to pick a commander with special units, why do you think you see Pershing or calliopes every game. There is no need for rangers or paratroopers.

You equip them with bars and yes they perform well. My problem is is how well they perform on the move.

If relic refuses to implement something that punishes blobbing (probably due to knowing 75% of the community will leave the game) they need to look at what promotes it.

Maybe even a decrease in moving accuracy or something I dono.
21 Mar 2017, 20:23 PM
#33
avatar of Hater

Posts: 493

And then there is the "skilled" blobbing, where there are 4-6 riflemen but split, 3/3 or 2/4.

Is it always a blobbing when somebody has more units than you?
21 Mar 2017, 21:03 PM
#34
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



I would've thought so too until running tests on infantry matchups. Volks actually beat rifles at long and mid range quite reliably if both are vet 0.
...


Volks with out ST44 beat riflemen at mid quite reliably?

If you are talking about VG with ST44 it is another story and imo the ST44 upgrade was bad design the same way the Penal SVT is bad design.
21 Mar 2017, 23:39 PM
#35
avatar of Intelligence209

Posts: 1124

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Mar 2017, 20:23 PMHater

Is it always a blobbing when somebody has more units than you?


Unmmmm no
21 Mar 2017, 23:50 PM
#36
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

jump backJump back to quoted post21 Mar 2017, 21:03 PMVipper


Volks with out ST44 beat riflemen at mid quite reliably?

If you are talking about VG with ST44 it is another story and imo the ST44 upgrade was bad design the same way the Penal SVT is bad design.


They do, so long as there is cover. Mind you, there's a steep switch between 'mid' and 'close' range, between 20 and 15 meters where suddenly volks lose hard/rifles perform much better.
22 Mar 2017, 00:42 AM
#37
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


They do, so long as there is cover. Mind you, there's a steep switch between 'mid' and 'close' range, between 20 and 15 meters where suddenly volks lose hard/rifles perform much better.

Generally speaking I would classify
0-10 close
10-20 mid
20-35 far

The performance you describe is as expected especially in cover. Bolt action rifles are supposed to be better than semi auto (carbine) in far and heavy cover.
22 Mar 2017, 01:07 AM
#38
avatar of Intelligence209

Posts: 1124

Something needs to be done to control/deter USF blobbing. To make it more punishable or to make it not as rewarding. To make strategic play more viable. In this case, having the same weapon that is effective yes, not as effective on the move but as effective while static is a first step in my opinion.
22 Mar 2017, 01:12 AM
#39
avatar of skyshark

Posts: 239

Something needs to be done to control/deter USF blobbing. To make it more punishable or to make it not as rewarding. To make strategic play more viable. In this case, having the same weapon that is effective yes, not as effective on the move but as effective while static is a first step in my opinion.


Stop whining and learn to use machine guns. If anything, ostheer is way better off than okw, since they normally need two mg34s for crowd control.
22 Mar 2017, 01:14 AM
#40
avatar of Vuther
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1



They do, so long as there is cover. Mind you, there's a steep switch between 'mid' and 'close' range, between 20 and 15 meters where suddenly volks lose hard/rifles perform much better.

I dunno, my own testing attempt just had me feel anything past mid-range between the two squads is super RNG.
PAGES (4)down
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

765 users are online: 765 guests
2 posts in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
40 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49069
Welcome our newest member, octavia15
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM