Login

russian armor

Lend Lease is completely broken

17 May 2017, 02:56 AM
#81
avatar of Cpt. Blitz

Posts: 55



Ostheer panther is in tier 4 sunshine and costs a 175 fuel on top of that pricey route to teching to and building tier 4. However, the sherman comes without any teching cost. I understand that you are extremely Allied biased, but you are taking it a bit too far. Troll more like this on this thread and I will report you.


How bout you STFU haha. Saying you're going to report ppl for expressing their opinions is reportable by nature. So go report yourself, or better yet, delete this useless excuse of a thread.

Lend Lease Shermans do not need a nerf. They haven't been touched since the beginning of the game. And they won't be touched now.

Axis are easier than Allies to play. Deal with it. My record agrees with me and so does everybody else not in the top 200 1v1.
17 May 2017, 13:08 PM
#82
avatar of Grumpy

Posts: 1954



Ostheer panther is in tier 4 sunshine and costs a 175 fuel on top of that pricey route to teching to and building tier 4. However, the sherman comes without any teching cost. I understand that you are extremely Allied biased, but you are taking it a bit too far. Troll more like this on this thread and I will report you.


So you're the Axis version of Kaitoff now? Are you going to report everyone who thinks comparing the M4c to a Panther is an idiotic comparison? If so, please include me.
17 May 2017, 16:03 PM
#83
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

The problem come from the fact that the doctrinal DSHK is better then the Maxim HMG.t

So 1vs1 maps it's rather normal that you want the best HMG, because it will have a greater impact.

If the DSHK is become similar to Maxim or a .50... why does it exist?

Nerf it to the level of the non doctrinal MG42 ? why not ?

The problem i see in the solution that all call in should be tight to a tier building is that in certain case they are a solution for fuel scarce situations. (where you dont want or can't build tier 4 as an exemple.)

the Lend-lease doctrine is made for those fuel scarce situations.

So maybe it's best to increase the mp cost of the call-in as someone said.
And it other case it's best to be tight to a tier.

The design of commander with call-in units must be thoughtfully analysed to find its original purpose.

:)


I don't care what its original purpose was, if it isn't working and is broken, it should be reworked. Or do we need to thoughtfully reanalyze the Tiger Ace and get it back to its orginal purpose?

Calls in are ruining the game since launch, that is why tigers, Is2s and other heavy tank call ins were limited to one at a time and the double T34-85 call ins tied to teching.

All call ins need to be tied to teching. And yes, even the ones from the factions you defend with every post.
17 May 2017, 16:51 PM
#84
avatar of voltardark

Posts: 976



I don't care what its original purpose was, if it isn't working and is broken, it should be reworked. Or do we need to thoughtfully reanalyze the Tiger Ace and get it back to its orginal purpose?

Calls in are ruining the game since launch, that is why tigers, Is2s and other heavy tank call ins were limited to one at a time and the double T34-85 call ins tied to teching.

All call ins need to be tied to teching. And yes, even the ones from the factions you defend with every post.


Well, i like all the factions, i just prefer to play the underdog.

It's in my nature to defend those i see in need of it.

I just think the Allies need some luv overall.

It's ok if you disagree with me.

Read my lasts post and you will discover that my demands are not that big...

Overall Call-in tuning;
OST's Stuka dive nuker;
USA's Calliope;
Soviet's HMG ajustments;
UK emplacement braces + standfast;
OKW's Walking stuka :ajustments;

So tell me how i'm not fair in this or fanboy as you say ? plz explain.
18 May 2017, 11:06 AM
#85
avatar of Garrett

Posts: 309 | Subs: 1

DSHK badly needs nerfs, that's for sure.

On the other hand, it's not shermans themselves that are broken. It's call-ins in general. Without call-in shermans there would be no counter to call-in command panther and vice-versa.


I wonder what was the justification to hide the t34-85 and the Easy-8 behind tech, but then dont do the same for other medium tank call-ins like the lend-lease Sherman? I mean doesn't it create the same problems like T34 call-ins previously?
18 May 2017, 11:11 AM
#86
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

jump backJump back to quoted post18 May 2017, 11:06 AMGarrett


I wonder what was the justification to hide the t34-85 and the Easy-8 behind tech, but then dont do the same for other medium tank call-ins like the lend-lease Sherman? I mean doesn't it create the same problems like T34 call-ins previously?


Command Panther meta

and before you ask, the reason for Command Panther is Armour company/Pershing

Then, the reason for USF call-in meta is USF late-game & Lightning war
18 May 2017, 13:14 PM
#87
avatar of Garrett

Posts: 309 | Subs: 1



Command Panther meta

and before you ask, the reason for Command Panther is Armour company/Pershing

Then, the reason for USF call-in meta is USF late-game & Lightning war


Well, I thought something along these lines. It shows that balance is rarely one-dimensional and also shows the problems of call-ins in general. Hiding a command panther or Pershing behind tech could mean that they become unviable because they hit the field too late and cost too much in general, I assume...
20 May 2017, 00:59 AM
#88
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

jump backJump back to quoted post18 May 2017, 13:14 PMGarrett


Well, I thought something along these lines. It shows that balance is rarely one-dimensional and also shows the problems of call-ins in general. Hiding a command panther or Pershing behind tech could mean that they become unviable because they hit the field too late and cost too much in general, I assume...

How many people actually rush command panthers or pershings though? I pretty much never do unless my t4 gets destroyed super fast as okw somehow.
20 May 2017, 01:23 AM
#89
avatar of Garrett

Posts: 309 | Subs: 1


How many people actually rush command panthers or pershings though? I pretty much never do unless my t4 gets destroyed super fast as okw somehow.


Well, in 1v1s stalling for a Pershing, Tiger or Command Panther is a very common thing. I am not a great fan of that, but its a legit strategy which a wide range of players use...
20 May 2017, 03:20 AM
#90
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

jump backJump back to quoted post20 May 2017, 01:23 AMGarrett


Well, in 1v1s stalling for a Pershing, Tiger or Command Panther is a very common thing. I am not a great fan of that, but its a legit strategy which a wide range of players use...

Oh yeah... forgot about that somehow lol. I too think it's stupid. I don't really think putting heavies behind tech would make them come too late or anything (except maybe for ost). I usually only call in Pershings, on the rare occasion I use them, after a Jackson and/or sherman.
20 May 2017, 05:41 AM
#91
avatar of Waegukin

Posts: 609

Lock all call-in vehicles behind tech. For the M4C, I'd also tweak its stats and price to make it a primarily anti-infantry unit (think Soviet Ostwind), which would make Soviet T4 somewhat similar in composition to Ost T3.
20 May 2017, 05:45 AM
#92
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

Lock all call-in vehicles behind tech. For the M4C, I'd also tweak its stats and price to make it a primarily anti-infantry unit think Soviet Ostwind), which would make Soviet T4 somewhat similar in composition to Ost T3.

I think its supposed to be more of a ez8 for soviets, and IIRC it has a smaller AOE. I actually think this makes more sense, as t34s already do a good job with infantry.
20 May 2017, 06:29 AM
#93
avatar of August1996

Posts: 223

Call ins in general need to be tied to teching(no exceptions). And the DSHKA needs a nerf as its Maxim on steroids. Maxim could use a bit of a buff in terms of setup/teardown time as its suppression is worse than other MGs, cost more and Cons are literally trash 20+++++ mins in 1v1.
20 May 2017, 06:33 AM
#94
avatar of August1996

Posts: 223



Yeah it's funny.

I play all the armies and Axis are always a cake-walk. Even in 1v1.

Sure in Pros ppl win allied games as 1v1 just because of map control and pressure. But below top 200 play Axis are leaps and bounds ahead of Allies. It's because they require so much damn micro


Then probably you need to play more Automatch and get paired with more suitable opponents. Axis and Allies are more same power level wise overall than it was 2016. People can quite literally steamroll any player that is lower skilled than them, regardless of faction. Also since you said below 200 I guess Brit sim city is an example of "so much damn micro"?
20 May 2017, 12:48 PM
#95
avatar of Garrett

Posts: 309 | Subs: 1

Call ins in general need to be tied to teching(no exceptions). And the DSHKA needs a nerf as its Maxim on steroids. Maxim could use a bit of a buff in terms of setup/teardown time as its suppression is worse than other MGs, cost more and Cons are literally trash 20+++++ mins in 1v1.


I agree, the current Penal spam into 120mm and 85s or Penals with Dshka into M4C spam is a result of poorly performing Maxims and Cons. When two of your three choices are underwhelming, and then you have the overperforming Penals, it is not hard to understand why most Soviet players choose to use Soviet T1...
20 May 2017, 15:22 PM
#96
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

jump backJump back to quoted post20 May 2017, 12:48 PMGarrett


I agree, the current Penal spam into 120mm and 85s or Penals with Dshka into M4C spam is a result of poorly performing Maxims and Cons. When two of your three choices are underwhelming, and then you have the overperforming Penals, it is not hard to understand why most Soviet players choose to use Soviet T1...

Yup. That's why I don't even play soviets anymore; most of their early-mid game isn't even viable anymore.

IMO cons should be decent mainline inf (and make the Molotov animation faster), maybe give them svts as an upgrade, and make penals basically ostruppen ("you need screening troops?") with mosins. Their vet1 ability also makes sense in that scenario.
20 May 2017, 15:47 PM
#97
avatar of Garrett

Posts: 309 | Subs: 1


Yup. That's why I don't even play soviets anymore; most of their early-mid game isn't even viable anymore.

IMO cons should be decent mainline inf (and make the Molotov animation faster), maybe give them svts as an upgrade, and make penals basically ostruppen ("you need screening troops?") with mosins. Their vet1 ability also makes sense in that scenario.


Well, I dont think that Soviets are weak, because Penals are very strong and while the T70 is pretty garbage right now, an early T34 can be quite annoying, let alone spamming Katyushas. The problem is that Soviets are pretty predictable since it is always Penals plus maybe Dshkas or 120mms (or both). Cons definetly should get a boost, they are supposed to be the mainline infantry but right now they are there simply for the snare (even though Penals can do the same now, even though less effective).
20 May 2017, 15:48 PM
#98
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066


Yup. That's why I don't even play soviets anymore; most of their early-mid game isn't even viable anymore.

IMO cons should be decent mainline inf (and make the Molotov animation faster), maybe give them svts as an upgrade, and make penals basically ostruppen ("you need screening troops?") with mosins. Their vet1 ability also makes sense in that scenario.


then you will get the same situation as you have now. Only in your solution we will have conscripts into dhsk into m4c lol. The entire faction needs a redesign badly.
20 May 2017, 15:49 PM
#99
avatar of Garrett

Posts: 309 | Subs: 1



then you will get the same situation as you have now. Only in your solution we will have conscripts into dhsk into m4c lol. The entire faction needs a redesign badly.


Not necessarily, because you could have mainline infantry (cons) which are worth their money plus team weapons (given that the Maxim gets a slight boost) instead of having to choose between competitive infantry (penals) or team weapons (subsituted by the Dshka).
20 May 2017, 15:52 PM
#100
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

jump backJump back to quoted post20 May 2017, 15:49 PMGarrett


Not necessarily, because you could have mainline infantry (cons) which are worth their money plus team weapons (given that the Maxim gets a slight boost) instead of having to choose between competitive infantry (penals) or team weapons (subsituted by the Dshka).


So then it will be conscripts (now the penals of current patch) into maxims (now a subpar dhsk of the current patch) into m4c spam lol. I understand what you are trying to accomplish by these changes, but unfortunately it won't change anything... :(

Or would you tie all call ins to teching?
0 user is browsing this thread:

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

708 users are online: 708 guests
0 post in the last 24h
12 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49989
Welcome our newest member, LegalMetrologyConsul
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM