The new patch

The new patch wasnt so new after all. We are back to Maxim spam plus 120mm spam where Russians just sit there and pick you apart. Good luck saving for that Pwerfer lol and even more luck hitting smth...

I agree about 120mm but we can still L2Flank HMGs, its not hard to flank Maxims now.

I always said L2flank heavy TDs in old patch, but people said that wasn't possible. How did flanking become possible in 1 patch?

I always said L2flank heavy TDs in old patch, but people said that wasn't possible. How did flanking become possible in 1 patch?

Flanking heavy TDs is significantly harder. They don't have a setup time and used to 2 shot most tanks (all nondoc tanks except comet). It would also never be cost efficient against a team that knows how to control their units at all, as losing 2 mediums is around the same, but you would usually lose more. You can also just blow up a maxim with a mortar, or snipe it, and once you flank you can nade it. Heavy TDs have over 1000 health and more armor than most other tanks period. And again, they don't have a setup time and can move, and have a huge range. So not really comparable to maxims. JT could also double tap, which is pretty lulzy when it kills a tank in 2 shots.

Sorry about the rant, but I was a bit triggered. It's also not even relevant anymore because they got nerfed pretty decently this patch.

I agree about 120mm but we can still L2Flank HMGs, its not hard to flank Maxims now.

It's not hard to flank Maxims, that's true. But if there are 3 Maxims because you are playing a small ass map against Soviets whose sole intent it is to camp the VP, good luck.

I always said L2flank heavy TDs in old patch, but people said that wasn't possible. How did flanking become possible in 1 patch?

...and you were always wrong when it came to team games. Long narrow maps like Red Ball plus commanders with Panzerfusiliers & JT or spotting scopes & Elefant made flanking difficult on those maps.

...and you were always wrong when it came to team games. Long narrow maps like Red Ball plus commanders with Panzerfusiliers & JT or spotting scopes & Elefant made flanking difficult on those maps.

That's precisely my point. You can't flank on narrow maps like road to kharkov. Yet we still neglect basic faction tools to deal with every situation because "asymmetric balance" XD

...and you were always wrong when it came to team games. Long narrow maps like Red Ball plus commanders with Panzerfusiliers & JT or spotting scopes & Elefant made flanking difficult on those maps.

Do such maps change their structure when maxims are used ?

Maxims still suck . In team games as well.

Do such maps change their structure when maxims are used ?

No, but players can't A-move maxims like they could before, and flanking a MG, particularly a maxim with the narrow arc, is much easier than trying to flank a JT with a spotter.

Also, OKW does get free smoke on the ISG, which is the only reason to ever get one in the current patch.

120 could probably use the same treatment as the other medium arty options, less autoattack range and better barrage cooldowns. Meanwhile, the leIG's explosive profile and scatter should be mirrored to the Soviet PM-81 so it can help out against the Maxim.

Can you give it a rest? If my soviet enemy plays Maxims I am glad as hell because I don't have to deal with schwarzenegger Penals and annoying snipers.

A maxim? So what. As Ost, I have a great mortar, as OKW I have Sturmpioneers and Kübels that can cap around the map and win against cons with ease.

A Soviet T2 means Medic HQ as OKW is a must. Flak HT is my absolute favorite unit after the patch, and LeIGs can deal perfectly with support weapons. Fire them up or smoke them, everything is possible.

The new patch wasnt so new after all. We are back to Maxim spam plus 120mm spam where Russians just sit there and pick you apart. Good luck saving for that Pwerfer lol and even more luck hitting smth...

people are spamming 120-mm because 82-mm is terrible. 120 mm on its background is just a good mortar, which is not inferior to other mortars / light howitzers.
Maxim is still a disgusting machine gun when I take Vickers or MG: what kind of divine machine guns are compared to Maxim.
Most Soviet units have a worse performance than other factions, which forces players to spam

I find it amusing at least that the 120mm which hasn't been changed (IIRC), and been argueable worst than the 82mm (consider the worst mortar or it might be the USF one atm) it is now suddenly OP.

Old post which might still apply.
Show Spoiler

Unless there's a ninja change somewhere or i'm missing a change, if you can barely micro your mortar, the default 82mm should be better, specially if you use barrage and vet 0 flares.

I find it amusing at least that the 120mm which hasn't been changed (IIRC), and been argueable worst than the 82mm (consider the worst mortar or it might be the USF one atm) it is now suddenly OP.

OP or not, 120mm is used a lot in team games at least. XP requirement might be high, but it's basically unwipeable (6-man crew, 1 man retreat). It also has huge range, and the biggest issue (or thing going for it, whichever way you look at it), each of it's shot is like a stuka dive bomb so you get a lot of squad wipes.

I find it amusing at least that the 120mm which hasn't been changed (IIRC), and been argueable worst than the 82mm (consider the worst mortar or it might be the USF one atm) it is now suddenly OP.

Old post which might still apply.
Show Spoiler

Unless there's a ninja change somewhere or i'm missing a change, if you can barely micro your mortar, the default 82mm should be better, specially if you use barrage and vet 0 flares.

paper and reality are different things:
- IS-2 on paper the best tank in the game, in fact the worst
- 82-mm on paper is better than 120-mm, in fact worse.
all that makes 82-mm is to scratch units, if he killed more than 15 people for the whole game - you are a lucky man, the Wehrmacht mortar does not make less than 30 kills per game (this mortar - op, it wipes out a full squad of 5/6 people), 120-mm make about 20 kills and yesterday he helped me by hitting on Pz-4, destroyed his main gun.

OP or not, 120mm is used a lot in team games at least. XP requirement might be high, but it's basically unwipeable (6-man crew, 1 man retreat). It also has huge range, and the biggest issue (or thing going for it, whichever way you look at it), each of it's shot is like a stuka dive bomb so you get a lot of squad wipes.

+1

A lot of people whinge about 120 not getting the kill count of the ost mortar, but it is doing almost constant damage to the health of all squads within range thus giving allied infantry the advantage, especially if those squads have ppsh's.

l2p flank and also you always have stuka like OKW

paper and reality are different things:
- IS-2 on paper the best tank in the game, in fact the worst
- 82-mm on paper is better than 120-mm, in fact worse.
all that makes 82-mm is to scratch units, if he killed more than 15 people for the whole game - you are a lucky man, the Wehrmacht mortar does not make less than 30 kills per game (this mortar - op, it wipes out a full squad of 5/6 people), 120-mm make about 20 kills and yesterday he helped me by hitting on Pz-4, destroyed his main gun.

We are talking about computer games, the stats that elchino is talking about is all that rule that game so actually "the paper" is the reality. But it does not have to equal with user experience for multiple reasons such as:
1. Bias - its often seen that players tend to see same unit as bad when they build it and good when opponent is using it.
2. Graphical effects - it is easy to see in the case of 120mm mortar. It has such a huge and realistic graphical and sound effect that people tend to think its better than it actually is.
3. Using bad measures of effectivness - in the case of mortar, kill count is not exactly the right measure becouse its mainly a damage dealer, not a model killer. Its very easy to steal kills from the mortar and the kill count is very dependant on how well your opponent manages healing. The AoE and scatter character of the weapon also means that it is always going to perform much better (in terms of model kills) against allies, just becouse of bigger squad size.

Even if that metric was a good one, why exactly do you think that a mortar that deals 33% more damage (15-20) is worth 42% higher cost (240-340)?

We are talking about computer games, the stats that elchino is talking about is all that rule that game so actually "the paper" is the reality. But it does not have to equal with user experience for multiple reasons such as:
1. Bias - its often seen that players tend to see same unit as bad when they build it and good when opponent is using it.
2. Graphical effects - it is easy to see in the case of 120mm mortar. It has such a huge and realistic graphical and sound effect that people tend to think its better than it actually is.
3. Using bad measures of effectivness - in the case of mortar, kill count is not exactly the right measure becouse its mainly a damage dealer, not a model killer. Its very easy to still kills from the mortar and the kill count is very dependant on how well your opponent manages healing. The AoE and scatter character of the weapon also means that it is always going to perform much better (in terms of model kills) against allies, just becouse of bigger squad size.

Even if that metric was a good one, why exactly do you think that a mortar that deals 33% more damage (15-20) is worth 42% higher cost (240-340)?

Statistics are reality? of course. Just why does no one use IS-2? On paper, this is the best tank, in practice the worst. Most of all I'm amused by the pseudo buff in the last patch, which did not improve performance at all. And the pseudo nerf King Tiger - he wiped the squad, and continues to wipe