Login

russian armor

My view on balance after taking a 1 yr gap

7 Jun 2018, 01:15 AM
#1
avatar of roll0

Posts: 64

Permanently Banned

Brits now seem like a hardmode version of ye old Ostheer of yesteryear that were struggling so bad against USF, except now it's brits on life support trying to survive against OKW and Ostheer. Do not get me started if they build an indirect weapon, mortar pit seems to be trash now and I just feel like you are toothless vs volks+team weapons into fast P4. The moment my opponent gets a MG in a important location I just feel like surrendering. You have so few options when everyone else can just build a normal mortar or pack howi.

You walk around the map with your rather expensive AEC or Bren carrier that just seems "meh" compared to the 222. Luch and flak HT seem to be quite balanced and finally in a good place now though. Put the 222 up to 290mp 30f and we would be okay, 200mp is too cheap.

-----

USF, not played too much 1vs1 with them but they seem to be so risky with their tech decisons. OKW now get a very early Panzer 4 and require no real fuel investment in sidetech to get there, just muni for healing and STG's. Sure if all goes well you can field a sherman at the same time BUT if things go wrong and you picked liut you're fugged. Thank god BAR's didn't get hit like brens did or USF would be as toothless as brits are right now.

However they still have their same old Pershing cheese that wipes things a little too well, how this thing has survived this long without an AoE nerf I don't know, but right now it gives you a rather solid gameplan of just hitting captain+bar rifles into call ins. With the removal of the tiger ace and stun nades this cheesy strat seems even stronger than when I last played.

----

Soviets are still strong as ever it seems, while a glance of the patchnotes seem to suggest they have revieved just as many nerfs as brits... Soviets always seem to sneak a few major buffs each patch keeping them top allied dog, point in case here the sniper. The soviet sniper is so strong vs gren and pgren play right now I would say he's OP, ironically the 2man change people called for only made him more of a monster to deal with when the RoF buff was thrown in. Especially vs Ost.

The KV-1, cheap T-70 that still scales great and PPsh changes on top of a few other things I've forgotten about also feel pretty strong, I never thought I would see the day the KV-1 was useful or cons blobs dealing with vet5 volks or LMG grens but it's here apparently.
7 Jun 2018, 03:44 AM
#2
avatar of Diogenes5

Posts: 269

You suck too much for anything you say to actually matter. Get good before you make generalizations because most of what you said was just flat out wrong.

Go watch some vids and learn how to play before you come on here acting like a Trump supporter with poor metacognition.
7 Jun 2018, 03:59 AM
#3
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930

You suck too much for anything you say to actually matter. Get good before you make generalizations because most of what you said was just flat out wrong.

Go watch some vids and learn how to play before you come on here acting like a Trump supporter with poor metacognition.


except roll0's assessment is fairly on point.

The soviet is definitely the strongest allied faction in game and tied with ost for being best overall.

British just feel bad atm.


The main thing I just disagree with the OP is his assessment of the OKW. I don't think They are as effortless as he portray them as. The ost is basically the superior Axis faction.

Generally, I would go:

soviet with good doctrine >= Ost => soviet > USF >= okw >>>>> brit.
7 Jun 2018, 05:03 AM
#4
avatar of Diogenes5

Posts: 269



except roll0's assessment is fairly on point.

The soviet is definitely the strongest allied faction in game and tied with ost for being best overall.

British just feel bad atm.


The main thing I just disagree with the OP is his assessment of the OKW. I don't think They are as effortless as he portray them as. The ost is basically the superior Axis faction.

Generally, I would go:

soviet with good doctrine >= Ost => soviet > USF >= okw >>>>> brit.


I gave him the generic balance-whine response. Apparently he is decent but I disagreed with most of what he said.

Brits are underpowered but there are doctrinal things you can use. Their design is just trash and can't be fixed without rework of their design. Accuracy bonuses in heavy cover is too map dependent. At the same time, if you play to British players strengths; then they are very annoying. Their bonuses in cover are ridiculous. But this is nothing new in the last year.

AEC is ok but it's still better than a 222. 222 kills infantry faster but is mostly useless against other medium vehicles. 222 is undercosted a bit. Should be nearer 240 and not 200 to stop spam. British have been underpowered ever since AE Cancer Commander was nerfed because their design is so dependent on structures. This is nothing new that has changed in the last year.

OKW analysis is WAAAAY off. It still takes a ton of time to get to a Panzer IV. If you rush to it without any side-teching, it's relatively quick, but it's unlikely you'll have enough map control without use of a flak half-trak or luchs to win battles. OKW has an incredibly hard time getting wipes and is dependent on good engagements with Obers or some lucky rocket hits to win the manpower game now and both come late. Before then, they have a very difficult time doing more than trading evenly depending on lucky mines and ISG shots. The advantages it use to have in timing are muted by nerfs to teching.

Pershing analysis is off too. All the heavies take fuel now when they didn't before. They also cost more pop. That is a large nerf to them. Pershing is like an upgunned wolverine with more hp. It's good, but frontal armor can be penetrated with most AT guns unlike Tiger Ace or Tigers where it seems many shots just bounce. It's gun is good, but really no different from other heavy tanks in terms of wiping.

And USF can't just play extended Tier 2/3 and just get a Pershing. You'll be at like 350+ Fuel by the time you get enough CP. You only need 230 for the Pershing. It is worth it to get the major to start vetting him, maybe use some barrage and recon flight, and most importantly use him as foward retreat to help push axis off the map. And Axis meta is rush to PIV now which is hard to fight with just AT guns. You definitely need a jackson if map control is being threatened.

Soviets are strong but seem linear. Most people only go the two Commanders (we all know which). Guards still seem a little good and required and other call-in infantry are not as great right now. Their strength is from being so cost-effective and mid-game advantage from having the best vehicle (t70) in the game before main tanks. In the end game they have a wide variety of answers to any situation that are cheap. Soviets are always good but the edge should go to Osteer because of the cost-effective stug and better heavy tanks.

7 Jun 2018, 05:38 AM
#5
avatar of TheGentlemenTroll

Posts: 1044 | Subs: 1

Yeah it seems that the sniper actually is getting more play by top tier sniper players. Both volks and grens get rektd by the new rof of the sniper even though it was believed the SOV sniper was going to never be seen (me included). Atleast ost has effective and early counters to the sniper OKW doesnt really have that dedicated early sniper counter unless you go luchs or puma.

7 Jun 2018, 06:15 AM
#6
avatar of cyso

Posts: 54

flamer pio/cons/guards + sniper + t70 + t34/76 - support your sniper with snare/ptrs and give t70/t34 vision .. this is damn (to?) strong, without big mistakes from the sov player i cant handle this.
even when he does mistakes i need a nearly perfect game or deep love from the rng god.
7 Jun 2018, 06:23 AM
#7
avatar of mondeogaming1

Posts: 464

You suck too much for anything you say to actually matter. Get good before you make generalizations because most of what you said was just flat out wrong.

Go watch some vids and learn how to play before you come on here acting like a Trump supporter with poor metacognition.
+1 agree
7 Jun 2018, 11:38 AM
#8
avatar of roll0

Posts: 64

Permanently Banned
You suck too much for anything you say to actually matter. Get good before you make generalizations because most of what you said was just flat out wrong.

Go watch some vids and learn how to play before you come on here acting like a Trump supporter with poor metacognition.


Woah woah woah

How about we set up a 1vs1 then Mr big shot, I see you've not linked your playercard. Scared much?

I was actually a Jeb Bush supporter FYI :wub:
7 Jun 2018, 11:39 AM
#9
avatar of roll0

Posts: 64

Permanently Banned
+1 agree


-1 don't agree :bananadance:
7 Jun 2018, 11:43 AM
#10
avatar of FichtenMoped
Editor in Chief Badge
Patrion 310

Posts: 4785 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Jun 2018, 11:38 AMroll0


I see you've not linked your playercard. Scared much?


You didn't either.

Let's get this topic back onto a discussion and keep out the political and whiny "playercard pls or no balance discussion" bullshit please.
7 Jun 2018, 11:57 AM
#11
avatar of roll0

Posts: 64

Permanently Banned


You didn't either.

Let's get this topic back onto a discussion and keep out the political and whiny "playercard pls or no balance discussion" bullshit please.


Well I'm happy for you to delete his and my posts if it's such an eyesore.

Otherwise I reserve the right for a 1vs1 from such trash talk, mostly because it's a bit of harmless fun.
7 Jun 2018, 14:36 PM
#12
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4


Pershing analysis is off too. All the heavies take fuel now when they didn't before. They also cost more pop. That is a large nerf to them. Pershing is like an upgunned wolverine with more hp. It's good, but frontal armor can be penetrated with most AT guns unlike Tiger Ace or Tigers where it seems many shots just bounce. It's gun is good, but really no different from other heavy tanks in terms of wiping.


I stopped reading here. Mainly because Tigers and the Pershing actually have the same exact armor :crazy:
7 Jun 2018, 17:42 PM
#13
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

And heavies always cost fuel besides Tiger ace (changed recently).
8 Jun 2018, 00:05 AM
#14
avatar of Diogenes5

Posts: 269



I stopped reading here. Mainly because Tigers and the Pershing actually have the same exact armor :crazy:


Have to go by feels since the main stats site went down like years ago. Only been playing seriously recently now that it finally feels balanced (only took 6 years but you know whatever).
8 Jun 2018, 01:35 AM
#15
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742



Have to go by feels since the main stats site went down like years ago. Only been playing seriously recently now that it finally feels balanced (only took 6 years but you know whatever).


The Pershing may have the same frontal armor as the Tiger, but the ATGs backing up the Pershing have 130/140/150 penetration (without AP round ability), whereas the pak40s you have when using Tigers have 190/200/210 penetration. Thus it's completely understandable to feel the differential between ATGs.
8 Jun 2018, 02:02 AM
#16
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

Parks should be topping out at 200 pen if I recall (200/190/180-c/m/f) but either way. Tiger is squishier (health pool and relative AT assets) but better offensively seems reasonable to me..
8 Jun 2018, 02:35 AM
#17
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4



The Pershing may have the same frontal armor as the Tiger, but the ATGs backing up the Pershing have 130/140/150 penetration (without AP round ability), whereas the pak40s you have when using Tigers have 190/200/210 penetration. Thus it's completely understandable to feel the differential between ATGs.


Parks should be topping out at 200 pen if I recall (200/190/180-c/m/f) but either way. Tiger is squishier (health pool and relative AT assets) but better offensively seems reasonable to me..


Zombi is correct here.

6 pounder and pak 40: 190/200/210

Rak and zis 180/190/200
8 Jun 2018, 02:45 AM
#18
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

Well shit. 210 seems like such a strange value. Thanks for the correction.
8 Jun 2018, 04:58 AM
#19
avatar of Rosbone

Posts: 2144 | Subs: 2


Zombi is correct here.

6 pounder and pak 40: 190/200/210

Rak and zis 180/190/200

And the Raketen will either miss or just plain not shoot 50% of time. Last game I played, Rak didnt take a shot then missed 3 for 3 on a stationary target. So 4 chances = 0 pens. Quality game, keep up the good work!

EDIT:
Raketen percentage stats:
60%/40%/When monkeys fly out of my ass
8 Jun 2018, 06:06 AM
#20
avatar of Stark

Posts: 626 | Subs: 1

besides Tiger ace (changed recently).


Is anyone uses Tiger ace after the patch? I feel like recent fuel price and old resources reduction killed that unit and entire commander.
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

701 users are online: 701 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49062
Welcome our newest member, Mclatc16
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM