Login

russian armor

Received Accuracy for OKW JLI and USF Pathfinder

24 Feb 2019, 18:32 PM
#81
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Feb 2019, 18:07 PMLago


The two units have very little in common now.

Almost all small arms are 50% less accurate versus a unit in cover. Heavy cover provides 50% damage reduction on top of that. This makes a squad in heavy cover about four times more durable than it is out of cover.

The damage on the JLI crit rifle is low, but it has 90% accuracy vs cover instead of 50%. It also has chance to instakill models below 75% health. These two bonuses combined heavily mitigate the benefit the enemy gets from cover.

Pathfinders don't have that accuracy bonus and can only crit models below 40% health. They're more of a force multiplier unit: they can do a lot of damage if a Rifleman squad is around to set up the crits for them, but they're pretty weak on their own.

IMO jaegers should be more like pathfinders. They have somewhat similar costs and the same reinforce costs, but jaegers are way tougher and have plenty of abilities, and their sniper is much better.
24 Feb 2019, 19:12 PM
#82
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2358

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Feb 2019, 18:07 PMLago

snip

Thanks for the information Lago, but i already knew that.
I said that pathfinders must be tweaked as well since the whole thread and almost any thread about JLI compares both of them and that is firstly used as an excuse to bring down JLI and buff pathF, but secondly to say how much JLI were OP.
The second point stands, as JLI are being toned down in order to become what they really were meant to.
But i do not like people with selective memory and i always said JLI are not the same as PathF, but since everyone who talked back at me said they were, i pay now with their money. Tone down JLI, and then tone down PathF, tweak one, tweak the other one too. This is a balance discussion not a bias war. Isnt it?

Why tone down/tweak pathF? its offtopic but simply because that way both units remain at the same role and function, unless you want a powercreep...

24 Feb 2019, 20:21 PM
#83
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

Why tone down/tweak pathF? its offtopic but simply because that way both units remain at the same role and function, unless you want a powercreep...


They don't fill the same role.

Pathfinders are combo units that are weak on their own and stronger when working with another unit that can set their crits up.

JLI are anti-cover troops like flamer engineers.

but since everyone who talked back at me said they were, i pay now with their money.

Then you descend to their level.
24 Feb 2019, 22:51 PM
#84
avatar of addvaluejack

Posts: 261

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Feb 2019, 20:21 PMLago

JLI are anti-cover troops like flamer engineers.

Is this really comparable? Will you move your troops out of cover/garrison simply because you see a squad of JLI is closing?
24 Feb 2019, 23:21 PM
#85
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053


Is this really comparable? Will you move your troops out of cover/garrison simply because you see a squad of JLI is closing?

I laugh if jaegers are closing in. They should be at max range and stationary.

That being said, if I engage them and my troops can function at short range, yes I do move out of cover and close. If not, I just cry and retreat or suffer losing the engagement or bring in other troops because how are you supposed to win if your cover is negated and his isn't (and his infantry is tougher than yours)?

Bottom line is, I'd disagree with Lago and I don't think they're comparable to flamethrower troops. Flamethrowers have significant caveats in that they're short range and don't work as well on troops out in the open since they're dependent on AoE. They're also only available on squishy engineer squads, for good reason. Jaegers, meanwhile, are long range, not so dependent on whether the enemy is in cover or not and completely self sufficient in that they're tough enough to stand up against most other infantry units (indeed, they're actually man for man a lot tougher than a lot of infantry units), and can even sprint away from unfavorable engagements. On top of that, them having a cover denial role in a faction whose mainline infantry have incendiary grenades makes no sense. They didn't ever have the 0.9 accuracy against cover until they got revamped, and didn't serve in that role before then. IMO all it does is encourage blobbing them up with other infantry and just a moving to victory since you can't outplay them with infantry because using cover gets voided and all the other okw infantry has stgs out the ass to counter closing/short range troops en masse. A mixed blob of JLIs and volks is pretty annoying to deal with in that regard and is really only possible with vehicles or indirect. They even get great sight range to avoid mgs if their commander has half a brain (which would be fine but for the reasons above IMO).
25 Feb 2019, 00:01 AM
#86
avatar of addvaluejack

Posts: 261


I laugh if jaegers are closing in. They should be at max range and stationary.

That being said, if I engage them and my troops can function at short range, yes I do move out of cover and close. If not, I just cry and retreat or suffer losing the engagement or bring in other troops because how are you supposed to win if your cover is negated and his isn't (and his infantry is tougher than yours)?

At least JLI with G43 is only good at long range. But Pathfinder with one Bar? Should I close in or stay at distance? I don't think JLI have any advantage over Pathfinder for this topic here.


Bottom line is, I'd disagree with Lago and I don't think they're comparable to flamethrower troops. Flamethrowers have significant caveats in that they're short range and don't work as well on troops out in the open since they're dependent on AoE. They're also only available on squishy engineer squads, for good reason. Jaegers, meanwhile, are long range, not so dependent on whether the enemy is in cover or not and completely self sufficient in that they're tough enough to stand up against most other infantry units (indeed, they're actually man for man a lot tougher than a lot of infantry units), and can even sprint away from unfavorable engagements. On top of that, them having a cover denial role in a faction whose mainline infantry have incendiary grenades makes no sense. They didn't ever have the 0.9 accuracy against cover until they got revamped, and didn't serve in that role before then. IMO all it does is encourage blobbing them up with other infantry and just a moving to victory since you can't outplay them with infantry because using cover gets voided and all the other okw infantry has stgs out the ass to counter closing/short range troops en masse. A mixed blob of JLIs and volks is pretty annoying to deal with in that regard and is really only possible with vehicles or indirect. They even get great sight range to avoid mgs if their commander has half a brain (which would be fine but for the reasons above IMO).

Any thing wrong with combined blob? Combining blob is strong for every faction, for example, combining Pathfinder and Rifleman is strong, too.
25 Feb 2019, 00:05 AM
#87
avatar of addvaluejack

Posts: 261

Since veterancy is totally based the damage dealt by the units, the rarity of vet4 or vet5 JLIs could prove that they are not killing machines.

P.S. I know JLI's vet requirements are little higher than Pathfinder's.
25 Feb 2019, 00:50 AM
#88
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3053


At least JLI with G43 is only good at long range. But Pathfinder with one Bar? Should I close in or stay at distance? I don't think JLI have any advantage over Pathfinder for this topic here.


Any thing wrong with combined blob? Combining blob is strong for every faction, for example, combining Pathfinder and Rifleman is strong, too.

Fair point but the pathfinders are considerably less tough and their snipers have almost twice as low the crit threshold. BARs make up for that somewhat, but they don't get the bonus against cover, which is really what negates counterplay for those particular blobs. How is one supposed to realistically outplay the blob if its tougher and is able to deny your cover?

And you're also forgetting that JLI can sprint, booby trap, self heal, and get a short 50% accuracy bonus out of camo.
25 Feb 2019, 01:19 AM
#89
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

If you are facing BAR pathfinders the only thing you do is regoice that they decided to spend 60mu for a droppable weapon on a squishy squad instead of their rifles and engage from Cover... Because that works, against pathfinders anyways.
25 Feb 2019, 11:13 AM
#90
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

Is this really comparable? Will you move your troops out of cover/garrison simply because you see a squad of JLI is closing?


It doesn't have the same damage or the AoE burst/damage all in hold that makes flamers annihilate garrisons.

The flamer similarity is in that cover is little defence against it. You don't need to ditch the garrison pronto, but if you stay in that garrison and they grab some nearby cover, they'll very likely win.
25 Feb 2019, 11:18 AM
#91
avatar of Loren

Posts: 107


At least JLI with G43 is only good at long range. But Pathfinder with one Bar? Should I close in or stay at distance? I don't think JLI have any advantage over Pathfinder for this topic here.


Any thing wrong with combined blob? Combining blob is strong for every faction, for example, combining Pathfinder and Rifleman is strong, too.


The funny fact is that JLI can actually defeat Pathfinders with BAR upgrades in almost any distance and situation.
The following video covers four different cases;

1. JLI hugging into 1BAR Pathfinder with light cover
2. JLI with light cover vs. 2BAR Pathfinder with heavy cover at Long range,
3. 3vet JLI hugging into 1 BAR 3vet Pathfinder with Heavy cover
4. 2BAR 3vet Pathfinder and 3vet JLI CQC Situation

Most situations are very ideally bad for JLI, but JLI defeats pathfinders very well.
JLI is obviously a long-range combat specialist, but even good enough at assuming a hugging situation using like CQC specialists.

JLI is clearly a unit designed with CQC weaknesses. However, in practice, JLI is not weak enough in CQC, and it becomes even more serious if it is a long-range combat.
In reality, If not ideal, the JLI is much more powerful with the help of utilities such as sprint, booby-trap, medic kits, and camo first strike bonus.
This unit is obviously OP. There are often people who tell a biased story here, but in any sense, it's no denying that there is a problem with JLI.



Interestingly, the JLI has a single weapon slot when it is repeatedly engaged with the USF, so a combination of BAR + JLI is often born.
25 Feb 2019, 13:15 PM
#93
avatar of SeductiveCardbordBox

Posts: 591 | Subs: 1

Since veterancy is totally based the damage dealt by the units, the rarity of vet4 or vet5 JLIs could prove that they are not killing machines.

P.S. I know JLI's vet requirements are little higher than Pathfinder's.


No idea who you're playing against, but I never have any problems getting my JLI to vet 5, so long as the game goes long enough for any infantry to get to vet 5.

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Feb 2019, 11:18 AMLoren
(snip)


Nothing new, but nice to have a handy visual demonstration for people to really understand exactly how different the two units are in terms of combat potential. A lot of people play only Axis or Allies, respectively, and all that. Or are just hugely invested in their own bias.

People can say all that want about JLI and how they are supposed to be a different 'type' of unit to Pathfinders.

Literally everything pathfinders can do, JLI do better. At any range. For less MP. With more abilities. And a potential Vet5.

25 Feb 2019, 13:30 PM
#94
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

Invised an offtopic post.
25 Feb 2019, 13:42 PM
#95
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Feb 2019, 11:18 AMLoren


snip
as i said multiple time the problem is the tresh hold is too high lower it to 50 add another sniper rifle and be done with it
25 Feb 2019, 13:57 PM
#96
avatar of Loren

Posts: 107

as i said multiple time the problem is the tresh hold is too high lower it to 50 add another sniper rifle and be done with it


totally agreed.
Anyway, I just do not want to see any more telling the biased story like the truth.
25 Feb 2019, 15:03 PM
#97
avatar of addvaluejack

Posts: 261

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Feb 2019, 11:18 AMLoren


The funny fact is that JLI can actually defeat Pathfinders with BAR upgrades in almost any distance and situation.
The following video covers four different cases;

1. JLI hugging into 1BAR Pathfinder with light cover
2. JLI with light cover vs. 2BAR Pathfinder with heavy cover at Long range,
3. 3vet JLI hugging into 1 BAR 3vet Pathfinder with Heavy cover
4. 2BAR 3vet Pathfinder and 3vet JLI CQC Situation

Most situations are very ideally bad for JLI, but JLI defeats pathfinders very well.
JLI is obviously a long-range combat specialist, but even good enough at assuming a hugging situation using like CQC specialists.
.


No offense, but you really should run your tests multiple times. JLI beat Pathfinder in close range is very rare. According to my 10 times' test, Pathfinder won 10 times.
25 Feb 2019, 15:12 PM
#98
avatar of SeductiveCardbordBox

Posts: 591 | Subs: 1



No offense, but you really should run your tests multiple times. JLI beat Pathfinder in close range is very rare. According to my 10 times' test, Pathfinder won 10 times.


JLI advancing across open ground into pathfinders who have also purchased a side tech upgrade to fight in CQC at point blank*
25 Feb 2019, 15:25 PM
#99
avatar of addvaluejack

Posts: 261



JLI advancing across open ground into pathfinders who have also purchased a side tech upgrade to fight in CQC at point blank*


Man, please read Loren's post. Loren created this scenario to prove JLI could beat Pathfinder in close range, I recreated his scenario to prove that his test samples are not large enough.
25 Feb 2019, 15:29 PM
#100
avatar of Loren

Posts: 107



No offense, but you really should run your tests multiple times. JLI beat Pathfinder in close range is very rare. According to my 10 times' test, Pathfinder won 10 times.



Even if it is just an effect of RNG, the overall story does not change anything. JLI still defeats them regardless of Pathfinder's BAR upgrade in long-range. Hugging scenarios are more common on the USF side. This shows that JLI is designed to be a weakness of CQC, but it is nevertheless very difficult to deal with. In general, no jerk will hug the JLI to Pathfinder.

This is just an extreme example, as I said from the beginning. For the most part, JLI is not a position to hugging, but a position to be hugged. As you can see in the second case above, regardless of the opponent's cover level, JLI can only beat the opponent very easily in long-range if only attack command is given.

Users who are very annoyed with some JLIs will try kiting again with Sprint when they approach JLI. As such, JLI is a problem with very large potential units.The comparison between Pathfinder and JLI, as you understand, comes from a similar set of roles. Both are scout units, and are long-range combat specialists. Production requirements are similar. However, the performance of both is very different. This means one of two things. Pathfinders do not have value, or conversely, JLI is OP.
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

535 users are online: 535 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49064
Welcome our newest member, cablingindfw
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM