Profile of Tobis

Jump back to quoted post27 Apr 2016, 03:59 AMDullahan

If instead of building a panic puma, you build panzerschrecks or even a second pak to stall until t3 hits, you'd have a much stronger mid to late game. It's bad because most of the time people use it they would have been better off not using it. Does that make sense? Also 9/10 players forget to tech and float 300 billion fuel after they get their panic puma and command tank combo out, but that's just bad RTS fundamentals at work.


The only time a panic puma makes ANY sense is if you are losing really, really hard and T3 isn't an option anymore. If you're sitting on three strat points and +7 fuel, fine.

Jump back to quoted post27 Apr 2016, 03:22 AMDullahan

And why is it picked a lot?

Because Puma provides a braindead counter to light vehicles. If you're dying to halftracks and stuarts or t70's you can call it in and it will give you a second wind in a game you would have otherwise lost.

You know what you can have at the same time as the Puma (6 cp ~12 minutes) if you have even map control and tech up? A stug.

The kind of situation where it works is like the game I linked, where Ostheer got his ass kicked and it's his only option to stay in the game, and even then it only works against an opponent who makes serious mistakes and isn't prepared for it.

Jump back to quoted post26 Apr 2016, 23:06 PMDullahan

They wouldn't choose it if they thought it was bad, but they're wrong about it being good.

It's a crutch for mistakes.

Jump back to quoted post26 Apr 2016, 22:02 PMDullahan

Panic Puma is always a bad idea.

It exists purely to lose games for people.