|
The questions should be picked via random number generator in order to ensure consistency. |
Unless I missed something, efficiency rating is driven by the absolute value of damage done. Consistently killing and forcing infantry to retreat can be more valuable than wiping out the squad if the net cost of consistently reinforcing them without producing results becomes greater than the actual value of the squad.
Unless I'm dealing with a campy motherfucker I don't really think about building the 120mm howitzers.
Except wiping a squad completely removes veterancy, and weapon upgrades. I would much rather make a vet 3 gren squad go poof then just kill 3 of it's models and have it retreat to it's base.
While a 81mm might do more damage in the long run it's having less impact because each model of allies is worth less than it is for Axis. If your fighting Soviets as Ostheer if your mortar kills 3 models, that's the equivalent of only 2 gren models. See what I'm saying?
The Soviet mortars shoot slower, but are more accurate because they are facing smaller squads and thus less quantity is needed and more accuracy is. Not to mention the large AoE on the 120 compared to the 81.
|
It's true but I don't suspect Alex of such deepness when he was writing this 
It was rather rage backed by nothing, with numbers from the sky.
Phrasing means nothing when the end result is exactly the same, take issue with the result not how you get there.
Ultimately, as said earlier speed is the issue here, not armor. |
|
Fun to play: OKW >= Soviets > Ost > USF
USF is simply not fun to play as highlighted earlier because there is extremely little unit variant's. To little infantry, and they took all the most boring shermans to use.
Like it's a complete joke the most fun and reliable Sherman is a Soviet unit.
EDIT: lol at all the people saying OKW is to easy to play. |
So easy and so much of a saver that literally nobody bothers to do it.
Most people are retarded and don't do smart things. The Sturmtiger is possibly in the top 5 units in the game but nobody uses it because it's "to hard".
In conclusion:
 |
I did not vote as there is no middle ground. But will say for the most part its too one dimensional. Just rifles into M20 and on to Shermans basically some of this because certain units kinda sucking rest is just bad design.
What I cant stand is Relics insistence to try to create SUPER UNIQUE factions in a game BUILT AROUND REAL WORLD ARMIES THAT ALL USED COMBINED ARMS In the end we just always end with gimmicky factions that always seem to encourage blobbing. This idea that factions should lack important weapon systems like mortars or getting MGs late is horrible!
I'd love to see both WFA get reworks so that they both have support early and good support weapons with weaker infantry so as to encourage blobbing.
USF Should get heavy Tanks
OKW SHOULD have medium tanks!
Soviet stock armor Should be viable!
ETC ETC ETC.......
Inb4 "want all factions to be the same"
good post, +1 |
USF and OKW don't lack support weapons, they just aren't any good. Buffing the leig, pack, and .50cal would go a long way in diversifying these factions. OKW also has a lot of what I would call "support vehicles" rather then many support weapons.
US might only have rifles, but with 4 different upgrade options they come in many diverse forms. Also okw and USF have more forms of "support infantry" like pathfinders, jeigers, and assault engis.
All of the USF support weapons are non doc, while 1 of the only 3 OKW support weapons is doctrinal. Both armies selection still pales in comparison to the other armies.
No mortar
No howitzer
No sniper
list goes on.
USF might have the option to upgrade rifles but simply look at the unit lists of each faction:
USF has Rifles and Paras for direct combat units, Pathfinders/Assault Engineers for support
OKW has Volks, Obers, Fuss, Fallsch, JLI all as direct combat units with Sturms for support. |
|
OKW and USF suffer from a lot of the same issues, lack of support weapons, little in the way of good builds outside of the standard cookie cutter, low amount of doctrines, ect.
But two things that makes me like playing OKW more is the more interesting tanks (Relic REALLY messed up with how few of the Sherman varients they put in), and you have a much much wider selection in the infantry you can get.
I would have a lot more fun playing USF if you didn't have 1 infantry unit and nothing else. |
Apart from wiping potential, I tried to use in last few day double 120 and double GrW34. There was not even a single game where 120 had better efficiency than GrW34 and only 1 game where 120s had more kills.
So 800MP is not better at killing than 480 MP (without looking at squad wiping potential).
If you look at MP cost, I would take 2 GrW34 over 1 120.
Do you seriously only look at kills when judging the performance of a unit because by that standard every Axis unit is better because every Axis unit will always be shooting at more infantry and killing more infantry.
two GrW34's might kill more models in the same game as 2 120's, but they will wipe far less squads and cause far less manpower drain.
The B4 had the worst ROF of any unit in the game but it was and still is great, the Sturmtiger is mostly the same but it remains good because of the impact of being able to just erase squads and tanks off the field. |
The ost mortar is definitely better, its got less range but fires 3 shots for every soviet mortar shot
The 120 is viable, so it gets calls for nerfs. No one picks up the 82 (probably because no one builds them), but the ostheer mortar is like finding an LMG on the ground, everyone rushes to steal it
The 82 is more accurate, so it doesn't need to fire as many shots. It's also shooting at much smaller squads as well.
Asymmetrical balance. |
0
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
