I would be more than happy to do a replay review for you if you like.
Regarding the USF I like to open with a Gren, MG, Gren, Gren. prioritizing teller mines if i suspect a Lt. They can really shut down any light vehicle opening, and it's smooth sailing from there. Remember their lack of indirect fire and defensive AT. Mortar's can really wreck havoc.
i've had much better games since then but after that one things clicked for me. the trick is staying compact, making sure your weapons teams are supporting your grens, creeping forward, moving from cover to cover, (supported with an HT is always a bonus as well).
the same sort of principles apply against the soviets, but they have a lot more maneuverability, depth and balance in their army so you really have to play pitch perfectly, almost like a robot. i can totally understand your frustration.
Yes, but that is what makes it a Balance post, bcs the OP has put thought into it and tried to establish an argument, based on figures.
It may be, of course, that the argument is flawed, but that is not for me to judge.
I was just frustrated at the time because these are discussions that people have been having, i'm sure at least during the private WFA alpha, and the OP presented a busted, one legged argument as though he'd uncovered the lost ark.
Things got a little mixed up here. Are we debating Ostheer's T3 viability, PzIV or Soviet Call-ins?
All three are intertwined.
I didn't suggest that you did want the 76 to counter larger armor. I'm sorry if my post was construed that way, I was using the Panther and anything larger to demonstrate the flow of the game, and the grander context, in which T3 for the Soviets is a bridge, and the role of those units is mid game shock, presumably originally to counter the wehrmacht early game shock of a flameht. if you wanted them to compete and scale better, they would have to cost more, and put them in line with timings similar to that of T4 +. i think you're asking T3 to do too much.
-Fixing Ostheer's teching (Unless we fix this, any buff to Soviets mid and late game will utterly crush Ostheer)
just give us a unit that we can use to actually attack/dislodge scripts/rifles from cover, give us the chance with skill to normalize our income in the dire situation where we lose ground, which will happen, it's really unforgiving as the wehrmacht. this would in my mind, revert the flow of the game, and balance out the disparities in aggressive/defensive playstyles for the factions.
I think the issue is actually the Ostheer early game map control that sets the teching back, not so much the price itself, but due to the weak early game this price is a lot more important that for USF and Soviets as your map control can't keep up with the costs (if you see where I'm going).
Implied vs. actual income is big when strategy relies on timing. It's also core faction design. The Wehr are a very defensive faction who lack shock units in the early, even mid game, and rely on maps to creep forward and methodically attack. You lose your cut off, you can basically forget about armour.
And why is that? Better armor, better penetration, better reload time... Everything in favour of Pz IV.
Advantages so statistically marginal it may as well be a rounding error. PiV misses the first shot, you win. PiV gets a rear armour hit first, they win. etc. etc. In the grander context Shermans can be replaced, and aren't as big a loss as often as your only PiV will be; again due to the numbers already cited in the thread. There's a lot more implied equity at stake with the PiV, way too much to be psyched about going into a coinflip of a tank duel.
That was not bad luck at all. even against the rear the p4 only has 50 % of penetrating and dont get me started about the is2 front armour. technically the t-34 has a better change against the tiger then the p4 has against the is2.
I think we do agree that Ostheer's T3 doesn't have any problem versus USF (at least on paper). Against Soviets, things are different yes, but still a vet 3 P4 is A LOT MORE intimidating than a vet 3 T34. I know, they should be because P4s are more expensive but the difference is greater than the actual fuel cost if you ask me. OKW's puma is ok IMO, specially with the 5 vet system, and the utility it has.
But you don't expect the puma to counter an IS2 do you?
I mean, it's debatable. I'm ALWAYS getting T3 as Soviets unless I can snooze my way to an IS2/85's, a quick t70 has won me games, ask tightrope. Can I say the same for the Ostwind? Not really... I'd call Wehr T3 a very situational thing, again because of the numbers presented and the actual amount of resources you have to play with, and no, none of those units perform all that well against the USF. Maybe, the Ostwind if they've gone Rifle Coy/ Infantry and you don't see a Cpt.
All I'm saying is, in much the same way you shouldn't expect a T34/76 to counter a Panther, at least not outright. I appreciate that units limitations, during the time frame in which it arrives, because these are essentially shock units, it's like a game of trumps, I play a t70 or 34, something bigger is going to arrive, it's just a matter of time. This is just the role in my mind that Soviet T3 plays.
0
Canada
United Kingdom
Stoned_Killer
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
