Is it anti heavy tank? Then it isnt anti-everything.
Are you saying that its anti medium tank? How does the ost's performance against the weakest and cheapest medium in the game, means it beats every other medium too?
And arnt they the same price? Why shouldnt they be about equivalent?
Because all (allied) mediums have pretty much same armor (150-160) and same amount of HP, it could've been cromwell or sherman
And again my point is - Ostwind performance is outlandish for it's cost and timing, especially against Soviets that do no have zooks or piats to try and ambush it, what happened to T-34 is just side effect JLI style overbuff to Ostwinds ROF. What was the point of nerfing Brummbar only to introduce current Ostwind later on?
The reason I was given was they didn't want to bind all heavies to tech blind. They didn't have the resources to rebalance every heavy tank, so they only bound the ones they were working on in the commander patch.
I wanted them all bound in the patch we just had, but I was told binding the Command Panther without other adjustments would eliminate OKW's only competitive high level team game strategy.
The intent in the next patch is to bind them all to tech.
And next patch is coming when? Late Summer? Fall? This stuff should've been postoned untill then.
The singular Ostwind gets beaten into the dirt by a T-34/76.
Double Ostwind vs stationary T-34/76 is a fair fight with pretty high variance.
Single Brummbar wins against a stationary T-34/76 pretty reliably.
Man you're so focused at T-34 duels even though my entire point here was Ostwind being overbuffed to the point of threatening mediums, not that it's effective AT vehicle. Brummbar was nerfed because it was too good at everything including fighting mediums thankts to retarded armor values. Ostwind is in same state as pre-nerf Brummbar now its too cost effective at what it does for it's cost.
Didnt you complain before using unrealistic stats and less than ideal void universe combats and even when proved wrong in such scenario now you bring a realistic one that will disfavour your non consequent argument even more?
sander just made a closer to real situation and it went all against your point. But to you, an even more reaslistic scenario is worth to bring up because you think its going to be in your favour?
Dont you get that AFK players combat or very dumb ones are simply out of context now?
Really, are you some kind of troll of another galaxy?
"Real situation" proved my point entirely - despite RNG being completely in T-34 favor and hitting every single shot on the move it still lost even under best circumstances.
180 fuel of units wins against 90 fuel of units! WOW!
I was talking about singular unit there but 180 fuel worth of anti-infantry/anti-aircraft vehicles threatening medium while wiping infantry? I dont see Brummbar pulling that off anymore and cost of T4 and Brumm combined is higher than two Ostwinds.
ur are just biased as always, it comes at the same time as centaur ur argument was that brits rushing centaur was weaker than ost rush cause u are so ignorant an biased u didn't even count tier 1 and 2 for the cost and was saying that ost RUSHING and SKIPPING tier 1 and 2 leaving them only with mgs pioneer and Pgren was stronger than brits rushing even tho they get x 2 the units
if u lost to ostwind and came here crying go play ost and show us how op they are
did u even play ost once in ur life to not know tier 1 and 2 cost fuel ?
Grenadiers dont need any fuel costing upgrades to work as mainline. Pgrens with schrek could easily cover lack of AT gun before you get to T3, you're not leaving yourself vulnerable to LV rushes while going to Ostwind. You absolutely do if you try to do this as brit. Very kind of you miss my point entirely and let me repeat again - I never suggested skipping T1
no u can get rack, why is bolster obligatory now ?
btw it's u who said rush ostwind
I'm not the one who suggested you should skip T1 while doing so
In any case It's quite clear people are defending it same way JLI and Overwatch were being defended even though it's obviously overbuffed. I made my case here - it's too easy to rush and it's wayyyy too powerful for it's cost and timing
.......... are u for real, u know building tier 1 cost fuel ? that's need to be added to the calculations, what he poster is literally tier 0 to tier 3 so 125 fu same as brits
Woah, if you add T1 suddenly costs are so high it's much higher than Brits with bolster and weapons racks?
/sarcasm
yea no green only mgs and pz green ....... are u for real man ?
Grens have faust and LMG's while Pgrens have Schrecks. You are completely exposing yourself as brit without bolster or weapons, you dont lose anything if you go T1+schrecks into T3 as Ost
Performance: roughly equal TTK as the Centaur in several scenarios (disregarding representability of number of tests because I can't be bothered to do more)
If you think the Ostwind's AI is 'ridiculous', the Centaur has been ridiculous for years now.
Yeah and you'll have to forego bolster and brens, leaving you with 4-man bren-less tommies and engineers without PIATS. Thats a lot of sacrifices for rushing Centaur, that cant be said about rushing tier 3 with ost.
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
