|
Mortabis posted:Surely the German community is not worse than the British? http://youtu.be/_lSR--KULac
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 09:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 21:26 |
|
|
Dezztroy posted:Well I feel silly now. So outside of accuracy and range, there's no way of knowing how good a SPAAG is just from looking at the stats? It can be really loving misleading but generally more expensive ones perform better. (shocking). You can also look at the AAA Compasion sheet I've done on this spreadhseet: https://www.dropbox.com/s/94n9gasvrrk221t/RD-AP-HEAT-HE-TableNewest.xls
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 09:21
|
|
|
This is the first time in a long time I have laughed at a downfall sub. e: lol Graphic quote:I still maintain that the US is the strongest faction in the game except in infantry. Including coalitions. Except for that Mrs. Kennedy, how did you enjoy your trip to Dallas? Mortabis fucked around with this message at 09:30 on Apr 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 09:25
|
|
|
Ever wonder how HMGs and autocannons stack up? GPMG 7.62mm: ~0.05HE/s @~29 rpm M2 Browning: ~0.08HE/s @ ~48 rpm KPVT 14.5mm: 0.07HE/s +0.07AP/s @ ~43 rpm M693 F1 20mm: ~0.05HE/s + 0.12AP/s @ ~23 rpm Bushmaster 25mm: ~0.18HE/s + 0.36AP/s @36 rpm L21A1 Rarden 30mm: ~0.07HE/s + ~0.13AP/s @20 rpm 2A72 30mm: ~0.29HE/s + 0.57AP/s @ ~43 rpm Bofors L/70 40mm: ~0.16HE/s ~0.47AP/s @ 27 rpm COMVAT 45mm: ~0.16HE/s + 0.62AP/s @27 rpm Shanakin fucked around with this message at 14:34 on Apr 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 14:25
|
|
|
Does that take into account the fact that the Rarden spends about half its time reloading? Also of course[/i][/i] the German autocannon is best.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 14:32
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Does that take into account the fact that the Rarden spends about half its time reloading? Yes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 14:34
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Does that take into account the fact that the Rarden spends about half its time reloading? What? There isn't even a German AC on that list. The Bofor is from STRF 9040. The RH 202 is one of the worst AC.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 14:52
|
|
|
Shanakin fucked around with this message at 15:20 on Apr 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 14:58
|
|
|
M693 F1 is worse than a KPVT? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 15:39
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:M693 F1 is worse than a KPVT? Worse HE, better AP. It's pretty atrocious yeah. And it costs you 10pts! Shanakin fucked around with this message at 15:44 on Apr 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 15:42
|
|
|
Shanakin posted:Worse HE, better AP. It's pretty atrocious yeah. And it costs you 10pts! It does have more range though, which does actually mean something with KE scaling.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 15:47
|
|
|
The 2AP M693 also lets it pen up to like AV10, whereas 1AP KVPT can only pen upto like 7AV.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 15:57
|
|
|
God that 2A72. No wonder the BTR-80As feel nuts. Also, from everything I've read the BTR-90 never had the 72, it had the turret straight off the BMP-2 with the 2A42. No so much in game though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 17:35
|
|
|
It's interesting how despite them all having the same putative HE value, the 2A72 is an order of magnitude better at killing infantry than the others. I didn't expect this much variation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 17:37
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:It's interesting how despite them all having the same putative HE value, the 2A72 is an order of magnitude better at killing infantry than the others. I didn't expect this much variation. I always figured it would be best in that particular case because acc is really the only determining factor, since it's all about shots on target inside the burst, and the 2A72 at 40% was the visible winner. What I didn't realize was it also has twice the burst size per volley and/or a shorter reload.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
Post good decks for Pact, I have no idea what the meta's like in Red Dragon but I want to make HATO angry.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 19:29
|
|
|
Just got pretty good and proper caved in with mmtt and two other guys on coms by two guys running mixed nato, bringing shitloads of M36 and M18 for cheap fodder / stunning, with Challenger mk1 for big guns and french celtics & HOT 2 helicopters to cover them. Chaps & Hawks kept their zone clear and those Maverick Equipped A-4s for taking out any Pact heavies. Along with I think Bacons to snipe any AA positions, just really effective once it got rolling. S-tanks and Swedish kustjägare kept me busy in the middle until the death ball got going on the right side, been awhile since I've seen a proper tank ball like that. Made me miss having those sweet sweet 1000kg bombers as Aussies.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
This is my current Soviet deck, with a preponderance of AA and AGM missiles to counter NATOs planes & heavy tanks. Otherwise a good mix of strong & cheap stuff. I'm currently experimenting with naval Biryusas and river boats deployed around islands to counter NATO ASM planes. jvAhHOKBYEUDPYYosxQRZig0NFBTq8yZtyi6KkAzMZkKlJ0nLiUVJwkzQ9JUECpBNOYm/TfoUkvhXksOJqROEBhLScQ= 
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 21:26
|
|
|
General Battuta posted:Post good decks for Pact, I have no idea what the meta's like in Red Dragon but I want to make HATO angry. Since nobody else has posted a deck, I'll post a probably bad deck for Redfor so we can learn from actual good players telling me that I've made bad decisions. jvAdoaKqncJWhwno52FLCCeWDE9TsKxCxJaQ7E1F2iVpBEgGgVIElei67UpAKT/KjF0S+Yj4R65cEvpxQ3gcYS2W9NDGhk7I Basically the idea is that since the buy-in for soviet infantry is so bloody high, I'm gonna use cheap armor and HE throwing whenever possible to soften things up wherever possible. Every combat infantry squad comes with potent autocannon havers to throw suppression and trade fire, and I've got plenty of T-34-85s to ball them up and lose them horribly trading volleys of HE fire with fancy specops infantry and come out ahead on points and availability and generally let me get the most out of my spets running up and dumping a volley of HE into enemy infantry's faces since I've got vehicles to peel off enemy IFVs. I'm not sure about the VDV but they seem like a good way to put up an anti-tank strongpoint. Dear god is it not nearly as easy to make a good looking USSR deck as it was in ALB. I can't think of a redfor deck without noticeable capability gaps, and their specializations seem to somehow suck even harder than blufor's ones. FFS, I waited half a day before posting that and I got beaten. I do think I like the idea of just not taking manpads and atgms so I can get some more precious precious infantry. xthetenth fucked around with this message at 21:41 on Apr 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 21:31
|
|
|
Well, Gornostrelki are ATGM infantry in addition to line infantry along with mad bitching helicopter rockets, so that's practically three roles covered in one. Whereas the strange placement of the Buratino in the vehicle section basically gives Soviets a free support slot for more vehicle AA, which are much better than infantry Manpads. I'm sure Soviets are the best general-purpose deck aside from their poor initial map presence due to a lack of cost-effective helicopter AA, which is easily solved with some Red Dragon or Eastern Block players on the team.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
I hate the fact that BTRs are 15 points now. It's a big part of why I won't play Soviets for the time being. You can get around it but I don't like rethinking how I do my openings. Is there a particular reason there is no Igla Hind?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
Would you all say the 2A72 needs a nerfing then? Or is it overall not a huge issue? I mean best case scenario, the others get buffed to have a scaling-level of performance with the COMVAT and 40mm being best dps, then scaling down the line. And god drat, the Rarden is actually GOOD? Steel Beasts experience has taught me thats about as inauthentic as possible! :P quote:Is there a particular reason there is no Igla Hind? Because why use Iglas when you'll get something a lil' big bigger 
Dandywalken fucked around with this message at 22:06 on Apr 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 22:02
|
|
|
BTRs are great fun. After dropping off their troops, you can do great things with their high speed and crappy autocannons that you probably wouldn't dare attempt with other units. Persoanlly I'd rather pay 15pts per transport and get a bunch of raiding squads than a load of useless machine gun APCs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
Mukip posted:BTRs are great fun. After dropping off their troops, you can do great things with their high speed and crappy autocannons that you probably wouldn't dare attempt with other units. Persoanlly I'd rather pay 15pts per transport and get a bunch of raiding squads than a load of useless machine gun APCs. Hello, Afghanistan bronegruppa tactics!
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 22:10
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Is there a particular reason there is no Igla Hind? I brought up this idea in the Soviet units thread in January, knowing the value of AA helos in a Conquest environment. I mentioned back in the old thread how the Russians were getting a new helo type, which at first i heard was the Mi-34, which is basically a Russian Gazelle (aka give it 4 Iglas and it's perfect), and got super excited. BTR also posted a bunch of examples of Mi-8/17/24 with R-60 and Igla mounts but nobody really said much, instead so focused on poo poo like T-80UM2 which had almost no hope of being a thing. Instead, we get another 150p Akula and fast forward to the open beta where this lack of capability gets a ton of attention. Unfortunately I have a handful more examples like that across a bunch of nations (like the Germans arguing to dump the rockets on the PAH-2 for more HOTs, even though they have 2 other ATGM-only helos), and it's largely why I stopped giving a poo poo about most of the balance stuff. Not only were the devs not listening, WG pubbies are literally too dumb to understand what they want vs what the decks need to actually give them something new and useful. Although the table stuff we've been doing is great because I love watching people argue with math. Dandywalken posted:Would you all say the 2A72 needs a nerfing then? Or is it overall not a huge issue? I mean best case scenario, the others get buffed to have a scaling-level of performance with the COMVAT and 40mm being best dps, then scaling down the line. The biggest problem I see with Eugen at the moment is far too many things are considered to be "overperforming" instead of being where everything else should be at. The NK T-72M is the biggest example of this recently, but it's been a thing forever. In this case, the other guns should absolutely be boosted to the same standard, because when you think about it, poo poo like the 2A42 on the BMP-2 is loving garbage, outclassed by the BMP-1s low velocity 76mm at basically everything. And that's an absolute joke. The big thing I've found is that when most units feel like they're overperforming, it tends to be balanced in it's own way while also allowing people to use what they want, not what they need. When stuff is garbage, it's not an option. When everything is awesome, everything is an option. Same can be said about a bunch of other unit type examples, but I'll stick to this for now. Mazz fucked around with this message at 22:42 on Apr 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 22:12
|
|
|
Really, every faction should get a decent AA chopper. Alternately, I think the game would be better off without them, because it reduces some matches to who wins the initial helo skirmish. Not that Eugen would ever remove a unit from the game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 22:17
|
|
|
I think the 2A72 is fine, it's very effective but its effectiveness seems to have been taken into account when pricing the units. As for the Igla hind, it's a good question. I'm fine with a lack of AA helos being a fundamental weakness for USSR, but I'd love to see Mi-24Vs with R-60s or Mi-28 with 8xIgla-1M, since we now have redundant Mi-24s due to the Mi-24P and the Mi-28 is outclassed because of the Akula.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 22:17
|
|
|
The USSR gets Ka50/52s with iglas, so they do have AA choppers. Igla Hinds would be a nice addition to the NSWP lineup, though, it would help them with their air assault gimmick.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 22:32
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:Because why use Iglas when you'll get something a lil' big bigger Oh come on, don't cocktease us like that I don't like the USSR having a fundamental weakness like "can't do chopper openings" when most of the coalitions seem to be engineered to lack weaknesses, in particular Commonwealth and Eurocorps. In a world where those exist, everyone should be getting the full spectrum of options, even if some factions get clear standouts over the others (TY-90, M1A2, etc). Mazz posted:Not only were the devs not listening, WG pubbies are literally too dumb to understand what they want vs what the decks need to actually give them something new and useful. See for example Americans begging for poo poo like LOSAT. Mukip posted:Really, every faction should get a decent AA chopper. Alternately, I think the game would be better off without them, because it reduces some matches to who wins the initial helo skirmish. Not that Eugen would ever remove a unit from the game. Other than botes which are in their own world, choppers right now are probably the gamiest part of wargame. I could get behind that. ArchangeI posted:The USSR gets Ka50/52s with iglas, so they do have AA choppers. Igla Hinds would be a nice addition to the NSWP lineup, though, it would help them with their air assault gimmick. The problem is they're not really affordable in the initial air push. Things like TY-90s and OH-58C/Ses which do one job and one job only serve nicely to cover your troops while they hedgehog up in a town at the very start. e: also NSWP has Sokols and has no need for better AA choppers. It's USSR and Scandinavia that need them. Mortabis fucked around with this message at 22:42 on Apr 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
ArchangeI posted:The USSR gets Ka50/52s with iglas, so they do have AA choppers. Igla Hinds would be a nice addition to the NSWP lineup, though, it would help them with their air assault gimmick. The Akulas are extremely expensive because they provide really good ATGMs or SEAD+Recon capability and aren't a really viable option to fight other anti-helo helos. I also agree on the sentiment that everyone should have AA choppers or no one should have them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 22:40
|
|
|
After killing his lone wolf Sovremenniy:
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 23:02
|
|
|
That guy was literally Hitler. "You had EXPLICIT ORDERS to defend Berlin!". Just look at the minimap.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 23:08
|
|
|
I love all these numbers being posted but I think people are jumping to conclusions too quickly. accuracy gain from higher base range is important especially when comparing MGs with rifles or HMGs with autocannons. MGs should probably be accuracy-matched to AR range, or maybe even SMG range. and of course suppression/sec is an important stat for infantry combat. quote:I don't like the USSR having a fundamental weakness like "can't do chopper openings" when most of the coalitions seem to be engineered to lack weaknesses, in particular Commonwealth and Eurocorps. In a world where those exist, everyone should be getting the full spectrum of options, even if some factions get clear standouts over the others (TY-90, M1A2, etc). TheDeadlyShoe fucked around with this message at 00:45 on Apr 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 00:36
|
|
|
How come my game crashes with an "access violation" when I try to do a skirmish on the naval map Out of the Blue? If anyone's got a fix or workaround I'd really appreciate it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 00:39
|
|
|
So is RD worth buying at the moment? I got a lot of hours out of both EE and ALB, but some of the balance issues I've read about in this thread make me unsure about picking it up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 01:24
|
|
|
Barent posted:How come my game crashes with an "access violation" when I try to do a skirmish on the naval map Out of the Blue? If anyone's got a fix or workaround I'd really appreciate it. I get this too. GorgeOnMySyphilis posted:So is RD worth buying at the moment? I got a lot of hours out of both EE and ALB, but some of the balance issues I've read about in this thread make me unsure about picking it up. I played a ton of ALB and I think RD is definitely worth picking up. The campaigns are oddly charming if you don't mind fairly dumb AI. We're a lot better at understanding and detecting balance problems now than we were early in ALB, and ALB got a ton of tuning across its lifetime, so assuming Eugen doesn't completely drop the ball I think RD will at least be solid. There's really nothing else like Wargame out there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 01:26
|
|
|
Are there any standout light/rifle infantry at the moment? Comparing Diggers vs Canadian Airborne vs Commadoes vs Royal Marines etc or the different NORK/Chinese infantry is pretty hard. At the moment I just choose based on their transport.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 01:35
|
|
|
They're all bad. Line infantry suck in general. Gornos '90 and Light Riflemen '90 are the best light infantry at the moment.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 01:38
|
|
|
GorgeOnMySyphilis posted:So is RD worth buying at the moment? I got a lot of hours out of both EE and ALB, but some of the balance issues I've read about in this thread make me unsure about picking it up. The games great, better than ALB in my opinion. This is just goons gooning. Wait for a sale if your still unsure.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 01:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 21:26 |
|
|
Mortabis posted:They're all bad. Line infantry suck in general. Gornos '90 and Light Riflemen '90 are the best light infantry at the moment. So its just reserves plus specialists as they way to go at the moment?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 01:41
|
|