|
I can't pick a deck in the ranked 1v1 menu. It just leaves me stuck on default Soviet.
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 02:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 04:02 |
|
|
Jet Age posted:So its just reserves plus specialists as they way to go at the moment? Yes, but you'll probably want some shock infantry to do menial infantry jobs that don't involve catching bullets. Shock infantry are decent and modern shock infantry (with the exception of US Marines '90!) tend to have good AT weapons and/or good transport options. For jobs that involve catching bullets, like garrisoning a town, you're better off with reservists who provide more meat and nearly as much firepower.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 02:59
|
|
|
General Battuta posted:I can't pick a deck in the ranked 1v1 menu. It just leaves me stuck on default Soviet. In the workers paradise nobody has the privilege of choosing unique decks. Marines 90 have to be the most disappointing upgrade in RD.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 03:02
|
|
|
Yeah at the moment i tend to take 1 x line, 1 x shock with a decent AT (Gorno or Highlanders), 1 x Good AA (mistral, Igla-M), 1 x mid tier AA (the west German Stinger-C is a real bargain here), 1 x Commandos for behind lines fuckery but it seems like line rifles don't accomplish very much if they are just holding a town
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 04:01
|
|
|
I lost the Busan campaign because helicopters suddenly ended up in Busan even though I controlled all the sectors around it. Do helicopters work in some special way?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 04:27
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:I lost the Busan campaign because helicopters suddenly ended up in Busan even though I controlled all the sectors around it. Do helicopters work in some special way? That shouldn't happen since there is no naval zone around the Busan pocket. But if there is, you can use it to flank around the ground sector.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 04:31
|
|
|
Jet Age posted: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. As far as light infantry goes, Gornostrelki '90 are the best followed by Light Riflemen and then regular Gornostrelki or NSWP Metys light infantry which are cheap enough that you can use them as your primary infantry. A lot of people are on the whole "rifle infantry are useless" bandwagon because regular line infantry have bad stats in infantry on infantry fights. But that's pretty wrong; with Motostrelki '90 you are bringing a 24 AP ambush weapon with a powerful IFV for cheaps, and with other nations you can bring 20rpm 875m range HEAT RPGs that eat tanks and light vehicles. If I need to deal with infantry, I'll hit it with other fires and then move in my line troops to mop it all up. In addition to all that, line infantry are cheap enough that you can use them to just fill out and occupy large spaces, and effectively deny those spaces to tanks/vehicles in a way that reservists cannot and shock infantry cannot do cost efficiently. So my top picks for line troops are Motostrelki '90 for REDFOR because of the high AP and amazing BTRs, and Diggers '90 and Sochong-Su '85 for BluFor because of the range and cheap fast transports. My infantry loadouts tend to be 3x line infantry choices with 2x support options. OctaMurk fucked around with this message at 04:46 on Apr 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 04:41
|
|
|
OctaMurk posted:As far as light infantry goes, Gornostrelki '90 are the best followed by Light Riflemen and then regular Gornostrelki or NSWP Metys light infantry which are cheap enough that you can use them as your primary infantry. Diggers '90 have the advantage of a really good MG that lets them punch above their weight in infantry fights, and for the ambush with light anti-tank weapon, there are squads which exist for this very purpose that also let you mass them and frontload serious amounts of HE for infantry fights.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 04:50
|
|
|
So in campaign, you fight battles where the enemy likes to blob lots of cheap units and will usually have several options for avenues of attack. You usually don't get recon choppers. So... just put sacrifice infantry units in each avenue as speedbumps and rush reserves to whichever lane they're using to attack?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 04:52
|
|
|
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. I don't think you really get enough 2A72's for it to be an issue. loving 6 BMP-3's a card is atrocious and BMP-T's really aren't the doom bringers they once were. A nerf in ALB might be more appropriate but then they also cost more there. Also in ALB even if you spammed a lot of them they weren't magic, they're still generally mounted on stuff with 3AV. As for the rardens, they're not poo poo tier, like the KPVT, RH 202 and M693 F1, but they're kinda bad compared with Bushmasters and a bit worse than BMP-2's 2A42s The French autocannon could probably be cheaper. It currently adds 10pts to a transport and I'm skeptical it's worth more than 5 TheDeadlyShoe posted:I love all these numbers being posted but I think people are jumping to conclusions too quickly. 2. Last I checked Suppression/sec was mostlyy linear to the HE/s output.... ie comparing one is basically the same as comparing the other. 3. We're not comparing MG's to Rifles. We're comparing MGs to MGs and some of them are loving atrocious. We don' actually know how accuracy scaling works (before anyone suggests 5%/175m know that this is not true), but we do know it applies equally (ie parallel lines) and that it scales less that we first thought. Regardless, bad MGs would have to gain so much extra accuracy from any extra range they have to compare to even mid-range options that it's obviously not the case. 4. Also vehicle weapons in rifle range is a bad idea 90% of the time, they tend not to be alive to use their HMGs/Autocannons anymore. Besides, it's going to favour the bigger guys anyway in a pretty obvious fashion so it doesn't really change much, just means the big guys can dominate even better against little guys. Mukip posted:In the workers paradise nobody has the privilege of choosing unique decks. Marine's 75 already outperform most pact units, some by a good margin. Marine's 90 is actually a pretty decent upgrade since it's one of the few that actually changes the machine gun (rifle changes are cosmetic only), and not just any change but to one of the best in the game providing a small DPS boos of about 0.05HE/s. It's not an amazing boost because the Colt LMG is already pretty solid. e: South Korean marines, Haebyung, now that's an upgrade. Shanakin fucked around with this message at 05:00 on Apr 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 04:53
|
|
|
Shanakin posted:
Wait what? The 1AV change only applies to ground?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 05:04
|
|
|
Did they change how 1 armor worked on helicopters in RD? In ALB I hated Hinds because those fuckers were impossible to kill with anything other than missiles.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 05:06
|
|
|
Tulip posted:Wait what? The 1AV change only applies to ground? Only applies to "balle" ammo types or something. Basically only infantry rifles, machine-guns and vehicle HMGs. It will mitigate small arms damage to the tune of a 0.4x multiplier. edit: actually 1AV applies a 0.1x multiplier to small arms. 2AV applies a 0.4x multiplier to HE. Shanakin fucked around with this message at 05:16 on Apr 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 05:13
|
|
|
Shanakin posted:Only applies to "balle" ammo types or something. Basically only infantry rifles, machine-guns and vehicle HMGs. It will mitigate small arms damage to the tune of a 0.4x multiplier. I'm referring to a change where 1AV no longer takes 4x damage from AP, though i only just now realize that this only affects autocannons w/r/t helicopters. e: This thread's avatar theme is spreading...
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 06:20
|
|
|
Don't autocannons only use HE rounds against helicopters?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 06:35
|
|
|
Tulip posted:e: This thread's avatar theme is spreading... Heh. RIP Jeb.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 06:49
|
|
|
Agean90 posted:The games great, better than ALB in my opinion. This is just goons gooning. Wait for a sale if your still unsure. So to anyone wondering, if you like Wargame it's worth it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 07:43
|
|
|
Sending a rookie Su-27K against a lone recon helicopter has the best results. 7 gun runs in, the helicopter had lost one bit of health, and the Su-27K had to evac because of fuel.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 07:58
|
|
|
Late ALB was pretty great though. I think the only legitimate complaints were that digging infantry out of towns and attacking into a helicopter defense were too hard. And that flamethrowers dominated forests to the point that you had to bring flamethrowers or go home. Other than that it was tuned pretty well by the end of its life.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 07:59
|
|
|
Dragon vs Bear sure is hard. I thought I had a good start ignoring Vladivostok first to catch 2 Soviet air squadron on the ground along with 4 other battlegroups that retreated there. Then IL-102s showed up and apparently 5 Chinese fighters aren't enough to bring one down in one pass (and forget chasing it with the massive turn radius on those fighters). Fun time fighting T72A and T80 with T-55 and lovely ATGM while 12 MALKA and Pion rain 203mm shells on you while needing to achieve a 2:1 KD ratio. Ok, the difficulty might have something to do with losing my ground attack squadrons because I was too lazy to move them back to Chinese boarder when the Spetznas showed up on my undefended flank.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 10:55
|
|
|
pedro0930 posted:Dragon vs Bear sure is hard. I thought I had a good start ignoring Vladivostok first to catch 2 Soviet air squadron on the ground along with 4 other battlegroups that retreated there. Then IL-102s showed up and apparently 5 Chinese fighters aren't enough to bring one down in one pass (and forget chasing it with the massive turn radius on those fighters). Fun time fighting T72A and T80 with T-55 and lovely ATGM while 12 MALKA and Pion rain 203mm shells on you while needing to achieve a 2:1 KD ratio. Taking Vladivostok early-ish is kind of crucial here, I think. It gets you access to more battlegroups via North Korean forces that you can land at the docks, including a proper air defence company with Pon-Gae 2s which can easily shoot down all those Soviet planes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 11:33
|
|
|
lol. Rarden is so bad even it's good version is outperformed by a ZPTU-2. Also the ZPT-90 on the chinese WZ-551 is a bit better than the 2A42 on BMP-2s Shanakin fucked around with this message at 12:02 on Apr 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 11:48
|
|
|
I think you have to both be Australian and familiar with Deng Xiaoping to get the thread title.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 11:50
|
|
|
Shanakin posted:lol. Rarden is so bad even it's good version is outperformed by a ZPTU-2.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 12:21
|
|
|
Elukka posted:This isn't how it ends up working in game, though. ZPTU is pretty much useless while the RARDEN is a perfectly serviceable autocannon. You can't ignore range and AP, they're a big deal in a gun whose main job is killing light vehicles. Yeah, that's true. It's better at killing infantry at their respective long ranges.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 12:24
|
|
|
The ZPTU-2 doesn't use explosive ammo though, so the Rarden should still do better against infantry in pretty much all situations.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 12:55
|
|
|
quote:1. 1AV on helicopters does absolutely no damage mitigation to missiles, or autocannons (this includes AAA by the way), it only reduces damage from small arms fire. (1AV on planes is literally worthless but they charge you extra for it). MGs are compared directly to rifles when totaling HE/s for infantry units. The currently posted values are illusory if they are not range normalized, being as there is no time the unit will ever be dealing the listed DPS. I went and got one in-game set of datapoints, using Fire Pos: (EDIT: replaced long chart with link) https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/166QMDUrYfbRKj2miUUErjHtGdLFKFu3afVcU_0QL12s/pubhtml In this case the MG3 is doing double the DPS at 450m (SMG max) than it is a 975m (MG3 max). assuming this data is valid for Jagers and Jagers are not already acc-normalized, it results in a 30% increase in total HE/S at the battle rifle's max range of ~600m. TheDeadlyShoe fucked around with this message at 13:05 on Apr 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 12:59
|
|
|
Dezztroy posted:The ZPTU-2 doesn't use explosive ammo though, so the Rarden should still do better against infantry in pretty much all situations.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 13:22
|
|
|
You guys seem to be talking past each other a bit, your both making reasonable points but not really addressing each other. For instance, I don't think Shan is discounting the MG value in total output, he just highlighted the difference in MG outputs. And he's right, in your own test tables the 175m range gap is only accounting for a 7-8% increase in accuracy, whereas the pure output of the high end guns (MG3/Mini) dictates something like a 25% improvement to make up the gap of their specific difference. After the merge they both scale equally until 100%. AKA even with a higher starting range, the m60, etc are still notably inferior to the other MGs. The +rifle/total output is completely separate from this, at least specifically referring to LMG comparisons. On a side note I completely agree that range is very important in AC comparisons, because besides the rest, AP damage scales with range and targets tend to be armored, which is an absolutely huge factor in effectiveness comparisons. Mazz fucked around with this message at 14:10 on Apr 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 14:04
|
|
|
@Mazz You're right about MG:MG comparisons, but my whole point to start with has been to make sure everyone knows to take the infantry performance numbers with a grain of salt as they are incomplete. People can and have been making conclusions about squad performance. I probably didn't state that clearly though, so, apologies. Naturally none of this would be a problem if the armory numbers meant anything. (Seriously, wtf.) Sidenote I didn't respond re: Suppression because I don't know anything about suppression outside what the Armory says. I'd be shocked if suppression scaled directly with he/s though because that runs counter to what i thought the announced design was (namely Battle Rifles vs ARs etc.) and intuitive sense (MG suppression). Also it blows my mind that armor doesnt work for helos or planes but the 'Massed HP Soak' method of dealing with AA helos still works pretty well. They just don't have the ammo reserves. TheDeadlyShoe fucked around with this message at 14:28 on Apr 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 14:21
|
|
|
Yeah I see what you mean. To be honest I'd rather put out values that do everything at the same range but we just don't currently have a nice function to model it. However as mazz states, the extra accuracy they will get doesn't really make up for their lower base accuracy, and worse still, it causes their DPS to cap sooner. Ultimately though once everything is in range, their rate of change will be the same between all weapons and thus parallel lines. The good ones will still have a major advantage.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 14:29
|
|
|
Elukka posted:It has both AP and HE/incendiary ammo: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KPV_heavy_machine_gun#Ammunition As is standard for HMGs. I mean ingame though, it doesn't have the AoE stat. Blufor marine deck, what's the go to for infantry? I'm using US Marine '90s and Navy Seals, which seems to be working out alright. Dezztroy fucked around with this message at 14:41 on Apr 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 14:39
|
|
|
Dezztroy posted:As is standard for HMGs. I mean ingame though, it doesn't have the AoE stat. US Marine 90's are really good and the grenade launcher transports are pretty great, if a bit slow. Also literally all HE weapons have a splash damage value regardless of the AoE stat. Even rifles are HE weapons. I don't know how that actually calculates though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 14:46
|
|
|
Consider putting in light infantry, SMAW, and assault engineers. Light infantry for area denial. Assault engineers to augment your SEALs in forest. SMAW is just a great unit now it can attack infantry.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 14:48
|
|
|
So after playing a bit of the Campaign, and failing miserably - I watched some Youtube videos, and have gotten a much better idea of the how and why of this game. There's still too much happening if I play a 1vs1 skirmish against the computer. I'm getting absolutely overwhelmed with opposing units.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 15:12
|
|
|
Single player tends to have high starting points and too much ground to cover. Team games are more focused and tend to have fewer units per player. You could come online and play without getting overwhelmed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 15:23
|
|
|
Also, without a bit of a milsperg background trying to decipher unit names can be a pain, hell in RD I still can't recognize half of the Asian units without hitting i. Playing online with goons is going to be the best starting point, especially now since so many people are new to the game as it was just released. There is very few goons here who will give a poo poo that your new or make mistakes, especially if your vocal about when and where you need help and/or ask questions. Tl;dr get online and play with goons. On that note, I'll try to get over my RD annoyances and get back on mumble for some games.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 15:32
|
|
|
If you jump on the CTS mumble and ask around there's normally, people playing, or at least willing to offer advice. We're mostly a pretty chill group who don't mind answering questions and helping out. Just be sure to actually say something if you need help or ask questions if you're unsure.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 15:32
|
|
|
pedro0930 posted:Consider putting in light infantry, SMAW, and assault engineers. Tried out the SMAW and yeah, they seem pretty great. While on the subject of decks, anyone see any glaring issues with this Red Dragon deck? tPClzkKjlEtoBI1v+hwg1UVRbnCD4YL7gvRac5Co5yFQT6WWMDIv0aKNFEsXUIipR1BagpMwoiKtGGBLYkREAiASqhvyogh4OWlv
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 15:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 04:02 |
|
|
Shanakin posted:If you jump on the CTS mumble and ask around there's normally, people playing, or at least willing to offer advice. We're mostly a pretty chill group who don't mind answering questions and helping out. Just be sure to actually say something if you need help or ask questions if you're unsure. Probably even more chill and forgiving of new people since I stopped playing!
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 15:45
|
|
