Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Hubis
May 18, 2003

Boy, I wish we had one of those doomsday machines...
Just had an amazing game against some PLF guys.I was pretty sure it was over after we (I) got rolled by a 2-man Chinese Helo push followed by bombing runs, but good support from Info, BrotherPedro, and Malamars managed to shore it up enough and they kept throwing good points after bad trying to hold it letting us reverse the momentum.

Also, M36 OP. :swoon:

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

RoboCriminal
Sep 21, 2007
Sup

Magni posted:

Overall, those are most of your decent units and you should probably just go ahead and experiment what you like best; my Wargame experience is that your playstyle can wildly change what kind of units work best for you. Hell, back in ALB I genuinely did better with crazy Cat C DDR shenanigans than playing the stereotypical Cat A USSR tryhard deck. :v:

Yeah I hear you on the differences. In ALB I tended to play a lot of redfor and would just exploit the fact that NATO players tended to rely too heavily on their air units by building towards a heavy armor push with a pretty formidable air defense network supporting it. A lot of games would end with me just rolling over their ground while they did stupid poo poo like start with a fighter against my non-existent air force.

In RD on the other hand I am finding that tanks are just way more vulnerable to inf/vehicles/arty then they were before, I can't quite put my finger on the exact change besides the higher availability of ATGMs but its like everything on the field is equipped to melt my armor. Kinda still getting used to it.

Dandywalken
Feb 11, 2014

Arglebargle III posted:

Google says that the Chinese voices are fan-sourced, which is really surprising. I'm not a native speaker but the Chinese voices sound good. Right stress patterns for excited/worried Mandarin speakers and a strong but understandable northern accent. The north tends to be more involved in the public sector, including military, and northern men have a sort of rough-and-tumble macho stereotype attached to them. So the stereotypical PLA man would have a northern accent.

What they don't have is some loving peasant coming on the radio speaking Sichuan dialect or Hunan dialect and jabbering incomprehensibly until everyone else can shout him down, which I hear happens a lot. A good friend of mine's dad was in the PLA and he said everyone in the PLA eventually learned Sichuan dialect because the Sichuanese soldiers just never bothered to speak Mandarin.

Chinese is fan-sourced, as is Korean :)

Fan-sourcing voices loving owns. We (CHECK ME OUT, IM SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF A COMPANY I DONT WORK FOR!) wanted to do the same for pretty much every nation but it hasnt been a gigantic priority atm. So far, Canada (and I think ANZAC) are the only two that are really planned. All we need are .wav's of proper quality though.

That was one of the purposes for "Hey Military guys over X-age, get in touch with us!" topics that appeared on the forums for a bit. They had a preference for 25+ years of age so they could get a reasonably NCO-ish sound from em rather than a bunch of Privates.

Dandywalken fucked around with this message at 04:21 on May 15, 2014

Arglebargle III
Feb 21, 2006

Maps are larger, tanks are still slow. I imagine that has a lot to do with the intangible feeling that tanks are weaker.

FlyingCowOfDoom
Aug 1, 2003

let the beat drop
This may have already been said, I know they had RUSE, but I really feel that a WW2 era game has to be in the pipe somewhere. This engine feels like it would fit perfectly especially with what they have learned making titles since.

SkySteak
Sep 9, 2010
Highway to the dangerzone.



Goddamn French drivers passing on the right. :argh:

Azran
Sep 3, 2012

And what should one do to be remembered?

FlyingCowOfDoom posted:

This may have already been said, I know they had RUSE, but I really feel that a WW2 era game has to be in the pipe somewhere. This engine feels like it would fit perfectly especially with what they have learned making titles since.

I feel like the main problem will be towed guns, really. Unless you just have 8 guys pushing heavy AA guns. :v:

Arglebargle III
Feb 21, 2006

I told you guys this game needs horses.

pedro0930
Oct 15, 2012

Hubis posted:

Just had an amazing game against some PLF guys.I was pretty sure it was over after we (I) got rolled by a 2-man Chinese Helo push followed by bombing runs, but good support from Info, BrotherPedro, and Malamars managed to shore it up enough and they kept throwing good points after bad trying to hold it letting us reverse the momentum.

Also, M36 OP. :swoon:

Yeah, sorry that I had to leave mid game, but we already have a 2-3 points lead at that point. Good to know we won.

Arglebargle III posted:

繁体字! 政委同志,抓获这个帝国主义者走狗!

Do they really say that by the way?

Yeah, I had no idea what they are talking about and had to look it up. Apparently it's a World of Tanks meme.

Arglebargle III
Feb 21, 2006

Hubis posted:

Just had an amazing game against some PLF guys.I was pretty sure it was over after we (I) got rolled by a 2-man Chinese Helo push followed by bombing runs, but good support from Info, BrotherPedro, and Malamars managed to shore it up enough and they kept throwing good points after bad trying to hold it letting us reverse the momentum.

Also, M36 OP. :swoon:

:justpost:

Srsly post the replay.

Arglebargle III fucked around with this message at 11:49 on May 15, 2014

Chiwie
Oct 21, 2010

DROP YOUR COAT AND GRAB YOUR TOES, I'LL SHOW YOU WHERE THE WILD GOOSE GOES!!!!

Stevefin posted:

Not really, we just got the Fighting Phantom II (F-4E Phantom II) which for high end air superiority fighter, falls rather short, though I have noticed that it does appear to be deceptively tough some how

Its really only plus side its air detention skills are exceptional and it can stay on the field an extra 5 seconds

It's strange that they didn't get an ASF F/A-18. They where brought to replace the mirages in that role.

On that note the F-4s where pretty much brought as a stop gap for the F-111s, so I have no idea why they have an air to air loadout.

That said, mild quibbles, ANZAC air is the funnest air to use.

Mazz
Dec 12, 2012

Orion, this is Sperglord Actual.
Come on home.
I honestly think Eugens biggest issue with adding more plane variants is they refuse to use the same names. Like there is no other good reason some nations don't have 4-6 F-16 loadouts.

They could just go F-16C [ASF] or [AGM] but nope gotta have specific designations for every plane.

Mazz fucked around with this message at 14:05 on May 15, 2014

pedro0930
Oct 15, 2012
And we got another patch:

quote:

GENERIC wrote:- Number of cards' standardization for vehicles : 2 cards is the default value, while prototypes are usually available in a single card but some units still exception , units come in 3 cards when the deck restrictions demands it.
- Supply helicopters optics reduced from poor to bad.



CAMPAIGN wrote:- reducing the ratio of losses for planes and command unit when using the Auto-Resolve function.
- airplanes and helicopters can no longer be destroyed in auto-resolved battle if the opponent has no unit capable of hitting them
- Climb Mount Narodnaia: new icon for the MLRS Coy. In the 1st Gds Tank Division.



LOCA wrote:- fixing the display of bombs weight and amphibious stat in Polish language
- Soviet Igla-1M renamed Igla-N.
- E-German KPz T-55 renamed SpPz T-55.



RECON wrote:- Soviet PT-71 classified as prototype.
- Soviet PT-85's gun brought back to normal stats (it wrongly used the new Zhalo's one).



INFANTRY wrote:- Soviet Motostrelki '90 base availability increased from 16 to 20.

- Canadian Airborne '85 base availability increased from 8 to 10.
- ANZAC Commandos '90 base availability increased from 8 to 10.



TANK wrote:- N-Korean T-55 base availability fixed from 8 to 12

- Canadian Leopard C1 & C2 side armor values (4 & 3 respectively) swapped, the C2 being now more armored.



SUPPORT wrote:- Soviet Tor's road speed decreased from 150 to 110 km/h, as other tracked vehicles.



VEHICLE wrote:- American/British AVRE and M728CEV minimal range increased to 350m which prevents them from using their main gun in forest fight.


Maybe a prelude for bigger changes to come?

pedro0930 fucked around with this message at 14:38 on May 15, 2014

Nickiepoo
Jun 24, 2013
I only get one card of Scorpion 90s now &*$&%$%£*^

Stevefin
Sep 30, 2013

Nickiepoo posted:

I only get one card of Scorpion 90s now &*$&%$%£*^

Really? :stonk: They where the only real offensive spam tonk ANZAC that did not run out of fuel simply moving out of the spawn location

Mazz
Dec 12, 2012

Orion, this is Sperglord Actual.
Come on home.
Wow it took them a long time to fix the Tor.

Shanakin
Mar 26, 2010

The whole point of stats are lost if you keep it a secret. Why Didn't you tell the world eh?

Mazz posted:

Wow it took them a long time to fix the Tor.

Yeah. Although there goes one of the few cost-effective units USSR had. Bugger.

Hubis
May 18, 2003

Boy, I wish we had one of those doomsday machines...

Mazz posted:

Wow it took them a long time to fix the Tor.

So long it made me think it was intentional, given that they HAD to have been aware of it.

Nickiepoo
Jun 24, 2013

Stevefin posted:

Really? :stonk: They where the only real offensive spam tonk ANZAC that did not run out of fuel simply moving out of the spawn location

They were the one tank I really used, even as full Commonwealth and one of my favourite units in general, bah. BAH. First the Kahu now this!

Shanakin
Mar 26, 2010

The whole point of stats are lost if you keep it a secret. Why Didn't you tell the world eh?
It's too bad they seemed to have buggered the 20 baseline availability for Motos'90; it would be an interesting starting point.

Tulip
Jun 3, 2008

yeah thats pretty good


It's interesting that the Chinese voices have a unique world of tanks line, I remember a Swedish player coming into the thread all excited that bacons said ‘two types artillerymen and targets'which was pretty :shobon:

I didn't really pay attention to the Japanese voices, but I also have met literally 0 jsdf vets so I have no idea if there is anything particular about their accents(I've met more hibakusha than that).

Mazz posted:

Wow it took them a long time to fix the Tor.

That was my first thought too.

OctaMurk
Jun 21, 2013
This patch was actually a huge nerf to USSR, in that I can now only have one card of BRDM-3s :saddowns:

Shanakin
Mar 26, 2010

The whole point of stats are lost if you keep it a secret. Why Didn't you tell the world eh?

OctaMurk posted:

This patch was actually a huge nerf to USSR, in that I can now only have one card of BRDM-3s :saddowns:

RIP.

Infidelicious
Apr 9, 2013

One is all you need brah.

pedro0930
Oct 15, 2012
They should give nations more useful combat recon. My Soviet moto deck just lost two of its most important cards that I can't find a satisfactory unit to replace with.

Cimber
Feb 3, 2014

pedro0930 posted:

They should give nations more useful combat recon. My Soviet moto deck just lost two of its most important cards that I can't find a satisfactory unit to replace with.

Don't other WP nations also have recon, or are you using an only soviet deck?

Dandywalken
Feb 11, 2014

Which Chinese line is the WoT meme? And any way for an English translation? I figure some people may get a kick out of learning that :P

Magni
Apr 29, 2009
Well, there goes my second card of PZG-95s, ZTZ-85-IIIs and ZW-550s and the optional second card of PTZ-59s. On the other hand, two cards of PTZ-89 is nice.

West Germany, UK and US can now field hilarious amounts of heavy tanks, though. UK and US especially, you cna build an US deck with 24 M1A1 and up.

Cimber
Feb 3, 2014

Magni posted:

Well, there goes my second card of PZG-95s, ZTZ-85-IIIs and ZW-550s and the optional second card of PTZ-59s. On the other hand, two cards of PTZ-89 is nice.

West Germany, UK and US can now field hilarious amounts of heavy tanks, though. UK and US especially, you cna build an US deck with 24 M1A1 and up.

Ugh, really? Expect hoards of idiots Abrams spamming in multiplayer game, cuz the abrams is the best!

Mortabis
Jul 8, 2010

I am stupid
You could already get more Abrams than you could ever reasonably want.

Hubis
May 18, 2003

Boy, I wish we had one of those doomsday machines...

Mortabis posted:

You could already get more Abrams than you could ever reasonably want.

:eugen:

OctaMurk
Jun 21, 2013
Gonna be That Guy but more Abrams is a definite buff and I have actually run out of 5 cards of Abrams in games before, and M1A1HA/HC are extremely good cards considering that the only real AT threat you face are AGM planes, which you can fend off with AA/ASFs and good use of cover. The Abrams horde presenting a half dozen or more tanks with 20+ AV backed up by a dozen with 17AV is actually pretty hard to deal with.

Cimber
Feb 3, 2014

Mortabis posted:

You could already get more Abrams than you could ever reasonably want.

MORE. ABRAMS. BEST. STRATEGY

Mr Luxury Yacht
Apr 16, 2012


Aw man, the ZTZ-85 III needed those two cards. It's a drat good tank, but 5 M1A1 equivalents just don't cut it when the US can get like 24.

Hubis
May 18, 2003

Boy, I wish we had one of those doomsday machines...

OctaMurk posted:

Gonna be That Guy but more Abrams is a definite buff and I have actually run out of 5 cards of Abrams in games before, and M1A1HA/HC are extremely good cards considering that the only real AT threat you face are AGM planes, which you can fend off with AA/ASFs and good use of cover. The Abrams horde presenting a half dozen or more tanks with 20+ AV backed up by a dozen with 17AV is actually pretty hard to deal with.

Sure, but 3000 points of anything is hard to deal with if your enemy chooses not to use any effective counters? :confused:

RoyalScion
May 16, 2009
Should have buffed availability on Soviet tanks instead, so I could bring 20 T80Us instead of 6. :ussr:

OctaMurk
Jun 21, 2013

Hubis posted:

Sure, but 3000 points of anything is hard to deal with if your enemy chooses not to use any effective counters? :confused:

As I said, Pact AT is a lot less threatening than NATO AT, so them choosing to use effective counters, does not really matter so much. 3000 points of Abrams is a hell of a lot more threatening than 3000 points of any REDFOR tanks simply because REDFOR tools to deal with that kind of armor are not as plentiful or effective. I usually use a 2:1 ratio of IPs to HAs, and having that second card of HAs really does help out; it is really not as farfetched as you think to call out 5 or 6 155 point tanks in a game.

OctaMurk fucked around with this message at 22:21 on May 15, 2014

Davin Valkri
Apr 8, 2011

Maybe you're weighing the moral pros and cons but let me assure you that OH MY GOD
SHOOT ME IN THE GODDAMNED FACE
WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR?!
I'd catch all the cluster bombs in PACT if I did that :(

Infidelicious
Apr 9, 2013

What are these "cluster" bombs you speak of?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Agean90
Jun 28, 2008


Davin Valkri posted:

I'd catch all the cluster bombs in PACT if I did that :(

If you use abrams swarms, the bombs dont do anything, and the bombers get shot down by the dozen avengers you no doubt have laying around, and then you just move up anyway since it they only took of like 2 hp.

  • Locked thread