|
OctaMurk posted:4chan Red Dragon has some awful and annoying people in it with terrible opinions, who all love destruction. That T-72A looks fine though; also T-72B1s getting 50/40 acc, T-72Bs being 95 pts, autocannons becoming boss weapons etc etc... rebalance looks pretty awesome to me. So looks like a DDR Mi-24VM or Mi-35M, as those had the avionics upgrades to carry both Iglas and Atakas/Shturms. It could even theoretically be a Vikhr -- allegedly there were Mi-35M's that modified to carry them (probably using parts from the Mi-17-1V). -e- Just realized what was bugging me. That ROF on the 30mm for the DDR Hind .... I hope that's just the ROF number in the armory lying. Leif. fucked around with this message at 06:13 on Jul 5, 2014 |
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 06:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 04:13 |
|
|
OctaMurk posted:4chan Red Dragon has some awful and annoying people in it with terrible opinions, who all love destruction. That T-72A looks fine though; also T-72B1s getting 50/40 acc, T-72Bs being 95 pts, autocannons becoming boss weapons etc etc... rebalance looks pretty awesome to me. That Mi-24V seems hilarious expensive given its poo poo load-out configuration, even if it does come with extra missiles.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 07:01
|
|
|
True, but wasn't the only Soviet AA-capable chopper thus far the 150 point Akula, which only had half as many Iglas? Also, all I want is for Komandosi to have Iglas-N is that so much to ask
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 07:46
|
|
|
Sure, but the Akula's is very effective at other things. It was a poo poo AA helicopter but good anti-tank. Meanwhile, This will be an overpriced specialist unit. How many people actually use HAPs and they have much better rockets, massively better gun and stealth. Oh and better missiles. Meanwhile at least the DDR version will be able to do something worthwhile after the start of the match and wont be outranged by other AA helicopters most of the time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 13:12
|
|
|
Shanakin posted:Sure, but the Akula's is very effective at other things. It was a poo poo AA helicopter but good anti-tank. Meanwhile, This will be an overpriced specialist unit. How many people actually use HAPs and they have much better rockets, massively better gun and stealth. Oh and better missiles. Having any helicopter with AA in that price band will help USSR a good bit, though Sokols will still be more cost-effective.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 13:31
|
|
|
I use HAPs. They're a great opener unit, just look at their loadout. They can shoot down most AA helicopters in a straight fight and then stun/panic ground units on roads with their rocket pods. A single Tigre HAP can clean up a poorly defended early game helicopter move by itself, and that's not an exaggeration. On more than one occasion I've shot down AA choppers, killed landing infantry with rockets, and then moved in close to mop up whatever's left with the autocannon. Requires your opponent to not bring enough AA but hey, that applies to any attack chopper. The Gazelle Celtic price bump is a big contributor to this. I can't get 2 Celtics for the price of one HAP, and the HAP has better stealth, speed, armor and HP, and it can play a significant role even after it exhausts its Mistrals. I rarely take Celtics in the opening any more. I tend to go with a HAP and some Crotales/VBL Mistrals. They also have bigger rocket pods than a HAD. I admit in the late game I'll usually reach for the HAD, but the HAP is definitely not a bad unit. And people would totally use Sokols if Poland hadn't been balanced out of existence. Arglebargle III fucked around with this message at 14:00 on Jul 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 13:48
|
|
|
The biggest difference you guys are overlooking is it carries 8 Iglas against helos it will 1 and 2 shot while having 10 HP and moving 330. It also has 64 rockets and the gun that can fire while moving. Yes it's still deficient against Mistrals but holy poo poo is that an improvement for USSRs opening game over 150p Akulas. That's a pretty good addition to USSR, a pretty solid AA helo, and coincidentally exactly what I asked for in the thread and their forums several months ago. They just fixed one of USSRs only problems with that change, and with those 29S changes maybe the only one left. Yeah they still play expensive but now they can build to do almost anything competitively. Mazz fucked around with this message at 14:25 on Jul 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 14:02
|
|
|
Yeah I'm also not getting the hate. No one ever took Mi-24V, now they have 8 AA missiles. There is no Bluefor chopper that can carry 8 AA missiles. They're not Mistrals but they're also not bad, and there's 8 of them. 8 AA missiles. Armored, 300 kph, 8 Iglas, I'm not seeing the problem. The HAP is the only thing (except the TY-90 of course) that will kill it in a straight fight, it will have equal odds against a more expensive PAH-2 Tiger, and it will kill every other NATO AA chopper without breaking a sweat. And it will keep shooting in those critical awkward seconds when everyone runs out of helicopter missiles.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 14:13
|
|
|
Mazz posted:The biggest difference you guys are overlooking is it carries 8 Iglas against helos it will 1 and 2 shot while having 10 HP and moving 330. It also has 64 rockets and the gun that can fire while moving. Yes it's still deficient against Mistrals but holy poo poo is that an improvement for USSRs opening game over 150p Akulas. That's a pretty good addition to USSR, a pretty solid AA helo, and coincidentally exactly what I asked for in the thread and their forums several months ago. Also, the East Germans might be a really good helirush country if they get an FJB-40 '90 unit with a decent manpad because the Brits get a ton of milage out of SAS. Everything else about british helirushes are pretty underwhelming, but SAS in sneb copters can pretty much win rushes alone.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 14:17
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:More accuracy, stab, and 8 RPM autoloader? I'm almost certain the immunity to morale degradation is going to be a huge thing, since its (still) way overmodelled in RD. Time will tell though. They're making the meat and potatoes tanks more expensive. Sure, also better, but that's not the real problem. The real problem is they aren't cheap.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 14:24
|
|
|
Elukka posted:But the problem with mediums is that they're too expensive to lose lightly and everything on the field will kill them in a second. Turning lower tier mediums into higher tier mediums isn't going to fix anything, they're just as much of questionable usefulness as anything else that isn't really cheap or really expensive and top tier. Yeah, I don't like what happened to the T-72M1s in Red Dragon. They got a lot better at gunning, but they also got significantly more expensive, and subsequently lost a lot of their value(though their armor is less significant in a world of mass milan 2s). I don't think Eugen understands that medium tanks weren't great in ALB, and the game became much much less friendly to them in RD between the map design, new superheavies, and new super-ATGMs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 14:42
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:More accuracy, stab, and 8 RPM autoloader? I'm almost certain the immunity to morale degradation is going to be a huge thing, since its (still) way overmodelled in RD. Time will tell though. Unless it got more armor too, it won't change the fact that for the cost of 2 or 3 T-72As I can buy a tank that will kill infinite T-72As. It also doesn't change the fact that I can buy a TOW 2 or a Milan F2 for 30 points and 1 or 2 shot a 60 point T-72A. On the offensive side, making a T-72A's accuracy better only makes it better at killing other medium tanks... which die to everything else in the game anyway. Milan 2 and TOW 2 jeeps are surprisingly amazing in the opener. It doesn't matter that you only have 4 shots when you can kill 120 points of tank with 50 points of jeep. Arglebargle III fucked around with this message at 14:54 on Jul 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 14:51
|
|
|
Elukka posted:But the problem with mediums is that they're too expensive to lose lightly and everything on the field will kill them in a second. Turning lower tier mediums into higher tier mediums isn't going to fix anything, they're just as much of questionable usefulness as anything else that isn't really cheap or really expensive and top tier. IMO the real problem with medium tanks is not that they are way too expensive, it's that they don't have defined roles and they are overall just "cheaper worse less effective MBTs". The current Kpz T-72M1s is an example of a good tank; it has a clearly defined role in that it has high AP for its cost; the Brennus has high ACC, the M1IP has very high armor. With the current system, if you downprice things like the T-72A instead of changing their role, you run into the problem where you cross a very thin line where they simply become too good for their price and it becomes a race to just buy more of your mediums than the other guys does; and this is my primary problem with Uralgraznomod--it just makes too much sense to just spam out T-72As because they outfight infantry and tanks in close-in areas point-for-point without fail. OTOH, if we were to say, up its armor to 14, we would have a pretty well-armored tank for 55 points that hits a solid role, yet doesn't run into the "buy a critical mass of T-72As or lose" issue. Overall I'm not concerned about medium tanks like the T-72A and M60A3 falling by the wayside, though, because in a game set in 1991, those should not be the meat and potatoes tanks anyways. The M1s, Leo2s, T-80s and late-gen T-72s should be where it's at. The other issues regarding tanks are that artillery is too good at stunlocking/panicking them when it really shouldn't do much at all to tanks, and that ATGM teams are invisible in buildings when shooting should make them visible at max tank range. quote:Unless it got more armor too, it won't change the fact that for the cost of 2 or 3 T-72As I can buy a tank that will kill infinite T-72As This is fine TBH; because buying T-72As has a fundamentally different type of value than buy a single super-tank. Cheaper tanks should not be as cost-effective point for point as higher end tanks because they give you the opportunity to buy non-tank units like infantry and AA and recon that can actually be pretty tremendous force multipliers while still being able to afford a tank, or allow you to have a lot more anti-"non tank" fire power, or cover more territory, etc. Upping the T-72As accuracy, also makes it much better at killing IFVs, infantry and recon reliably, and overall supporting your infantry. OctaMurk fucked around with this message at 15:06 on Jul 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 14:57
|
|
|
Mazz posted:The biggest difference you guys are overlooking is it carries 8 Iglas against helos it will 1 and 2 shot while having 10 HP and moving 330. It also has 64 rockets and the gun that can fire while moving. Yes it's still deficient against Mistrals but holy poo poo is that an improvement for USSRs opening game over 150p Akulas. That's a pretty good addition to USSR, a pretty solid AA helo, and coincidentally exactly what I asked for in the thread and their forums several months ago. Yeah I am 100% in love with the changes -- it's actually close to something I'd floated internally a while back, so I'm glad to see it got picked up. Elukka posted:But the problem with mediums is that they're too expensive to lose lightly and everything on the field will kill them in a second. Turning lower tier mediums into higher tier mediums isn't going to fix anything, they're just as much of questionable usefulness as anything else that isn't really cheap or really expensive and top tier. I'm convinced RD balance will really never be "fixed" so long as Eugen cares about Destruction -- which they will, because stupid pubbies love that poo poo for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 16:14
|
|
|
Hubis posted:I'm convinced RD balance will really never be "fixed" so long as Eugen cares about Destruction -- which they will, because stupid pubbies love that poo poo for some reason. I don't know why you'd use these in destruction, either, because they hemorrhage points for little gain. Like, i'm trying to think of a role here: Are they good against infantry? No, because one expensive gun barrel is less effective than several cheaper ones. Are they good against tanks? Not really. They can't pen the real quality tanks and they get popped in two shots by them. Do they take hits well? Not much better than the cheapest vehicles, unless you live in a world of Milan Is and Fagots. Are they fast? Hehehehe no.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 16:27
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Yeah I'm also not getting the hate. No one ever took Mi-24V, now they have 8 AA missiles. There is no Bluefor chopper that can carry 8 AA missiles. They're not Mistrals but they're also not bad, and there's 8 of them. 8 AA missiles. Armored, 300 kph, 8 Iglas, I'm not seeing the problem. The HAP is the only thing (except the TY-90 of course) that will kill it in a straight fight, it will have equal odds against a more expensive PAH-2 Tiger, and it will kill every other NATO AA chopper without breaking a sweat. And it will keep shooting in those critical awkward seconds when everyone runs out of helicopter missiles. The Super Cobra can still engage it outside of it's maximum range.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 16:47
|
|
|
Okay, I forgot about the Super Cobra because how often do you see a Super Cobra in opening helicopter fights? Does the Sidewinder still do a number on FOBs? Doesn't change the fact that it's a good AA chopper for a reasonable price. I still don't understand the dislike. There are three helicopters in the game that can outshoot it; the two on BLUEFOR are both more expensive. And it has 8 AA missiles to boot. What's the problem?
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 17:07
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:I don't know why you'd use these in destruction, either, because they hemorrhage points for little gain. you're right, but I was mostly referring to the mentality of "cost must be directly derived from combat capability" rather than treating cost/availability as its own characteristic. Arglebargle III posted:Okay, I forgot about the Super Cobra because how often do you see a Super Cobra in opening helicopter fights? Does the Sidewinder still do a number on FOBs? No, they (according to patch notes) supposedly fixed the Super-Cobra sidewinder cost. I don't know how it compares now, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 17:36
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Okay, I forgot about the Super Cobra because how often do you see a Super Cobra in opening helicopter fights? Does the Sidewinder still do a number on FOBs? Yeah, while i'm sure USSR players would have preferred a cheaper MI-8 with just Iglas, an igla hind will do nicely.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
Is it just me or is US infantry p. bad
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 18:54
|
|
|
Top Hats Monthly posted:Is it just me or is US infantry p. bad They really are. Well stingers are good, but everything else is bad.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 18:57
|
|
|
It's not just you. US Infantry breaks down like this: - Riflemen, Riflemen '90: They have the worst machine gun in the game, so they don't stack up against other infantry, and that's not even getting into the fact that line infantry are bad all around - Light Riflemen: Like riflemen, except with lovely dragon missiles - Light Riflemen '90: Used to be pretty good in a helo rush, got nerfed, now they're way too expensive. - Mountaineers: They only come in shithooks and the Dragon II is still a Dragon. - Marines, Marines '90: They would be pretty good, except that 15 man squads are now overpriced and these don't come in wheeled transports. Also their LAWs blow. - Deltas: Worst SF infantry in the game, combining worst machine gun/rifle combo with worst LAW. At least they come in armored transports now. - Rangers: They're scouts, they do scout things. - SEALs: Neither fish nor fowl. Too low availability to use as real infantry, no AT weapon for CV hunting. We are all praying that the upcoming DLC turn this around. Hopefully Rangers as shock infantry will shake things up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:It's not just you. US Infantry breaks down like this: The US doesn't need any more infantry types, it just needs light infantry to be reclassed as shock and given the M249. Rangers are better suited for raids as a recon unit. For anti-infantry work, there is no better vehicle than the SU-122. 5 HE HEAT gun with a KPVT, they're grossly efficient for 15 points. The KPVT is decent at anti-vehicle and helicopter roles since you can blob so many of them (IF they foolishly fly choppers too close), and the cannons eviscerate infantry and can tag things at range since they're HEAT. They're good to park on the sides of towns to shoot anything trying to come down roads, but far back enough that they aren't wasted if they bring tanks of their own.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 20:53
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:It's not just you. US Infantry breaks down like this: Playing U.S. means relying a lot on fire support and micromanagement to fight effectively in towns. Navy seals in particular are amazing and I always take two cards of them because they are so effective at clearing out cities. Their grenade launcher is phenomenal at killing infantry, but it requires constant supply.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:I want to know if Mot-Schutzen and FJB-40 are getting year updates, or any swank new transports. IIRC at least Luftsturmregiment 40(LStR-40), aka the 90's-version FJB-40, has been confirmed by Flieger already.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 02:12
|
|
|
Wait, what? How could there be a '90s version of a military formation of a country that ceased to exist in late 1990? e: okay it's from 1986
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Wait, what? How could there be a '90s version of a military formation of a country that ceased to exist in late 1990? Well, the game *is* alt-history already. It's not exactly a stretch.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 03:21
|
|
|
Magni posted:IIRC at least Luftsturmregiment 40(LStR-40), aka the 90's-version FJB-40, has been confirmed by Flieger already. I'll elaborate a bit on 'em even :P Indigenous assault rifle. RPG-29. AA missile.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 03:33
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:I'll elaborate a bit on 'em even :P Yeah, I like that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 03:56
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:I'll elaborate a bit on 'em even :P Oh drat, Flieger was not exaggerating about DDR infantry being boss as all get out
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 04:09
|
|
|
Mazz posted:The biggest difference you guys are overlooking is it carries 8 Iglas against helos it will 1 and 2 shot while having 10 HP and moving 330. It also has 64 rockets and the gun that can fire while moving. Yes it's still deficient against Mistrals but holy poo poo is that an improvement for USSRs opening game over 150p Akulas. That's a pretty good addition to USSR, a pretty solid AA helo, and coincidentally exactly what I asked for in the thread and their forums several months ago. Arglebargle III posted:Yeah I'm also not getting the hate. No one ever took Mi-24V, now they have 8 AA missiles. There is no Bluefor chopper that can carry 8 AA missiles. They're not Mistrals but they're also not bad, and there's 8 of them. 8 AA missiles. Armored, 300 kph, 8 Iglas, I'm not seeing the problem. The HAP is the only thing (except the TY-90 of course) that will kill it in a straight fight, it will have equal odds against a more expensive PAH-2 Tiger, and it will kill every other NATO AA chopper without breaking a sweat. And it will keep shooting in those critical awkward seconds when everyone runs out of helicopter missiles. The having 8 Iglas is not going to matter a drat when an individual helicopter is unlikely to fire off more than 2 before getting downed. This is because it can only aim at one target at a time and as such should two OH-58C or other cheap AA helos attack it it will proceed to kill one while the other shoots it down merrily unless the RNG is particularly favorable. Against Mistral helicopters it will be getting shot at before it can even reply. The HP10 doesn't matter as with MANPADS it's either one or two hits to kill in this fight. That constantly vaunted armor is only going to protect against small arms and does nothing against auto-cannons or HE. This is also before we consider it's soft stats as the Hind will stilly be a wallowing whale and will struggle to bring it's weapons to bear in time. I don't think it will be a particularly effective chopper. Better than nothing but what really galls me about it is that the best possible setup for it is going in, but we can't let the USSR have nice things.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 07:51
|
|
|
Is there an indigenous East German designed assault rifle that isn't an AK variant?
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 08:15
|
|
|
Xerxes17 posted:I don't think it will be a particularly effective chopper. Better than nothing but what really galls me about it is that the best possible setup for it is going in, but we can't let the USSR have nice things. Okay, if it's outnumbered by units designed to counter it it will die SO IT'S USELESS got it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 08:51
|
|
|
90 pt igla hind is perfectly competitive against super cobras; you need 2 super cobras blowing their load to kill one hind after which the hinds mop up. oh/58c meaningless against igla hind because igla hind has massive speed advantage. slow escort choppers can not get the job done. US airborne still needs a fast aa copter. Blackhawk DAP should've carried stingers from the start. US marines are actually one of the roughest toughest close combat units in the game just because of the LVTP/15 man shock combo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 10:11
|
|
|
Still doesn't hold a candle to the UH-1E.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 10:30
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Still doesn't hold a candle to the UH-1E. God those helos were awesome. The infantry we pretty much secondary to those.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 13:26
|
|
|
Xerxes17 posted:The having 8 Iglas is not going to matter a drat when an individual helicopter is unlikely to fire off more than 2 before getting downed. This is because it can only aim at one target at a time and as such should two OH-58C or other cheap AA helos attack it it will proceed to kill one while the other shoots it down merrily unless the RNG is particularly favorable. Against Mistral helicopters it will be getting shot at before it can even reply. The HP10 doesn't matter as with MANPADS it's either one or two hits to kill in this fight. That constantly vaunted armor is only going to protect against small arms and does nothing against auto-cannons or HE. This is also before we consider it's soft stats as the Hind will stilly be a wallowing whale and will struggle to bring it's weapons to bear in time. I really can't agree with you at all here because this argument being made is really narrow. Right now the Soviets need to bring 150p Akulas with the same Igla dilemma, MANPADs in Mi-8s, or rely on a Chinese teammate to have TY-90s. What they are about to get is quite possibly the most useful AA/utility chopper going in the game, because not only does it tie for the highest missile load, it can continue fighting helos well after all 8 are fired and has 64 rockets to boot. ATGMs on AA helos are a gigantic waste given their role, because I buy AA helos not only to kill escorting helos, but shoot down the transports they are moving with. Rockets and the cannon make it so even if they land, I still can do that job real well. Let's make a direct comparison to the AA helos you're worried about : OH-58C have 4 HP and carry 4 92A stingers, meaning they can, at best, shoot down 2 Hinds in a perfect world. This leaves zero ability to do anything about the Mi-8s they are escorting. These 92A are also outranged and have less accuracy then the Iglas they are up against. You can buy 2 at a time per Hind yes, and yet you're still not getting as much value as you would with one Hind if your opponent does anything but goes all-in on helos. Celtics have 4 HP and carry 4 Mistrals, giving the exact same outcome as above. These Celtics also take a 25p increase for that extra 350m range, only 20 points less then the Hind mentioned. You're not seeing this big numbers advantage unless your spending far more on helos, in which case, yes, you should win if you're not careless. Tigers/Tigres cost more. Still carry less AA missiles. Lynx 3 cost more, kill less. BHS are in the exact same situation as the OH-58C except they have more accuracy. The only time your AA helos don't have enough time to fire more then 2 is if you generally didn't bring enough for what you were doing, because while the first 1-2 go down, I routinely found the TY-90 or Celtics that made it out were always at least 3-4 shots deep. Those helos are not markedly cheaper then this Hind is, so it's the same point made. Just because Russia isn't getting a 60p Mi-8 with the Igla load that makes it the best AA helo in the game doesn't at all mean this is somehow lovely. This change puts Russia on the step right below Eurocorps for helo abilities, when before it was literally last, at least before decks like Scan that have zero AA options. No deck needs the best option to be competitive, you just need a good one, and there's absolutely nothing about this thing that screams non-competitive. You're really taking the idea too far that the USSR can't have nice things here, between this change and the MiG-29S I'd argue they got 2 of the best loadout changes of any nation in the game, given that that's literally all they were missing. Russia being hard to play by being expensive has always kind of been Russia's thing, it's just different here because your tanks are no longer able to shitstomp everything when used right. Given the fact also in the DLC that tank mounted ATGMs can now be fired on the move ([SA]), no longer take reload penalties from morale, and in general are getting significantly better accuracy levels, I think the USSR is coming out of this just fine. Mazz fucked around with this message at 16:21 on Jul 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 13:43
|
|
|
I am so going to abuse the hell out of move and fire tank ATGM's. There will be a sea of Kobras and Reflex slamming into everything again and again while I cycle them back to waiting supply trucks. The fact that NATO ATGM's barely and often don't match the range of their soviet counterparts, while also having to deal with ability to just reverse out of their range and try again. It's going to be glorious and possibly pubbie rage inducing. God, even the T-80B may actually be useful for the first time in its wargaming career. I'm rather curious if they have anything in the works for AAA? Apparently they had a damage boost in beta that got rolled back and now they're kinda back to being useless again.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 18:44
|
|
|
FLX posted:Tanks without stabilizers will lose the ability to fire on the move  NOOOOooooo my T-34s 
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 19:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 04:13 |
|
|
Mortabis posted:
And a few M60 variants IIRC 
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 20:39
|
|