Mike wrote:Doeko wrote:Mike wrote:Oh I saw them plenty in tournaments Centurions taking blows for the Leopards and Abrams.
In contrast to using them as a spam or opening move unit, this actually is a valid tactic! I have yet to see a Leopard or Abrams in a ranked game (against someone who actually knew what they were doing)
Seeing that this game is set in 1991, I think that's a serious problem.
That's exactly my point. These crap cheap tanks should be usable as filler but even if 100 of these rusty pieces of junk face off against a Leo2 or an M1A2 they should lose. Their only purpose should be to catch fire and kill equivalently crap units, not be able to kill clearly superior units. Not even in numbers. Sure let them shoot dead APCs, AA units, infantry and so forth but what the hell are these units doing winning fights with Leo2 and mighty Abrams?
An Abrams vs. these stupid old 15pt scrap quality tanks should be more or less like this:
No matter how surrounded it gets, no matter how outnumbered it gets, the Abrams should carry its weight (against other armor and ground units that are not elite infantry right next to it). Imo you should need 5 tmies the price of an Abrams in crappy chepa tanks to take it down, not equal or even less.
By the way Shogun 2 was a game that had awesome balance and gameplay. People actually tried different tactics (including with and without heroes). I had a bunch of different army setups. That hero unit isn't OP in the slightest (in multiplayer) yet it can win being outnumbered 30 vs 1800. If that unit managed to get to the fight in a battle you could expect pretty much any unit that was next to it to end up taking severe losses. Was it unstoppable killer plz nerf? Far from it! You could easily kill it with matchlocks or you could run it down with (heavy) cavalry.
If you put 30 abrams vs 1800 (or 3 vs 180 to put it in slightly more realistic in-game terms) 15pt centurions or t34 I expect the abrams to come up on top in virtually any circumstance (the only exception being the abrams group is surrounded from all sides AND buried deep in a forest). Would that make the abrams OP? Not really, you can still kill it with another Abrams or T80, a helicopter, an airplane or endless arty barage. These stupid <30pt tank category units should be 100% useless except for engaging defenseless units and for absorbing fire perhaps. The whole idea that a few of these stupid units can do ANY real damage beyond an armor point or 2 to a goddamn wargod machine is just beyond what I can accept in a game.
By the way the above also goes for modern medium tanks. It should even be VERY hard for these worthless units to kill medium tanks EVEN in numbers.
Even the mighty BTR80A should have big trouble to kill armored units. Shred unarmored vehicles and infantry? Sure. Shred APC's? With difficulty. Shred armor? Hell no. Maybe if you give it 10 minutes it should be able to wear it down eventually.
Anyway this was also a "problem" in ALB. A few BTR could also kill an Abrams but this issue was much less noticeable and it was still possible to beat idiots who did nothing but try and sneak past your lines with infantry and BTR's to knock out your CV's and other stuff. I raged a lot about that but for some reason I kept playing regardless. With this game, I cannot bring myself to keep playing.
This is pretty much 50% what is broken. Anything can kill an MBT with relative ease and cost-effectiveness and the MBT can't really kill anything back with cost effectiveness. Now we see only inauthentic crap units everywhere while the whole reason I play this game is to see Abrams and Leo2 and T80U rip into enemy formations. Not to try and fend off measly T34's!!!!
It has been this way since beta so I doubt balancing the game in a way that feels authentic and fun is on the dev's minds tbh.
In real life a T34 would explode simply by being in the presence of an Abrams wargod machine. To make Abrams as powerful as RL would make ittoo OP, but it should at least be made semi-invincible against these cheap tanks and autocannon APCs.