The "Israel is OP" thread

[hansbroger]

Yep, because Israel doesn't really have a great line infantry. It's average, as well as average APCs (compared to godlike Mot Schutzen on BMP-1 and BMP-2 transports ). So long range ATGM seems like a good balance.
Shame there aren't really good APC options for Tzanhanim.

Tries not to remember all the whining over BTR-T back in the day...... HAPCs will be just fine and given what's going on with tank stats I doubt they'll be paying a premium for the armor... IDF APC options look very cost effective for what they're used for and don't seem to be loaded with dubiously useful extras that aren't worth paying for.

Long range infantry ATGMs for IDF isn't good balance not is it necessary, IDF already has a massive proliferation of LONGEST IN GAME RANGE atgms on TD and Helo platforms and that's it's shtick. It even gets a stealthy 2800m SALH infantry recon atgm that can self designate & defend itself and a 2800m GLATGM on its super heavy, not to mention the TOW 2 and other missiles it can bring as well.... There are major nations in game with no good infantry ATGMs that make do by relying entirely upon 2625m TOW equipped TDs for their infantry AT support and somehow they survive... The IDF is going to be fine, it's infantry are ASSYMETRICALLY very well supported.

The IDF has great infantry or should I say, it won't have to suffer with infantry like the USA/USSR/RD have to make do with that's for sure. With that artillery park why do you even need good infantry!?

[codextero]

Talking about line infantry. Not 90pts regular squads.
A single Merkava tank won't hold up against the mighty Mot Schutzen and Granatomets with their uber powerful transports.
God I love playing eastern bloc.

Merk 2 is immune to autocannons from the front, you need 10 shots from mot shutzen or grom to kill one.

Mot shutzen 90 needs 3 hits to kill a merk 2, and they cost 30 points each in BMP-1 SP1.

[RedFive]

It even gets a stealthy 2800m SALH infantry recon atgm that can self designate & defend itself

I don't think it's 2800m range, 2450m is what I've seen in the preview videos. Still a powerful unit, though.

[hansbroger]

It even gets a stealthy 2800m SALH infantry recon atgm that can self designate & defend itself

I don't think it's 2800m range, 2450m is what I've seen in the preview videos. Still a powerful unit, though.

Change is good!

[Yakhont]

The strength of a Superpower or "Good" Coalition deck comes from the large variety of units for almost every situation and sprinkling of magic unicorn units.

Im sceptical of Eugen's strategy of making Israel a standalone deck without over buffing what seems to be specialised units and some special units.

In fact im not sure if its even possible to balance if large capability gaps appear and Eugen tries to compensate by buffing the good ones. It just becomes a theme deck.

[Mighty_Zuk]

Yep, because Israel doesn't really have a great line infantry. It's average, as well as average APCs (compared to godlike Mot Schutzen on BMP-1 and BMP-2 transports ). So long range ATGM seems like a good balance.
Shame there aren't really good APC options for Tzanhanim.

Tries not to remember all the whining over BTR-T back in the day...... HAPCs will be just fine and given what's going on with tank stats I doubt they'll be paying a premium for the armor... IDF APC options look very cost effective for what they're used for and don't seem to be loaded with dubiously useful extras that aren't worth paying for.

Long range infantry ATGMs for IDF isn't good balance not is it necessary, IDF already has a massive proliferation of LONGEST IN GAME RANGE atgms on TD and Helo platforms and that's it's shtick. It even gets a stealthy 2800m SALH infantry recon atgm that can self designate & defend itself and a 2800m GLATGM on its super heavy, not to mention the TOW 2 and other missiles it can bring as well.... There are major nations in game with no good infantry ATGMs that make do by relying entirely upon 2625m TOW equipped TDs for their infantry AT support and somehow they survive... The IDF is going to be fine, it's infantry are ASSYMETRICALLY very well supported.

The IDF has great infantry or should I say, it won't have to suffer with infantry like the USA/USSR/RD have to make do with that's for sure. With that artillery park why do you even need good infantry!?

Problem is, I hate ATGMs. I would take a less accurate, lower range glass cannon any day.

[hansbroger]

Yeah with the way ATGMs work in this game I will take a good gun system any day. One of the saving graces of RD are the PTZ-89 and ATS-103, cheap good guns or even effective RR's are much better than most ATGMs. Its kind of sad that most ATGMs are relegated to the rubbish bin with poor accuracy, significantly reduced range and funky hit mechanics.

Well placed RR infantry are in many cases better than most ATGM squads as they effectively fire F&F, have the stealth to stay hidden until engagement range and are cheap enough to be taken in number sufficient to soak tank hits and panic tanks with volume of return fire. I find them more useful than most all ATGM teams other than high tiers like Milan 3/Konkurs-M. That and they do a great job of giving line inf some spine, 2 HE isn't great but it adds up. I'd be a fan of more countries getting CatC M40/SPG-9/B-11 teams,

Surprisingly though the dual purpose M47 teams are actually proving to be rather useful, they essentially blend the best of both features.

[smyljr]

That being said, if a Hind is cruising along and a Gepard opens up on it, the Hind should have a life expectancy of 2-3 seconds tops. That thing might be tough, but a stream of 35mm shells is going to give it a really bad day.

how would you increase dps on hinds, while decreasing dps on planes? just drop spaag range on planes a step across the board.

[Wolke]

Is the Merkava IIB a bargain or is the KPz T-72M1 just too expensive?



The T-72 outranges the Merkava by 175m, but he cannot shoot at it until the Merkava is in range, too. Then the Merkava has a faster fire-rate (by almost 30%), better accuracy (not made up by size difference), better close-in defense against infantry due to two MGs and 4 top armor ensures you won't have to worry about bombs that much.

It loses out on optics, size, offroad-speed and less range on the main gun and not having an auto-loader.

I dunno, to me it seems that the T-72M1 is losing out in the important stats in most combat situations.



Or here:



Sure, Mag'ach is bigger and has 1 less HE per round, but other than that ...

43% higher rate of fire. 1 more AP.

Maybe the 2 less side armor go along with the new "just flank it" meta.


Edit:

Bedoins or Shayetet need at least another transport option in mechanized, imho. They both share the 1 truck-card and that's it for ground transports.

[Mighty_Zuk]

Is the Merkava IIB a bargain or is the KPz T-72M1 just too expensive?



The T-72 outranges the Merkava by 175m, but he cannot shoot at it until the Merkava is in range, too. Then the Merkava has a faster fire-rate (by almost 30%), better accuracy (not made up by size difference), better close-in defense against infantry due to two MGs and 4 top armor ensures you won't have to worry about bombs that much.

It loses out on optics, size, offroad-speed and less range on the main gun and not having an auto-loader.

I dunno, to me it seems that the T-72M1 is losing out in the important stats in most combat situations.

Look at the stats again. The T-72 has 18AP and the Merkava has 18FAV. Means the T-72 can engage the Merkava at further range.

But it doesn't end there. The T-72 has better optics, much better autonomy, and its higher AP allows engaging some of the more heavily armored tanks if you can bunch them up.
I'd say they both play differently, but you definitely get your money's worth from both of them if you use them correctly.