Page 3 of 9

Re: the balance

Posted: Sun 7 Jul 2013 00:04
by Scharnberg
mrl0ve wrote:
Hartmann wrote:Anyone expecting ATGMs in general to reliably deal with heavies in quantity is playing the wrong game.


No that one is just playing NATO.



What you seem to forget is that nearly ever god dam PACT tank have ATGMS while nearly none of nato tanks have ATGMS and thoese 3 who have do 16 AP.

That means if we take a heavy tank - Leopard 2a4 to 145 points we have to spend at least another 40 points to get a 8 acc, 2450m range and 24 AP ATGM meaning 145+40 = 185

While you can spend 170 on a T-80U which have alot of armour and gets 10 acc, 2800m range and 24 AP. This means if you take a T-80U vs a Leopard 2a4 with a ATGM Milan F2 infantry team the T-80U will win. Its the same result if you use a vehicle and not a infantry team.

Of course this is 1on1 (1on2) which cant be compared when everybody have all of their units into the fight.

The konkurs have 2625m range which means they can take care of any NATO ATGM vehicles before they get within range. And because of the increased range they can be used in more situations than NATOs ATGM infantry teams and vehicles.
Since all NATO ATGMs are low armoured and can even easyly be killed by artillery and even 250 lb bombs, i myself find alot more use for PACTs ATGMs.

Re: the balance

Posted: Sun 7 Jul 2013 00:07
by mrl0ve
If you didn't deleted most of your replays like i did, then you have one, Lillehammer, 2vs2, Genossekommissar ..

Are you turning into elitesniper ?

But look pact has NO hardcounter to heavys actually, there is always a good chance they just escape (besides some stupid stuff like 4x t-80U stack atgm fire)

but nato.. Well the only problem they have is that they have too many options there for they might losing time to make a decision (LOL)

Re: the balance

Posted: Sun 7 Jul 2013 00:09
by Tommoscimmia
crazy stuff in this thread.

You guys don't realise the core of the game.

Range is almost as important as AP.

'nough said

Re: the balance

Posted: Sun 7 Jul 2013 00:22
by Hartmann
Corsair wrote:
Hartmann wrote:I play French national deck as Nato, so I use F2s and HOTs. F2s don't come on any vehicle, making them pretty redundant in the current meta. No good player relies heavily on foot AT teams. You want wheels under your ATGMs. I'm coming to a point where I'm considering removing the F2s from my deck, they're just not useful in the current meta. Too vulnerable to artillery, especially due to them having only 2 health. Konkurs foot teams it's pretty much the same thing, except it takes much longer for artillery to root them out of buildings. This is a huge advantage in the artillery centric meta right now if you do insist on using foot AT. But neither units are particularly amazing atm.


Exactly the same or worse for wheeled ATGM, and also very easily spotted. Well, that's my feeling..


Except you know, you can micro them out of the way of artillery and to constantly be in ideal positions. You can't do that with a foot team. Those can't kite enemy armour, that is what this is all about.

Try it and get enlightened.

Re: the balance

Posted: Sun 7 Jul 2013 00:29
by Hartmann
mrl0ve wrote:If you didn't deleted most of your replays like i did, then you have one, Lillehammer, 2vs2, Genossekommissar ..

Are you turning into elitesniper ?

But look pact has NO hardcounter to heavys actually, there is always a good chance they just escape (besides some stupid stuff like 4x t-80U stack atgm fire)

but nato.. Well the only problem they have is that they have too many options there for they might losing time to make a decision (LOL)



Good job of actually responding to my arguments, instead of just waffling on about other things without even bothering to support your statements.

It's funny how people are actually taking the time out to try and write meaningful responses to this neverending stream of nonsense you call posts.

Typical that you are unable to provide replays. But then again what else is new right.

Re: the balance

Posted: Sun 7 Jul 2013 00:50
by Hidden Gunman
What is this T80OU of which we speak? I haven't used the top of the range gear for ages...

Re: the balance

Posted: Sun 7 Jul 2013 01:15
by mrl0ve
Hartmann wrote:
Good job of actually responding to my arguments, instead of just waffling on about other things without even bothering to support your statements.

It's funny how people are actually taking the time out to try and write meaningful responses to this neverending stream of nonsense you call posts.

Typical that you are unable to provide replays. But then again what else is new right.



You mean arguments like "T-55A is the best tank in the game, you can kill every heavy and chopper, you just need to take sideshots, learn 2 micro noob"
thats basicly all that you people say just in another fashion, thats neither meaningful nor helpful,
while you can't answer to a simple question "why NATO have 20139 uber AP hardcounter atgms, while pact have to buy more expensive heavy tanks as response to heavy tanks"?

Ranked game before the same , NATO spams again a lot of abrams, challengers, leopard 2a4s, while our only way to counter it is bank for heavy tanks while they just attack every direction, covered by an chapral shield and marder rolands ..
the only way we won this was beeing surrounded close to main sector and hunting for "gaps" in their defense lines and better micro.. not to mention commando raid in their arty
beeing vastly outnumbered by high performance tanks doesn't help either...
why the hell i should buy a expensive atgm to counter medium vehicles ?..

Re: the balance

Posted: Sun 7 Jul 2013 01:43
by Hartmann
mrl0ve wrote:
Hartmann wrote:
Good job of actually responding to my arguments, instead of just waffling on about other things without even bothering to support your statements.

It's funny how people are actually taking the time out to try and write meaningful responses to this neverending stream of nonsense you call posts.

Typical that you are unable to provide replays. But then again what else is new right.



You mean arguments like "T-55A is the best tank in the game, you can kill every heavy and chopper, you just need to take sideshots, learn 2 micro noob"
thats basicly all that you people say just in another fashion, thats neither meaningful nor helpful,
while you can't answer to a simple question "why NATO have 20139 uber AP hardcounter atgms, while pact have to buy more expensive heavy tanks as response to heavy tanks"?

Ranked game before the same , NATO spams again a lot of abrams, challengers, leopard 2a4s, while our only way to counter it is bank for heavy tanks while they just attack every direction, covered by an chapral shield and marder rolands ..
the only way we won this was beeing surrounded close to main sector and hunting for "gaps" in their defense lines and better micro.. not to mention commando raid in their arty
beeing vastly outnumbered by high performance tanks doesn't help either...
why the hell i should buy a expensive atgm to counter medium vehicles ?..



Yeah, you're beyond helping.

Post a replay and your antics might become marginally entertaining. Now you're just a bore. Don't know why anyone else is even wasting time on this guy anymore.

Re: the balance

Posted: Sun 7 Jul 2013 01:47
by FirmusPiett
mrl0ve wrote:decrease chapral aviability

What, to 2?
For a 35 points system?
Teehee, good one!

Re: the balance

Posted: Sun 7 Jul 2013 01:49
by Scharnberg
mrl0ve wrote:
Hartmann wrote:
Good job of actually responding to my arguments, instead of just waffling on about other things without even bothering to support your statements.

It's funny how people are actually taking the time out to try and write meaningful responses to this neverending stream of nonsense you call posts.

Typical that you are unable to provide replays. But then again what else is new right.



You mean arguments like "T-55A is the best tank in the game, you can kill every heavy and chopper, you just need to take sideshots, learn 2 micro noob"
thats basicly all that you people say just in another fashion, thats neither meaningful nor helpful,
while you can't answer to a simple question "why NATO have 20139 uber AP hardcounter atgms, while pact have to buy more expensive heavy tanks as response to heavy tanks"?

Ranked game before the same , NATO spams again a lot of abrams, challengers, leopard 2a4s, while our only way to counter it is bank for heavy tanks while they just attack every direction, covered by an chapral shield and marder rolands ..
the only way we won this was beeing surrounded close to main sector and hunting for "gaps" in their defense lines and better micro.. not to mention commando raid in their arty
beeing vastly outnumbered by high performance tanks doesn't help either...
why the hell i should buy a expensive atgm to counter medium vehicles ?..


NATO tanks aint better than PACT, The best NATO tank is the leopard 2a4 which you only get 4 of, Tanks which are equal to the Leopard 2a4 (145) are the T-64BV (135) and T-80A (130), they are a little bit worse but not much.

But then NATO should complain that Leopard 2 (100) are worse than T-72B1 (90)

The 2nd best NATO tank are either the M1A1 Abrams or the Challenger (I think the Challenger - more armour and you get 2 cards of 8 instead of 1 card of 4)

The M1A1 abrams (135) has 17 armor, big size, 11 acc, 19 ap. Its counterpart is also the T-64BV and the T-80A.
T-64BV has less acc, 1 less rear, top and side armour but has and ATGM which does 3-4 dmg to a M1A1 abrams if it hits. The T-64BV does 3 dmg at full gun range against the M1A1 abrams.
The T-80A has 1 less front, rear and top armour but has and ATGM which does 6-7 dmg to a M1A1 if it hits. The T-80A does 2 dmg at full range against the M1A1.

And finaly the challenger.
The challenger (130) has 19 front armour but only 17 AP and fire only 7 rounds per min. . Its counterparts are again the T-64BV and the T-80A.
The T-64BV does 1-2 dmg with ATGM and 1 dmg with gun at full Range against the Challenger.
The Challenger does 1 dmg with gun at full range against the T-64BV.

The T-80A does 4 dmg with ATGM and 1 dmg at 2100m range against the Challenger.
The Challenger does 1-2 dmg at full range against the T-80A

And USSR also gets the super tank which outranks every tank in game. THE T-80U :)