WG4 Vision: What works, what doesn't, what needs improved?

User avatar
HrcAk47
Colonel
Posts: 2788
Joined: Sat 3 May 2014 18:00
Contact:

Re: WG4 Vision: What works, what doesn't, what needs improved?

Postby HrcAk47 » Mon 22 Jan 2018 04:17

Tbh, you're showing a bit of a misunderstanding of this game. Fans with your attitude actually memed the US into the ground.

How do you feel about Deltas getting a better AT launcher in the final patch? Buff or nerf?
The SEAD never bothered me anyway.

SMB Yugoslavia Retexture Mod, now released, v.1.0

User avatar
Grabbed_by_the_Spets
General
Posts: 6554
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2012 11:40
Contact:

Re: WG4 Vision: What works, what doesn't, what needs improved?

Postby Grabbed_by_the_Spets » Mon 22 Jan 2018 06:28

alphafoxtrot wrote:I want the US to be actually representative of it's capabilities instead of it's semi-nerfed current state. I want my TOW teams and Javelin-equipped infantry squads.


TOW squads are not going to be a thing, ever, it wasn't a part of US doctrine for infantry to haul around 200+ KG's of kit, they were either used in defensive positions, or carried around in the back of jeeps (Which is already represented by TOW jeeps).

Javelins, will probably not be a thing, Killertomato had a decent thread about the javelin prototype which could arguably have been fielded in small numbers by the US, but a full production Javelin.. No.

Not to mention Maglans were pretty much the epitome of the type of cancer people were worried about when it came to javelin like launchers anyway.

I want my ADATS Bradley and LAV-ADs.



The omission of short ranged Air defense units for the US is probably the most glaring issue of RD's US. Bradley linebackers, LAV-AD's and ADATS were all well within at least prototype stage of RD.

However, you did get the patriot, you know, the only ADN unit of it's type in game and by far one of the most broken units in game, especially considering that ADN's like that were provably in other armies at that time.


I want the airforce that would blot out the sun with bombs and missile loads to match. I want the USN to be representing! I want...


You have that, US has by far the biggest airforce selection to choose from, with one of the strongest aircraft in game.

The problem with the US airforce, bad plane synergy with load-outs certainly aren't unique to the US, nor is the US affected the worst by this.

OK the USSR, Yugoslavia and Israel are over-engineered and over-represented, but US is probably best equipped to deal with this.

... oh forget it. As long as Eugen's staff has a light hate-boner (at best) for the US


Image
Image

urogard
Brigadier
Posts: 3058
Joined: Sun 4 May 2014 13:31
Contact:

Re: WG4 Vision: What works, what doesn't, what needs improved?

Postby urogard » Mon 22 Jan 2018 10:52

HrcAk47 wrote:How do you feel about Deltas getting a better AT launcher in the final patch? Buff or nerf?

We both know whatever argument alpha puts forward, it's probably going to be very shallow and will only re-iterate the depth of his knowledge of the game. So that's a pure bait question what you asked.

I'd go with buff, but solely based on my personal style of playing USA which by default means minimal/no city fights.

Grabbed_by_the_Spets wrote:Not to mention Maglans were pretty much the epitome of the type of cancer people were worried about when it came to javelin like launchers anyway.

The worst part was:
- Israel preview shows Maglan stat card
- Everyone shits their pants predicting maglan spam which will happen after live release
- Israel live release
- Maglan spam
- Nerfhammer on Maglan as well as Spike ATGM

Thank the FSM that EUG was smarter about tweaking some other units between the preview and the release.
Too bad they didn't listen about AGL Merkava Transport.

User avatar
Markenzwieback
Captain
Posts: 1707
Joined: Tue 27 Oct 2015 17:06
Contact:

Re: WG4 Vision: What works, what doesn't, what needs improved?

Postby Markenzwieback » Mon 22 Jan 2018 11:07

Grabbed_by_the_Spets wrote:
I want my ADATS Bradley and LAV-ADs.

The omission of short ranged Air defense units for the US is probably the most glaring issue of RD's US. Bradley linebackers, LAV-AD's and ADATS were all well within at least prototype stage of RD.

However, you did get the patriot, you know, the only ADN unit of it's type in game and by far one of the most broken units in game, especially considering that ADN's like that were provably in other armies at that time.

You didn't get what you asked for. But hey, you got a totally unneeded and broken unit nobody asked for. Really good point... :roll:
Image

User avatar
Grabbed_by_the_Spets
General
Posts: 6554
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2012 11:40
Contact:

Re: WG4 Vision: What works, what doesn't, what needs improved?

Postby Grabbed_by_the_Spets » Mon 22 Jan 2018 12:14

Markenzwieback wrote:You didn't get what you asked for. But hey, you got a totally unneeded and broken unit nobody asked for. Really good point... :roll:


Yeah, we didn't need an air defense unit... We needed and air defense unit!
Image

User avatar
Grabbed_by_the_Spets
General
Posts: 6554
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2012 11:40
Contact:

Re: WG4 Vision: What works, what doesn't, what needs improved?

Postby Grabbed_by_the_Spets » Mon 22 Jan 2018 12:15

urogard wrote:Thank the FSM that EUG was smarter about tweaking some other units between the preview and the release.
Too bad they didn't listen about AGL Merkava Transport.


I would have thought the internal balancing team at Eugen would have gone "Huh... This is completely broken" when seeing a completely broken unit.
Image

User avatar
Markenzwieback
Captain
Posts: 1707
Joined: Tue 27 Oct 2015 17:06
Contact:

Re: WG4 Vision: What works, what doesn't, what needs improved?

Postby Markenzwieback » Mon 22 Jan 2018 12:35

Grabbed_by_the_Spets wrote:
Markenzwieback wrote:You didn't get what you asked for. But hey, you got a totally unneeded and broken unit nobody asked for. Really good point... :roll:


Yeah, we didn't need an air defense unit... We needed and air defense unit!

Patriot is the new SHORAD!

Grabbed_by_the_Spets wrote:
urogard wrote:Thank the FSM that EUG was smarter about tweaking some other units between the preview and the release.
Too bad they didn't listen about AGL Merkava Transport.


I would have thought the internal balancing team at Eugen would have gone "Huh... This is completely broken" when seeing a completely broken unit.

Which internal balancing team?
Image

User avatar
Razzmann
General
Posts: 7497
Joined: Fri 7 Mar 2014 15:29
Location: The land of flowing beer and Sauerkraut.
Contact:

Re: WG4 Vision: What works, what doesn't, what needs improved?

Postby Razzmann » Mon 22 Jan 2018 13:03

Grabbed_by_the_Spets wrote:the internal balancing team at Eugen

Pretty sure this does not exist. Also pretty sure there is only a single person at Eugen who is decent at Wargame in the first place.
And supposedly that person had to work in their freetime for the last couple of patches.

People fanboys complaining about US forget one thing: there is something called balance. Granted, Eugen has not put too much effort into that in Wargame's last 4 months of patching, but generally still tried to improve it - at least up until Israel.
US is fine.

urogard
Brigadier
Posts: 3058
Joined: Sun 4 May 2014 13:31
Contact:

Re: WG4 Vision: What works, what doesn't, what needs improved?

Postby urogard » Mon 22 Jan 2018 16:04

Grabbed_by_the_Spets wrote:
urogard wrote:Thank the FSM that EUG was smarter about tweaking some other units between the preview and the release.
Too bad they didn't listen about AGL Merkava Transport.


I would have thought the internal balancing team at Eugen would have gone "Huh... This is completely broken" when seeing a completely broken unit.

They released at least half a dozen units (remembering off the top of my head) that should have elicited the same reaction, and yet they still got released.

alphafoxtrot
Private First-Class
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon 4 Apr 2016 08:05
Contact:

Re: WG4 Vision: What works, what doesn't, what needs improved?

Postby alphafoxtrot » Mon 22 Jan 2018 17:38

Razzmann wrote:
Grabbed_by_the_Spets wrote:the internal balancing team at Eugen

US is fine.

No it isn't by any metric outside of the groups that want US screwed. Even the US haters and pro-balance peps on the Spacebattles and Sufficent Velocity forums acknowledge this.

Jemnite wrote:Like most DLC nations besides the Dutch it is slightly overpowered and possesses some unit stand head and shoulders above the rest of their type and break the generally established balance rules.

Jakaari '90 are the most cost efficient infantry around, with a 16 AP rocket launcher and a decent MG for 10 points breaking the rule of 15 point '90s line infantry with more than 400 RPM on their MG that was established when Jager '90 got nerfed to 15 points.

The XA-185KT are a 15 point wheeled transported with the single best autocannon in the game with more accuracy and a faster rate of fire than the BTR-80A, which is 5 points more.

The Finnish crotale has double the missiles for some godforssaken reason for about 1/4th the cost more, which means you are effective getting double the effectiveness of a very good AA platform for just 15 points which is ridiculous.

The Finnish T-72M1MOD has the best accuracy of any REDFOR tank. Period.

They get a spike atgm team for some reason as if we needed more spikes in the game thanks Eugene.

They get a wheeled TOW2 carrier which not only has a faster rate of the Canadian wheeled TOW2 carrier with the same amount of ammunition, but also costs 15 points less.

And the Mi8KT is flat out broken, with a autocannon with over 2000 rpm and Mi8 rocket pods which were always very strong.

Like all DLC nations it's P2W. Buy it if you want a nation with broken units, that you can then pair with poland to cover its capability gaps.

Linky to post in question, and the generally the entire thread is made up of Spacebattles questioning the decisions of Eugen.

That is just one of the highlights. If one considers Wargaming dead, then they can simply point to Eugen itself for their inability to actually balance while retaining historical accuracy. If you guys don't like it? Then fine, ignore it at your own peril. Don't cry to me and my fellows at SB and SV that Eugen's inability to balance historical accuracy with game balance ruins the franchise.

If you want to keep Wargaming alive, then Eugen has to shape the [line of expletives] up! Have a genuine balance team to make sure that it is genuinely balanced. Have copies of Jane's Ships/Anti-Air/Artillery/[inert term here]. Have the doctrines and TO&Es of every nation you're putting into the game on hand (no matter how hard it is to get one) or have genuine officers of said military as attaches if you can't find them.

But you don't care, go ahead and belittle me. The amount of [expletive] I can give right now is negligible at best, and that is sadly the sort of thing that is needed to fix this franchise.

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 36 guests