the balance

mrl0ve
Sergeant Major of the Army
Posts: 350
Joined: Wed 5 Jun 2013 07:14
Contact:

Re: the balance

Postby mrl0ve » Sun 7 Jul 2013 02:04

Scharnberg wrote:
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 :)


Too bad all these "super tanks" die to two squads of Milan
So i'm right it seems, you suggest me to counter nato heavies with more expensive pact heavies that dies to two nato missiles.. interessting.

User avatar
Azaz3l
Brigadier
Posts: 3295
Joined: Sat 1 Oct 2011 10:38
Location: Bus 410
Contact:

Re: the balance

Postby Azaz3l » Sun 7 Jul 2013 02:10

Scharnberg wrote: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 2 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.

The T-80A does like 6 dmg with its ATGM agaisnt a M1A1 Abrams.

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 :)

T-64BV isn't really a match for Leopard 2A4, it will just get outshot by the Leo 2A4 at gun range and its ATGM won't help either as it'll only do 1 damage and has bad accuracy. T-80A is even worse at this aspect, it'll do 3 damage frontally to a leopard 2A4 with its atgm meaning it'll need 4 missiles to take down the leopard while the T-80A only carries 3 missiles. This is even worsened by the fact that T-80A got a veterancy nerf last patch which means that not all 3 missiles will hit. Once Leo 2A4 gets in gun range it's pretty much over for the T-80A.
M1A1 counterpart would be the T-64BV as it has like 50/50 chance to win against it 1vs1 due to similar gun stats. Also its missile would do only 2 damage to the Abrams.
Pretty much 19 front armor tanks are a problem for pact as only T-64BV could somewhat deal with them but since its availability has been nerfed...
Image

User avatar
Corsair
Lieutenant
Posts: 1457
Joined: Mon 15 Apr 2013 19:40
Location: Montpellier (34, France)
Contact:

Re: the balance

Postby Corsair » Sun 7 Jul 2013 02:19

Again, you are all forgetting about accuracy - Chally I is available at 16 !
The counterparts you are taking are only available at 8 and 4, and only 4 for mixed pact.. NATO heavies (Leo 2 family) are all more available.
Image

Malakin
First Sergeant
Posts: 221
Joined: Fri 24 Feb 2012 14:33
Contact:

Re: the balance

Postby Malakin » Sun 7 Jul 2013 02:22

the challenger has a ROF much much much slower than the others, and can be out manuvered with almost no effort.

User avatar
Radioshow
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 852
Joined: Mon 18 Jun 2012 00:40
Location: Canada

Re: the balance

Postby Radioshow » Sun 7 Jul 2013 02:27

Units are not meant to be balanced one on one, or by unit type. All units and stats + availability must be taken into account to compare anything.

All this comparing one unit to another is useless.

Look at Igla's, full range and high accuracy and HE, better than all of them by far. Stinger has less range, RBS70 shoots slow as hell. Do you see NATO crying about it?
Sheskna/Reflex have clear range advantage, which in most games, is not allowed for a faction, clearly unbalanced. But you don't see us crying about it because in the grand scheme it works out.

The game is balanced to a mix of units all working together.

edit: lets see some replays of this M1/Leo2 spam where your seeing 12-20 heavy tanks. I have a feeling you don't because this is all fantasy.
[EUG]MadMat wrote:Radioshow is not a troll, he is our resident Doom Prophet.

Image

User avatar
Scharnberg
Master Sergeant
Posts: 152
Joined: Wed 22 May 2013 11:17
Contact:

Re: the balance

Postby Scharnberg » Sun 7 Jul 2013 02:30

Also all of USSRs ground ATGMS on tanks, infantrys, vehicles outrange every NATO ground ATGMs.

USSR also has the infamous BMPT stunlocker vehicle, which is god dam bad ass.

USSR also has the best artillery, which means if you feel like attacking you can do alot of status dmg rendering Nato tanks close to useless. Especially if he only have taken high tier tanks as that means less targets. (unless the nato person havnt spread out his units proberly)

USSR also have the best normal tier helicopters (The high tier helicopters are equally good)

USSR also has the best normal infantry (VDV has 875m range with RPG which is 350m more than any nato infantry at the cost of 3 ap less. They also have a few infantry units with 1 ap less but same range)

(just had to write this too) USSR also has the BMP- 2 obr 1986 which has the highst ground AP ingame. (the only thing which has a higher AP is the Hellfire missiles which are on 2 of USAs helicopters)
Pro Rege Et Grege

User avatar
Corsair
Lieutenant
Posts: 1457
Joined: Mon 15 Apr 2013 19:40
Location: Montpellier (34, France)
Contact:

Re: the balance

Postby Corsair » Sun 7 Jul 2013 02:32

Radioshow wrote:Units are not meant to be balanced one on one, or by unit type. All units and stats + availability must be taken into account to compare anything.

All this comparing one unit to another is useless.

Look at Igla's, full range and high accuracy and HE, better than all of them by far. Stinger has less range, RBS70 shoots slow as hell. Do you see NATO crying about it?
Sheskna/Reflex have clear range advantage, which in most games, is not allowed for a faction, clearly unbalanced. But you don't see us crying about it because in the grand scheme it works out.

The game is balanced to a mix of units all working together.


I don't care about stats imbalance as it is justified (historical, or engine limitation..). Here there is just no justification for av. nerf (except a supposed late end spam which I never encountered in my 260 games).

(just had to write this too) USSR also has the BMP- 2 obr 1986 which has the highst ground AP ingame. (the only thing which has a higher AP is the Hellfire missiles which are on 2 of USAs helicopters)

Have you ever see the BMP mod. 86 in game ? I did not, personally, thanks to his enormous cost (just like the BMP-3).
Image

User avatar
Scharnberg
Master Sergeant
Posts: 152
Joined: Wed 22 May 2013 11:17
Contact:

Re: the balance

Postby Scharnberg » Sun 7 Jul 2013 02:33

seen it twice i think xD
Pro Rege Et Grege

User avatar
Scharnberg
Master Sergeant
Posts: 152
Joined: Wed 22 May 2013 11:17
Contact:

Re: the balance

Postby Scharnberg » Sun 7 Jul 2013 02:35

But yea NATO is better at doing a frontal assult. But USSR is alot better at flanking because of higher range.
Pro Rege Et Grege

User avatar
NATO Potato
Captain
Posts: 1691
Joined: Sun 20 Jan 2013 01:22

Re: the balance

Postby NATO Potato » Sun 7 Jul 2013 03:06

Hartmann wrote:
mrl0ve wrote:
Radioshow wrote: :lol: You have got to be kidding.


Nah, don't worry. Won't happen because people like you don't want to be on a equal playing field with pact.. You might lose.



24AP konkurs.

"Micro is too hard, just give me an ATGM that can hardcounter all heavy armour frontally from extreme range"

If you need this to 'even' the field you must be an absolutely atrocious player.

*looks at Milan F2s*

Return to “Wargame : AirLand Battle”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests