Double PE on vengance

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[Smokaz]

Scorched/luft "defending" (eventually) on Vengance.

Smokaz/Mudkipz vs Wind/Fallen

http://www.filefront.com/14823601/double%20PEs.rar

Feedback, please. I really want to believe that PE can stand on its own, but other than stolen machineguns, crazy mp44 charges and the occasional hummel barrage there doesnt seem to be any way to punish infantry blobbing from the allies, or rather than blobbing heavy infantry pushing with upgraded weapons and handheld AT.

In this game I felt I had a superior strategy to the allies and that I put a lot of effort into outsmarting them, like waiting with destroying the bridge, tank trapping the other side of the map and then one big infantry push from the allies just sweeps us away.

I think PE really needs to gain some kind of supression tool to help them handle infantry. Its just sad how little I can get out of my own infantry in terms of fighting other infantry because I am constantly running around with half-dead squads lacking supression or grenades that win fights.

[fallensoldier7]

GG lol.

[TheWindCriesMary]

 I think this was a fantastic game, and the level of gameplay was really challenging but enjoyable. TONS of vet units die in this game, on both sides. There is strategic backcapping, some really effective scorched earth mines, and lots of great firefights.

 The biggest high light of the game I would have to say would be the final battle. Cut off from their spawn, one side has to try and break out with a sizeable force of survivors. It is a heroic but ultimately doomed attempt.

 -Wind

[TheWindCriesMary]

In this game I felt I had a superior strategy to the allies and that I put a lot of effort into outsmarting them, like waiting with destroying the bridge, tank trapping the other side of the map and then one big infantry push from the allies just sweeps us away.

 I felt the opposite to be honest. Destroyign the bridge didn't really affect us because we never really made any attempts to advance across it, partly because we were pushing across the rivers or laterally along the road when we did try to push, and partly because the mysterious rape mines on the other side that we had encountered early game gave us a strong mistrust of the whole place.

 As for the tank traps, your extensive use of them on the left was a continual source of perplexment for me throughout the game. Neither Fallen or I relied on tanks much at all in the game, (he used 1 croc and a hellcat as I recall, while I used 2 fireflies late game) but even when we did it was almost exclusively on the right. The tank traps on the left however I found to be enormously beneficial as it offered cover and safety from iht's and armored cars, while our infantry (which was pretty much all we used) was able to pass through with ease.


-Wind
 

[Smokaz]

Thats a good observation after the game, but we cannot predict that you guys will be running nothing but infantry in your companies before after the game, like mudkipz said in vent.

[Mukip]

They kept getting away to go and heal.  That map is good for defending the bridge and river, but it's hard to pursue them when they retreat to heal their Airborne, and so the Ab player ends up with 17 vehicle kills.  I thought we played better until the major infantry attack rolled over us.  Partly my fault for not fielding enough infantry.

It's annoying that PE infantry are so vulnerable to a Rifleman hand grenade, it's been said before that PE could really benefit from a survivability boost. 

[TheWindCriesMary]

Thats a good observation after the game, but we cannot predict that you guys will be running nothing but infantry in your companies before after the game, like mudkipz said in vent.

 That is a good point to be sure.

-Wind

[Smokaz]

Oh and I HOPE KILLERS PANTHER AND THIS FAIL PE ACCOUNT BURNS IN HELL![ STUPID ASS MONG PE! /vent

[Killer344]

What a way to loose my vet 3 panther.

[fallensoldier7]

Lol did you actually watch how it died?

[TheWindCriesMary]

 I dont think too many judgements should be passed on PE as a result of the outcome of this battle.

 -Wind

[Smokaz]

Go back to your noodles

[BaleWolf]

By outmaneuvering did you mean keeping your forces a field away from the enemy?

[CrazyWR]

will watch and comment later tonight or tomorrow...

[CrazyWR]

I dont think too many judgements should be passed on PE as a result of the outcome of this battle.

 -Wind

why not?  I realize its a bit of a perfect storm in terms of the enemy infantry fielded and their survivability...but AB and tommy squads with vet(and even w/o tbh) are so much more survivable than any form of infantry PE can field and don't lose any firepower to make up for that fact...I don't know who changed the stats for PE armor type and what the rationale was, but PE infantry just drops like flies compared to brit infantry and airborne...they also lose out to rifles with either nades or bars...

[TheWindCriesMary]

why not?  I realize its a bit of a perfect storm in terms of the enemy infantry fielded and their survivability...but AB and tommy squads with vet(and even w/o tbh) are so much more survivable than any form of infantry PE can field and don't lose any firepower to make up for that fact...I don't know who changed the stats for PE armor type and what the rationale was, but PE infantry just drops like flies compared to brit infantry and airborne...they also lose out to rifles with either nades or bars...

 Because drawing conclusions that PE's infantry is underpowered based off of this game is not responsible. In this game you have two allied companies almost entirely infantry based, with all of their doctrine abillities and resources poured into their infantry units. On the other hand, you have two PE armies who could not possibly be considered infantry based, and who have not poured every last bit of PP into improving their infantry. Of course the allied companies in this game should have an advantage in their one area of focus: infantry.

 It is simply common sense that in this case the infantry of the allied companies should strongly outperform the infantry of the PE. It would be inane to think that the infantry from a company devoted to fielding as much infantry as possible, (and upgrading them as much as possible),  should not be superior to the infantry from a company who does not have such a single-minded and solely-focused priority.

 This is the same kind of thinking that used to irk me so much when I played my PE tank hunters company: after many games I would hear allied players saying that american tanks/vehicles were underpowered because my tanks/vehicles were tearing them apart, despite the fact that my entire company was designed around the ONE goal of destroying tanks and vehicles. Of course my tanks/vehicles are going to be superior to yours if I've sacrificed improving any other area of my army to achieve that goal!
Never mind that I had crap infantry, and was severely weak to infantry because I was so specialized... that didnt matter. They refused to believe that they should have to accept that a specialized company was going to outperform them in one area - they wanted to be on par in every field.

 
   It is also not responsible to make balance suggestions on a case of comparitive equivelency. Eg. "AB and tommy squads with vet... are so much more survivable than any form of infantry PE can field." because this game, and this mod, is not checkers. It's 3rd chess underwater with a blindfold on. That is to say, if the red army gets a unit that does action 1, that doesn't mean the black army has to get a similar unit with comparitive capabillities to make it balanced. Thats how you turn the game into tic tac toe, where all you really do is change the names and appearances of the units between armies, but they all do roughly the same thing.

 Instead we have armies and doctrines that allow for specialized excellence at the expense of all-round capabillity. In this game Fallen and I had no artillery between us, very few vehicles, and you could count the number of tanks we used on one hand and still have fingers to spare. It worked for us this game, and we won, but what if we hadn't? It certainly wasn't a landslide, in fact the units I had left on the field at the end were all I had. Could I have decried that allied armor was underpowered because we couldn't field anything to match a panther? Hell no.

 -Wind

[fallensoldier7]

why not?  I realize its a bit of a perfect storm in terms of the enemy infantry fielded and their survivability...but AB and tommy squads with vet(and even w/o tbh) are so much more survivable than any form of infantry PE can field and don't lose any firepower to make up for that fact...I don't know who changed the stats for PE armor type and what the rationale was, but PE infantry just drops like flies compared to brit infantry and airborne...they also lose out to rifles with either nades or bars...

 Because drawing conclusions that PE's infantry is underpowered based off of this game is not responsible. In this game you have two allied companies almost entirely infantry based, with all of their doctrine abillities and resources poured into their infantry units. On the other hand, you have two PE armies who could not possibly be considered infantry based, and who have not poured every last bit of PP into improving their infantry. Of course the allied companies in this game should have an advantage in their one area of focus: infantry.

 It is simply common sense that in this case the infantry of the allied companies should strongly outperform the infantry of the PE. It would be inane to think that the infantry from a company devoted to fielding as much infantry as possible, (and upgrading them as much as possible),  should not be superior to the infantry from a company who does not have such a single-minded and solely-focused priority.

 This is the same kind of thinking that used to irk me so much when I played my PE tank hunters company: after many games I would hear allied players saying that american tanks/vehicles were underpowered because my tanks/vehicles were tearing them apart, despite the fact that my entire company was designed around the ONE goal of destroying tanks and vehicles. Of course my tanks/vehicles are going to be superior to yours if I've sacrificed improving any other area of my army to achieve that goal!
Never mind that I had crap infantry, and was severely weak to infantry because I was so specialized... that didnt matter. They refused to believe that they should have to accept that a specialized company was going to outperform them in one area - they wanted to be on par in every field.

 
   It is also not responsible to make balance suggestions on a case of comparitive equivelency. Eg. "AB and tommy squads with vet... are so much more survivable than any form of infantry PE can field." because this game, and this mod, is not checkers. It's 3rd chess underwater with a blindfold on. That is to say, if the red army gets a unit that does action 1, that doesn't mean the black army has to get a similar unit with comparitive capabillities to make it balanced. Thats how you turn the game into tic tac toe, where all you really do is change the names and appearances of the units between armies, but they all do roughly the same thing.

 Instead we have armies and doctrines that allow for specialized excellence at the expense of all-round capabillity. In this game Fallen and I had no artillery between us, very few vehicles, and you could count the number of tanks we used on one hand and still have fingers to spare. It worked for us this game, and we won, but what if we hadn't? It certainly wasn't a landslide, in fact the units I had left on the field at the end were all I had. Could I have decried that allied armor was underpowered because we couldn't field anything to match a panther? Hell no.

 -Wind

Well said, and I agree.