Munitions cost of Quad

[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

[HansVonLuk]

So recently(use loosely, been gone for a while), Whermact has had flamen werfer half tracks and puma up gun costing no munition but have ended up costing man power and fuel.  With a slight increase of the pump up-gun pop cost.  At the moment the quad is 90 munition and with the repair even more.  Would it not be better to give this just a man power and fuel cost in-line with other light vehicles.  Just an idea because at the moment when deciding between, a quad and a Sherman up-gun with repair, the Sherman is fair superior for the same if not lest cost.

-Hans

[LeoPhone]

sherman upgun just needs a price increase.

thats the problem.

[nated0g]

The difference is the quad can cap for armour doctrine. It is also signifcantly (IMO) better than the Flame halftrack; doing dmg to light vehciles and can supress.

[Mysthalin]

The sherman upgun has the same cost as the quad?
What ARE you smoking now?

The main difference between the flametrack and the quad is that the quad kills stuff, while the flametrack just stares at you in sad eyes, pondering the meaning of it's existence.

[vivie5]

Unless you take 7 of them, then the Flametrack shows you who is boss.

[HansVonLuk]

The sherman upgun has the same cost as the quad?
What ARE you smoking now?

Smoking I don't smoke!  Munition wise,

Quad 90 + 25 = 115
Up gun Sherman 60 + 50 = 110

Munitions wise a much better investment.

The up gun puma use to cost like 75 munitions
and I think the flamen half track like 40 or something.

I just trying to point out that 90 munition seems a little costly, when compared to other rape vehicles like armoured cars, which don't cost any munition to purchase just the base unit.

[HansVonLuk]

The main difference between the flametrack and the quad is that the quad kills stuff, while the flametrack just stares at you in sad eyes, pondering the meaning of it's existence.

Lolz

Its not that bad

[Mysthalin]

Quad 90 + 25 = 115
Up gun Sherman 60 + 50 = 110

Just taking the munitions cost and ignoring something like fuel is fairly useless - you need to consider the entire costs when comparing units' efficiencies.

The up gun puma use to cost like 75 munitions
and I think the flamen half track like 40 or something.

Why does it matter? The quad also used to cost 5 popcap at one point, raising since then. We didn't also move up the popcaps of all the other light vehicles.

I just trying to point out that 90 munition seems a little costly, when compared to other rape vehicles like armoured cars, which don't cost any munition to purchase just the base unit.

The statistical average in kills for the quad and the axis Armoured cars leans quite heavily in favour of the quad. Not only that - the quad has suppression, which helps other units get kills that the quad itself doesn't get.

Unless you take 7 of them, then the Flametrack shows you who is boss.

What's sad is that 2 boys AT rifle squads, or 2 ranger squads would indeed show that HHAT is boss.

Lolz

Its not that bad

It is. Trust me.

[HansVonLuk]

"The statistical average in kills for the quad and the axis Armoured cars leans quite heavily in favour of the quad. Not only that - the quad has suppression, which helps other units get kills that the quad itself doesn't get."

This is completely useless, and pure conjecture. What statistical evidence do you have?  Do you keep a database with kills to death ratios?

You always miss the point, 115 munition on a very fragile unit. that  yes can kill inf but so can a puma or an armour car cost ruoughly the same fuel and manpower, but the quad cost an additional 90 munitions.

[Mysthalin]

This is completely useless, and pure conjecture. What statistical evidence do you have?  Do you keep a database with kills to death ratios?

Actually, I've been keeping note of the kills my quads and my ACs would get each game for the past while. The average kills on the quad is 10.8, with most kills being grenadiers and panzergrenadiers, when the average kills on a PE AC is 8.6, and the puma has 7.7. Mostly riflemen/at gun crewmen killed. Larger KDR for PE AC is easily creditable to flank speed.
I did not factor in light vehicle kills which the quad tends to get if fighting PE.

You always miss the point, 115 munition on a very fragile unit. that  yes can kill inf but so can a puma or an armour car cost ruoughly the same fuel and manpower, but the quad cost an additional 90 munitions.

They don't suppress(extremely important), kill less per game, and have in general less damage output. They're also shorter ranged than the quad.

It doesn't matter if it's fragile - the 50mm is even more fragile than the quad. But it's powerful, therefore it's expensive.

[NightRain]

In short Quad pays for its huge damage imput and suppression but sacrifices its armour for that. Same thing with M10. Fast and hard punch but very fragile

[SX23]

In short Quad pays for its huge damage imput and suppression but sacrifices its armour for that. Same thing with M10. Fast and hard punch but very fragile

Not really... It rapes any PE infantry, not to mention it needs 5 shrecks shots to die (at least from PE, already tried bunch of times with 2x shrecks + camo, I can confirm). In some instance it's however very weak, agreed. For example, 50mm 2-shot halftracks, wich makes no sense since it needs 5 shrecks to die)

[Tymathee]

but it still costs a lot of muni plus the manpower and fuel. I think it's what, 310 90 and 30? If you're say, armor doc, which would you rather have, t-17 or quad? thats an easy answer, most people take the t-17 as it can cap as well, plus does more damge to infantry, does very well vs support units and can take out pe vehicles as well.

 So, what does this rape machine of a t-17 cost? 330mu 85fu + 25 for repair and only 60 for sandbags, which is less overall than the quad. Then there's the m8 which is used in somewhat the same role as the quad and t-17 290mu 50 fu and 35mu for .50 cal, 45mu for skirts (80 total) then repairs is 25mu and a mine 35mu. It's a bit more than the quad but it also had a price decrease, it used to be 50 for both the .50 cal and skirts, actually skirts used to be 100mu not too long ago.

in the end, the quad does need a price decrease if only slightly, i'd say about 75mu would be good. and that would make the total upgrade cost 100mu which puts it in line with all other lv's in terms of total mu cost

[Sach]

This is completely useless, and pure conjecture. What statistical evidence do you have?  Do you keep a database with kills to death ratios?

Actually, I've been keeping note of the kills my quads and my ACs would get each game for the past while. The average kills on the quad is 10.8, with most kills being grenadiers and panzergrenadiers, when the average kills on a PE AC is 8.6, and the puma has 7.7. Mostly riflemen/at gun crewmen killed. Larger KDR for PE AC is easily creditable to flank speed.
I did not factor in light vehicle kills which the quad tends to get if fighting PE.

You always miss the point, 115 munition on a very fragile unit. that  yes can kill inf but so can a puma or an armour car cost ruoughly the same fuel and manpower, but the quad cost an additional 90 munitions.

They don't suppress(extremely important), kill less per game, and have in general less damage output. They're also shorter ranged than the quad.

It doesn't matter if it's fragile - the 50mm is even more fragile than the quad. But it's powerful, therefore it's expensive.

mate, you need a hobby

[Mysthalin]

mate, you need a hobby

I know, but in my black hole of a town there's absolutely NOTHING to do. As in, seriously, we don't even got a fucking cinema.

And seeing as I am intending to study economics - gathering info and interpreting it is fairly decent training.

thats an easy answer, most people take the t-17 as it can cap as well, plus does more damge to infantry, does very well vs support units and can take out pe vehicles as well.

Not really - T17 relies entirely on being at short range to hit infantry. Quad can deal it's damage at long range, as well as short.
Quad rapes quads if it flanks them, just like the T17 does.
Quad destroys PE vehicles very well, too, actually.
It can cap just as good as the T17 does.
And all this for just 6 popcap, unlike the T17, on top of being far cheaper in fuel.

then there's the m8 which is used in somewhat the same role as the quad and t-17 290mu 50 fu and 35mu for .50 cal, 45mu for skirts (80 total) then repairs is 25mu and a mine 35mu

Yet again - costs more popcap, and more resources in total. The fact it "used to cost more" holds NO relevance whatsoever.

[Groundfire]

Hans, im gonna save you all this time arguing with mystalin till your blue in the face and just tell you that for every quad you have, sell it, buy 2 nilla halftracks instead.

Twice the firepower for the same pop, and alittle more MP and fuel.

With the fucking enormous munitions you save in this move, you go buy your upguns.

[CafeMilani]

lower quad muni cost by 20.

[Smokaz]

Quad is fine, if anything the bugs that certain plaers build their companies around ( i did it once but it sucked for me ) make the quad ridicolous, fixed next patch but the base quad is fine.

[Unkn0wn]

Quad is fucking Ace imo, just remember to use it defensively.
(Keep it in the back of your ATGs)

You do bring up a fair point about making it cost just fuel though. The munition cost is still a remnant from when it was a HT upgrade rather than a separate unit.

[HansVonLuk]

This is completely useless, and pure conjecture. What statistical evidence do you have?  Do you keep a database with kills to death ratios?

Actually, I've been keeping note of the kills my quads and my ACs would get each game for the past while. The average kills on the quad is 10.8, with most kills being grenadiers and panzergrenadiers, when the average kills on a PE AC is 8.6, and the puma has 7.7. Mostly riflemen/at gun crewmen killed. Larger KDR for PE AC is easily creditable to flank speed.
I did not factor in light vehicle kills which the quad tends to get if fighting PE.

You always miss the point, 115 munition on a very fragile unit. that  yes can kill inf but so can a puma or an armour car cost ruoughly the same fuel and manpower, but the quad cost an additional 90 munitions.

They don't suppress(extremely important), kill less per game, and have in general less damage output. They're also shorter ranged than the quad.

It doesn't matter if it's fragile - the 50mm is even more fragile than the quad. But it's powerful, therefore it's expensive.

I feel for you to even admit to this is some what scary if not sad, and with out proof this is still conjecture.  Oh look I make a list of numbers, oh look they tell me what I want to hear.  What every you say unless these is hard evidence you are wrong.