*

Account

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 18, 2024, 09:19:59 am

Login with username, password and session length

Resources

Recent posts

[June 14, 2024, 01:23:36 pm]

[May 28, 2024, 01:28:23 pm]

[March 08, 2024, 12:13:38 am]

[March 08, 2024, 12:12:54 am]

[December 30, 2023, 08:00:58 pm]

[February 04, 2023, 11:46:41 am]

[December 25, 2022, 11:36:26 am]

[December 14, 2022, 12:10:06 am]

[September 22, 2022, 06:57:30 am]

[August 22, 2022, 05:10:35 pm]
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: [CW] Staghound - Underpriced?  (Read 41900 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
cloud234 Offline
EIR Veteran
Posts: 363


« on: December 13, 2010, 08:13:32 pm »

I think staghounds are severely underpriced. I will compare a staghound by using a M8 as a benchmark as it appears to be the closet comparison.

From my observations:

1a. A staghound has more HP than a M8, taking damage much better. While a M8 has "dodge", the poor pathing (at least from my experience) exposes it for longer periods to enemy fire.

b. The raw base hp also allows it to perform better in my personal opinion in majority of the situations.

2. The .50 CAL mg upgrade increases its anti-infantry capability massively compared to the M8 .50 CAL upgrade. It can be argued that the .50CAL is really what makes Staghounds useful and rightfully so. However at 50 munitions, it is too cheap for its firepower, essentially better than almost every other anti-infantry upgrade which is priced similarly. It feels more like a mobile Gren LMG42.

3. Its top turret, while low in damage, still penetrates medium tanks (p4) adequately and performs better against infantry, whereas M8s (for me at least) does not score hits as often. It can also suppress rather well.

At 310 MP 90 Fuel, it is only 20MP and 10 Fuel more expensive than an M8. However, I find myself killing way more with staghounds than with M8s. They can function very well on their own, moving in to flank paks/kite schrecks, with enough HP to risk getting hits while still killing off the anti-tank units.

I think it should be priced on the concept of the T17, having higher fuel as a staghound has the potential to outperform the cromwell.

The greatest disadvantage of the staghound is its lack of "dodge" bonuses which is afforded to an M8. My thoughts are as follows:

i. Cloaked pak fires @ vehicle. Regardless of dodge modifiers a cloaked pak shot usually hits the M8, therefore the dodge modifier does not really make the M8 superior vs the Staghound. Usually these units take only 1 hit before reaching the flank/off-side of the field of fire, essentially resulting in defeat for the pak. I'm thinking the pak fires at "medium" range as at "long" range, the pak sees vehicle, moves barrel to target it and just as it fires, vehicle has reahed medium range. However, on prolonged skirmishes at long ranges, the dodge will be a definite advantage.

ii. Schrecks. They generally miss at long range but at short - medium range, even on "calculated" misses, their trajectory is still straight enough to score hits. Raw hp appears to be more beneficial.

Therfore I think, it would be good to do a combination of the following:

1. Raise MP cost marginally, by 10-40MP to reflect its cost effectiveness against infantry squads.
2. Increase Fuel cost to at least 100. At T17 price would appear excessive (125 fuel)
3. Increase Munition cost for .50Cal upgrade to reflect its effectiveness.

Main argument: Too cost effective for what it can do, to the stage of being underpriced.

Experience: Currently playing Brit Mandos as Cloud09. With 4 staghounds.
Logged
Tymathee Offline
Donator
*
Posts: 9741



« Reply #1 on: December 13, 2010, 09:49:17 pm »

thats kinda funny that the .50 cal on the stag does more damage, especially seeing as the use the same gun. m8s dodger more stags always seem to get hit. now, the old hmg used to be ridiculously powerful and needed like Sherman pricing but atm, i think its fine.
Logged

"I want proof!"
"I have proof!"
"Whatever, I'm still right"

Dafuq man, don't ask for proof if you'll refuse it if it's not in your favor, logic fallacy for the bloody win.
Groundfire Offline
EIRR community manager
EIR Veteran
Posts: 8511



« Reply #2 on: December 13, 2010, 09:52:06 pm »

Staghound has the M3 HT top MG.

It's inbetween the Sherman 50.cal and the old Stag 50. cal in effectiveness.

But yeah, everyone pay attention. This is how you gripe and get noticed by the illuminati, the hidden covenant of shadowy balance advisors that dictate the order of the world and the stats of all the units you use. Wink
Logged

Latest Shoutcast:
EIRR Groundcast 11 "The Super Dev Showdown!!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOGm79rXWhU (full version)

Artekas Offline
Donator
*
Posts: 784


« Reply #3 on: December 13, 2010, 09:53:23 pm »

The M3 has the same MG as the M8, so it's a moot point. Unless this mod changed something, of course.
Logged
smurfORnot Offline
EIR Veteran
Posts: 4715



« Reply #4 on: December 13, 2010, 09:54:53 pm »

yea,old one was rly powerful....but even now,stags are quite cost effective,2 of them coming at once will do short work of any infantry,and pak covering it,unless you have some tank around....but at close,they pin infantry and kill em very fast
Logged
Groundfire Offline
EIRR community manager
EIR Veteran
Posts: 8511



« Reply #5 on: December 13, 2010, 10:01:30 pm »

The M3 has the same MG as the M8, so it's a moot point. Unless this mod changed something, of course.

The M3 50.cal's accuracy is twice as good as the M8's 50.cal (sherman 50.cal) at all ranges.

M3 50 acc. L/M/S = .2/.45/.45
Sherman 50 acc. L/M/S = .1/.25/.25

Logged
Artekas Offline
Donator
*
Posts: 784


« Reply #6 on: December 13, 2010, 10:34:38 pm »

Oh, my bad.
Logged
Smokaz Offline
Honoured Member
*
Posts: 11418



« Reply #7 on: December 13, 2010, 11:02:15 pm »

I find companies consisting of lot of them to be more bad for gameplay than a company that has 2-3. Haven't really encountered much staghound spam, I see Nug playing around with it using multiple piat sappers for heavy AT support that kinda shows to me that their AT capability isn't that great. However I do dissaprove of the modifiers it has against some PE stuff which makes it unreasonable good against marders and HT's.

Nug's stag spam was effective but he was not facing any hetzers, panzer IV's etc. Panthers were rendering them unable to go close enough to molest infantry too well, marders were hitting them, shreks were hurting them etc.

Dunno what to think of this. If someone starts with 3 staghounds versus a Panzer IV + shrek start the staghounds get routed easily etc.

If anything adding canister shot to them is a bad idea making it completely negate inf ht by modifiers and easily gibbing a shrek squad on foot.
Logged

SlippedHerTheBigOne: big penis puma
SlippedHerTheBigOne: and i have no repairkits
SlippedHerTheBigOne: ( ͡ ͜ʖ ͡)
cloud234 Offline
EIR Veteran
Posts: 363


« Reply #8 on: December 14, 2010, 12:01:43 am »

I find companies consisting of lot of them to be more bad for gameplay than a company that has 2-3.
...
Nug's stag spam was effective but he was not facing any hetzers, panzer IV's etc. Panthers were rendering them unable to go close enough to molest infantry too well, marders were hitting them, shreks were hurting them etc.

That is precisely correct. Staghounds will not face up to tanks and its ability does not lie in being spammed in tandem.

I think it is force multiplier effect in combined arms which makes staghounds very effective.

Assuming the common AT counters: Pak38 [380MP 120MU 4Pop] Schreck Gren[240MP 120MU 5Pop] P4 [400MP 250FU 12Pop]

And the reasonable, and I think, most common combinations which should work against a single Staghound
Pak38 + Schreck Gren [640MP 240MU 9Pop]
Pak38 x 2 [760MP 240MU 8Pop]
P4 [400MP 250FU 12Pop]

They often require either microing 2 units against 1, or significantly larger pop and resources (i.e. tanks) to beat a single staghound.

Other counters such as pure fausts volks, schreck storms, Tigers are less common.

Remember that the brit player has only used 8Pop. If he has only pure infantry based units with a stag, all the AT investment could be potentially wasted, as strong as it is.

Tanks are somewhat negated by a smaller popcap combination, Bren (Tommies/Tommies in Bren/MMG Bren Carrier) + ATG, which in due honesty, only has 4 popcap invested purely into AT but a good versatile AI/AT weapon. Thats about 12Pop losing to 9Pop.

I think it will be logical to assume that most british players would definitely have an ATG and Bren in their army build. At least I would definitely start with a Bren + ATG.

Overall, this makes fielding a Staghound a strategic advantage, requiring your opponent to use more resources against you. If a staghound is used in the game at all times, you're effectively tieing down at least 8 popcap worth of your enemy's troops into AT roles, without helping in AI roles where as your own Brit troops are significantly more versatile and are only really losing 4Pop into AT against tanks.

If someone starts with 3 staghounds versus a Panzer IV + shrek start the staghounds get routed easily etc.

If you meant a 3 staghound start, you're probably right. Too much micro and resource intensive to actually pay off against the wehr player. I'm thinking of a combination of Stag, Bren Tommie/MMG Carrier + ATG which goes at about 16/17 pop, comparable to your own Pop and a straight on conflict, I think, favours the British side more.

The stag would focus on pushing the schrecks to prevent a fire off, while the bren buttons the tank and the atg finishes it. Very ideal situation I know, but I can't help thinking about this caveat where as I'm not too sure about the "ideal outcome" for the wehr. Killing staghound first? Killing Bren first? Or what?

However I do dissaprove of the modifiers it has against some PE stuff which makes it unreasonable good against marders and HT's.

I know very little of the effects of the staghound on the PE. Could you explain more?

If anything adding canister shot to them is a bad idea making it completely negate inf ht by modifiers and easily gibbing a shrek squad on foot.

I have not tried the canister shot combination yet. However, I think it may result in a need for 3 Inf-AT to deal with a single staghound, as in the presence of only 2 units, it can canister shot one, and flank the other thereafter, having enough HP (I think) to sustain the damage received.

This is of course, purely hypothetical and subject to the terrain (hedges, cover, roads[for fast flanking & higher damage] etc.)
Logged
Smokaz Offline
Honoured Member
*
Posts: 11418



« Reply #9 on: December 14, 2010, 12:09:37 am »

Well button will probably be nerfed soon. All the vehicle disablers are going in the direction of being worse, like threadbreak.

Staghound modifiers vs pe inf ht and marder makes it do like 120 dmg a shot.

Logged
Artekas Offline
Donator
*
Posts: 784


« Reply #10 on: December 14, 2010, 12:10:35 am »

Quote
All the vehicle disablers are going in the direction of being worse, like threadbreak.

Oh my god yessssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
Logged
Spartan_Marine88 Offline
EIR Veteran
Posts: 4838



« Reply #11 on: December 14, 2010, 12:16:06 am »

like threadbreak.
the forums are getting nerfed?


Button is nerfed now, last time i used it, it maybe halfed the vehicles speed, firerate by about 4

as it was an ist, i buttoned it and it took 4 seconds instead of 1 to wipe my squad

*speaking of an IST, ever see what happens when a stag runs into one?

trust me, PE has nothing to worry about the stag cost is fine
« Last Edit: December 14, 2010, 12:19:42 am by Spartan_Marine88 » Logged

Yes that's me, the special snowflake.
Smokaz Offline
Honoured Member
*
Posts: 11418



« Reply #12 on: December 14, 2010, 12:17:34 am »

Thats purely guesswork, but look at changes overall. T17 stun, threadbreak etc.
Logged
Artekas Offline
Donator
*
Posts: 784


« Reply #13 on: December 14, 2010, 12:19:51 am »

Oh, I was hoping there was some kind of consensus in the shadowy elite forums about vehicle disablers needing a nerf. Way to get my hopes up man.
Logged
Spartan_Marine88 Offline
EIR Veteran
Posts: 4838



« Reply #14 on: December 14, 2010, 12:23:11 am »

Oh, I was hoping there was some kind of consensus

the day there is ever something like this, prolly will be the day we all die.
Logged
Illegal_Carrot Offline
Global Moderator
*
Posts: 1068


« Reply #15 on: December 14, 2010, 12:27:46 am »

It'd think the best solution would be to increase its pop cap to 9, bringing it in line with the T17. It certainly has better combat capabilities than the M8, but it lacks the versatility.
Logged

Quote
Rifle87654: Give me reward points.
Brn4meplz: I'm drunk.
slyguy7447 Offline
Donator
*
Posts: 76


« Reply #16 on: December 14, 2010, 02:33:56 am »

I thought the stag bonuses vs PE vehicles was nerfed at the same time the stag price was last increased?
Logged
LeoPhone Offline
Honoured Member
*
Posts: 0


« Reply #17 on: December 14, 2010, 02:40:55 am »

staghound also has tank criticals what means he will rarely get engine damage. and the top gunner is bugged. he cant die.
Logged
Unkn0wn Offline
No longer retired
*
Posts: 18377


« Reply #18 on: December 14, 2010, 05:59:30 am »

No troll images in balance threads, consider this your one and only warning Nug
Logged
Tymathee Offline
Donator
*
Posts: 9741



« Reply #19 on: December 14, 2010, 06:57:41 am »

Stag have no more bonuses vs any type of vehicles, it's all at least 1 or lower. That was changed long ago.

Tbh i love Stags but I've found that having too many can actually cripple me. I tried running 5 (1 starting) and funnily, i dont do as well as if i have 3 and 2 stuarts.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2010, 07:08:04 am by Tymathee » Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

TinyPortal v1.0 beta 4 © Bloc
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.9 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.117 seconds with 35 queries.