[WE] Puma vs M8

[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

[Demon767]

Considering the amount of time it takes to get that amount of kills on a puma and the weak armor it has we can assume the following
1: You play against new players who have absolutely no idea how to counter pumas well.
or
2: You focus most of the game on your pumas and support your teammates with them instead of taking any action yourself (aka babysitting), however with this strategy you're more of a leech on your team, kind of like someone who would bring out hummels in his first call-in.

So as you probably know it won't matter if you get 1 or 50 kills because that hummel has been taking up most of your population the entire game. So the fact is you having 8 of an high pop, high cost and relatively weak unit is not a good thing. Getting 5-10 kills on a puma is possible although it takes a considerable amount of time, however getting it on 8 of your pumas is quite impossible unless both statement 1 and 2 are true.

The puma armored car is too expensive for what it does. It costs almost as much manpower as most tanks (which perform better at every role) and if you have many of them they're also a big drain on your fuel. It's just as expensive as most LV even though it's the only one without any upgrades or abilities and it perform worse at both AI and AT and even scouting duties.

High cost, low survivability, low damage: well then what is it good for? I would say hunting snipers but bikes already perform that role better than the more expensive puma + bike combo.

um yer just pathetic assumptions that are wrong

each puma gets 1-2 ATGs and a squad or 2 airborne squads

oh and puma + hummel? last time i checked puma aint a PE unit. gtfo noob.

i mean seriously i could redo what you just said easily by saying

ASSUMPTION

[NightRain]

Puma.


Idea. Give it more LoS to make it a richman's bike

[PonySlaystation]

um yer just pathetic assumptions that are wrong

each puma gets 1-2 ATGs and a squad or 2 airborne squads

oh and puma + hummel? last time i checked puma aint a PE unit. gtfo noob.

i mean seriously i could redo what you just said easily by saying

Nice comeback LOL,

To a more serious point you have completely missed the point. The number of kills is not a measure of how good a unit is. This is where the hummel parable fits very well. If you have a hummel in your start then you will get a lot of kills on it but that doesn't mean that you used it right or played well or helped your teammates at all.

There is of course a third theory: You exaggerated the number of kills your pumas get, which makes you a liar.

So your first post in this thread is either
1: Lying bullshit
or
2: Off-topic trolling

[Demon767]

well 2 atgs = 4 men and 1 infantry squad or 2 airborne squads adds up to the next 6 men. then im calculating the rest of my battallion damage towards airborne, however my pumas do more significant damage to airborne, thus an average of 3 men per squad is a good average to go by on.

btw if you read what i said, all i stated was that each of my pumas get 5-10 kills each and that i will be happy if it gets a price decrease ^.^ L2R

[BigDick]

um yer just pathetic assumptions that are wrong

each puma gets 1-2 ATGs and a squad or 2 airborne squads

who are you playing? im just curious maybe i can grab that stomp next time to vet up some units

pumas do almost no damage against units in cover
they do no damage when they are not right behind AT guns
the conclusion is the guys you play don't support their AT guns

=> stomps?

[NightRain]

Which pumas are we talking about here. the upgun or 2cm? The 2cm makes me want to cry.

[Mysthalin]

I find pumas work amazing in conjunction with StuGs (and other high-armour units). Have the StuG take the ATG shots while the puma flanks around the ATG and takes it out. Of course, that won't work particularly well if there's a second ATG covering the first.

[BigDick]

and of course  that does not work when players follow basic rule number 1 of EIR

- keep always 2 pieces of AT arround

a zook squad will shred pumas as well same to boysAT and even RR when used in cover as support or any kind of Vehicle/Tank or stickies taking of 50% health of puma

and to suicide a unit into its hardcounter to take at gun shots to make an other unit maybe "useful" if there i not enough support for that AT gun sounds a bit weird

[Mysthalin]

Even with a ranger squad shooting at the puma with every shot hitting - it will not kill the puma fast enough to save the ATG, and you know it. Stickies are a complete non-issue since you'll need 35 seconds before you can throw the second one.

[Tymathee]

I find pumas work amazing in conjunction with StuGs (and other high-armour units). Have the StuG take the ATG shots while the puma flanks around the ATG and takes it out. Of course, that won't work particularly well if there's a second ATG covering the first.

could also use better strategy, run infantry at the atg, make the atg fire and start to move, rush in puma, dead atg either way.

[DarkSoldierX]

It is buffed, please see the Armor Doctrine. Any Pershing comparison must be made using those doctrine abilities.

Puma should get more buffs to it from the doctrines. Blitz could give it more sight and accuracy, Terror could give it Suppression Fire,  Defensive....sucks.

Theres something I may agree on. I don't agree with the buffing of a normal puma. Terror already gains +20% puma damage in neut/enemy territory.

[RikiRude]

i agree with ampm, pumas need doctrine love.

[smurfORnot]

I find pumas work amazing in conjunction with StuGs (and other high-armour units). Have the StuG take the ATG shots while the puma flanks around the ATG and takes it out. Of course, that won't work particularly well if there's a second ATG covering the first.

so you have around 3x more pop to face single atg...what if there is also sherman,m10 or another 1-2 atg's around?!



for those who defend how puma is actually usefull,replay against good players please,not when you rape some random noob...

and those who say ,allies should have stronger lv's ,ok,but that doesnt mean that axis should have one which is crap and no one is ussing it...if allies armor is so inferior I wonder why people still use it?! since I dont see shortage od m10,shermans or m8's on the field...

[Vermillion_Hawk]

so you have around 3x more pop to face single atg...what if there is also sherman,m10 or another 1-2 atg's around?!



for those who defend how puma is actually usefull,replay against good players please,not when you rape some random noob...

and those who say ,allies should have stronger lv's ,ok,but that doesnt mean that axis should have one which is crap and no one is ussing it...if allies armor is so inferior I wonder why people still use it?! since I dont see shortage od m10,shermans or m8's on the field...

Smurf, that has to be one of the singlemost idiotic statements I've ever heard. Allies use their armor because it's THE ONLY ARMOR THEY HAVE. I wish I could pop a Panther in with my Rangers, but no, it doesn't work like that! Yes, Allied armor does not measure up against Axis armor, but it's the only stuff we've got, so might as well use it!

[NightRain]

Damn, I would so wish to be able to capture enemy tanks if they are forced to remain on field after either side wins the fight. That'd be golden to roll a P4 and a M4 Sherman in your starting calling. Free resources one says? No, not really. It'd be a unit HELD in a new bar where you can additionally buy it for your forces to use rather than have free resources like in old EiR. I think it'd need major work of course but I can not see how it'd fail. The major work would be to get the axis armor ready to fight axis armor and allied armor vs allied armor. Those are the major flaws that once fixed would make fun mode.


Replays of pumas owning. I don't care if it is vs noobs or not because were the player nub or not, they automatically know how to deal with a puma.

[DarkSoldierX]

so you have around 3x more pop to face single atg...what if there is also sherman,m10 or another 1-2 atg's around?!



for those who defend how puma is actually usefull,replay against good players please,not when you rape some random noob...

and those who say ,allies should have stronger lv's ,ok,but that doesnt mean that axis should have one which is crap and no one is ussing it...if allies armor is so inferior I wonder why people still use it?! since I dont see shortage od m10,shermans or m8's on the field...

If thats the way you think, why in every single game ive played this month has included Puma's and AC's?

[AmPM]

Smurf, that has to be one of the singlemost idiotic statements OpI've ever heard. Allies use their armor because it's THE ONLY ARMOR THEY HAVE. I wish I could pop a Panther in with my Rangers, but no, it doesn't work like that! Yes, Allied armor does not measure up against Axis armor, but it's the only stuff we've got, so might as well use it!

Sherman is better than P4 or STuG.

M10 kills P4 and STuG.

Pershing kills Panther, HVAP Pershing destroys panthers and tigers.

Jumbo and churchills rock for AI and soaking hits.

Firefly can solo a Tiger or KT.

Why don't you have good armor again?

[RoyalHants]

*hides*




Imo i agree with whoever said axis should have worse lvs

[AmPM]

It is relevant though, in terms of gameplay they feel Axis armor is superior to it's Allied counterparts, and therefore Axis LV's should be worse.

When you point out that Allied Armor is superior to equivalent Axis Armor it defeats that argument that Axis LV's should be worse.

The Puma 2cm could use some help, the 50mm is mostly useless.

[DarkSoldierX]

It is relevant though, in terms of gameplay they feel Axis armor is superior to it's Allied counterparts, and therefore Axis LV's should be worse.

When you point out that Allied Armor is superior to equivalent Axis Armor it defeats that argument that Axis LV's should be worse.

The Puma 2cm could use some help, the 50mm is mostly useless.

But the thing is, allied armour isnt superior. It requires less micro for that tiger to be efficecent then that firefly to be effiecent, but i admit its a good tank.

I still believe that a few doctrinal buffs for puma and AC, thats fine, some doc's already have some buffs for them though. But if they get buffs I believe another allied unit equivelent should get buff outside of armour doctrine as they have enough buffs for that.