ATG prices and other subjects

[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

[TheVolskinator]

I made the change from riflezooks to M3 Grease Guns in my trademark mg+dual squad call ins (which I so rarely see elsewhere) and the effects were tremendous. Tbh, zooks are complete shit and are only useful for 'scavenging' damage, lets say getting in 1-2 rockets max on an already-dead or nearly so panther. Shrecks and RRs are definately better for blobs, but tank cannon splash eats blobs, especially the sherman. Elite armor? Insert flames here--I like flames. A lot.

[PonySlaystation]

I'm stating my honest opinion.  When was the last time you seen ANY ranger player actually spam zooks?  Every Ranger player pretty much will have mass SMGs, I run at most 2-3 squads of zooks now and rely on ATGs.  Crazy's original post was complaining why there are too many ATGs, and other than the fragile M10, handheld AT (doctrine specific) and the ubiquitous ATG, what else is there to field to counter heavy tanks?

Maybe if you cool down and just don't shoot down plausible explanations as 'fanboy-ism', you might see that for yourself.

I probably see zook rangers more often than smgs. Tank Reaper zooks are deadly.

[BigDick]

ii think beside increasing resources of at guns a bit the pop need to be increased further to at least 8 per AT gun
to make them still a good counter to heavies the heavy tank pop need to increased a bit too

same goes to tankdestroyer (marder, gwaggon +2 pop, m10 +2 pop)

[lionel23]

My god, 8 pop atgs?  Jesus man, that's crazy pop.  You know how crazy that is on reman?

Single 5 pop riflesquad, remans an ATG... you are now eating 10 POP for remanning (minus 3 for the rifle squad while the gun and recrewers count 8 against your POP pool, plus the 2 for the remaining rifles).  So if you're at say 25/30, you're not going to be at 35/30.

And craziness raising the pop on all that.  No one would be able to afford to bring tanks and there would be even more infantry.  An infantry spammer with mass RRs or stickies would totally stomp anyone using ANY vehicles.  Stugs are considered TDs, so they would jump to 10 pop, M10s and M18s would be the same pop as a Sherman, so why would I take those TDs now unless they had a major health buff.  Marders/Gwagons/50mm would be pop prohibitive... so now people will spam light tanks for LESS pop overall to overcome your infantry that is now lacking AT.  Let's stop and say 2 Greyhounds at 8 pop each (16 in LV), you need to bring out the 16 POP of AT just to cover yourself as 8 POP worth of AT isn't going to stop dodging LVs... T17s and Stags will have a field day, as well as the Panzer 2 with rofl-stomping anything.  And if you wanted to bring out 2 stugs... that's 20 POP of tank to stop 16 pop of LV, and one stug is probably going to get real messed up during it.

[BigDick]

- 2 stugs are 16 pop not 20

- an airborne RR spamer will be handled by 3 pop mgs and supporting inf

- 8 pop for an ATG is not crazy is the only way to stop people heaving 2-3 ATGs each always on the field

the most eir maps are just to small for being not completely locked down with at last 6 ATGs in a 3v3

[lionel23]

2 stugs would be 10 POP under your proposed change (+2 pop to 8 Pop stug).

Also, you give a bigger advantage to a heavy tank player. A tiger is 16 POP.  In order to counter that, you need to bring out the same amount of pop in AT to stop it.  So let's look at this:

Tiger + 2 Gren squads (16 + 10) = 26 pop
2 ATGs + 2 Riflesquads (16 + 10) = 26 pop

All the grens have to do is kill the weak ATGs, heck even the tiger can do it knowing there's no way you'd have 3 ATGs at 24 POP on the field.. which is equal to the tiger with support.

During the fight, the American remans the ATGs, assuming no losses to any squad members

Tiger + 2 Grens = 26 pop still
2 Remanned ATGs + 2 Riflesquads (at 3 man each now) = 16+4 = 20 POP.

That's pretty excessive pop demand for ATGs and you can't bring enough AT or infantry to stop that.  What if in a 3v3 the axis all start with tigers?  It would require every allied player to START with 2 ATGs to even have a chance, and if the 3 tigers w/ support gang up fast and eliminate all 6 ATGs in the beginning of the game, you have no way to counter the tanks.

Now with your pop increase on TD, you have to bring out MORE armor than the tiger player to counter him.

2 M10s = 24 POP to counter a 16 pop tank.  He has 8 pop advantage on support escort.  Or worse, if you try to bring out as many M10s as possible

3 M10s = 36 POP... with absolutely no escort other than a MG or mortar on the field for the remaining 4 pop.  That tiger player now has a 16 POP tank with 20 POP of support or he can field 2 tigers at once AND still have a support squad (4-5 pop) for a supporting infantry squad.  I doubt the m10s would win in such a situation.

It would strongly favor the heavy tank and infantry-heavy player and gimp any way to counter it unless the allied players were fielding pure inf or mass heavy-tanks to be cost effective.

[BigDick]

2 stugs would be 10 POP under your proposed change (+2 pop to 8 Pop stug).

where did i said a stug needs a pop increase?

Also, you give a bigger advantage to a heavy tank player. A tiger is 16 POP.  In order to counter that, you need to bring out the same amount of pop in AT to stop it.  So let's look at this:

read again, thats why i said heavy tanks need pop increase too so your argument is invalid

[lionel23]

Stug is a Tank Destroyer, so it would be affected by your choice.  Otherwise you're pitting 8 pop stugs against 12 pop M10s, which is grossly imbalanced against the allies.

And heavy tanks would have to go above 20 pop then, well at least for the tiger/jadg/king tiger... which if one person spams ATGs still at 8 pop and another person says spams 3 pop MGs and such... the heavy tank with support would have no way to still go through, as by raising the pop on all tanks you'd have much less to counter ATG creep with their own guard if they say spam 9 Vicker MGs and 5 or so ATGs.... under that situation for example.  It would seem it would now favor support spammers for lots of low pop units to control everything as you'd effectively eliminated tanks from practical use now?

[BigDick]

Stug is a Tank Destroyer, so it would be affected by your choice.  Otherwise you're pitting 8 pop stugs against 12 pop M10s, which is grossly imbalanced against the allies.

stug is no tank destroyer its an assault gun

and an 8 pop stug vs an 12 pop m10 is no imbalance since the m10 completely rape the stug

furthermore the pop difference between 2 units does not need to represent the performance of the units vs each other but the whole performance of a unit on the battlefield
and there is an m10 obviously way superior

[lionel23]

It's considered a TD in this mod, so it would go up.  You don't bring stugs out to floor infantry (though you can powerslide), that's what the P4 is for.

Stug is Anti-tank and everyone knows this.  It's slightly less pop due to lack of turret, and you would have to raise it otherwise it would give the axis an unfair advantage in mass spamming stugs with no hope for the allies to counter it without going equal in ATGs to stop that.

[AmPM]

STuG is better at AI than AT Lionel...sadly.

I think it should go to 10 pop, get better pen and 45 range like all other TDs. Oh, and a price increase.

[lionel23]

Doesn't it have a better penetrating gun than the P4?

[BigDick]

It's considered a TD in this mod, so it would go up.  You don't bring stugs out to floor infantry (though you can powerslide), that's what the P4 is for.

i bring out a stug for its mg and to protect my infantry a bit against light vehicle rushed or mainbattle tanks (role = infantry support assault gun)

stug completely lacks in mobility and in a turret and blows vs. heavy tanks and is just dead meat on its own

other than m10 with more range an awesome agility and as one of the best AI vehicles....which can go raiding on its own

[AmPM]

Doesn't it have a better penetrating gun than the P4?

No, not really. It just has a better damage modifier.

[lionel23]

At 12 pop the M10 would be a horrible choice to bring out, hitting inf and stopping pretty much to be blown away by even the 8 pop stug or any sort of handheld AT.  I'd just faust spam to wipe out M10s at that point, with 50 MU for them being a deal now to counter expensive tanks.

[BigDick]

why? its main tread paks would have increased a pop same as its targets that he can't just take on its own mostly (heavy tanks)

[PonySlaystation]

- 8 pop for an ATG is not crazy is the only way to stop people heaving 2-3 ATGs each always on the field

That is a terrible idea, people are already limited by the high pop. If someone actually has 2-3 at guns on then you can have 2-3 grenadiers or riflemen on more than that guy and rape his at guns.

[Poppi]

2 stugs would be 10 POP under your proposed change (+2 pop to 8 Pop stug).

Also, you give a bigger advantage to a heavy tank player. A tiger is 16 POP.  In order to counter that, you need to bring out the same amount of pop in AT to stop it.  So let's look at this:

Tiger + 2 Gren squads (16 + 10) = 26 pop
2 ATGs + 2 Riflesquads (16 + 10) = 26 pop

All the grens have to do is kill the weak ATGs, heck even the tiger can do it knowing there's no way you'd have 3 ATGs at 24 POP on the field.. which is equal to the tiger with support.

During the fight, the American remans the ATGs, assuming no losses to any squad members

Tiger + 2 Grens = 26 pop still
2 Remanned ATGs + 2 Riflesquads (at 3 man each now) = 16+4 = 20 POP.

That's pretty excessive pop demand for ATGs and you can't bring enough AT or infantry to stop that.  What if in a 3v3 the axis all start with tigers?  It would require every allied player to START with 2 ATGs to even have a chance, and if the 3 tigers w/ support gang up fast and eliminate all 6 ATGs in the beginning of the game, you have no way to counter the tanks.

Now with your pop increase on TD, you have to bring out MORE armor than the tiger player to counter him.

2 M10s = 24 POP to counter a 16 pop tank.  He has 8 pop advantage on support escort.  Or worse, if you try to bring out as many M10s as possible

3 M10s = 36 POP... with absolutely no escort other than a MG or mortar on the field for the remaining 4 pop.  That tiger player now has a 16 POP tank with 20 POP of support or he can field 2 tigers at once AND still have a support squad (4-5 pop) for a supporting infantry squad.  I doubt the m10s would win in such a situation.

It would strongly favor the heavy tank and infantry-heavy player and gimp any way to counter it unless the allied players were fielding pure inf or mass heavy-tanks to be cost effective.

FINALLY.  People are discussing the imbalance of heavies. Not to mention the heavies that can function as AI and AT. Best POP and money you can ever spend.

[Mysthalin]

8 popcap for ATGs is probably just a tad bit excessive - though I see no reason why they couldn't be increased to 6 popcap, to be fair.

[shockcoil]

8 popcap for ATGs is probably just a tad bit excessive - though I see no reason why they couldn't be increased to 6 popcap, to be fair.

Because then you can't start with 4 rifles and a ATG and if that happens I will hold you personally responsible for ever and never talk to you again