wow p4 start

[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

[BradAnderson]

p4s

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Draygon]

all I can say....lame as hell

Edit: To further state why it was lame.  We knew they were going to be a tank heavy start, so we brought out AT guns at the start to be ready for that.  They Tank Trapped the entire map all the way across.  Then had 2 more layers of TTs behind that so if we got past one they had another one up.  They had the 3 P4s hold us up, and then 2 Nebels and a Stuka  hammer us while they made the rest of the layers.  Being able to DT/TT 3/4 of the map off is horrible, and yes MCP then screws you becuase you can never get anywhere close to getting to the middle.

[fldash]

Battle?

[Tkaudi]

what map and battle

[fldash]

And I'm guessing you guys lost... WAAA!  P4 start is just as valid as any. 

[BradAnderson]

2386 abbeville

also 1 p4 is fine but 3 and a panter wow

[fldash]

heh, big tank starts of yesteryear..

[Unkn0wn]

This strategy is as old as the street.
Me, AMPM and some other guy used to start out 3vs3s with triple Tiger Ace back in the days, it was 'insanely' powerful or semt that way anyway but it drained so much pop, especially with MCP it could easily be countered.

I'll watch it and 'review' none the less though.

[Draygon]

They had infantry too, shrekers to be exact.

[salan]

shrekers are mean when you bring out heavy tanks right off the start. very difficult to counter without more stickies

[Draygon]

If I had munitions for them Id get them, but dont have enough for stickies at the current price.

[fldash]

I watched the replay.  It was a very sound move and you guys had them really hurting but their were M8's sitting up north doing nothing while the tanks had around 1/4 health or less after the first battle.

P4's had nothing to do with the loss.  Bad play had everything.  Brad Anderson owned, the rest of the Allies played pretty shitty.

[Unkn0wn]

Alright. I expected something big but I'm pretty dissapointed.

They started off with a Stuka, Two PzIVs and a whole lot of troops. Nothing special, this is just a traditional defense start except they have 'more' tanks than usual.

Draygon was AFK in the first 4 minutes or so, meaning his AT guns & M8s just sat there when they could've supported .
2 PzIvs face off against an unupgunned sherman and an upgunned one, RRs drop in but fail to be effective enough. Both PzIvs are badly damaged, Brad makes a mistake by driving his 5% health upgunned sherman up and getting it killed instead of letting the unupgunned one take the damage.

Both PzIVs sit at the repair bunker, badly damaged for about 5 minutes. Draygon has M8s right next door and his halftrack ran into him earlier so he knew they were there. M8s could have easily taken out one panzer IV, maybe even both since they were lacking other support.

From then on it justs goes downhill, Panzer IVs keep sitting there and get repaired to full health, a third one comes in.
All 3 allies focus on one area, which is a mistake when facing both a Stuka & a Nebelwerfer, they get outplayed and can't get past the first 5 territories.

Panther only comes in after the 15 minute mark but the game is already lost from there on .


You guys got outplayed.

[fldash]

What Unkn0wn said.  I watched in like 10x speed so I missed a lot. 

[Unkn0wn]

I watched it at fast speed after the panther rolled on, to be honest it was already lost at that point anyway.
(15 - 20 minutes into the game)

It's a good example though of how a strong early-game can win you a game in MCP .

[Ucross]

Personally I think it was more skill than MCP as the factor that lost them the game.  Especially considering the popcap difference at 15-20 min.  Maybe that's just me though.

[Draygon]

Yea I was afk at the start....my M8s would have done shit to the double P4s, AT could have been in a better spot...Killed the Panther at least.

You guys go play them, then post the replay of how shitty you played

[Unkn0wn]

my M8s would have done shit to the double P4s

Not true, one had 5% health and when on the move, PzIVs have a 'shitty 'accuracy against m8s, you would've only needed to get 1 shot off on each m8 to kill the Panzer IV, you could've easily pulled that off. With some proper micro you would probably even be able to take the other one out too although it was getting a little high on health.

Watch the PzIv/Panther vs M8 spam videos if you don't believe me about this .
(Two greyhounds can take out an unsupported Panther when properly microed & with some luck - a lot of the shots will miss or 'go through' the m8.)

[Draygon]

Well I love how everyone that comes against a new tactic or a new way of play and loses "plays like shit."  It couldn't be that we were just not prepared for it or that we got flustered when we saw what we were up against, or the fact that quite possibly our companies were not set up to go against it at all.

Before you tell someone or say someone played like shit...think first.

[Unkn0wn]

That's not what we're saying, however this is really not a "new strategy" imho.
You were prepared for it, you had 2 shermans and AT guns out at the start, you could've properly countered it.

I really think you got outplayed, that doesn't mean "you played like shit", it just means they had a better strategy and played better.