Login

russian armor

[1v1] Struggling as Soviets

28 Feb 2017, 22:22 PM
#21
avatar of Sturmpanther
Lead Strategist Badge

Posts: 5441 | Subs: 35

Moved to Red Army Strategies at Turbo's request


Changed the color :P

And i'm not sure, what we can talk more on this thread tbh^^

Your replay is done and i guess alot allready spoke about soviets in 1vs1.

Lets hope the patch will come soon and then we have to look.

Atm in this patch brits, soviet are very ez to play to rank up and have fun^^.
1 Mar 2017, 10:09 AM
#22
avatar of turbotortoise

Posts: 1283 | Subs: 4

Moved to Red Army Strategies at Turbo's request


Thanks Maj, you're the best. :)



allright,
so i get a 7 days ban when on another topic i noticed that the guy giving advice was not even top 300 but here this guy say that i am "dangerous" and "unproductive" and goes away with it ?

For obvious reason, i won't say anything directly on you and your skill but you should consider more my advise.


I have no say in the moderation, if you have a problem, PM one of our tireless mods, they do a thankless job keeping this community somewhat productive, so please be considerate.

Also I did consider what you said. I wasn't saying that your feedback was poor, I was however being critical of how you presented it and your argument structure. Surely you can understand the dangers of saying "do X and you'll win." CoH as in life is a little more complicated and nuanced than that, and if we want to avoid the nihilism that AAA suggests plagues us-- it is my suggestion that we look a bit deeper, be more mindful, and come up with real solutions to problems we can solve with the skills and tools we have.

x



Changed the color :P

And i'm not sure, what we can talk more on this thread tbh^^

Your replay is done and i guess alot allready spoke about soviets in 1vs1.

Lets hope the patch will come soon and then we have to look.

Atm in this patch brits, soviet are very ez to play to rank up and have fun^^.



Hiyah Sturm, I hardly get a chance to speak with you in any threads, so allow me to take the opportunity to say how much I appreciate your feedback and participation around this place. :)

I do however want to discuss midgame army composition, because it's something that plagues me in a lot of my games, not just in this one instance.



It is becoming more clear to me that I did not have enough units on the field to both harry my opponents resources as well as maintain a defensive front on my own resources. Your argument of "more because more" is simplistic on its face, the only clarification I request is the pragmatics of it, because I'm struggling to believe that maintaining 4 front line squads, 2 elite infantry squads and a smattering of support teams is sustainable.

If I may ask a favour, it's a quite an imposition, so I apologize and understand if you deny my request, but could you point to a replay where this is the case? I would love to see it in action, and don't have the time/motivation myself to try it at the moment.

---Had you known of the coming StuG Es I believe this is where you would've turned the match. Preping for the StuG Es with another SU-76 or side tech for zis guns.----

This is the part that confuses me. I feel although I was partially caught off by them, (I still had the Su76 and a ZiS almost immediately which wasn't enough) I feel I made the best decision with the resources I had at the time. Losing both naturally doesn't help, but I was also at risk of losing my headquarters if I didn't fight at all.

So I guess what I'm trying to say is. I feel given the mistakes up to the point, I made the best decision, therefore we have to examine what I did wrong prior. Can that be attributed to:

Floating resources earlier to that point which led to:
-losing a cut off multiple times
-lacking offensive pressure

which thereby limited my tech and my ability to deal with StuG's and a Tiger?

if that is the case, how many units is enough, and at what time do I need these units? After all manpower income isn't tied to territory anymore. I can't quite remember when my float got out of hand, perhaps a few minutes after the 'script squad? And therefore, was this (and I presume a cut off) actually the crucial point in this game, was the game for all intents and purposes actually over already and the StuG's / my counterattack before hand just a coup de grâce and delaying the inevitable?
1 Mar 2017, 10:57 AM
#23
avatar of Sturmpanther
Lead Strategist Badge

Posts: 5441 | Subs: 35




Hiyah Sturm, I hardly get a chance to speak with you in any threads, so allow me to take the opportunity to say how much I appreciate your feedback and participation around this place. :)

I do however want to discuss midgame army composition, because it's something that plagues me in a lot of my games, not just in this one instance.




Thx so you talk about midgame from soviets right?

T70 + su76 and you are done :P

Also Demos are midgame stuff + spam mines overwhere you can, ( ofc not, when you know that the enemie have 2 pios with minesweeper. But often ost has maximal 1, because the other pio has flamer)

Another point is, if you play vs okw for example to kill their t4 flak, if he build this unit outside of his base agressive.

1 Mar 2017, 12:59 PM
#24
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Feb 2017, 00:05 AMaaa
imo topics like that. Not this one but like that in general even if made by me or by solid player are complete waste. Since you cant tell anyone what he did wrong.
I sometimes read chess forums there are topics "what I did wrong" made by very low ranked players ussualy.
You cant tell what was done wrong except "everithing". Only can say what is right to do and that is in books. In rts there is no books no pro community to learn from. That why rts is flawed at this pointn as a competitive genre


1st your post is completely useless here, not helping the player, actually telling him to not even post replay again because he will get nothing.
2st you´re indirectly attacking at all pro players of coh2.org. Most players are learning from books, they are learning by practicing and from other players.
3rd you´re directly attacking our strategic office questioning its use, skill and ability to help players.

You was not helpful nor trutful nor friendly by posting this, I suggest you to post thoughtful posts that help instaed of harm here or completely abandon state office as whole and move to balance forums of sh*tbox. i recommend you reading State Office Rules

I won´t tolerate this from anyone in state office. You will either stop deflamating players brave enaugh for asking for help (they hope we will help them, not harm them because they are new to this game) or I will you won´t end up well.


PS: Coh2 is not chess and will never be, it is impossible, far more options what to do every second, it´s real-timed, not turn based and also imbalanced in terms of different starting positions and RNG. Chess lacks this. Thats why you cannot create book on coh2, because there are so many possibilities, what everything can break up just because of map/RNG.
1 Mar 2017, 17:05 PM
#25
avatar of le_saucisson_masque

Posts: 485 | Subs: 1



I have no say in the moderation, if you have a problem, PM one of our tireless mods, they do a thankless job keeping this community somewhat productive, so please be considerate.

Also I did consider what you said. I wasn't saying that your feedback was poor, I was however being critical of how you presented it and your argument structure. Surely you can understand the dangers of saying "do X and you'll win." CoH as in life is a little more complicated and nuanced than that, and if we want to avoid the nihilism that AAA suggests plagues us-- it is my suggestion that we look a bit deeper, be more mindful, and come up with real solutions to problems we can solve with the skills and tools we have.


allright, i missunderstood your first comment.
1 Mar 2017, 23:54 PM
#26
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

It is becoming more clear to me that I did not have enough units on the field to both harry my opponents resources as well as maintain a defensive front on my own resources. Your argument of "more because more" is simplistic on its face, the only clarification I request is the pragmatics of it, because I'm struggling to believe that maintaining 4 front line squads, 2 elite infantry squads and a smattering of support teams is sustainable.

If I may ask a favour, it's a quite an imposition, so I apologize and understand if you deny my request, but could you point to a replay where this is the case? I would love to see it in action, and don't have the time/motivation myself to try it at the moment.


Look to any high level player, specifically top tier ones and see that they will not float to the absolute best of their ability. Floating means that magical value in the bank is not gaining you any territory, harrassing his territory or forcing his retreats. Floating turns to being outnumbered and outgunned and eventual bleed and loss of the float. Also veterancy is not being obtained with floating.

So I guess what I'm trying to say is. I feel given the mistakes up to the point, I made the best decision, therefore we have to examine what I did wrong prior. Can that be attributed to:

Floating resources earlier to that point which led to:
-losing a cut off multiple times
-lacking offensive pressure


Yes. If you're not pushing you are defending which means that not only are his territories intact and safe, you're at risk of losing yours. So a decision must be made, you need to fortify defensive positions or find a way to harrass his resources.

if that is the case, how many units is enough, and at what time do I need these units? After all manpower income isn't tied to territory anymore. I can't quite remember when my float got out of hand, perhaps a few minutes after the 'script squad? And therefore, was this (and I presume a cut off) actually the crucial point in this game, was the game for all intents and purposes actually over already and the StuG's / my counterattack before hand just a coup de grâce and delaying the inevitable?


Personally I believe that with your first few mistakes, the m3 going down immediatly, argueably the conscript squad and then the floating of like 300 manpower or so led to the losing of your cutoff as this is about a 700 manpower gap between you and your opponet. I'm just rounding but regardless, it was this gap that led to your cutoff being pushed and eventually disconnected at times which furthermore strengthened the gap. Your counterattack came with 4-5 wipes and arguably evened or turned the game at that point. Stolen MG42s, double pio wipes, a gren, and the 2nd MG42 destroyed. Then you had to deal with the strongest form of ostheer meta which is where your utilization of resources was outmatched. I can purchase 2 kubels for 420 manpower or I could buy an Obersoldaten squad for 400 in the lategame. Although they both cost around 400 manpower, the obers squad is far superior and a stronger resource investment than the 2 kubels. Meaning my obers will most likely have a larger impact than the 2 kubels which inturn results in more resources for me, less for him and stronger capabilities. That in a nutshell is what "meta" is, just the strongest utilization of ones resources. If I personally was to play soviets and use a meta form of play I'd build T1, 3 penals -> guard motor -> double guards -> HM-120 ->t70 or su76 depending on game into t34/85 spam. Every single one of these units is incredibly powerful and in combination with each other form a very well rounded composition. Now depending on the game and map you can alter such things. For example if I knew StuG E spam was coming I'd go su76 for sure and possibly grab a zis gun or 2 because I know if I don't I'm going to get run over. No game is ever over till you run out of VPs, hit surrender, or your base is destroyed. Theres always time for your opponet to throw the game, however it can become increasingly difficult to level out the game when you don't utilize your advantages like your opponet did. In Coh2 no situation is ever like chess where you have static fixed movements which will determine your outcome 100%. One MG flank will never be like the last, but there can be an increasing and decreasing amount of similarities.

So in a quick response, your unit quantity is dependant on how much pressure you'd like to apply to your opponet. I'd say 2 guards minimum is a must for that unit, as it allows you to snare in 2x the locations as well as use strong AI in 2x the locations. Having some guards by the 5-6 minute mark is probably alright and having both by 11 at maximum. You should always have 2 just aim for those marks. Against ostheer you'll probably be facing the 222 which means you'll need that earlier guard squad at 5-6 for the PTRS, against OKW you're probably safer as mechanized is more difficult to play with due to the lack of medics.

Feel free to ask more questions, comments or concerns should they arise.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

New Zealand 109
unknown 10
South Africa 1

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

671 users are online: 671 guests
5 posts in the last 24h
39 posts in the last week
136 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45076
Welcome our newest member, loladrush
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM