Login

russian armor

Allied INF Team Games

26 Sep 2020, 06:52 AM
#81
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1


...Ce's where 200mp for years...

C.E. where proably never 200. They have actually been 170 since 2014...
26 Sep 2020, 07:58 AM
#82
avatar of Aphyria

Posts: 7

Uhh, quick check of the changelog puts CEs at 240 prior to Feb 2014, where they got changed to 210. Then to 190 in March 2014, then 170 in April 2014. Then apparently from 180 to 170 in October-ish 2014 (don't ask me how since the previous patch notes for them in April already changed to 170).

26 Sep 2020, 08:43 AM
#83
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Sep 2020, 04:28 AMSerrith




Combat engineers are the most pop and cost efficient engineer in the game. Their combat stats allow them to be an actual stand in for conscripts if you have a way of getting supplemental AT in lieu of AT grenade cons.

I wouldn't call them OP, but they are very very good for their price. Some might say too good.

Pios are not comparable in terms of price to performance. RE(USF) come close but suffer from redundancy due to vehicle crews.


As has already been said, CE are not a stand in for cons because they have only 2/3 the health and get none of the durability bonuses cons get meaning while you can have more they are significantly easier to push off.

They are pop effecient I'll give you that but that's entirely because they are as bare bones as an engineer gets. That's their thing. They are cheap. Them and the t34 are the only remaining units that are cheaper than their counterparts
26 Sep 2020, 09:13 AM
#84
avatar of Serrith

Posts: 783



As has already been said, CE are not a stand in for cons because they have only 2/3 the health and get none of the durability bonuses cons get meaning while you can have more they are significantly easier to push off.

They are pop effecient I'll give you that but that's entirely because they are as bare bones as an engineer gets. That's their thing. They are cheap. Them and the t34 are the only remaining units that are cheaper than their counterparts



Specifically in the early game on a per model basis before vet really comes into play engineers are more cost efficient then cons.
They are 9% more durable per model and only cost 5% more to reinforce. They are built faster and 4 engineers can be called in a fair bit earlier then 4 conscripts due to the difference in MP. Yeah they don't scale combat wise but you've spent 50% less MP on 4 CE then 4 Cons which means faster medics, early tech and supplemental units, or bank for an extra elite infantry at 2cp. Bleed won't be as bad since per model your squads are more cost efficient until vet becomes relevant by which time you should have supporting troops.
26 Sep 2020, 09:15 AM
#85
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Sep 2020, 09:13 AMSerrith



Specifically in the early game on a per model basis before vet really comes into play engineers are more cost efficient then cons.
They are 9% more durable per model and only cost 5% more to reinforce. They are built faster and 4 engineers can be called in a fair bit earlier then 4 conscripts due to the difference in MP. Yeah they don't scale combat wise but you've spent 50% less MP on 4 CE then 4 Cons which means faster medics, early tech and supplemental units, or bank for an extra elite infantry at 2cp. Bleed won't be as bad since per model your squads are more cost efficient until vet becomes relevant by which time you should have supporting troops.

Actually I have come across some x3 CE builts in 3vs3 games recently for great repair power later in game.
26 Sep 2020, 09:19 AM
#86
avatar of Serrith

Posts: 783

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Sep 2020, 09:15 AMVipper

Actually I have come across some x3 CE builts in 3vs3 games recently for great repair power later in game.


Yeah late game even if I didn't go a CE heavy start I usually end up with at least 2 and usually 3 CE.
26 Sep 2020, 09:25 AM
#87
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17875 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Sep 2020, 09:13 AMSerrith



Specifically in the early game on a per model basis before vet really comes into play engineers are more cost efficient then cons.
They are 9% more durable per model and only cost 5% more to reinforce. They are built faster and 4 engineers can be called in a fair bit earlier then 4 conscripts due to the difference in MP. Yeah they don't scale combat wise but you've spent 50% less MP on 4 CE then 4 Cons which means faster medics, early tech and supplemental units, or bank for an extra elite infantry at 2cp. Bleed won't be as bad since per model your squads are more cost efficient until vet becomes relevant by which time you should have supporting troops.
That becomes irrelevant the very moment cons hit vet1, which does not take all that long.
4 engi is not exactly meta, just a meme exclusively against OKW, which happens to work by a virtue of surprise rather then actual units strength.
26 Sep 2020, 09:40 AM
#88
avatar of Serrith

Posts: 783

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Sep 2020, 09:25 AMKatitof

That becomes irrelevant the very moment cons hit vet1, which does not take all that long.
4 engi is not exactly meta, just a meme exclusively against OKW, which happens to work by a virtue of surprise rather then actual units strength.

lol if you say so.
26 Sep 2020, 10:14 AM
#89
avatar of Boz_Hower

Posts: 28

And just like that everyone got derailed the original topic with only a comment that mean to be a example...
26 Sep 2020, 11:20 AM
#90
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289

Okay i totaly mis remembered that one. Time flies bye. Thanks for the correction.

The gradual price drop is telling about their general preformance.
26 Sep 2020, 11:28 AM
#91
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1

Okay i totaly mis remembered that one. Time flies bye. Thanks for the correction.

The gradual price drop is telling about their general preformance.

Not really.

When it comes to infatry anything before the weapons profile overhaul is rather irrelevant.
26 Sep 2020, 14:09 PM
#92
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Sep 2020, 11:28 AMVipper

Not really.

When it comes to infatry anything before the weapons profile overhaul is rather irrelevant.


I dont agree. Pio's sturms and sapper are quite strong close up. Ce's never had an optimal range where they could force off anything by the selfs. Without flamethrower or cons support. They also have fewer abilities.
26 Sep 2020, 14:15 PM
#93
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Sep 2020, 09:40 AMSerrith

lol if you say so.

Keep in mind that cons have minimum 1 model not being targeted this will more than make up for the target size difference. CE drop like flies as they lack the soviet trademark infantry durability (which is fine since they are cheap as hell)
26 Sep 2020, 14:59 PM
#94
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1



I dont agree. Pio's sturms and sapper are quite strong close up. Ce's never had an optimal range where they could force off anything by the selfs. Without flamethrower or cons support. They also have fewer abilities.

You missed my point.

Before weapon profiles overhaul the small arms systems was different and comparison pre and post overhaul are probably misleading. It might as well be a different game. CE have been 170mp since after the overhaul.

Combat engineer use a bolt action rifle designed to perform good at mid to far range. Their optimal range depends on what their are fighting.
26 Sep 2020, 16:43 PM
#95
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Sep 2020, 14:59 PMVipper

You missed my point.

Before weapon profiles overhaul the small arms systems was different and comparison pre and post overhaul are probably misleading. It might as well be a different game. CE have been 170mp since after the overhaul.

Combat engineer use a bolt action rifle designed to perform good at mid to far range. Their optimal range depends on what their are fighting.


Yeah i mist your point completly. My bad.

Still ce's are a 2/3 cons squad at best in terms of dps and hp. And cons are not doing high damage at long range currently.

I've seen ce's beat grens in close range once but other then that every other inf mops the floor with them.
26 Sep 2020, 16:52 PM
#96
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1



Yeah i mist your point completly. My bad.

Do not worry about no harm done and maybe I was not clear enough



Still ce's are a 2/3 cons squad at best in terms of dps and hp. And cons are not doing high damage at long range currently.

I've seen ce's beat grens in close range once but other then that every other inf mops the floor with them.

Combat engineer are a cost efficient unit and as Serrith pointed getting 3 CE as start is actually viable or more viable the most other engineers that is.
26 Sep 2020, 17:23 PM
#97
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1289

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Sep 2020, 16:52 PMVipper

Do not worry about no harm done and maybe I was not clear enough


Combat engineer are a cost efficient unit and as Serrith pointed getting 3 CE as start is actually viable or more viable the most other engineers that is.


I agree completly they are cost effective. Some claim they are OP mainly because they are cheap.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

382 users are online: 1 member and 381 guests
nigo
17 posts in the last 24h
45 posts in the last week
99 posts in the last month
Registered members: 44645
Welcome our newest member, otorusqtwk
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM