Login

russian armor

PzWerfer vs Calliope.

12 Sep 2016, 22:49 PM
#1
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

As a main allied fanboy (lel) I would like to know why PzWerfer is so shit and Calliope so good.

What pushed for this thread? Just done 1v1 vs USF.

Calliope vs PzWefer.

Non-doc Calliope killing unlimited amount of models, leaving Paks40 without any chances to survive.
Meanwhile PzWerfer shooting directly at mortar - 2 models down.

Point is not to buff PzWerfer but nerf Calliope so it acts like a Katyusha.

Don't get it why call-in is way more powerful and durable than T4 unit.




So what's the reason behind sucking Pzwefer and wiping Calliope? Or maybe different way. What's the reason for normal acting PzWerfer and way way more powerful Calliope?
12 Sep 2016, 23:01 PM
#2
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1

With all Rocket Arty you need to drive up close for dem wipes, the Calliope is just the most likely to survive doing this, due to it's huge HP and how much Smoke USF has.
Panzerwerfer has Surpression as added utility to it's name.
12 Sep 2016, 23:03 PM
#3
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

With all Rocket Arty you need to drive up close for dem wipes, the Calliope is just the most likely to survive doing this, due to it's huge HP and how much Smoke USF has.
Panzerwerfer has Surpression as added utility to it's name.


And for what reason you need this suppression if all rockets are lanuched at the same time? :foreveralone:


I used PzWefer as close as possbile and even after 4 barraged I could not make it as good as 1 calliope barrage.


And what's the reason for expensive T4 units to be worse than non tech call-in?
12 Sep 2016, 23:08 PM
#4
avatar of easierwithaturret

Posts: 247



Non-doc Calliope



Wat?

Anyway perhaps it's because the calliope is more likely to be used against less mobile forces. Also what Sidaroth said; I'm sure you are using the pwerfer at short distance but I doubt you're driving it quite as close as you would a calliope because you know how fragile it is.
12 Sep 2016, 23:08 PM
#5
avatar of Omega_Warrior

Posts: 2561

Why are you making the arbitrary comparison with the pwerfer and the calliope. Why not throw the stuka in there too? Calliope doesn't look that strong vs stuka which comes even sooner.

Also I don't think you are giving the pzwerfer enough credit. Most people who say it's bad are trying to use it at max range, and the calliope isn't even good if you use it at max range, but the pwerfer suffers greater from it. It's also the only rocket arty that has supppression, so even if you miss and don't get much wipes it can turn an engagement. It also has a higher alpha damage firing all at once and I believe it also reloads faster then the calliope but i'm not sure.

Most importantly, the calliope is much more expensive then the pzWerfer. It's like asking why the T34-85 is better then the T34-76.

Also we've seen what a stronger pwerfer looks like. It wasn't pretty.
12 Sep 2016, 23:08 PM
#6
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2



Wat?

Anyway perhaps it's because the calliope is more likely to be used against less mobile forces. Also what Sidaroth said; I'm sure you are using the pwerfer at short distance but I doubt you're driving it quite as close as you would a calliope because you know how fragile it is.


non tech sry
12 Sep 2016, 23:10 PM
#7
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

Why are you making the arbitrary comparison with the pwerfer and the calliope. Why not throw the stuka in there too? Calliope doesn't look that strong vs stuka which comes even sooner.

Also I don't think you are giving the pzwerfer enough credit. Most people who say it's bad are trying to use it at max range, and the calliope isn't even good if you use it at max range, but the pwerfer suffers greater from it. It's also the only rocket arty that has supppression, so even if you miss and don't get much wipes it can turn an engagement. It also has a higher alpha damage firing all at once and I believe it also reloads faster then the calliope but i'm not sure.

Most importantly, the calliope is much more expensive then the pzWerfer. It's like asking why the T34-85 is better then the T34-76.

Also we've seen what a stronger pwerfer looks like. It wasn't pretty.



Stuka is easy to dodge. Calliope is not.

Yup, calliope costs more what what if you need arty to counter vet 3 double LMG rifles? You need to tech and teching to T4 in 1v1 is not cheap. Meanwhile USF player can get non tech Calliope and spend rest fuel of Jackson/Shermans.

Before nerf PzWerfer was way OP. Now with Katy they are fine but why Calliope has to be on top on it? Why it does not leave a chance to move away/save crew weapon?
12 Sep 2016, 23:17 PM
#8
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

I think it's was good before it was hit by the aoe nerf
And no it doesn't need to do what calliope do just half is good after all all the rocket are fired in 1 barrage so no time to move
I would suggest to give back the old aoe profile
12 Sep 2016, 23:20 PM
#9
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1



And for what reason you need this suppression if all rockets are lanuched at the same time? :foreveralone:


I used PzWefer as close as possbile and even after 4 barraged I could not make it as good as 1 calliope barrage.


And what's the reason for expensive T4 units to be worse than non tech call-in?


It can help stop blobs, the main reason werfer is purchased, even if you don't kill them

Because USF has Calliope in ONE doctrine, Wehr can always go T4 for the Werfer.

Panzerwerfer is for stopping blobs, Calliope for annihilating support weapons camping, which is why it's such a good unit to round up the USF army.
12 Sep 2016, 23:22 PM
#10
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

I think it's was good before it was hit by the aoe nerf
And no it doesn't need to do what calliope do just half is good after all all the rocket are fired in 1 barrage so no time to move
I would suggest to give back the old aoe profile


It wasn't.

If rocket arty does not leave a chance to survive for crew weapon it's bad.

Let me put it this way:

Kholodny,
PzWerfer standing behind middle VP house and shooting at mortar behind middle VP church. No retreat, no dodge - effect? 2 models down.

Callipe shooitng at Pak40 kept at high of left cut off which were moved away jsut after hearing the sound? Wiped.
12 Sep 2016, 23:24 PM
#11
avatar of Omega_Warrior

Posts: 2561




Stuka is easy to dodge. Calliope is not.

Yup, calliope costs more what what if you need arty to counter vet 3 double LMG rifles? You need to tech and teching to T4 in 1v1 is not cheap. Meanwhile USF player can get non tech Calliope and spend rest fuel of Jackson/Shermans.

Well vet3 lmg blobs is a problem for another thread.

Thing is the pwherfer was designed as a T3 unit, it was only moved to T4 because the T4 was barren after losing the elephant. And TBH the idea of "T4" unit being stronger is something that never really worked out. Since some factions max out at T3 level tech, T4 can't actually be really stronger because at the end of the day the T3 level factions still need to be able to handle it. So in actuality T4 ends up just being kind of different rather than actually being more powerful.
12 Sep 2016, 23:26 PM
#12
avatar of Omega_Warrior

Posts: 2561

Also am I the only one who thinks it would make much more sense if the pwerfer and the stuka were switched?
12 Sep 2016, 23:30 PM
#13
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2


Well vet3 lmg blobs is a problem for another thread.

Thing is the pwherfer was designed as a T3 unit, it was only moved to T4 because the T4 was barren after losing the elephant. And TBH the idea of "T4" unit being stronger is something that never really worked out. Since some factions max out at T3 level tech, T4 can't actually be really stronger because at the end of the day the T3 level factions still need to be able to handle it. So in actuality T4 ends up just being kind of different rather than actually being more powerful.



But when you consider than finally USF tier costs you 180F while T4 270F (210 if skipped T3 which is something too hard) you would expect that T4 units will be quite poweful. They should reward you for expensive teching instead of relying on cheap call ins.
12 Sep 2016, 23:40 PM
#14
avatar of Omega_Warrior

Posts: 2561




But when you consider than finally USF tier costs you 180F while T4 270F (210 if skipped T3 which is something too hard) you would expect that T4 units will be quite poweful. They should reward you for expensive teching instead of relying on cheap call ins.
Yes it should. But you can't do that if the other side can't equally tech. And that's what it was like in the first year of the game, and it was terrible.

Because one side had a late game and the other didn't ostheer clearly had an advantage as the game went on, and to compinsate soviets had to have a dominating early. Both sides complained and here we are. The game still suffers for that bad early design. If I had my way every faction would have a T4 and every call-in would require tech.
13 Sep 2016, 01:14 AM
#15
avatar of Imagelessbean

Posts: 1585 | Subs: 1

This is a good example of "show a replay please", not because I doubt you but it would make this conversation much smoother.

Pwerfer is alright, but it's late arrival and potential bad RNG can ruin its effect. Realistically it needs to make an impact within 2-3 barrages for a player to have a chance to continue to fight, otherwise you just gave up the equivalent of a 1.5 Panzer IV's for a couple of model wipes. Most games conclude before this unit can efficiently influence the game. On the other hand I have seen it wipe 2-3 squads in the FoW with good RNG and outright win games on the first shot.

I still think it should shoot slower and have larger AoE to help it punish static play will allowing some counterplay.
13 Sep 2016, 01:56 AM
#16
avatar of Corsin

Posts: 600

Pwerfer is severely lacking in terms of its killing power, especially since its fighting larger squads.

Its worse than the Cally yeah, but its also worse than the land mattress (by quite alot) and its worse than the Katy. (Including when you take into account the alpha strike).
13 Sep 2016, 03:48 AM
#17
avatar of easierwithaturret

Posts: 247

PzWerfer is alright IMO. It does a fine job at killing models at 0 risk to the user, which makes it a useful late-game purchase AFTER you've already got some armoured units on field. It is susceptible to RNG, in that sometimes it will wipe that pesky ATG completely and sometimes it will only drop 1 model. That is ok though, being able to delete enemy units without any risk is the last thing the game needs more of.

Of course it is rarely seen in 1v1 but that is due to the general difficulty that OH has in getting the resources needed to build t4 when they are already under heavy pressure at the t3 stage. In team games it is plenty useful. That applies to most artillery really, in that buffs to make it worthwhile in 1v1 risk making it OP in a team context.
13 Sep 2016, 04:28 AM
#18
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930

the panzerwerfer fire half the rockets (9 vs 18), have 1/4 the HP (160 vs 640), and still have the same pop cost.

The HP difference is huge, because it to allow you to safely use the calliope more aggressively. Even the priest, sexton, and stuka only have 320 hp compared to the calliope's 640.
13 Sep 2016, 04:39 AM
#19
avatar of pigsoup
Patrion 14

Posts: 4299 | Subs: 2

pwerfer is fine. calliope and land mattress are not.
13 Sep 2016, 05:59 AM
#20
avatar of PanzerGeneralForever

Posts: 1072

PzWerfer is alright IMO. It does a fine job at killing models at 0 risk to the user, which makes it a useful late-game purchase AFTER you've already got some armoured units on field. It is susceptible to RNG, in that sometimes it will wipe that pesky ATG completely and sometimes it will only drop 1 model. That is ok though, being able to delete enemy units without any risk is the last thing the game needs more of.

Of course it is rarely seen in 1v1 but that is due to the general difficulty that OH has in getting the resources needed to build t4 when they are already under heavy pressure at the t3 stage. In team games it is plenty useful. That applies to most artillery really, in that buffs to make it worthwhile in 1v1 risk making it OP in a team context.


I disagree that it's a zero risk unit. It is so fragile if the enemy decides to fire back at it there's a good chances it will die. On top of that it needs to get close to actually do any dmg.

Id like the aoe far dmg buffed so it doesn't always need to be on top of its target to kill it.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

Russian Federation 67
United States 81
unknown 4
Indonesia 2

Ladders Top 10

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

Replay highlight

VS
  • Oberkommando West flag Oziligath
  • The British Forces flag T.R. Sidewinder
uploaded by Oziligath

Board Info

217 users are online: 1 member and 216 guests
OrangePest
9 posts in the last 24h
163 posts in the last week
558 posts in the last month
Registered members: 34031
Welcome our newest member, SavannahpClements
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM