Login

russian armor

Soviet Lendlease rework

19 Dec 2019, 10:12 AM
#41
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2181 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Dec 2019, 10:06 AMLago


And there is the proof that you haven't even played the new Lend Lease.


I played Lend Lease just yesterday and it’s absolutely not worth the price. Maybe for a fictional fight against spam, we will add fuel to the cost of Paratroopers and Fallschirmjager, because flying on an airplane will require a huge amount of fuel.
19 Dec 2019, 11:22 AM
#42
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

I played Lend Lease just yesterday and it’s absolutely not worth the price. Maybe for a fictional fight against spam, we will add fuel to the cost of Paratroopers and Fallschirmjager, because flying on an airplane will require a huge amount of fuel.


Then play those docs. Leave my Lend Lease alone. I don't want my Assault Guards nerfed.
19 Dec 2019, 11:27 AM
#43
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2181 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Dec 2019, 11:22 AMLago


Then play those docs. Leave my Lend Lease alone. I don't want my Assault Guards nerfed.


They are already useless. Take the Shock Troops - they are in many commanders, and they are better. Are you talking about some nerfs? On the contrary, I want a buff for them. and stupid design with HT prevents this. Justifying its fictional spam when comparable units do not have such restrictions.
19 Dec 2019, 11:35 AM
#44
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

They are already useless. Take the Shock Troops - they are in many commanders, and they are better. Are you talking about some nerfs? On the contrary, I want a buff for them. and stupid design with HT prevents this. Justifying its fictional spam when comparable units do not have such restrictions.


You know what Shocks also are? Expensive.

You're not going to get a buff for a 270 MP 0 MU unit that's stronger than Cav Rifles. If you detach them for the halftrack, Lend Lease will be the meta doctrine for a patch and then they'll get nerfed.

The M5 Assault Group is really, really good if you time it right. I see no reason to ruin it just because you personally don't like unit bundles.
19 Dec 2019, 11:48 AM
#45
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2181 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Dec 2019, 11:35 AMLago


You know what Shocks also are? Expensive.

You're not going to get a buff for a 270 MP 0 MU unit that's stronger than Cav Rifles. If you detach them for the halftrack, Lend Lease will be the meta doctrine for a patch and then they'll get nerfed.

The M5 Assault Group is really, really good if you time it right. I see no reason to ruin it just because you personally don't like unit bundles.


You know that Assault Guard the are even more expensive and are delaying the construction of T3 and T4. and Again the ridiculous excuses of poor design. Why do you compare the Assault Guard with the Cavalry. The Assault Guard is comparable to the Shock Troops and Rangers / Paratroopers. And they do not cost 270m. they cost 510 + 30 their price can not be considered separately. When the HT is removed, you can talk about their price. Let's everyone call-in infantry arrive with the HT and fuel for the paratrooper squads - this is was is really, really good if you time it right, will reduce spam and delay the construction of all tiers for all fractions.
19 Dec 2019, 11:54 AM
#46
avatar of Raviloli

Posts: 72



You know that Assault Guard the are even more expensive and are delaying the construction of T3 and T4. and Again the ridiculous excuses of poor design. Why do you compare the Assault Guard with the Cavalry. The Assault Guard is comparable to the Shock Troops and Rangers / Paratroopers. And they do not cost 270m. they cost 510 + 30 their price can not be considered separately. When the HT is removed, you can talk about their price. Let's everyone call-in infantry arrive with the HT and fuel for the paratrooper squads - this is was is really, really good if you time it right, will reduce spam and delay the construction of all tiers for all fractions.


Except you're wrong, you get the M5 halftrack rather early, 30 fuel is only a 1 minute delay on tech, and with their early shock value they can just walk on foot and be reinforced by the halftrack,as there shouldn't be much AT out yet. Later on you can upgrade it to serve as the best AA in the game, and send it to guard flanks from being capped by lone squads.
19 Dec 2019, 11:59 AM
#47
avatar of Maret

Posts: 711



You know that Assault Guard the are even more expensive and are delaying the construction of T3 and T4. and Again the ridiculous excuses of poor design. Why do you compare the Assault Guard with the Cavalry. The Assault Guard is comparable to the Shock Troops and Rangers / Paratroopers. And they do not cost 270m. they cost 510 + 30 their price can not be considered separately. When the HT is removed, you can talk about their price. Let's everyone call-in infantry arrive with the HT and fuel for the paratrooper squads - this is was is really, really good if you time it right, will reduce spam and delay the construction of all tiers for all fractions.

I'm big fun of Lend-Lease commander. Assault group, in fact not delay your T3 and T4. Why? Fuel drop. HT costs 30 fuel, the same amount you will get from 1 drop. You can call-in assault group BEFORE you even build T3. When you have quad you don't need t-70, quad counter any OST LV and could fight against flak-ht from OKW. Only luchs and puma could kill it very easy.
In fact, i would prefer fully remove assault guards from doctrine and move call-in HT to 2 CP like in UKF lend-lease commander. Because main power of this commander, not HT, not guards, but M4c and fuel drops.
Also self-repair for shermans (to reflect, that you can't repair M4c by crew as USF) and repair station instead repair for cons will be better for overall theme of commander.
19 Dec 2019, 12:20 PM
#48
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

You know that Assault Guard the are even more expensive and are delaying the construction of T3 and T4. and Again the ridiculous excuses of poor design. Why do you compare the Assault Guard with the Cavalry. The Assault Guard is comparable to the Shock Troops and Rangers / Paratroopers. And they do not cost 270m. they cost 510 + 30 their price can not be considered separately. When the HT is removed, you can talk about their price. Let's everyone call-in infantry arrive with the HT and fuel for the paratrooper squads - this is was is really, really good if you time it right, will reduce spam and delay the construction of all tiers for all fractions.


The halftrack costs 240 30. The Assault Guards cost 270. Together, they cost 510 30.
19 Dec 2019, 12:24 PM
#49
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17875 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Dec 2019, 12:20 PMLago


The halftrack costs 240 30. The Assault Guards cost 270. Together, they cost 510 30.

And since you can't get them separate, that means you need to pay MORE then you would need to pay for shocks.....

Joint call-in is an artifact of old soviet teching, where it was intended to combine this doc with T4, which had no med tank and no halftruck.

It lost all relevance the moment soviet tech was redesigned.
19 Dec 2019, 12:25 PM
#50
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Dec 2019, 12:24 PMKatitof
And since you can't get them separate, that means you need to pay MORE then you would need to pay for shocks.....


I mean yes, if you just suicide away the halftrack then they would be.

But if you want Shocks, why are you playing Lend Lease again?
19 Dec 2019, 12:31 PM
#51
avatar of blancat

Posts: 810

buff assault guard(reduce cost or add some skill)

done
19 Dec 2019, 12:36 PM
#52
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Dec 2019, 12:31 PMblancat
buff assault guard(reduce cost or add some skill)

done


They did that in the last patch. They gave them three Thompsons and cut the cost of the Assault Group by 60 MP and dropped the CPs down to 3.
19 Dec 2019, 12:49 PM
#53
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2181 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Dec 2019, 11:59 AMMaret

I'm big fun of Lend-Lease commander. Assault group, in fact not delay your T3 and T4. Why? Fuel drop. HT costs 30 fuel, the same amount you will get from 1 drop. You can call-in assault group BEFORE you even build T3. When you have quad you don't need t-70, quad counter any OST LV and could fight against flak-ht from OKW. Only luchs and puma could kill it very easy.
In fact, i would prefer fully remove assault guards from doctrine and move call-in HT to 2 CP like in UKF lend-lease commander. Because main power of this commander, not HT, not guards, but M4c and fuel drops.
Also self-repair for shermans (to reflect, that you can't repair M4c by crew as USF) and repair station instead repair for cons will be better for overall theme of commander.


In general, I agree. Replacing the Storm Guards is simply a stupid unit design for access to the Allied arms racks (maybe a bit overpaid for balance) or giving the Inductees four Thompson and the Penalties two Bazookas.
19 Dec 2019, 13:27 PM
#54
avatar of SuperHansFan

Posts: 833



Son of a bitch, those ungrateful Soviet bastards, I swear.

It was better than their AT rifle that couldn't penetrate anything above a light tank's armor for sure, or suicide charging against an enemy tank with AT grenades. But then again these are the Soviets we're talking about so I'm sure that a rocket projected weapon would be less preferred than running to your death in the name of the motherland.


Latewar by the time AT rifles were obsolete they already had 1000's of captured panzerfausts that the retreating Wehrmacht left around in depots like candy. It was one of if not the most commonly captured weapon iirc, which is substantial.


Watch any late war footage or photographs and you'll see a lot Soviet infantry running around with a panzerfaust or two in hand. Bazookas and piats were disliked and put into storage


But a Churchill for the doctrine could be cool
19 Dec 2019, 14:08 PM
#55
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

OR OR OR OR OR

HEAR ME OUT

OR

We KEEP the assault group call in as an ability, but make Assault Guards buildable from T4 at a higher price than the call in (320mp).
19 Dec 2019, 14:17 PM
#56
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

OR OR OR OR OR

HEAR ME OUT

OR

We KEEP the assault group call in as an ability, but make Assault Guards buildable from T4 at a higher price than the call in (320mp).


I mean, you could do that, and it probably would't hurt.

Is it really necessary, though?
19 Dec 2019, 14:45 PM
#57
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2181 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Dec 2019, 14:17 PMLago


I mean, you could do that, and it probably would't hurt.

Is it really necessary, though?


Dude, this is no longer funny how much you can justify shit design.
19 Dec 2019, 15:09 PM
#58
avatar of flyingpancake

Posts: 186 | Subs: 1

OR OR OR OR OR

HEAR ME OUT

OR

We KEEP the assault group call in as an ability, but make Assault Guards buildable from T4 at a higher price than the call in (320mp).


I kinda like this idea.
19 Dec 2019, 15:28 PM
#59
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

Dude, this is no longer funny how much you can justify shit design.


I like the M5 Assault Group, post buffs. I liked the Recon Company AT Gun + Support Paratrooper airdrop too.

Unit bundles, if priced correctly, can be both viable and strategically interesting.

Sure, you could ditch the halftrack and just have Assault Guards, but then you'd just end up with another generic CQC unit. The price would go up because unbundled Assault Guards are overpowered at a 270 MP 0 MU price point.

You'd just end up with another generic CQC squad. We've got loads of those.

If you dislike unit bundles on principle, fair enough, but the M5 bundle is well worth its price in its current state.
19 Dec 2019, 16:36 PM
#60
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Dec 2019, 15:28 PMLago


I like the M5 Assault Group, post buffs. I liked the Recon Company AT Gun + Support Paratrooper airdrop too.

Unit bundles, if priced correctly, can be both viable and strategically interesting.

Sure, you could ditch the halftrack and just have Assault Guards, but then you'd just end up with another generic CQC unit. The price would go up because unbundled Assault Guards are overpowered at a 270 MP 0 MU price point.

You'd just end up with another generic CQC squad. We've got loads of those.

If you dislike unit bundles on principle, fair enough, but the M5 bundle is well worth its price in its current state.


Which is why I suggested T4 buildable guards so you can have both the bundle, which averages at a lower price and is immediate, as well as buildable at a higher price if you absolutely don’t want the M5.
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

498 users are online: 3 members and 495 guests
Tiger Baron, Voxy, donofsandiego
15 posts in the last 24h
41 posts in the last week
95 posts in the last month
Registered members: 44643
Welcome our newest member, Leiliqu96
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM