Profile of zarok47

Didn't Cruzzi lose that game? No offense Cruzzi
Aimstrong made alot more mistakes then Cruzzi in the early game. You're not telling the whole story here.

In my opinion, Cruzzi threw that game, after dominating as USF in mid-late game on a map which most agree is axis favored.

He could have won, but he didn't.

In any case, its only 1 match, hardly any prove of anything.

Let me just say i do not have permission from either player for this upload, i just hope ami+ciez will cast it.
But the game is damn good.

EDIT:
and i misspelled simon......

EDIT 2:
well it seems this game wont be live casted on SNF, if someone else is willing to cast it, feel free to do so.

Also, my apologies to either player if they feel i shouldn't have uploaded it, just thought the game was worthy of SNF.

Edit3: and they did cast it, i really should stop editing my post

Since this thread has taken a rather interesting turn regarding Cruzz and some passionate forum poster's, i think it's time to return to the matter at hand:

Close Air Support commander.

For starters, i like to say i have been playing with this commander for the past 6-7 months (so before it even became meta) thus i like to think i know a bit about the commander.

Why is it OP?

In theory, CAS is a unique and fun commander allowing for a completly different ostheer playstyle: one that doesn't rely on tanks, but on infantry+support weapons instead (plus mines, bunkers etc).

In practicse, this commander does far more than that.
By foregoing teching, the ostheer player saves alot of manpower (both on teching itself aswell as on the tanks) which means the ost player has little to no manpower issue's.
Furthermore, the fuel to ammo ability, coupled with the no teching, leads to the ost player not to worry about either fuel, or ammo.

An ostheer player who doesn't need to think about manpower, fuel or ammo, is a very, very scary player to face.

The reason why this doesn't happen the same way with the ostruppen commander is because that commander lacks the abilities to support this play style.
The CAS strafe however, do support it.
Facing arty? Stuka it. Tanks? let's get some schrecks on or just strafe it. Infantry? LOL let's strafe it, lmg gren it or do w/e else strikes my fancy.

In closing, the CAS player doesn't worry about most resources, or most enemy unit's.

So, what can one do vs CAS?

For Soviets, the only 2 tanks that don't oneshotted by the strafe and can take one the shrecks+paks are the IS-2 and ISU-152. Thus these units (and the commanders they come in) should be the ones you pick vs an CAS user.
As Americans, your only options are HE shermans or the m8 scotts (i really don't think the bulldozer is a capable anti-inf tank) everything else falls apart real fast and even these listed options aren't reliable.
As an American facing CAS, you're in for a though time.

The only real counterplay vs CAS, is to constantly be on the lookout for the recon plane and move whatever you think is the intended target (fun mind game stuff for the CAS user, not so much for his enemy). Failing to spot the recon plane more than once is a mistake you can't afford to make.

The nerfs

Not something i am fully sure what is the best course of action, but currently i support the idea of a lower conversion rate+ higher cooldown for the fuel to ammo thing.
This, becuase it's the vital part of this commander, what allows you to do, what you do.
Should it not be enough, we can look at the individual strafe's but imo, they are not what truly allows the madness that full CAS is.

( if you can't tell by now, i really enjoy playing with CAS >.>)

As a reward for reading all this, here is a funny picture explaining once again why CAS is so powerfull:

Figuratively speaking, you have better chances to be hit by a falling plane in your own house than meeting this situation on the field: same okw player build one Jagdtiger and one KT in one game and keep them alive to act as a team. Or you got stomped quite hard since game beginning. ....Aaand that game has to be real long. ....Aaand okw player did not spend its fuel on anything else but teching, KT and Jagdtiger.
I doubt I'll ever meet that tbh.

Not exactly the situation you are referring too, but i once faced an double OkW team on Eindhoven were there was both a JT and a KT on the field ( one player going JT and the other KT).
Lateron, one JT was killed but another was called in again.

Eventho this wasn't what you asked for, it certainly was possible for the OkW player's to get multiple heavies on the field (including the aformentioned combo of JT and KT) in a 2vs2.

If you have an hour to spare or simply require proof, i recommend you watch the cast of it:

(the cast and game are quite good if i may say so).

@zarok47 catch up with earlier posts first, we're talking model to model comparison, which originated from #62 post.

My first post in this thread (#67) explains why allied troops generally have less dps then their axis counterparts.
This is specificly the case with the model-to-model comparison, and thus you need to take into account the generally larger squad size when comparing allied to axis units.

Saying a unit has a received accuray modifier or higher dps in the model-to-model comparison without taking in account the squad sizes is therefore not showing the entire picture.

In that regard, i want to ask @TensaiOne whether your comparison is just straigh dps per model or altered to compsensate for the squad sizes?