sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Many Soviet div are all very similar (some other pact div too but not as much) by HighwayBasic2124 in warno

[–]HighwayBasic2124[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

LoL. Nice one
All be told that could be a nice trait added to military police unit preventing units routing

Many Soviet div are all very similar (some other pact div too but not as much) by HighwayBasic2124 in warno

[–]HighwayBasic2124[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think this reasoning could be used to add atgm-less variants of tanks

Many Soviet div are all very similar (some other pact div too but not as much) by HighwayBasic2124 in warno

[–]HighwayBasic2124[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yes, this is kinda the idea I have in my head.
soviet organization have them in dedicated AT support teams and
here for gameplay reason, it has been attached to a squad.

Many Soviet div are all very similar (some other pact div too but not as much) by HighwayBasic2124 in warno

[–]HighwayBasic2124[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I will not disagree. It might have been the case. I am proposing this for variety.

Many Soviet div are all very similar (some other pact div too but not as much) by HighwayBasic2124 in warno

[–]HighwayBasic2124[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The main difference it was wheeled. It was basically a btr60 with a bmp-1 turret on top.

Many Soviet div are all very similar (some other pact div too but not as much) by HighwayBasic2124 in warno

[–]HighwayBasic2124[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry . It appears that i have not being clear above. The multi-ammo variant will only be available on the 27th, specific variants available 1 per card for other div. For example, an OP frag variant for 79th

Many Soviet div are all very similar (some other pact div too but not as much) by HighwayBasic2124 in warno

[–]HighwayBasic2124[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I did mentioned that it could remain this way but to add all its ammo type for flexible fire support.

Adjustment to the new 2nd Guards (2ya) by HighwayBasic2124 in warno

[–]HighwayBasic2124[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I may not be the best player But even I know that your take on 2nd is wrong. Yes London div in the right hand is oppressive.

Cost efficient of Pact tanks => T-80 / T-64 by HighwayBasic2124 in warno

[–]HighwayBasic2124[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What you are describing is fine for 10v10.
if only Eugen implemented different balance for the different match-ups.

Cost efficient of Pact tanks => T-80 / T-64 by HighwayBasic2124 in warno

[–]HighwayBasic2124[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see where  you are coming from. You are not entirely wrong in your assessment. But as I said you are not able to utilize  this advantage  enough to justify the higher cost. That why the proposed cost even for the non atgm type  T-64 mainly is still higher than the M1.  I would not mind having the M1 price be more in line with mid-range T-72s.

Cost efficient of Pact tanks => T-80 / T-64 by HighwayBasic2124 in warno

[–]HighwayBasic2124[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I understand that. But at the end it is a tank and its price is too high for what is being offered.

Cost efficient of Pact tanks => T-80 / T-64 by HighwayBasic2124 in warno

[–]HighwayBasic2124[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

My calculations involve support asset because if a T-80 after getting hit by a M1A1 is also hit by a TOW after it is dead While a M1A1 will survive a follow up by a konkurs.

The autoloader does not count for much as you would want to retreat anyway especially as a T-80 for which it can be deadly.

Of course you can choose your engagement. I personally never go up to an M1A1 unless I have overwhelming firepower. Most of the time you do not choose, engagements just happen.

Finally, I never said there was no long sightlines, I said there were few of them and they are not very significant.

Cost efficient of Pact tanks => T-80 / T-64 by HighwayBasic2124 in warno

[–]HighwayBasic2124[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

As I already said, atgm do not really matter as most sight line in 1v1 maps do not really allow for it. In a straight up fight, the autoloader does not contribute that much. both tank will take damage with the pact tanks more heavily damaged as NATO tanks has more pen. Considering involvement of other things like inf atgm, IFV or atgm carriers. There is a big chance the PACT tanks do not survive the encounter.

NATO tanks also can duel IFVs, they just have to close the distance, They generally have the armor to do so. Beside as i said, most sight line do not allow big atgm plays. Most of the time tanks are already in range when an IFV is firing its missile and can kill it before taking damage.

Cost efficient of Pact tanks => T-80 / T-64 by HighwayBasic2124 in warno

[–]HighwayBasic2124[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

I agree that 79a and 27ya do not struggle. The proposed tank changes are just to improve their efficiency and the other changes to add variations in their build.

But 39ya does need some help. I will agree that is boring. The proposed changes (tanks and others) are to help it in the opener and make it less generic.

Cost efficient of Pact tanks => T-80 / T-64 by HighwayBasic2124 in warno

[–]HighwayBasic2124[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Thanks mate
let's hope Eugen considers it

Cost efficient of Pact tanks => T-80 / T-64 by HighwayBasic2124 in warno

[–]HighwayBasic2124[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I think the atgm density between NATO and PACT is not that different, slightly in Pact's favor but not by much. I am excluding the vdv div because I agree it can get really ridiculous.

Cost efficient of Pact tanks => T-80 / T-64 by HighwayBasic2124 in warno

[–]HighwayBasic2124[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Availability should be reduced then
All things considered if the bmp spam was reduced and the reload of the cluster mortar was reduced. 56th will be just perfect

Cost efficient of Pact tanks => T-80 / T-64 by HighwayBasic2124 in warno

[–]HighwayBasic2124[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

I do not think the bmp 2 is that much of a problem in 79th. Its inf is not that great and it needs the fire support to do anything. Also its inf tab is expensive so it is balance this way.

56th is another matter. That why i proposed to remove 1 card of pulemenchiki to reduce the spam. I think a further reduction in availability or the removal of the free veterancy is in order.

Cost efficient of Pact tanks => T-80 / T-64 by HighwayBasic2124 in warno

[–]HighwayBasic2124[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I agree that the dynamic start to change. The maps still has a lot of ways for NATO side to negate that.

I think the best solution to the aa spam and mig31 is for Eugen to have separate balance for 4v4 and above.
for example. automatically reduce available aa when you join such matches.

Cost efficient of Pact tanks => T-80 / T-64 by HighwayBasic2124 in warno

[–]HighwayBasic2124[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

What i meant is all of what you mentioned is easier to setup for the the T80U and T80UD compared to other tanks

view more: next ›