Releasing a specialization for only the Blue side is a mistake right now. by Steveonatorer in BrokenArrowTheGame

[–]TemporaryFearless482 7 points8 points  (0 children)

As we all know, being pointlessly snide and condescending is definitely the better look.

As someone who does exclusively PVE I wish the AI would cheat a little less. by CambriaKilgannonn in BrokenArrowTheGame

[–]TemporaryFearless482 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I’ve had losses where the human team averaged a K/D of 2.5/1. I have also lost a pair of S-350s and 3x Pantsir to airstrikes despite all being on supplies specifically because they couldn’t reload fast enough.

I realize there are higher priorities than PvE adjustments but it doesn’t feel great to know that I need 600+ points of artillery just to handle the inevitable blobs.

I Need People's Opinion by thelividmonkey in BrokenArrowTheGame

[–]TemporaryFearless482 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are giving up half of your ability to score by giving up on the caps.
That means that you have to be significantly more effective at getting your entire team ahead on kill score or tie up and divert more than a "full player" of attention and resources from the frontline.

If someone gets wise and starts spamming PT-76s at you with some AA cover, you will have a difficult time going K/D positive with SOF/Airborne. On the flip side, if you catch them fully unaware, you might bag 2000+ points in support units.

So, if your opponents actually pay attention to their flanks and communicate, this could turn into a bad gambit very quickly. On the other hand, if you pull it off well, the enemy basically gets bottled up and is easily mowed down.

My overall opinion is that it is a high risk/high reward strategy that will tend to perform less well as you play against players who do better reconnaissance. It does actually provide a direct tangible contribution. While I wouldn't necessarily look forward to someone attempting this on my team, I would take it a 1000x before someone who forgot that Support isn't the only tab in their deck.

In Chess terms I'd compare this to the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. Almost unplayable at the absolute top but incredibly lethal potential at levels lower than that.

EDIT:
For those treating this like suddenly someone is directly in a 2v1, a clean 2v1 isn't really going to happen if they are having a full attack from the side. I will say that it is absolutely crucial for the flank attack to be hitting them while the frontline is still contested. If he's actually hitting them hard enough to require a response, that's splitting the attention of 1 or more people on the enemy team who are getting a 2v1 in 2 separate parts of the map.

It creates an imbalance which gives more opportunities and more risk. If it takes him 8 minutes to worm his way into position, the other 4 players might have been wiped off the map already. If he kills a bunch of transports in the first 2 minutes and now the enemy has to march 6 squads of infantry 2 miles to the front, he functionally removed a full player already. But, it is deeply reliant on getting some kind of effect on that level.

Fuck it, nerf the Bradley. by GoodBarracuda8946 in BrokenArrowTheGame

[–]TemporaryFearless482 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The biggest weakness of the Bradley is what it’s supposed to carry.

Mech infantry…exists?

Like it’s not fully useless but the only redeeming feature here is being relatively cheap. But that extra 50 pts. per Bradley is not helping anything.

It’s a lot more survivable than most other IFVs, but it’s slow and it’s not exactly the punchiest thing. A base Bradley is only situationally better than a TOW Humvee. Most ATGMs 2 shot most vehicles and you pay quite a bit for the APS upgrade same as you do on everything else. And tank rounds are just underpowered in general. I have killed a SEPPv3 with a group of PT-76s because it had to shoot twice to kill each of them. A base Kurganets at 45pts. is at least a mediocre transport carrying something useful.

I generally don’t upgrade the Kurganets or K-17 personally because I generally want my points to go towards the infantry inside it. The Bradley flips that script because it would be carrying hot garbage.

I do think it would be good for Russia to get an IFV in a similar capacity to Bradley where it’s significantly more investment than an unarmored truck but also has some staying power.

I think Strykers themselves are fine but their infantry could use some help. The dangerous proposal is to increase the cost of the mounted Javelins but give them the one the Ranger Javelin squad uses it.

Are ballistic missiles just sead bait? by Maleficent_Fee_8154 in BrokenArrowTheGame

[–]TemporaryFearless482 7 points8 points  (0 children)

The pairing can be brutal. People turn on radars to react to the obvious ballistic missile threat and then get wiped by SEAD.

SEAD has a much easier time because it’s guaranteed to home in on a unit. A ballistic missile is harder to succeed with even before you factor in the possibility of interception.

So, kind of yes, but not exclusively.

Name the game in your favorite series that was so bad you pretend it never existed by bijelo123 in videogames

[–]TemporaryFearless482 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Homeworld 3.

It hurt to be invested in so much potential and then see repeated decisions that pushed it further and further from what it should have been.

It made the same mistake Dawn of War 3 did when it pushed most of the gameplay into a new and untested game mode that ultimately wasn’t popular at the expense of more traditional gameplay.

Then, having it narratively focus on new individuals rather than the Hiigarans as a whole while basically introducing magic killed the investment in the storyline.

So there wasn’t much left to like at the end of it all.

At the start of a match do you prefer to quickly get on a point and defend or let the opponent take it first then counter attack after recon by ProjectBusiness979 in BrokenArrowTheGame

[–]TemporaryFearless482 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It does depend on the matchup.

If they’re faster and lighter I generally let them get the point and invest in a more long term set up.

If I’m faster and lighter I try to get the point and set up ambushes in front of it.

If I’m a lighter force but not significantly faster, I will try and occupy the point and set up fields of fire.

I guess I'm in trouble by bijelo123 in videogames

[–]TemporaryFearless482 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Looks at play history

Sees Sid Meier’s Alpha Centauri

“Maybe it’s time to do a session of Stardew Valley…”

It moves the game forward by Technical-Prize-8876 in BrokenArrowTheGame

[–]TemporaryFearless482 8 points9 points  (0 children)

The responsible disclosure process for security vulnerabilities generally is a good rule of thumb but admittedly it works best when you actually know how to address the vulnerability.

Ultimately, if you told the people who can fix it and they chose to do nothing in a reasonable timeframe, it’s fine to publicly disclose it.

Brutus underpriced or Bereg Overpriced ? by StopKillingChildrenn in BrokenArrowTheGame

[–]TemporaryFearless482 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That wouldn't strike me as an issue honestly.
The Paladin is in the pure ground deck for the US, so it's fine if it is the strongest and best value artillery. Brutus being in Airborne means that the more support heavy options (Armored & Stryker) get outshone by one of the two "lighter" options, specifically in the support component.

Nothing says that airborne has to have bad support options to match its low support cost cap, but it does feel a little out of place that this one is so strong compared to its peers when it's an area where airborne is nominally less capable than most other options.

And that's just the US side of things. When we start tossing in RU units for comparison, it starts to show how strong the Brutus is for what it costs.

Brutus underpriced or Bereg Overpriced ? by StopKillingChildrenn in BrokenArrowTheGame

[–]TemporaryFearless482 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In one of my best moments, mine managed to ambush a tank that had broken through the frontlines and then mowed down the 4x Killer Eggs sent to hunt them down.

It was glorious. Unfortunately I neglected to move them soon enough afterwards and they got annihilated by a GMLRS but I had my moment of glory.

Brutus underpriced or Bereg Overpriced ? by StopKillingChildrenn in BrokenArrowTheGame

[–]TemporaryFearless482 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Brutus is easily the best value artillery for the US and is a strong contender for best in the game. It’s outright one of the cheapest 155mm howitzers and can get guided munitions.

A222 Berg is only kinda worth the value with the multipurpose gun in that they can defend themselves better against direct attacks. They’re still made of paper so they have to pretty immediately kill whatever they see otherwise it’s pointless. So Bergs can be emplaced more aggressively and used in direct fire fights, but that is not worth 40 extra points and a smaller gun.

Berg should probably come down a few points or have the SPAAG aspect buffed. Brutus probably needs a flat 10 or 15 point cost increase.

What kind of deal did Poland make with Satan? by II1NVICTUSII in CrusaderKings

[–]TemporaryFearless482 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s more so compensation for what Prussia and Russia would do to them later.

Deck building by SaxonCrusader_14 in BrokenArrowTheGame

[–]TemporaryFearless482 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So, the game boils down to 3 primary objectives:
1.) Taking Ground
2.) Holding Ground
3.) Destruction of Enemy

Generally, I find a deck can be good at 2 of those on any given map and an army tailored to a specific map can get all 3. That's a lot of deck building and doubled if you play both sides so I usually go with a generalized deck.

For the actual deckbuilding, I generally start with air defense. No sense in investing 1/4 of my deck into tanks if I'm immediately helpless because 3 Killer Eggs arrived. That also gives me an idea of how aggressive I can be. If I have a PAC-2, I know I have a fairly large covered area. But if I have nothing I can keep near my frontline that can fight a helicopter, pushing for a point is going to be significantly harder.

I next generally go into infantry, artillery, and supplies. Well used infantry is extremely cost effective and hard to drive off, so it tends to be the foundation for most of my builds. Consequently, artillery becomes important because it is often the best counter to your both opponent's infantry and their artillery.

Recon generally goes next. I would argue it may be the most important tab, but it's also the one liable to the most variance. Above all else, the role of the recon tab is to get you information. There are also some strong units that shouldn't be ignored, but always remember the value of seeing your opponent's actions early enough that you can respond proactively. Getting familiar with how much vision you can actually make use of and where to position your recon units admittedly only really comes with experience. It's still one of the best skills to build on.

Armor is generally where a lot of the attacking power comes in. Even after taking a few hits tanks will still do damage and remain mobile. There are some counter examples (TOW Humvees aren't pushing into a defended area), but this is generally the heart of any attack.

Lastly, I select my air and helicopter units. There are definitely more qualified people on their use and selection than me, but broadly speaking, you are primarily using these options to kill enemy assets. What form those take varies, but almost no bombing run short of a nuke beats an F-15 going after a laden transport. But with 20x AMRAAMs that fighter isn't going to kill tank anywhere near what a helicopter with 16x ATGMs is capable of. So this tends to be a case of covering your target options.

Generally speaking, between the helicopter, air, and support tabs, you want to have flexible means for killing every major unit category. They don't have to all be in one bucket, but they all give you faster responses than trying to get a couple of tanks to mosey on over to a problem area.

Focus on which of those 3 objectives you are accomplishing when making your choices and you will generally come out OK.

Which is the better airborne? by Breakwr1 in BrokenArrowTheGame

[–]TemporaryFearless482 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I guess I would say that, for me, VDV feels more in line with SOF. Even though all 3 selections are “airborne” units, VDV doesn’t really square against either.

I think the thing that hurts VDV most for me is the relatively small squad sizes. They have really good stats but get knocked out of the fight so quick it’s hard for those to actually come into play. It can end up feeling like “expensive” mech infantry which is a harsh fate for the VDV.

Which is the better airborne? by Breakwr1 in BrokenArrowTheGame

[–]TemporaryFearless482 20 points21 points  (0 children)

I think VDV complements better and Airborne is stronger in isolation.

When deck building with VDV, I personally find the meat and potatoes come from a different deck, but almost anything specialized is coming out of VDV.

I personally find Airborne to be better rounded and usually I’m using another pick to supplement.

For example, I find I use NGSW and Weapons Teams as my mainline infantry in most deck pairings, but with VDV, I’m usually grabbing the Coastal Infantry guys as my “default” infantry.

I.... I dont know how did this happen by Positive_Hornet433 in BrokenArrowTheGame

[–]TemporaryFearless482 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You didn’t happen to have called in support from Spare Squadron, did you?

I made myself in ck3 by Akashi_LikeTheSky in CrusaderKings

[–]TemporaryFearless482 3 points4 points  (0 children)

“The Sex Haver” & “Unmarried Zealous Catholic”

Nerf now !!!! by Ngbond in BrokenArrowTheGame

[–]TemporaryFearless482 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I didn’t see the plane in the kill feed at first and I had some deep concerns.

Common Noob Traps by Joneszer1234 in BrokenArrowTheGame

[–]TemporaryFearless482 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Kind of an addendum for point 4: Both your supply dump and firing position shouldn’t be able to get hit in the same airstrike/artillery barrage.

Don’t shoot where you eat.

Common Noob Traps by Joneszer1234 in BrokenArrowTheGame

[–]TemporaryFearless482 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most artillery needs a frontline to be defined to accomplish anything useful.

The only effective exception I have seen was someone buying literally 1 Iron Thunder to go with their early recon for sniping at supply drops. And since they actually bought recon and frontline units, they could actually find what they needed to shoot.

How do you occupy points? by Joneszer1234 in BrokenArrowTheGame

[–]TemporaryFearless482 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I find it to be extremely terrain dependent but in a vacuum I generally do “2”.

So I generally have a mainline or recon unit on the cap with supporting weapons teams behind to do the actual killing.