[UKF] [ALL] British Emplacement Counterplay

189111314

Comments

  • #302
    2 years ago
    BeardedragonBeardedra… Posts: 1,495
    edited January 2017

    @Hingie said:

    @Beardedragon said:
    heck, a flame halftrack can wreck an emplacement in shorter than 20 seconds without brace. if it does brace, this time might increase to 50 seconds.

    Actually, there lies the problem. If a FHT would destroy an emplacement in 20 without brace, it would take it brace + 15 ish seconds. That means you have just easily doubled the amount of time you have to react. Even if you only half-heartedly support your emplacement it can still survive an attack because it just pops in the immunity button and is free of care. And dont give me that "brace is retreat for emplacements" shtick. Thats nonsense. To make up for their immobility British (and only british, mind you) emplacements have been give very high HP pools. 700 HP is more than 2 full mortar crews of other factions have HP, just in comparison. Also Emplacements dont bleed you. You dont have to pay a single bloody MP to reinforce them because they dont lose models. And dont start telling me they bleed because they cost pop. Thats not bleed, thats upkeep.

    Just to put it into contrast yet again: If Soviets, OKW, Wehr or the US dont support and defend an Emplacement, said Emplacement is gone very, very fast. A single infantry squad can swiftly destroy bunkers and fighting positions, can decrew Pak43s and artillery. Rule so far was that if you have a static structure somewhere you need to support it or it gets crushed swiftly. Only the bloody Brits are given special tratment in 3 ways. First, their Emplacements can take more damage than other factions. Second, they cant be decrewed (neither can the bunker, but everything else can), and third they get a button that negates any meaningful damage for half a goddamn minute.

    yes but lazarus, it is also a 30 second free time for YOU to run up where it ISNT supporting his army. his 400 manpower emplacement is not aiding him no more and you can run up and deal with the rest of his army.

    What? That makes no sense. So if I attack an Emplacement hoping to destroy it and it uses its FREE get out of jail card ability I am then supposed to abandon my attack and focus on forces present elsewhere? Right. Sure, whatever.

    You and McMartel surely seem to have a peculiar interest in keeping scummy Brit Emplacement abuse in power.

    lol

    i never said the emplacements bleed so why even bring this up.

    also, british emplacements are unique, USF wehr or soviets have nothing of this sort. and the OKW trucks are not emplacements either, they're base structures. no one asked you to place it directly on the front line. emplacements, however, are MEANT to go to the front lines.

    and yea, brace IS the retreat for these and its not free of care, it still takes 25% damage. again, no one pops brace at 100% hp and if they do you can just loiter in the area or give them the full force AFTERWARDS. they were given high health because they cant move, that is true. but they are easy as fuck to kill without brace. a constant barrage of any given sort completely negates repairing from sappers. and it cant survive an attack just because it can brace.

    emplacements are strong, but the UKF army as whole before late game, really isnt all about utility, and early vehicles is one of their weak sides. to counter early vehicles they gotta rush out a BOFOS, AEC or AT gun, meaning less pressure on your team weapons as whole. and lets not forget that 2x 222s can destroy one AEC for less fuel. in fact, 222s are completely brutal against someone who didnt pick the BOFOS emplacements (and still brutal outside its range).

    The british army mid game is garbage when they dont have emplacements (note, when they DONT have em or dont fight near em) and most kinds of vehicle gameplay will win against them. yea, the sappers are good for their price and so are tommies, and you get a bit more utility from a bren carrier than the common scout car, and the sniper is better than the rest. but thats it. they have zero AT bombs, flame halftracks destroys them and vehicle play is insanely efficient versus the Brits. the Vickers also cost more than the MG42 despite not being better. if they dont get an AT gun in the early game your vehicles have free reign of terror because he cant AT bomb you as a last resort. and mines aint an argument because anyone can basically mine in the game except the USF, and the PIATS take away much needed AI from tommies, unless you put them on sappers, in which case you can smash the sappers with grenadiers. the fact you cant cripple vehicles with those AT bombs, is a HUGE disadvantage. Vehicle play is the key word.

    so why do i mention their army being bad mid game without emplacements? because hes without emplacements when they brace, so its just your OKW or Ost army which is not bad at all in the mid game, versus his meh army at best.

    who ever told you to back down? if it braces, thats exactly the reason you go up (or stay up in case you were already there). when his emplacement is out cold, you should by all means, have the upper hand. sure its easier to defend than to attack, but the mid game UKF army as whole without emplacement isnt really that great.

    i really dont see the problem in mortar emplacements, only BOFOS emplacements.

    and yea i play a lot of 4v4, but due to you guys at the balance forum, i start trying out 2v2. i honestly find taking out emplacements easier in 2v2 than 4v4 because less protects it. Mortar emplacements are in particular not a problem. im not saying i walk all over them, but they're not as difficult as you guys make them out to be. the only problem where i can find myself completely pushed out is when he uses a BOFOS as well. but that thing needs to chill out.

    the mortar emplacement? please.

  • #303
    2 years ago
    mrgame2mrgame2 Posts: 496
    If we tweak brace, then we should tweak squad wipes on repairing emplacement.

    Even with brace now, it is very dangerous to repair emplacement, that's why they need the hp...

    And back to the Han video, the brit is using advanced emplacement, which mean she is locked out from certain abilities and why it took han time to kill it. Normal emplacement is weaker duh
  • #304
    2 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,806
    Well to be fair, you dont even NEED to risk your squads to repair your emplacments, you can pick a commander that repairs it by itself! Even braced! Hell even in combat! It repairs nice and quick, faster than anything less than a full assault can damage even. Its a must for a cancer heavy playstyle
  • #305
    2 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,018
    edited January 2017

    @Beardedragon said:

    yes but lazarus, it is also a 30 second free time for YOU to run up where it ISNT supporting his army. his 400 manpower emplacement is not aiding him no more and you can run up and deal with the rest of his army.

    by no means should you necessarily be losing that fight. its like retreating your Obersoldaten squad because he got insta smashed by something. run up with the rest, because the heavy hitter cant hit back. when its out of comission, you basically have a bigger army than he does, because a big chunk of manpower is sitting in an emplacement that dont hit back.

    Except you didn't just crawl out of the ground under the pit the second they finished building it. It has been shelling you. It has been causing bleed. It has suffered 0 of its own. Hell - supposedly you need to have your 2 LeiGs to force it to brace, which puts you down 260 MP (a Sapper, UC, or nearly an I.Section or Vickers) or your double Ost Mortars, which puts you down 80 MP - but good luck assaulting British infantry with Osts current kit anyway.

    Even if you haven't gone the double indirect route, your army has been leaking MP like a sieve under fire from that pit. Not to mention the Brit will have muni and fuel to spare on account of all that map control too. Certainly enough to get the 5 man upgrade or some LMGs.

    Emplacements aren't the core infantry of the British faction. They're not supposed to show up every game. They're not supposed to be amazing and prop up the whole army. You know what fortification is supposed to be propping up the British army? The trenches, that hardly anybody ever builds. They're the core of the British defense. They give you 360 degree garrison cover, the RoF bonus, and it's no coincidence that it is built by I.Sections and procs the Vickers vet 1 ability that's for damn sure.

    People need to be redirected away from using emplacements as a crutch. Hell, if the British can't stand up without them, a build time + cost buff for the Trenches might even be in order.

  • #306
    2 years ago
    BeardedragonBeardedra… Posts: 1,495
    edited January 2017

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    Well to be fair, you dont even NEED to risk your squads to repair your emplacments, you can pick a commander that repairs it by itself! Even braced! Hell even in combat! It repairs nice and quick, faster than anything less than a full assault can damage even. Its a must for a cancer heavy playstyle

    yes you can pick a commander, but you cant do it without.

    why are we fixing soviet tier 1 to give penals PTRS? you can just pick a commander to get guards! how easy!

    because the game is meant to be able to work without commanders, at least, you are meant to be less commander dependant.

    not being able to repair when theres fire all over the place, means a lot. but again this is more of an ost thing, not really OKW given they barely have fire.

    but yes they can bypass this with a specific commander, but getting him means not getting something else.

    @Lazarus said:

    @Beardedragon said:

    yes but lazarus, it is also a 30 second free time for YOU to run up where it ISNT supporting his army. his 400 manpower emplacement is not aiding him no more and you can run up and deal with the rest of his army.

    by no means should you necessarily be losing that fight. its like retreating your Obersoldaten squad because he got insta smashed by something. run up with the rest, because the heavy hitter cant hit back. when its out of comission, you basically have a bigger army than he does, because a big chunk of manpower is sitting in an emplacement that dont hit back.

    Except you didn't just crawl out of the ground under the pit the second they finished building it. It has been shelling you. It has been causing bleed. It has suffered 0 of its own. Hell - supposedly you need to have your 2 LeiGs to force it to brace, which puts you down 260 MP (a Sapper, UC, or nearly an I.Section or Vickers) or your double Ost Mortars, which puts you down 80 MP - but good luck assaulting British infantry with Osts current kit anyway.

    Even if you haven't gone the double indirect route, your army has been leaking MP like a sieve under fire from that pit. Not to mention the Brit will have muni and fuel to spare on account of all that map control too. Certainly enough to get the 5 man upgrade or some LMGs.

    Emplacements aren't the core infantry of the British faction. They're not supposed to show up every game. They're not supposed to be amazing and prop up the whole army. You know what fortification is supposed to be propping up the British army? The trenches, that hardly anybody ever builds. They're the core of the British defense. They give you 360 degree garrison cover, the RoF bonus, and it's no coincidence that it is built by I.Sections and procs the Vickers vet 1 ability that's for damn sure.

    People need to be redirected away from using emplacements as a crutch. Hell, if the British can't stand up without them, a build time + cost buff for the Trenches might even be in order.

    of all what map control? at best you can control 2 areas with the mortar pit. i can send you my latest 2v2 game if you want. mortar pits were not the problem, only BOFOS pits were.

    and yea hes been shelling you, but why wont you shell him back? he cant repair while it being attacked by mortar fire as their sappers will get hit and eventually retreat.

    i dont know what to say. you guys are having issues dealing with something i dont have issues with.

    do you guys find yourself constantly losing when the enemy goes mortar pit? if not, why are you complaining?

    i also disagree with you on whether they're a core part of the army. i think they are.

    sure tommies are the core infantry, but the emplacements are a core integral part of the army too. if you took away the emplacements all together and did nothing else to the remaining army, the UKF mid game would be meh at best.

  • #307
    2 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,018
    @Beardedragon on the phone so cant quote myself. Why arent I shelling him? See the post you replied to - RE: no bleed from pit, costs more than the pit so youre behind again.

    Dont agree with your assessment of "if you remove emplacements" spiel either. For starters nobody uses the 17 pdr, BOFORS is totally optional and not everyone goes pit. So yeah. I disagree.
  • #308
    2 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855
    edited January 2017

    @Lazarus said:

    @MCMartel said:
    Do you get the difference between a soft and hard counter @Lazarus ? Cause it sounds like you don't. Brace isn't at all too forgiving, it is the only thing stopping emplacements from being completely unviable.

    @MCMartel said:
    Heck, you can kil a bofors with a couple of raketnwerfers if you're lucky, so stop complaining, this really is a L2P issue.

    Do you have the game installed Martel? Cause it sounds like you don't.

    Yes I do, you apparently don't, but hey, I guess retreating is OP too.
    @Hingie You clearly hate the brits and have an irrational hatred of emplacements, we get it, so please just drop all the ad-hominem and come back when you have real arguments.

  • #309
    2 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    @Farra13 said:
    @mcmartel and @Beardedragon Are we playing the same game? There is no current hardcounter for emplacements.

    There are however a series of softcounters for example mortars and at guns, these are softcounters as its takes them over 2 mins of actual uninterupted fire to kill a single mortar pit/bofors due to their high health and brace. Many of us are asking for a hardcounter eg. flame damage to ignore brace and give players a tool to actually threaten emplacements in a similar manner to how a td threatens a tank.

    So if an axis player gets a flametrack right up next to your mortar pit and proceeds to melt it, it should in concept be wiped quickly as the brit player has been "outplayed" by allowing it to get into weapon range. Similar to how if a commando team wipes an LEFH.

    That means we should in theory see no more of the mortar/bofors combo locking down a series of crucial points whilst the brit happily trundels around the other side of the map without a worry in the world about them.

    Mortars hard counter Bofors, a number of things hardcoutner mortar pits, almost everything besides a frontal assault with armor counters 17pdr. If you don't want to use hardcounters, that's on you, if you want to pretend they don't exist, also on you.

  • #310
    2 years ago
    MisterBastardMisterBas… Posts: 285
    edited January 2017

    @MCMartel said:

    Mortars hard counter Bofors, a number of things hardcoutner mortar pits, almost everything besides a frontal assault with armor counters 17pdr. If you don't want to use hardcounters, that's on you, if you want to pretend they don't exist, also on you.

    Jeebus some of you ppl would probably quit this game without teh scrubbofors or mortar pits wouldnt you...

    Saying mortars hard counters bofors is like saying pfaust hard counters a Sherman...in both cases its only posible if the enemy goes full retard/disconects from the game...so you have ages to kill him with "a thousand needle stings"

  • #311
    2 years ago
    BeardedragonBeardedra… Posts: 1,495

    @Lazarus said:
    @Beardedragon on the phone so cant quote myself. Why arent I shelling him? See the post you replied to - RE: no bleed from pit, costs more than the pit so youre behind again.

    Dont agree with your assessment of "if you remove emplacements" spiel either. For starters nobody uses the 17 pdr, BOFORS is totally optional and not everyone goes pit. So yeah. I disagree.

    thats fair. but you guys have issues with something i have no issues with. im not sure what im supposed to be saying.

    even in the few 2v2 games ive had which ive ltierally only played as with wehrmacht against brits, have the mortar pits not been problems. BOFOS sure are annoying but not the mortar pits them selves.

    saying learn to play seem a bit mean and unneeded but im not actually sure what else to say. i can combat british mortar pits just fine.

    im not a british fanboy either in fact my skills with the brits arent even that good. they're probably my least played faction along side OKW.

  • #312
    2 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    @MisterBastard said:

    @MCMartel said:

    Mortars hard counter Bofors, a number of things hardcoutner mortar pits, almost everything besides a frontal assault with armor counters 17pdr. If you don't want to use hardcounters, that's on you, if you want to pretend they don't exist, also on you.

    Jeebus some of you ppl would probably quit this game without teh scrubbofors or mortar pits wouldnt you...

    Saying mortars hard counters bofors is like saying pfaust hard counters a Sherman...in both cases its only posible if the enemy goes full retard/disconects from the game...so you have ages to kill him with "a thousand needle stings"

    So you're saying it wouldn't undermine a faction to remove it's only long-range artillery and it's main mid-game defense? You make it like they're not key parts of the faction, and calling it "scrubbofors" doesn't make your point any less ludicrous. That's like saying "I bet you wouldn't play OST anymore if they removed the mg-42 and the stug" well duh, cause they're integral units to the faction.

  • #313
    2 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,018
    edited January 2017

    @MCMartel said:
    Yes I do, you apparently don't, but hey, I guess retreating is OP too.

    No, you don't actually, but hey, I guess learning to play without cancer city emplacements is too hard.

    @MCMartel said:

    So you're saying it wouldn't undermine a faction to remove it's only long-range artillery and it's main mid-game defense?

    Who said anything about removing the 25pdrs and the Trenches?

  • #314
    2 years ago
    HingieHingie Posts: 1,984
    edited January 2017
    I guess McMartel is right, the Bofors is the only relevant mid game defense seeing how the UKF don't have an MG... oh wait, no, they've got the Vickers. Oh well, it's such an easy thing to forget. And so flimsy compared to the Bofors.

    And no, I don't hate UKF. I hate all their OP stuff and I hate their emplacements because these promote a static, dreary game play that requires more resources and micro from the attacking player to be countered than by the using player to be used. And you're one to speak when it comes to arguments. First you claim 2 Püppchen can counter an emplacement only to retract that statement as soon you're proven wrong by denying Püppchen to be counters.
  • #315
    2 years ago
    BeardedragonBeardedra… Posts: 1,495
    edited January 2017

    @Hingie said:
    I guess McMartel is right, the Bofors is the only relevant mid game defense seeing how the UKF don't have an MG... oh wait, no, they've got the Vickers. Oh well, it's such an easy thing to forget. And so flimsy compared to the Bofors.

    And no, I don't hate UKF. I hate all their OP stuff and I hate their emplacements because these promote a static, dreary game play that requires more resources and micro from the attacking player to be countered than by the using player to be used. And you're one to speak when it comes to arguments. First you claim 2 Püppchen can counter an emplacement only to retract that statement as soon you're proven wrong by denying Püppchen to be counters.

    hate all their OP stuff? looking at the statistics, they arent on top of all categories, they're pretty average with the rest.

    i suppose they let their opponents win so people wont find out they have OP stuff.

    those sneaky Brit players.

    you do realize that its not OP because you dont know how to deal with it yes?

  • #316
    2 years ago
    HingieHingie Posts: 1,984
    edited January 2017
    No. They have stuff that is op and the only reason why Brits are not higher in the ranking is because their early game is poor. They have plenty of OP crap later on. Or wjat else would you call the 25 mun stock tank commander which boost vet rate, accuracy, vision and detection? Or the victory charge that gives +40% accuracy and -75% (!!!!) Received accuracy? Or the Comet, who has basically all possible benefits a tank can have piled onto itself? Or the Cromwell which is a better version of the Pz IV that is cheaper? I could go on if you want. The faction as a whole isn't op but they have a ton of stuff that is easily op as heck.
  • #317
    2 years ago
    BeardedragonBeardedra… Posts: 1,495
    edited January 2017

    @Hingie said:
    No. They are op and the only reason why Brits are not higher in the ranking is because their early game is poor. They have plenty of OP crap later on. Or wjat else would you call the 25 mun stock tank commander which boost vet rate, accuracy, vision and detection? Or the victory charge that gives +40% accuracy and -75% (!!!!) Received accuracy? Or the Comet, who has basically all possible benefits a tank can have piled onto itself? Or the Cromwell which is a better version of the Pz IV that is cheaper? I could go on if you want. The faction as a whole isn't op but they have a ton of stuff that is easily op as heck.

    so they have crap early game, but strong late game.

    isnt that whats called balance in a sense? i would love to see their late game scaled down and their early game scaled.. up? but in all senses, it is somewhat balanced now. you just need to hold down their power creep.

    what would the point be of an early, not so strong game, with a mid game featuring only 1 vehicle, if late game didnt give you more than enough spark for your money?

    basically some of their OP late game units are made up by poor early game.

    because im not disputing with you on the tanks part. they are very very good those tanks. but i wouldnt say they are directly too good, as long as their early game isnt better. otherwise its just meh all the way.

    you also said earlier you dont like their emplacements because it promotes static gameplay. well that is correct, emplacements do that. one can like it or not. but that doesnt make them op :)

  • #318
    2 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855
    edited January 2017

    Just getting sick of this argument, it's pretty clear no one is listening to eachother anymore.

  • #319
    2 years ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 647

    Oh no, we listen and then disagree, present counterpoints that you then ignore, and then you proceed to repeat your earlier statements regardless of when someone picks apart your argument. I believe "broken record" comes to mind.

    Put emplacements in a vacuum test against say a pair of mortars, and yes its dies. Whereas in a real game their incredible durability due to high health and brace means its incredibly difficult to dislodge them well at the same time dealing with the troops supporting them, currently they add nothing more than frustration and a horrible playstyle to gameplay, giving players a hardcounter would do alot to remove the company of mortars playstyle they incite and open up more gameplay diversity than spamming indirect to deal with them.

  • #320
    2 years ago
    BeardedragonBeardedra… Posts: 1,495

    Well. talking about mortar pits here:

    The OKW needs a hard counter option (a unit that spews fire).

    for mid game the Wehrmacht have the flame halftrack.

    if its late game, any given tank works.

    but yea its a bit difficult for OKW in the mid game section. not so much difficult for Ost given the flame halftrack.

  • #321
    2 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    @Farra13 , you're not even arguing in good faith anymore. You're ignoring all my points, and just insisting you're correct completely regardless of logic and relying on snide weaselwords and prhases like "company of mortars" to ignore that fact that you're just refusing to acknowledge that both soft and hard counters exist for emplacements in their current form, and you either need to stop pretending you don't hate the UKF or L2P.
    I am getting sick of this "OMG BRITS OP!" nonsense that flies in the face of all the evidence from win rates, playthroughs, and any other empirical measure. You're whining with no empirical basis and I'm worried your baseless whining will hurt game balance if the devs listen to you.

  • #322
    2 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,018
    edited January 2017

    Whatever Martel. You were proved wrong on the Raketenwerfers being a counter. That's arguing in good faith. Whining that nobody is arguing in good faith and then calling them whiners is a failure to argue in good faith.

  • #323
    2 years ago
    BeardedragonBeardedra… Posts: 1,495
    edited January 2017

    @Lazarus said:
    Whatever Martel. You were proved wrong on the Raketenwerfers being a counter. That's arguing in good faith. Whining that nobody is arguing in good faith and then calling them whiners is a failure to argue in good faith.

    why is the raketenwerfer not a counter?

    i get it might not be a hard counter, but why isnt it a counter? it can damage reliably. in my optics that does make it a counter.

  • #324
    2 years ago
    MisterBastardMisterBas… Posts: 285
    edited January 2017

    @Beardedragon said:

    @Lazarus said:
    Whatever Martel. You were proved wrong on the Raketenwerfers being a counter. That's arguing in good faith. Whining that nobody is arguing in good faith and then calling them whiners is a failure to argue in good faith.

    why is the raketenwerfer not a counter?

    i get it might not be a hard counter, but why isnt it a counter? it can damage reliably. in my optics that does make it a counter.

    In theory yes...in practice...well, see Helping Hanses replay...even he got frustrated a number of times by Bofors...untill he got a walking Stuka it was repelling both raketenwerfer and panther fire with ease...

  • #325
    2 years ago
    HingieHingie Posts: 1,984
    Püppchen are at best softcounters. That means that the circumstances for the to successfully destroy the Bofors must be very much in favour of the Püppchen. Either that or they need substantial support. Which makes them a very, very poor counter by themselves. It's a question of efficiency. If only because a unit can damage another would mean that said unit is a counter, the Brummbär would be a counter for the IS2 because it can damage it regularly. And he stated that 2 Püppchen can counter a Bofors which, if you watch the video again, is wrong. It took 1 Panther, 2 Volksgrenadiers, and 2 Püppchen in the end to counter the Bofors. That's why they aren't really counters. A Bofors needs less support to destroy a tank than 2 Püppchen need to destroy a Bofors. Just to put things into perspective.
  • #326
    2 years ago
    BeardedragonBeardedra… Posts: 1,495
    edited January 2017

    @MisterBastard said:

    @Beardedragon said:

    @Lazarus said:
    Whatever Martel. You were proved wrong on the Raketenwerfers being a counter. That's arguing in good faith. Whining that nobody is arguing in good faith and then calling them whiners is a failure to argue in good faith.

    why is the raketenwerfer not a counter?

    i get it might not be a hard counter, but why isnt it a counter? it can damage reliably. in my optics that does make it a counter.

    In theory yes...in practice...well, see Helping Hanses replay...even he got frustrated a number of times by Bofors...untill he got a walking Stuka it was repelling both raketenwerfer and panther fire with ease...

    ah yes the Bofos.

    does the BOFOS not out range the Raketenwerfer? so if the raketen shoots in to fog of war, the BOFOS can shoot back in to fog of war too.

    i thought it was about mortar pits, which they do fine against i think.

  • #327
    2 years ago
    HingieHingie Posts: 1,984
    Actually the Püppchen out range the Bofors by 5. Rw has 50 range, the Bofors 45. The Bofors however can barrage them easily.
  • #328
    2 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,018

    @Beardedragon said:

    @Lazarus said:
    Whatever Martel. You were proved wrong on the Raketenwerfers being a counter. That's arguing in good faith. Whining that nobody is arguing in good faith and then calling them whiners is a failure to argue in good faith.

    why is the raketenwerfer not a counter?

    i get it might not be a hard counter, but why isnt it a counter? it can damage reliably. in my optics that does make it a counter.

    See the Hans replay. No, the Bofors doesn't outrange the Rak (you've got about a monkeys asshair worth of margin of error though) but the amount of time it takes a pair of raks to do anything remotely meaningful to the Bofors is anywhere beyond unreasonable.

    RE: Mortar pit - no it won't counter them either. You either need to be in literal kissing range, or to move your Raks after every single shot. Because they'll get aced pretty damned quickly if you don't. Even ignoring the micro tax of having to reposition your units every single time the mortar fires, the extra time you spend picking up, relocating, setting up and firing gives the Brit all the time in the world to respond. That's before we even get back on the topic of brace.

  • #329
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,595

    @Hingie said:
    The Bofors however can barrage them easily.

    Only when garrisoned(pointless if you plan to have bofors as area denial) or next to another 300mp investment.

  • #330
    2 years ago
    BeardedragonBeardedra… Posts: 1,495
    edited January 2017

    @Hingie said:
    Actually the Püppchen out range the Bofors by 5. Rw has 50 range, the Bofors 45. The Bofors however can barrage them easily.

    well it only does barely outrange them that makes them difficult to use, i see that problem.

    however, i wont agree to barrage being the issue if we talk any given AT gun here.

    Barrage can for the most part be heard if you're close enough, so when you hear it, just move. it also requires someone to be garrisoning it, or it needs to be near a forward assembly.

    in the same way you can smash BOFOS pits with mortars, the barrage doesnt nullify mortar counter, unless you dont move and keep standing still and get crushed by the shots falling.

    @Lazarus said:

    @Beardedragon said:

    @Lazarus said:
    Whatever Martel. You were proved wrong on the Raketenwerfers being a counter. That's arguing in good faith. Whining that nobody is arguing in good faith and then calling them whiners is a failure to argue in good faith.

    why is the raketenwerfer not a counter?

    i get it might not be a hard counter, but why isnt it a counter? it can damage reliably. in my optics that does make it a counter.

    See the Hans replay. No, the Bofors doesn't outrange the Rak (you've got about a monkeys asshair worth of margin of error though) but the amount of time it takes a pair of raks to do anything remotely meaningful to the Bofors is anywhere beyond unreasonable.

    RE: Mortar pit - no it won't counter them either. You either need to be in literal kissing range, or to move your Raks after every single shot. Because they'll get aced pretty damned quickly if you don't. Even ignoring the micro tax of having to reposition your units every single time the mortar fires, the extra time you spend picking up, relocating, setting up and firing gives the Brit all the time in the world to respond. That's before we even get back on the topic of brace.

    i use AT guns versus mortar pits rather often and it works fine.

    first of all, if there aint no bofos emplacement and you beat some of his army back, theres nothing really stopping you from setting up defensive lines near the mortar pit. then you have all the time in the world to destroy that mortar pit with your AT gun.

    or you could attack the mortar pit from multiple angles, be it a single mortar and a single AT gun defended with an MG. if one falls, have pioneers or so recrew it. it will have to pick between the AT gun or the mortar.

    these things dont hard counter the mortar. but you can take it down with this anyway. i mean if it hard countered, it would be around the same pricing or cheaper. an AT gun and a mortar unit isnt really cheaper.

  • #331
    2 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,018
    edited January 2017

    @Beardedragon said:
    i use AT guns versus mortar pits rather often and it works fine.

    I use AT guns versus pits often and it doesn't work fine. My anecdote cancels out your anecdote.

    @Beardedragon said:
    first of all, if there aint no bofos emplacement and you beat some of his army back, theres nothing really stopping you from setting up defensive lines near the mortar pit. then you have all the time in the world to destroy that mortar pit with your AT gun.

    This requires you to beat his army back while fighting under the emplacement - which itself requires the Brit to make a massive error.

    @Beardedragon said:
    or you could attack the mortar pit from multiple angles, be it a single mortar and a single AT gun defended with an MG. if one falls, have pioneers or so recrew it. it will have to pick between the AT gun or the mortar.

    and while this is going on and you're throwing MP in to the wind, the Brit is sitting there getting a lead over you, both in map control and in unit preservation. So no dice here either.

Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

  • © SEGA. SEGA, the SEGA logo, Relic Entertainment, the Relic Entertainment logo, Company of Heroes and the Company of Heroes logo are either trademarks or registered trademarks of SEGA Holdings Co., Ltd. or its affiliates. All rights reserved. SEGA is registered in the US Patent and Trademark Office. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.