Fuck leavers.
Fuck the no saving in missions.
Buff infantry.

>>2081209 (OP)
>buff infantry
will never happen. more people are interested in vehicles than infantry.

Should APS be altered to have different qualities of APS?
All the APS in game works 360, including top attack, vs even munitions going like mach 2. And all, that I've noticed, recharges at the same 5 second rate, only variation is number of charges.
Should APS have varying sectors it can cover depending on which system it is?

>>2081209 (OP)
Those hovercraft propellers in the background look fucking huge.

I did Papers Please in the campaign.
A bit of an annoying mission, but not with different problems than any other mission.(Pacing on triggers feels terrible and enemy outmatches you dramatically in equipment all the time)

But I don't see how you could lose the mission, the required objectives are pretty easy, you get infinite dudes and more than enough artillery to grind away at the enemy.

Does the Su-25 works better as a strafer or a bomber?

>>2081259
The Zubr IS fucking huge

everyone start to run the same spec now

What is it with IronThunder arty that lets it kill everything so quickly?
My Russian howitzers do jack shit most of the time. Hell on occasion i can even see the enemy they hit barely have the lifebar go down.

>>2081504
laser designation?

>>2081504
5km range and tiny CEP for tube artillery

Downsides is that it takes a longass fucking time to reload it (10+ minutes), it's incredibly supply hungry, no smokes and no clusters.

>>2081502
>one spec lets you run a few more interesting infantry and paper mache troop carriers that can float on water
>the other gives you heavy tanks to capture positions and artillery to spam any area of the map with football fields of rockets every 10-20 seconds

In hindsight, it was never going to work out with the current MP scenarios.

>Loading screen tip:
>Units with Autoloaders do not suffer a reload speed penalty from stress statuses.

Units with autoloaders should have a 15% chance to instantly detonate when taking any form of HP damage.

>>2081516
they need to buff some of the meme infantries at least
like the marine/coastal specialized amphibious units need to have easier time sneaking through water
like PDSS (and hopefully SEAL) need to be able to dive under the water and have 3+sneak underwater for a duration basically like sprint but for water
instead of being a floating pinata on the water
then maybe let more marine units able to swim

>>2081462
AWACS > Strafer > ASF > Bomber

Are recons without lasers designators meant to be combat recon /ambushers?

>>2081504
>My Russian howitzers do jack shit most of the time.
Malkas absolutely obliterate shit.

>Enemy flies a large-scale helo rush right into my PIVAD
I love this thing. One hundred points of FUCK YOU.

>>2081546
Let me show you what "a large scale helo rush" looks like.

they hate him for he spoke the (multi-target) truth

>>2081549
The cheaper TOR version can target up to four enemies at once at a negligible reduction in range
#JustVatnikThings

>>2081566
Not negligible
I need that range

>>2081570
ok
>SEADs your Pantsir to death

>>2081571
ZSU sama will protect my pantsir

>>2081573
No ... You can't just counter my single solution with your own counter!! NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!

>>2081576
You can still rocket/arty it

>>2081527
>he thinks it's just the autoloader
lmao

Cruise missiles and rocket artillery arent fun to play against.
Its cool they're in the game but there should be a bigger supply cost or limit to using them regularly.

Do you need to activate radar at all to use SAM and AAA? I know they reduce range, but it seems like activating makes you vulnerable to missiles, forcing you to layer the defence with multiple redundant systems.

>>2081533
the PDSS is kinda buggy in the water right now
they were completely immune to damage for me a few times while in water

>>2081588
they teach you in the tutorial to only turn on the radar if you actually need to use the system, but in practice, its the opposite.
you need to have radar activated to respond to threats early, respond to aerial incursion and hopefully intercept munitions. ballistic missiles being the BIG one here, since only big SAMs can do that (save for some, like the Tor and Pantsir).
against SEAD missiles, having an el-cheapo radar cannon foil to down them is a big plus if you can spare the points.

>>2081587
Double Katrans with cruise missiles are hard countered by a single SPAAG.

>>2081592
Theres counters to everything sure, but I dont want to play spot the launch smoke or missile defender half the match when the meat of the game should be on the front lines.

I think airborne are better off without the NGSW loadout. At least how they get used most of the time.
Loosing the MAAWS sucks but they end up basically like a morskaya pekhota squad.

And the NGSW loadout only outclasses other infantry at only range, but most of the time I run into airborne they're being used aggressively against me or I'm aggressing them. So they keep getting stuck in like 150m fights or even 0m knife fights, where they're just shittier than any other mid tier infantry for way more dosh.
Even at their ideal range a lot of other squads bully them due to having more anti infantry firepower from launchers and such.

>>2081566
>cheaper version is better
I noticed this on a few units wonder whats the point of upgrades

>>2081600
Pic related.
The launchers are shittier, but they have an extra man so they have a bit more survivability and can fight other infantry squads in a fight.
I know chemical damage is scaling so it does matter, but not many Russian tanks have armour between 450 and 600(Only the T-72B3M comes to mind) so its doing OK damage vs all the things the MAAWS was and shit damage vs all the things the MAAWS was. But 4 shots rather than 1 means you're way more likely to kills with your opening volley.

>>2081600
>I think airborne are better off without the NGSW loadout
I think you're crazy.
>they keep getting stuck in like 150m fights or even 0m knife fights
Skill issue. You need to put them in detached buildings with enough space around. If they're rushed by a door kicker squad with tons of smokes, you just run away. The main niche of NGSW is MAAWS, but they're great against shitty infantry too. You can even grind with them if your micro is good enough to keep them alive.

>>2081592
Just launch you missiles somewhere else bro. It's a helicopter with a long range missile, you have angles.

>>2081610
I barely use them, I'm mostly commenting from observing fighting them. But I've mucked with them a bit and I feel like they're shit at their 'niche'
They do win a 600m fight eventually but they're literally pissing on enemy squads, usually leaving them open to be shredded by support fire. Or just walk up to them and kill them. They can't operate in woods cause thats the knife fight dimension, and most cities have more than enough cover.
It doesn't take a doorkicker squad to beat them, even a morskaya pekhota sitting in the building over like 100 or 200 metres will beat them for less.

Its a 40% damage increase to have the standard loadout. The only utility I see is the value trade vs armour 10 infantry running at you through a completely open space is pretty good, as you'll deal full damage to them all the way out to 600. But how often does that sort of stuff happen?

And if we want AT and firepower out to 600m, the weapons squad offers way better AT and can still pee on squads 600m away(Expensive ofc though).
If its for supporting fire to help cover advancing assault infantry/cover your forward squads when an enemy assault happens, thats what AGS teams are for, or vehicles, or even an M2 which all do the job better than the airborne NGWS will.

>>2081600
It's best to think of NGSW purely as an AT squad. Clear infantry with some anti-infantry specialist from your partner spec, like Engineers and then use pairs of NGSW to keep tanks from rolling over you.

Don't treat them like Morskaya. I know the cheaper loadout costs the same and their small arms have the same stats. But Morskaya are good *for an AT squad* they're justified by their 5x disposable launchers with 650 own and 9 damage. Downgrading your Airborne leaves you with yet another worthless AT4 squad

>>2081610
not a skill issue
game design makes inf shit at range unless they're a weapon team (as it should be)
you don't get to decide where every firefight will take place every time, or what the enemy brings such as a tank or ifv that will still outrange you
so if running a unit that works 98% of the time costs less than a unit that works 99% of the time, it's the better option bc then it's easier to fit weapon teams and other assets in your deck

i've gone down the 50pnt mech squads hole

>>2081621
>It's best to think of NGSW purely as an AT squad
They're 5 points less than Ranger MAAWS for 2 less launchers.
They compare miserably to AT squads.
1 launcher is not enough, which means you need to group them together.
2 of them costs way more than a weapons squad with the ripple fire javelins, for a much shittier AT package.

>>2081620
>>2081624
Pic related is what a well-placed infantry squad can do against other infantry because of its superior guns. Anti-infantry capabilities of NGSW are even better.
>>2081628
>2 of them costs way more than a weapons squad with the ripple fire javelins, for a much shittier AT package.
Do you really think that Weapon Squad and Airborne NGSW are in the same niche? Why the fuck are you even comparing them? A Weapon Squad cannot assault, is really bad against infantry, performs badly against armor up close (forest and urban fights), and you can only have 4 of them in a deck.

>>2081630
>Why the fuck are you even comparing them?
...
>It's best to think of NGSW purely as an AT squad
I wonder why I was comparing NGSW to other AT squads?

Also
>using STT to stand in as NGSW
1750 sight vs 1200, 2.5 stealth vs 1.75 stealth, and almost the same damage output despite lower manpower.
STT are an example of a unit that does the niche well, NGWS don't have the right stats to compete.

>>2081630
have you considered you were fighting a dipshit?
>>2081634
also this

anyone think that infantry should be able to leave smaller buildings faster?

>>2081635
>have you considered you were fighting a dipshit?
Yeah this, when fighting retards anything is possible. Pic rel is not representative of how good / bad a BMP-2M is.

>>2081638
i can't comprehend that happening, did you get it in their back line or something?

>>2081628
Javelins can't fire at close range, they fulfill different roles.
And yes, NGSW is horribly overpriced compared to Ranger MAAWS. In case you hadn't noticed, Airborne is a bad spec.
But we used to pay 120pts for standoff Raiders because they were the only Carl Gustaf squad. NGSW are pretty passable compared to that, especially if for whatever reason you can't pick specops instead.
And yes, all short range AT squads (which I guess I now have to specify because someone can't tell the difference between a carlG and an ATGM) need to fight in pairs to be effective. There are no exceptions.

I miss fighting retards. I miss being able to counter a tank rush with a single helo. I miss SAMs and artillery just being left in the open, and my drones never get shot down.

Now I am the retard, getting chipped away at constantly by superheavy tanks that simply back off after deleting something, and my positions get hit by constant artillery I never get to see, and there's six recon squads all lasing the same supply depot in my backline.

>>2081642
why there should be casual mode and ranked mode
i'm at the point i can't tell if the other guy is a master of hiding recon or using map hacks
I also don't know how some of my teammates have the same elo as me

>>2081643
If I get to 1v1 someone, I typically get to bully the shit out of them. The problem is I can't effect any sort of carry; If I bully them enough to push forward, I just get more and more support crap dropped on me until I'm back at square one.

>>2081640
The BMP was in a woodline with a supply dump behind him, all the results of the pic were the match long attempts to zerg across open ground into him.
He had a T-72B3M helping him for some of it, it took most of the hits while he raped things with his cannon. And there was a sniper team reconning the enemy approach so I knew what was coming way ahead of time.
Which is the trouble with using the end of match kill feeds as representative of unit value, it rarely depicts the whole story. Sometimes 1 unit just eats up all the last hits but wasn't the one doing the work.

>>2081641
Squads with disposables are vaguely functional without a double up, very good with a double up. 7 AT4s doing like 30-40% damage is gonna achieve more than 1 MAAWS doing 50% damage.
A single MAAWS is not worth 85 points in the present game.

And if someone says
>you gotta look at this as AT
I am gonna compare it to other AT options, I don't care if they're not close range AT. Especially because again, at close range disposables become better than the reloadable launchers unless you really mass them, which is too expensive to do with NGWS.
Assaultmen SMAW are better. Stryker troopers are better. MAAWS are better.
Only Armour lacks a better AT option without a minimum range.

>>2081647
yeah showing each unit's damage would be better

>>2081647
>I don't know what I'm talking about but I'm going to double down
Yikes

>>2081637
they have to implement some sort of mechanic for buildings because right now, if they are spotted, any vehicle will just kill them
let us do a defensive stance or something where you armor gets doubled but your firerate halved or take a "stealth stance" in the buiilding for increased camo (this obviously isnt allowed to go above 3) or let us deploy smoke in the building to get out safe
anything really

>>2081652
>I have no argument so I will claim victory and give up

What niche is the NGWS meant to fill? Currently I've seen:

>its just AT
which its worse than all its contemporaries at
and
>its stand off anti-infantry fire power
which it doesn't have the stats to perform properly like recon units can, and doesn't have the fire power to perform it like support weapon teams do

What value does it bring? Being bad at 2 things?

>>2081653
do what COH did
they have a suppressed and pinned system already
just make it where it reduces their chance to get hit as well since they can you know, go deeper into the building
would add more inf tactics to suppressing and assaulting
infantry aren't going to just stand in a window and die

>>2081647
>I am gonna compare it to other AT options, I don't care if they're not close range AT
If you're gonna be retarded on purpose then there's no point arguing with you.

>>2081658
>What niche is the NGWS meant to fill?
Fighting armor in towns and assaulting positions reinforced with armor. Support squads can do neither. Regular Airborne can only do the first one.

>>2081647
>A single MAAWS is not worth 85 points in the present game.
It absolutely is. A single MAAWS is worth 120pts, because for that price it will solo a T-72 and a pair of them for 240 will kill an Armata.
The Ranger MAAWs being the most cost-effective US RPG squad by a country mile doesn't make the other ones bad, just vastly inferior by comparison. But not every deck wants to or can spare to run specops, and if I had to choose between a pair of 85pt Carl Gustafs or a pair of 120pt Carl Gustafs I know which one I would tend towards.

NGWS being inferior to Ranger MAAWs is symptomatic of Airborne's overall problem in that across the board virtually all of its key offerings are too similar to SF and inferior. I don't think there's a reason I would ever pick Airborne over SF except to make like, a Marines + AB list (because Marines+SF has no AA), and so I don't think I would ever be in a position to pick NGSW over RAAWs.
But if SF didn't have a better air tab, better heli tab, better infantry tab, enormously better recon tab and literally reproduced every single one of Airborne's strengths and gimmicks with a unit that is simultaneously superior and more cost-effective, I would take NGSW because it's a Carl Gustaf squad. If you can't understand why a Carl Gustaf matters or why 4 AT4s are not serviceable anti-armour firepower then you probably just need to spend more time playing the game and less time sharing bad opinions on /vst/
>>2081672
Regular AB can't even fight armour in towns. A pair of them literally run out of ammo before killing a tank frontally, and even if both are getting side shots they'll struggle to kill an APS vehicle before they run out of shots. If 4 AT4s were serviceable AT then the 50pt Mech. Rifles carrying just that would be premium infantry. Vanilla AB pay 20pts for 2 more bodies.

>>2081668
Calling me a retard repeatedly doesn't change the fact that there's a long list of AT squads without a min range better than NGWS right after that statement.

>>2081672
Standard airborne are gonna perform better assaulting enemy positions, their damage output is much higher for a lower cost. VS vehicles supporting those positions they're more likely to actually kill them or at least perform critical hits with 4 shots vs 1 MAAWS tickling the vehicle. The extra 200 metre range could come in handy, but you can pull up support assets to punch out beyond 600.

>>2081658
You can't really compare it to specialized units it's an all-rounder, more of a side-grade to Troopers or Rangers.
but yeah the standard version should be its default setting, NGWS feels more like one of those meme upgrades many units in this game have.
There’s an argument for its paradropping ability, but nobody really uses that, and Rangers can do it too.
but there is a case that air spec do gets some extra points for vehicles and the support tab, so you can add something extra there.
so if you pick guard, then air spec let you bring few extra tanks/AA/Arty compare to guard+socom
then maybe you can pick the standard airborne over mech rifleman if you want extra body

The problem with infantry that people seem to struggle with is that there are basically 3 kinds of squads that matter.
ATGM squads. These are self-explanatory. They have a minimum range and cannot fire in forests, so they can't be your only source of AT.

Close range AT squads. These are launchers powerful enough to threaten vehicles in close range where ATGMs can't fire, where the squad essentially faces a DPS race with a vehicle. AT-4s and RPG-26s cannot serve this purpose against anything heavier than a BMP-2, because their damage, penetration and ammo are too low relative to the armour available to heavier vehicles. They literally run out of ammo before dealing lethal damage to side armour, even in pairs. Marines are arguable the closest to a 'viable' AT-4 squad, because they carry 6 launchers and have a truckload of health, but two Marines will still run out of ammo before killing a Barbaris.

And Anti-infantry specialist squads. Once again, self-explanatory. There's a colossal gap in anti-infantry performance between squads with AT and squads without and the ones without are always considerably cheaper. If you need to kill infantry, you bring one or two of these.

"Hybrid" squads don't make any sense unless they're as good at one job as a specialist. Marine Raiders AT, for example, are as good at fighting tanks as NGWS, but also beat most infantry 1v1. Morskaya Pekhota are better at fighting vehicles than a squad of Rangers RAAWS, but also quite capable against infantry. I wouldn't use Morskaya in place of a dedicated anti-infantry squad because they aren't good enough to be a replacement--but I need less anti-infantry squads because my dedicated AT squad is also good vs infantry.

If your 'hybrid' squad sacrifices efficacy in both jobs then it's not good enough at either.

Pic related is why the AT-4 is NOT adequate anti-tank firepower.

Are there any good single player scenarios on the workshop yet? So far only ( https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3505558190 ) seems like any effort was put into making something more than "go clear the map."

>>2081697
yeah AT-4s and RPGs need serious buff
i did take out a T-90 with 2 mech rifleman, but that was literally the most ideal situation to do such

>>2081679
>It absolutely is. A single MAAWS is worth 120pts, because for that price it will solo a T-72 and a pair of them for 240 will kill an Armata.
In open. It'll drop a T-72B1 to about half. 2 squads will drop an armata to 25-50%.
In a building. 1 squad will just kill a T-72B1, anything with better armour like a T-72B3 and they run out of ammo before it dies. 2 squads run out of ammo before a T-14 dies.

Disposable setups are more likely to immobilise the tank and get even an armata to half health if they manage to flank then still escape with a decent chunk of their HP.

Damage actually much better than I had previously assumed.
NGWS loadout will do better in defensive position in building at warding off a tank, not so much killing.
Disposables better for securing the kill on vehicles as they can pretty quickly cause mobility loss or get a flurry of shots in and kill before the tank player can retreat.
But, you're ignoring SMAWs which just barely fail kill a T-72B3, and easily kill a T-72B1 10-15 seconds faster than the NGWS with way less damage taken and 2 missiles left over.

Trooper team performs shittier than I expected, I forgot javelins switch to direct fire at close range and even when being guided the squad getting suppressed causes the guided missile to miss. So they're better than them.

>>2081711
You keep thinking in terms of single squads when it's been already pointed out that taking double squads of AT is a qualitative change not a quantitative.

>>2081715
I keep thinking in terms of what the previous person fucking said.

is Iskander any good?

>>2081711
Addendum, forgot to say I tested with NGWS cause thats what we were talking about, shoulda said that. Marine raiders will perform way better, due to having 8 shots and can get kills on T-72B3s and such. Plus more guys, harder to suppress, and don't keel over when infantry attack them.

An NGWS team can't even win a 1v1 vs a morskaya pekhota squad if the fight starts within 300 metres.

>>2081697
personally I usually use these generic all-rounder squad as the escort squad to the specialized squads
so I would bring my regular ranger along to escort RAWS or delta force
basically just use them as fodder that can do little bit of each

>>2081697
There's more to it. Infantry isn't supposed to fight tanks head-on. Tank has a heavy armor and your infantry is soft, it's not that complicated. The tank facing you is literally the worst case scenario, because that way it's showing its thickest, frontal armor. If you want your short range AT weapons to be effective then you must at lead attack it from the side. This is why Javelins are great, because they're the top-attack weapon and go for the thinnest armor, dealing the maximum amount of damage. The same goes for TOW-2B or Hellfires.

>>2081718
With cruise missiles it's decent. Ballistic missiles seem to be worthless in general.

>>2081711
Yeah troopers have AT-4s more or less as a consolation, so you can't just rush a humvee up into their minimum range. Their ability to fight vehicles at close range is essentially nil. The main value to them is that they are a Javelin Squad for 90pts, while most other Javelin squads are much more expensive. You pay for that by only having 2 shots but I've found I would never want to keep them in the fight longer than that anyways. The fact that they pair directly with a long-range fighting transport means they're highly mobile in practice, so you can load/unload as needed to add firepower to your force, protect them from counterattack or rotate them out of the fight to restock ammo.
>SMAW
Yes these guys are really good. 70pts for 2x reloadable launchers with MAAWs damage/pen. It's basically a poorman's Ranger MAAWS. Not as cost-effective but an important asset to have in a spec that also provides tanks

>2 squads run out of ammo before a T-14 dies.
The reason that you pair up short ranged AT squads, aside from their lack of ammo, is that a tank can only point front armour at one squad at a time. You bring two so that they can split up, so one squad is certain to strike side armour and both will if it tries to reverse so safety. This is how you actually secure kills.
It works better in forests than in urban combat, because forests impede the mobility of tanks and prevent them from fleeing out of kill range, but it can still work in tight urban terrain given you position well. Side shots against most tanks will deal more than twice as much damage.

As a side note, medium and tall buildings allow RPGs to strike top armour assuming the target is close enough to the building. In that scenario, penetration is moot. It's an important little trick to know since you can really get the jump on a tank if you hide behind a building flanking a road and pop in right as a tank is passing.

Opinions on ATGM carriers?
Do you use them?

During the last matched, I used Khrizantema to support my tanks and got mixed results. The ripple fire is great, because at least one missile always gets APS, so you can use it with cheaper tanks, as economical way to stop armor. Tanks will eat rounds while Khrizantema will deal the damage. At least in theory, I kind of fucked it up, beause I was stretched thin and the only tank near the point got destroyed, so Khrizentema died shortly after. And that was a mirrror match, so against me were Russian tanks with ATGMs, which made this situation worse.

>>2081729
Troopers are alright as a wall of deterrence against tanks. They don't necessarily know they only have two shots each, but seeing four ATGMs being launched from four different highrises is pretty big on the "Okay, I don't want to go there anymore" vibes for armor players

>>2081729
Here's a quick and dirty demonstration of "why NGWS"
Two of them can and will beat any vehicle in a forest fight. Urban combat, I don't know, that's harder to test in a controlled setting. But they have the ammo and the firepower to kill them. And yes, the 170pts worth of infantry nearly lost a squad to the 290pts of anti-infantry heavy armour. I don't think NGWS are particularly outstanding squads when things like Ranger MAAWs exist--but they can still do the job.

AT4s can't do this. They literally just can't. They run out of ammo even 2v1, even hitting side/rear armour.
>but the Barbaris let you hit rear armour
1 squad hitting front and 1 hitting rear is roughly the same as both hitting side armour. It's one or the other. This is why pairs are so effective.
>but the Barbaris didn't reverse to escape
It can't. Infantry walk forward faster than the Barbaris can reverse in forests. There's no facing that would have protected its sides/rear from both squads.
>it didn't smoke
Since it can't outrun us, the smoke would have only benefited the infantry squads, who have been able to reload their launchers without taking fire while los was broken.

Any pair of squads with 600+ pen launchers can replicate this, though RU squads with their high-pen disposables obvious do it better

>>2081735
Big fan of the kornet-D.
They do a similar job as an ATGM squad but generally better, especially as if they kill a transport they can fuck up the infantry that spill out.

>>2081735
The ripple-fire RU ones are good, especially when they can be up-armoured to take a hit.
I think the US ones are mostly a trap, though. None of them can ripple-fire and the best ones are similar in price to a Bradley but nowhere near as good or versatile.

Maybe the IFAV TOW and the Humvee TOW are usable, though. Just because they're cheap.

>>2081698
This scenario has unfortunately set the bar really high. Wild that it was made basically within a week of launch.

>>2081751
Decent case actually, against lighter vehicles the disposables will perform better. Such as BMPs, BTRs etc.

But also you're incorrect, a barbaris can reverse faster than infantry walk. Sprint will catchup but if the infantry don't secure a mobility hit while their sprint is on the barbaris will disengage, especially if it pops smoke.

>>2081751
not him
>bro under ideal circumstances this unit/upgrade is good despite these circumstances never really coming up in multiplayer or to a degree that would change the outcome of the game
you've been coping this entire thread

I really like that russian mission where you use crews to pick which vehicles you want to get first, reminds me of that mission on world in conflict where after the nuke hits you capture soviet equipment

>still no patch
Have they been drinking since the 19th or what?
I was expecting at least some minor update or some announcement.

Hello BA gamers, I cannot be a BA gamer also because I am working.
Please post funny memes, epic webms and cool screenshots so that I may vicariously be a pseudo BA gamer.

Regards
Anon

>>2081773
Just in time, lol


>We sat down with the developers to discuss what is coming next for Broken Arrow. The next patch is going to be 1.08 and it’s going to be a big one. Compared to the immediate hotfixes on launch week this update will be larger and will need more thorough testing, so we’re currently targeting the week of 7th July for its release.
>Let’s have a look at what it is going to contain:
>First off, improvements to stability, both offline and online;
>Fix to the most significant problems related to memory consumption;
>Reconnect fixes and improvements;
>Update to the anti-cheat system;

>The possibility to choose between a small or large layout for the maps has been added for custom matches and skirmish for players looking for smaller matches than 5v5. The game will automatically select the layout corresponding to the number of players+AI but you can also force one layout or the other;

>The tower defense mode that was present during the beta is back and has been improved;

https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/1604270/view/537731883551687825

>>2081784
>As for Save Games, we know it’s a highly requested feature. However, implementing it is more complex than it may appear. Currently we’re investigating our options to make your single player experience more convenient.

Is this a joke?

>>2081789
The game is always online and tracks your progress server-side.
Missions don't call home mid-game (to avoid disconnecting you if there's a server issue) so there's no way to save. To change this they would either have to build a client-side save game file structure from scratch or integrate server features into offline singleplayer. In either case, they also have to be careful that it can't be used to circumvent anticheat or upload malicious files disguised as save data to the server.

Basically they lacked the foresight to lay the groundwork during primary development and now it's biting them in the ass. File structures for saving is game coding 101 but if you've built your game from the ground up without it then implementing it post hoc without breaking shit in the process gets messy.

>upgrade unit
>it get worse
why do they do this?

>>2081800
Examples?

I want EU faction with German France British Sweden Spec
I want China faction
I want Navy Seal unit on Marine spec

>>2081803
EU faction would be way too limiting. The major european nations have enough stuff for multiple specializations.

>>2081784
>We’re going to address the issue of the lack of a penalty for players who leave during a multiplayer match: we’re going to introduce a time-out system that will penalize leavers with progressively longer time-outs. Furthermore, we’re planning on introducing a Surrender option.
>Surrender option
Thank god

>>2081803
If I had to guess
>"Army of Europe" faction that's just Poland, Germany and the Baltics combined
>Border Guard spec for RU with 30pt mobile released with it
>Comes with a "war in Europe" dynamic campaign scenario

>China faction with all the fancy new amphibious wunderwaffe they can't actually build yet
>US Navy spec following the new Force Design concept, with Super hornets, SEAL teams, Seabees and cruise missile spam released with it
>Comes with a "South China Sea" dynamic campaign scenario
Not sure how they'll handle countries with big enough arsenals to form their own factions, like the UK, France, South Korea etc. Maybe just as standalone faction dlc.

>>2081751
As a side note, if you are the heavy armor being pincered like this, don't try to reverse away from both squads. You go full-tilt towards one squad, aiming to escape them that way. Smoke behind you, and the flanking unit can't get free shots at you, letting you 1v1 the other infantry unit. You keep driving away until the first infantry is dead, then go back and kill the other one.

It's not always possible depending on who you're playing against, but it's reasonably reliable. Alternatively, just escape.

>>2081802
Stryker Dragoon turret
TOR > Pantsir
Uh

Some shitty APCs where upgrading them are actually downgrades because they're just more expensive without being noticeably worthwile?

I'm a newfag getting my asshole blown out Iraq style. Anyone I can watch to help me get the basics down? Generally what I should be doing with my stuff. Stuff that trips me up is trying to advance with tanks and getting ambushed in the woods by AT inf, or getting javelin'd from the FoW. I suck balls at doing recon and I wanna get better.
Also, how CAN you even use CAS if the entire time has like 4 patriots? Just accept that air is a lost cause and focus on other stuff?

>Russians pretending their arny is 10% as competent or powerful as Americas now
I thought we realized that lie a few years ago now?

>>2081857
>Stuff that trips me up is trying to advance with tanks and getting ambushed in the woods by AT inf
Probe with cheap transports carrying anti-infantry squads, such as engineers. Work to clear out the woods you want to push through in the future

> getting javelin'd from the FoW
Smoke when you see the ATGMs are launched and back out. You now know where the launchers are

>I suck balls at doing recon and I wanna get better.
Basic sniper teams are relatively cheap. Recon vehicles with 2400 recon are also relatively cheap if you don't load them down with crap. Keep a BFIST Bradley with your tanks, or any other recon unit of your choice.

Drones are incredibly strong recon, but very vulnerable to SAMs and ASFs.

You can watch vulcanhdgaming, though he's mostly reliant on his team. I don't really watch many jewtubers for the games I play, but I checked https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwirGAcTaS0 and picked up some tips myself. You can also join the >>>discord we made at launch to organize games, and I'm sure people are eager to spoonfeed you

>>2081592
when in doubt
more missiles

>>2081857
Im a big believer in playing not watching others to get better, finish the campaign (even on easy if you fail a mission 3+ times, it's alright, it's pretty hard even on normal) and maybe try to some 5v5 pve skirmish (AI spams shit but is also quite careless so it puts a lot of pressure on your lines but also there's a lot of units you can pick off).
And conventional CAS requires 2 things - constant SEAD (pairs of Su-57 or microing Ka-52K from far flanks, or for US Growler spam or F-16CJ) so you get windows of little to no heavy AA present and active, or make it cheap and fly low until the last moment (Su-25 with 8 x S-25 rockets will kill any ground unit you right click guaranteed, in general anything in 200-300 point range will do work whether its rockets or AGMs or bombs) but dont expect it to survive every time and thats fine.
Alternatively you get stealth shit like F-35 with 1 x 2000lb bomb and 1 HARM that survives most of the time or standoff options such as Tu-22 with 3 cruise missiles that it launches and goes RTB before entering heavy SAM range.

>>2081868
I'd say they're much more competent at modern war seeing as they've actually been in one and have been slowly winning ever since the failed Ukrainian counter offensive

>>2081209 (OP)
So how good is the multiplayer and can you run this thing on a 10 year old potato with a 1060?

>>2081904
This is one of the worst optimized games I've played in the last six months. Worse than Helldivers 2.
>>2081872
>You now know where the launchers are
How should I deal with them? Call in some mortars and keep them on standby to bomb atgms?
>Sniper teams/recon vehicles
How do I use them? Turn off their weapons and park them in forests/buildings?
>discord
Invite link?
>>2081885
You know, I didn't think of using SEAD at the same time as calling in a bomber. Mostly because of how expensive the prices are for two planes at the same time.
>f-35
How do you actually use it? I've been running one with a smart bomb and a jdam and it flies in then gets raped, sometimes before even dropping the bomb.

>>2081915
>This is one of the worst optimized games I've played in the last six months. Worse than Helldivers 2.
Shame. Guess I will stick with Gates of Hell and MoW2 Until I can get a better machine.

>>2081868
Well, they have written it with russians running out of fuel in the middle of the operation and resorting to looting with only the old soviet officer knowing the manual didn't account for conscripts stealing half of it, but even that could be seen as wanking how ingenious they are if you try hard enough.
Russians are generally shown as competent and mostly in positive light though overall and the campaign ends in outcomes rather favourable to russia.

>>2081919
I'm not sure if you can, but you could attempt to pirate it and see how it runs in an actual battle. The main menu is actually worse than when you're in a match, with explosions and shit happening. It's absurd.

>>2081835
The dragoon turret is an upgrade over the vanilla stryker. The javelin upgrades are both the most expensive and best
>TOR/Pantsir
Tor is anti-helo, Pantsir is anti-missile. It's a role change.
>else
Yeah probably correct. The BTR-90 comes to mind, being basically the price of a premium IFV but it's a fucking BTR with 5 seats. Not sure what they were thinking with that.

>>2081915
>How should I deal with them? Call in some mortars and keep them on standby to bomb atgms?
Mortar them to death, throw smoke in their face with mortars, smoke meme them with tanks (drive forwards until they launch, smoke, drive out of smoke and let them shoot again, reverse back into smoke, repeat until they're out of missiles), use vehicles with APS and just run them over, airstrike them, etc
>How do I use them? Turn off their weapons and park them in forests/buildings?
Yes.
>Invite link?
https://discord.gg/jtDPj2RB

i start getting high enough elo that its always sweatfest against full stack team
I need to lower my elo

>>2081944
Just stack up yourself. Stack v stack is pretty fun as long as you don't hate your friends.
For the most part there aren't enough people above 1k so most sweatstacks end up endlessly punching down to much lower elo soloqueue teams where nobody has any fun.

>>2081962
I dont have friends

>>2081930
>smoke mortar/arty
I gotta remember to use that shit. If I wasn't retarded, I'd use it before an attack to cover my insert.
Thanks for the link.

>>2081898
>Russians unironically think they're winning
Positively grim. imagine if Russia in 1916 was that delusional.

>>2081497
HUEG

oh I finally get cluster now
its much better on the rockets since you shoot out so many at once

is this thing any good?
why is it so cheap?

>>2082028
it's called pt-76 because it was made in 1976

>>2082038
Nah, it was made in the early 50's, it has a 76mm gun though.

>>2082044
>it has a 76mm gun though.
What a stunning coincidence

>>2081797
>they also have to be careful that it can't be used to circumvent anticheat
Why should they care if people cheat in singleplayer?

>>2081209 (OP)
zubr as a unit when?

>>2082028
>is this thing any good?
No
>why is it so cheap?
Because it's bad

Mech and Coastal have a lot of meme options that exist because Russia unironically still uses them despite them having absolutely no place on the battlefield. This thing is basically the closest you'll get to a playable T-34m except you can put a lot of funny turrets on it.

>>2081868
just like wargame broken arrow is military autism smash bros where all the proto and papershit actually exists and works and everyone is a terminator 110% focused on doing their best

>>2082028
Russia isn't using them in Ukraine which probably tells you everything you need to know about their usefulness

>>2082028
These things are unironically good because they're so retardedly cheap, literally throw packs of 2-3 on wide flanks near map edge into enemy backline, add a Shilka and a recon jeep too and you get a 200 point murderblob that basically cant kill more than they're worth. Keep 1 or 2 such packs permanently active and enemy is forced to commit helis to hunting you and push their supply dumps and SAMs closer to the front where your team can spot and kill them much more easily. It's high-APM but stupid efficient

>>2082071
can't kill less than they're worth*
big boy shit like Armata are good and all but the better I get the more I rely on mass of cheaper units, like T-90A or BMP swarms or murderblobs of ancient garbage like these PT-76

>>2082056
Maybe when they make that attack/defend game mode. People asked about it and they seemed to be open about possibility of some amphibious landing map where one side has ships and shit.

>>2082088
obligatory https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WopbvjBMa3A

>>2082100
>be me
>be norgie
>that mission
>the mission recovering the spy plane with the norgie rangers
>the constant despair at out VA's

>>2082056
It's available in campaign already.

>>2082100
WiC has some kickass music

How would you rate these guys?

The thought occurred to me that maybe we don't actually want China. The INSTANT that they drop the China DLC, this game will be flooded by 10,000+ Wang Guo Lo Mein's from Harbin province who will be driving their Chinese tanks around the map at mach 60 one shotting everything and spawning 50,000 nukes. Then the game will get review bombed by the Chinese because the Type 24 ShittenPoopen is not accurately destroying all inferior western vehicles as it would in real life.

>>2082182
Correct, we want norks!!!

>>2081802
Could argue Kornet-D1, goes from 1 Kornet M rack to 2 Kornet racks.
Airborne NGSW :)

>>2082171
Discount Ranger RAWS?
They are the same price as the RAWS with out upgrade, get slightly better pen and damage than the upgraded Rangers while having an extra guy and the extra hp from it.
You pay for that by only getting 2 instead of 3 launchers and in turn only 2/3rds of the ammo. So decidedly not as good against aps but they arguably serve the same role.

I really enjoy BAs soundtrack
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRvBg45SMQo

>Go 2v1
>Additionally an enemy disconnects
>Team still can't win 4v2
>Lose

>>2082171
If you transplanted these guys into the US they would be an instant must-pick but in RU they're mediocre because Coastal, Moto and Guards all have superior AT squads.

They basically just exist so that a hypothetical Mech/VDV isn't fucked out of credible infantry AT. I would probably bring them along if I made a Mech/Mot deck so that GRU aren't my only AT, but I don't think I would make a Mech/Mot deck period. Guards probably doesn't need more than its 4 Gvardii for infantry AT and Coastal gets 8 Morskaya.

Honestly this is a big problem with Mechanized. Its IFVs are good but there's no Infantry worth bringing to actually access those IFVs.

>>2082062
>Russia unironically still uses them despite them having absolutely no place on the battlefield
Blyat comrade, tank is fine.
Its some deep rooted military culture autism they have, probably based on ww2 again like most of the other shit. It's not horrifically shit though, with minor upgrades, or none even, a ton of old equipment is better than nothing and can find a role.

Also funny to bring this up on the PT-76, one of the things not getting brought out of storage by anyone.

>>2082028
World in Conflict larping.

>>2082197
That slaps

I'm never managing to get value out of SAPOGs, not sure if that's an issue of skill or what.
Magnolias are pretty cool, but I only get a good cluster hit like once a match. If I switched to Nonas I could have like twice as many and a more mobile platform.

Managing to handle tanks fairly fine, but really massed good infantry the morskaya struggle to keep up a bit

>>2081755
apparently the editor is really strong, I might tool around with it later

>>2082221
Bring BT-3Fs. They're bricks that can carry 2x Morskaya. Helps move them around but they can also hide inside to avoid units like Delta Force that they can't fight. Babysitting your infantry with a battle taxi totally shits on pure anti-infantry squads that can't hurt vehicles at all.
I don't know why you'd bother with Konkurs teams when you already have 4 of the ripple-fire Kornets.

BTR-90s are shit.

I'm personally a fan of the Cluster Magnolia, mainly because it also comes with a tonne of ammo for precision rounds so you can just use it as a regular mortar and save the cluster rounds for when you can catch multiple vehicles at an ammo dump or something.

The main thing that makes Sapogs good is that they have enough range they don't reveal themselves when firing from a building. You want them where there are wide sightlines, so they can take potshots at incoming targets. Even if they can't pen a vehicle, they'll suppress it after a shot or 2.

>>2082236
>I don't know why you'd bother with Konkurs teams when you already have 4 of the ripple-fire Kornets.
Paranoid fear of light APS spam.
Also they eat up APS for better things and lots of people don't comprehend they're not great and run away when they don't need to.

>>2082236
WE DO NOT TALK ILL ABOUT BTR-90s IN THIS HOUSE!
YOU'RE GROUNDED!

Is Fagot/Faktoriya as bad/obsolete as it looks?

>All but one enemy leaves
>Instead of retreating, he fucks over my K/D in particular by nuking me repeatedly
Sore loser.

>>2082261
Fagot teams typically get two launchers, which makes them pretty good.

>>2082261
Fagots are good for morale because you can laugh at them.

>>2082261
those lil 45point fagot clown cars can be very annoying for the pittance you pay for them

>>2082261
The dual launcher FAGOT teams eat APS and lighter vehicles decently.
Also makes positions seem a lot more ATGM heavy than they are, valuable psychological warfare.

>>2082257

>>2082261
Pen is bad but usually they're cheap and come in pairs so you can saturate APS for low cost.
Weak ATGMs are still 'good' because they still deal full suppression even if they deal tickle damage, and most ATGMs suppress in 1/2 hits. A suppressed tank shoots like half as often if it isn't autoloaded and they still have to be careful not to show side armour even to the shittiest launchers.

2000lbs bombs are so KINO

Is there a single player sandbox mode with unlimited units/resources?
Want to have quick fun, watch explosions. Using cheat engine tables gets you banned even if you're in singeplayer.

>>2082350
The editor.

Here's some trivia: the Russian voice actor for the rocket artillery has also been doing Supreme Commander casts for nearly a decade now

>>2082343
How do I into high altitude bombs?
Hard mode: not cruise missiles or anything else that can be ranged fired from safety.

Ive been getting good at low alt drag bombing runs. Still get the plane shot dow half the time even with afterburner maneuvers, but at least i can hit front lines.
The normal bombs i havent tried because theres a swarm of AA even if the team runs sead.

>>2082396
Basically you don't do high alt bombing runs if you care about losing your plane. There's a reason they're so cheap; so that the plane has a better chance of trading up in pts when it dies. Most of the time a dumb bomb payload is so expensive that it's hardly worth the bomber surviving anyways.

Is it just me... or is Russian Mech absolute rotten dogshit? Like what the fuck

luv me coastal / moto

also getting real sick of US heli spam, killer eggs, 64E/D, comanches, so many that i constantly need to resupply my Tors

>>2082425
Ah Iskander chan, my waifu

>>2082425
Is that the cruise missile version? There's no way you're using the ballistic missile and actually killing something with it. Every time I tried to use it the missile were instantly shot down.

>>2082418
It's strong but just less intuitive than Guards.
Spam fully upgraded BMP2s, not 3s. They outrange tanks, so keep them at a distance and just hurl ATGMs. Fan out with them so you can hit multiple angles and catch side armour. They ripple fire so they get damage through APS consistently and force tanks to smoke left and right

Tulpans are the star unit of the spec. Make sure to either have laser designator recon positioned all around, or bring a designator vehicle with your tanks. Call a precision Tulpan strike with 2 of them, then mark a tank with the designator while the Tulpan aims. The shell will home in on top armour and delete it. Guided Mortars are secretly broken right now and the Tulpan does double the damage of the next best.

Otherwise just avoid falling for the trap of actually buying mech's infantry. All of it is overpriced shit that only exists to be a deck tax for BMP2 spamming. The goal of the spec is basically to go wide with cost-effective IFVs and cheap tanks, avoid pitched engagements and just kill your opponent's frontline with mortars while they struggle to find an angle to get through your wall.

I feel like Guards has too many prototype/staple units. Like the T-15 and Kurganets-25 should be moved to Mech to make it more interesting.

>>2082427
Yep, 4 x cruise because same as you every time I try ballistic its either intercepted or Im hitting a low value target like single inf squad. Also coordinate with 2 x Su-57 SEAD mission or cruise Ka-52k or cruise Tu-142 whenever possible

>>2082429

>Tulpan.

Mortar one or the upgraded Giatsint howitzer one?

>Build new Stryker deck
>Awesome let's go try it out
>1100 ELO lobby
>2v2 situation
>The retard right next to me has a bunch of Avengers
>The enemy has three helicopters
>Helicopters come in to attack
>Avengers don't move
>Helicopters wipe out my entire frontline
How are people still this bad in four digit ELO? It wasn't even ATGM helicopters. They only had helicopters, and he just stood there and watched my entire infantry line die.

>>2082451
mate its 2025, 3/4 of the internet is jeets chinks niggers and seaniggers, there is no such thing as a "team" unless you're in a premade on voice comms

>>2082451
i think elo goes up too fast and it messes up a lot of people
I went up too fast and had to deal with different types of micro i was not prepared for

>>2082062
t. doesn't understand what PT-76 is for

ba hub is actually cool
i kinda knew where my weaknesses were but it's nice seeing it laid out

>>2082467

It's an amphibious light tank, a very old one. It's intended to support amphibious assaults, recon and fire support, so it is reserved for naval infantry. But it is very old, from the late 60s and has shit armor. The closest US' equivalent would be the Sheridan.

>>2082474
How do you get those stats?
It cant find my steam id

>>2082499
top right of steam click your name
click account details and it will be under the account name

>>2082474
pretty interesting but can you really get a good k/d when you try to capture points every game?
in my games it feels like Im the only one initiating a push
also wtf is combat efficiency?

eagle bros what do you fit on your 15EX?
I'm just running 3 JSOW + 2 Harm

>>2082523
It's too fucking expensive, and it doesn't even get the JATMs

Kind of a fucking lemon desu

This GRU is probably my most favorite infantry
but which loadout do I use?

>>2081645
Is that you, Pyrrhus?

>>2082556
kek

New feature: troop carriers should resupply infantry ammo and revive +20% soldiers.
Now you can get autistic about it and pretend they have extra supplies inside, medical equipment, or they have only give ammo corresponding to AA, AT they themselves carry out of their own pool.
But by any method it would give them a bigger role. It would also make up for infantry being so slow that a standard resupply takes longer than just having them die off and replaced with a chopper drop.

>>2082523

>>2082567
The less weapons a troop transport has, the more supplies it should be able to aura. A fully upgraded Stryker/Bradley/Barbaris/Bumerang shouldn't have any. They have too many gats, no room for spare materials for the boys.

A multipurpose truck has 1000 internal supply. A humvee with just a .50 has 500, a .50/AGL Stryker has 300, etc

Just enough to reload the infantry it carries and maybe revive a guy or two. The auras cannot affect vehicles, and they can only drain one vehicle at a time, so no "lol i dont need ammo dumps anymore" memes

>>2082182
I want Germany, UK and France. Fuck China

>>2082588
>Fuck China
Agree

>>2082223
If you want an example on how the scripting works, all of the campaign missions can be opened in the editor. You just need to copy one and change "public" to true in meta.json.

>>2082545
Im always running them with verbas but Im gonna swap it to mixed or even go full rpg I think, have to try it out more
the verbas are nice to have but I dont really get much use out of them and this squad is pretty decent in cqc so the rpgs might get more use and those rpgs are some of the best

>>2082520
I'm not sure
if i had to guess it'd be what's killing what, or kills per unit
like either you're playing better at rock paper scissors, or a lot of kills coming from fewer units

attacking is pretty hard to not lose units if no one has overwhelming support advantage, arty, access to low contested CAS ect
i hope they make the destruction points not scaling with phases

will the devs make enough improvements to the game so that the playercount doesnt fall off a cliff, or will they be too late?

>>2082446
Mortar. There are a million pieces of barrel artillery in RU, you don't need another one.
The Tulpan has laser guided secondary shells (so they'll steer to top attack a painted target with perfect accuracy) and deals 18 damage so it twoshots tanks and oneshots everything else.

Most mortars have an option for guided rounds and they're all good but typically deal half the damage of the Tulpan. The reason guided mortar rounds are so good is that mortars have very low aimtime relative to all other artillery, quick enough that your target is probably still in the vicinity by the time the shot fires. There's a limit to how much the laser guidance can correct a target, so normal artillery aims too long to hit moving targets, while mortars aim quickly enough.

Which spec do I pair USMC with?

>>2082624
I think a few balance changes could go a long way.
Distant rocket/missile doinking needs to be toned down a bit and infantry/apcs assaults given a bit more life.
Theres nothing like watching your column get whittled down to smokestacks before you even hit the point of contact.
And then you're just stuck there resupplying and fixing gaps for 5 minutes before you can start making any real moves again. Rinse and repeat.

>>2082639
Pretty much any, really.
USMC is the jack of all trades spec. You have top-tier infantry with SMAWs (for AT) and Raiders. You have excellent recon with Force Recon (their LAV also gets recon stats). You get beefy weapon teams for holding ground. You get proper tanks. You get all the important helicopter stuff (and SEAD helis). You get a fat air tab with the best SEAD by far and most of the best-in-slot planes.

All they're missing is AA (no manpads, no radar) and indirect fire.

The only no-go combination is USMC/SF, because then you have no radar AA period and >>2082425 happens.
USMC + Cavalry gives you tanks for your Strykers and is a super all-rounder with good shit in every tab.
USMC + Airborne is the premier airspam setup but I wouldn't pick it unless you're really familiar with air micro and loadouts.
USMC + Armoured is honestly probably just a worse version of SF/Armoured.

>>2082631
How about Vasilek?

>>2082647
It doesn't have laser-guided shells.

>>2081566
It's a video game, anon. They're atrocious IRL but that's irrelevant in fiction.

Is there any reason to use TOW unit over weapon team?

>>2082685
Cheaper/availability/number of launchers

>>2082691
and longer range.

>>2082685
Mainly just cost and mobility.
A 65pt Humvee can carry a top-attack TOW2 and move itself around. The expensive TOW launchers are kind of made irrelevant by the existence of IFVs, like there's no reason to spend 100+ points on an M113 with a TOW on it when you can get a Bradley instead.

>>2082644
I would like marine+air more if it has patriot
I guess you kinda have to rely on fighters to clear the sky instead of ground SPAA?
also I wonder if I should put fuel tank on A2A fighters to help with air fight?
most people just play F-22 with bunch of long range missile instead

>>2082713
SLAMRAAMs are your Patriots. No, they're not as good, but they're better than nothing.
An F-15 with a single fuel tank has a 240s uptime. Planes have a 240s base cooldown after rtb assuming full hp. 1 fuel tank and 2 alternating F-15s gives 100% uptime on a loitering fighter. Just make it fly circles in your backline and it will detect incoming drones and stealth planes for your team's AA all game. Planes pay half the upkeep of ground units so it's actually pretty cheap to keep one up.

I would recommend either the 6 or 8 AMRAAM loadouts. You don't really need Sidewinders outside of the opening air tax.

Also I'm not sure why you would bother with CAAT Javelins when you can bring Weapon Teams instead.

>>2082723
Seconding this. Think of your SLAMRAAM more of an anti-cruise missile tool, rather than a true SAM unit.

>>2082545
Go full RPG-28 so they get SIX launchers and can melt even tanks with APS if they get close.

>>2082723
>You don't really need Sidewinders outside of the opening air tax.
Horrible advice. When you have a helicopter in your backline, you want sidewinders to kill it. Never pick a fighter without at least two helicopter-targeting missiles.

>>2082567
>It would also make up for infantry being so slow that a standard resupply takes longer than just having them die off and replaced with a chopper drop.
Yes, please send your infantry to their deaths so I can get an easy +500 points for no reason other than you being too retarded to move them back rather than forwards.

what are your thought on SEAD helicopter?

I hope they buff everything i like and nerf everything i dislike

>>2082789
I want to try them out more as a helo support unit. The Sidearm doesn't do enough damage to pop SHORAD, but it force it to target the missiles instead of my apache, and if it gets a hit, it will panic it

You can also keep it at low altitude and out of sight, so if a SHORAD nigger (excepting the SOSNA and dervitsaya) tries to sneak up on the hellfire carrier it might give me the distraction i need

>>2082789
I tried out a single cheapo 135pt SEAD heli in my stryker/marines deck and I liked it. The ARMs almost never actually get through without being intercepted but you can use them basically as recon-by-fire to identify where hidden AA is lurking so your gunship helis can avoid them.

What actually ended up happening is that I could keep checking like this until I found a gap and then just flew the SEAD heli in and started killing backline stuff with the autocannon.

>>2082789
Luv me Ka-52K, simple 'as

>>2082545
All AT, 900 pen is fucking absurd. And they are good at dealing with infantry with the rest of their weapons too so just use like regular infantry that can melt Abrams SEP v3

lol

cant go pass 600 elo lmao
I guess this is as far as I go

>>2082868
The higher you go the less fun it gets

I finally get it
you suppose to just mass the ATGM and just watch anything that doesnt have smoke explode
I tried using the 65 pts dragoon but they they are kinda useless
dragoon without ATGM is also kinda pointless, since MGS is better at fighting other IFV
In which I think the fully upgrade m10 might be even better at that job

i might bring a ferrying truck that can also carry troops instead so I can move both supply and reinforcement at the same time
that way I can skip having to bring cheap IFV all together

>game starts
>going all ground opener rather than helis
>other players decide to call in AA instead of planes
>cool, not a problem
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>he deploys it 2 seconds after spawning and it blocks the fucking road
>all my units freeze in place since there is a fucking patriot parked in the middle of the road
>huge traffic jam and delays the entire team

>>2082914
I know that feeling. Retards do not understand that they need to move their shit off the road before deploying radar.

>>2082912
actually nvm
now that I think about it
why bring 200 pts light tank when you can bring 200 pts mbt
I guess it doesnt have APS
so yeah guys
are 2 shots of APS worth losing half of the gun and front armor for?

>>2082924
You can change the Booker to have the 50mm autocannon, which tears up infantry and shitter vehicles pretty good (or so I am told, I haven't used it yet personally). Just an option

>>2082924
If you have a tank, there is no reason to bring the booker with the tank gun. It has less armor, less pen, less damage, and less health. The only reason I would say to bring the 200 point booker is if you have no tanks. So justbring it with autocannon if you want it at all

>>2082937
>If you have expensive tank there's no point in cheap tank
Retarded.
Bookers are better for their cost vs IFVs, cheap Russian tanks, and infantry. Basically anything but another Abrams. The Abrams has a dog shit HEAT and HE round. They're only good at fighting heavy tanks with their AP round.

>>2082932
which is why I wonder if its even worth it
I feel like other Strykers can tear up infantry just fine even without dragoon autocannon, and they can still fight against heavy tank with their ATGM
the autocannon only m10 probably cant help fighting heavy tanks the way the rest can, so I dont think 190 pts infantry shooter that are hopeless against heavies is worth it
so yeah its a toss up between non APS standard Abrams, max out cannon M10 or 2 x kitted out MGS

>>2082943
>>If you have expensive tank there's no point in cheap tank
More like
>if you have a cheap tank with better damage, penetration, armor, and health there is no point in a cheap tank that is worse in every way besides having 2 APS
The Abrams in the picture is a much better alternative for a cheap tank. We are comparing the abrams in the picture vs the booker, not the abrams SEP v3 vs the booker.
>Bookers are better for their cost vs IFVs, cheap Russian tanks, and infantry
APS wont stop a tank round. The HEAT round on the Abrams is better vs IFVs. Booker is better vs infantry sure, but only by 2 damage. And At that point just get the 50mm autocannon booker to save points and kill infantry better.

on US side who else beside Raptor has long range AA missiles?
seem like everyone else only has AMRAAM

>>2082963
F/A-18C gets AIM 174 Gunslinger which are basically the F-22's AIM 269 JATMs but with extra damage.
BA-Hub says they also have multi-targeting and simultaneous but I have no clue how accurate/relevant that info is.

>2v1 on my front
>Rest of the team manages to lose anyway
This describes my last eight games.

luv me deri

>>2082990
Its even worse when you can tell another player is arty striking you or sending plane and they still get rolled. Its like, what the fuck else am I supposed to do? I suppose I should just be grateful they didn't drop in the first 2 mins after their airdrop with no escort got blown out of the sky.

>>2083119
>after their airdrop with no escort got blown out of the sky.
I fucking hate this. Even at 1200 ELO, I still see retards sending one full helicopter as their initial deployment; and it gets shot down without fail because people at this rank know it is worth committing on.

Are the 20+ points for the top-attack missile on the Armata worth it?

>>2083125
Nah, Armata's too busy shooting things to make use of it.

Holy shit. Am I reading it wrong, or the BMP-3 can use a more armour than the Kurganets (minus active protection)? Is it meant to be an assault vehicle? In that case, is the Epokha turret worth it?

>>2083138
bulat rapes infantry

>>2083138
400 chemical armor really isn't all that much. Maybe you can deflect a LAW or something, but who in their right mind is gonna be using those? 120 kinetic armor is okay against autocannons, I guess. Can still get penned by a Bushmaster up close.

>>2083152
>chemical
Why do you keep doing this? What's the endgame?

>>2083163
That's what it was called during both of the playtests. It's a better name than whatever the hell it is now ("explosive" or some shit?).

>>2083123
>retards sending one full helicopter as their initial deployment

Im that guy. 50% of the time, it works every time..
Peeves me off when the enemy team somehow magically know and go full airtax. Or even when we're sending interceptors, their planes are magically immune and they always somehow shoot down my chopper in a single strafe run. Meanwhile any time i send my plane to shoot down a heli, its flies by and does like half damage.
Very tempting to rage quit at the moment, but ive always played on and the result doesnt get determined by that points loss.
It just sucks when you're playing VDV and you're not allowed to even get that initial advantage of your deck to capture positions quickly.
Like when am i supposed to do, heli drop my troops on a flank during mid-game when every AA is set up and theres, shorads + missile shitter troops hiding in every bush.

>>2083163
Not him. I also do it and I will not stop.

>>2083138
Think of it as a dedicated anti-infantry vehicle. The 400 CE armour in front and sides makes it much more survivable against most infantry AT and the Bulat plus autocannon excels at fire support.

For fighting vehicles you generally want the BMP-2 instead. The BMP-3 costs as much as a Bradley with APS, and that's just too much to be your main line vehicle without APS. BMP-2s get the same ATGMs and enough armour to survive two hits from an Abrams but are like 30% cheaper than the BMP-3.

>>2083163
The two damage types are kinetic and chemical. This has been standard gaming terminology since Chromehounds

>>2083169
As VDV you split your deployment between multiple ~100 pt helis and cover with a fighter so that even if you lose one you're still on the map, rather than putting everything into a thousand pt pinata that's worth sacrificing a fighter to pop.

S-8 vs S-13 vs S-25 rockets.

>get a drop to some afk T14 in the forest with marine raider (stand-off)
>it lose
wtf you guys lie to me about m4 launcher

>>2083224
I like smol but more rockets usually cause my main use of rockets are for shitty shitbox or infantry
but desu I think they are all the same

>>2083224
s-25 literally 2 or 3 shots any tank in the game, the explosion damage is insane. I once nuked 3 abrams bunched up in a forest with one 205 point plane with 6 of them on it.
>>2083175
I bring naked BMP 3's at 65 points, one big advantage is the ability to fire its missile on the move which is very nice, and for 65 points the ability to delete enemy infantry is amazing. Also worth noting the upgraded turret gives you 2 smokes which is unique on IFV outside the barbaris.

>bring out Tor for one game instead of pantsir
>opponent literally never use heli and it keep getting SEAD'd

General Bennet was pretty based, he loved killing Russkis and didn't afraid of anything. Not as good as WiC, but better than anything Eugenes made.

They really should go for Dynamic campaigns now, Army General is the only thing worth copying.

MY ELO IS GETTING TOO HIGH IM NOT HAVING FUN ANYMORE
every matches is a fucking sweatfest

>>2083296
time to become a supportard with a podcast in the background and drop back down to your fun zone

>>2083288
>Dynamic campaigns now, Army General is the only thing worth copying.
>it's just skirmish with army attrition

No thanks

>>2083288
>Army General is the only thing worth copying.
No, it's fucking dogshit.

Whats your guys fast response anti-chopper option?
Feels like planes are too fast and stray into AA without getting enough value kills.

>>2083313
Yak-38 with 2 gunpods and 4 R60 but thats more for wide flanks where enemy has no AA cover
205 points, will kill at least two 64E/D and is worth almost half of a single one

>>2083296
I know this feeling, only it's the enemy team that are sweating their balls off while my team is a bunch of incompetent chucklefucks from start to finish.

>>2083348
>1200 elo
>my team:
>2x Bob the Artilleryman. Damn, he just wants to grill
>Pete the Airman, currently sending his third globemaster into the same SAM network
>Jimmy Delta, currently sending his third Delta Force to fight an immobilized T72
>Me thinking I could get carried for once in a semi-teamstack and just have fun but now the weight of the world is on my shoulders

>when your full stack cluster + incendiary hits right along the column

Now I know what those poor villagers of Pompeii experienced when they were rained down with hot ash and lava. Except in my case, it was not hot lava but hot, frothy, ZB/RBk-500

which one white nigger?

>>2083313
Kiowa with MANPADS. Ka-29 with guns shreds non-MANPAD helicopters.
>>2083374
Flanker, because Su-57 is for SEAD.

>>2083375
but mig35 is a cheaper SEAD

>>2083378
Only 10 pts cheaper, and you lose stealth.

>>2083374
I'm rocking the Su-57 as ASF and then the Su-35 as SEAD.
Been working well for me.

>>2083351
Don't forget Tommy Tank.
>Doesn't occupy any zone
>Wait until near the end of a phase
>Spends all of his points on a single armored column of tanks/APCs
>Drives through your line at full speed into the enemy
>Might capture a single point before his A-moved blob is bombed / strafed / picked off / destroyed by helicopters
>Will inevitably blame you for "not supporting him"
>Shifts the kill counter all the way to the enemy side
Not to be confused with Henry Helo, who does mostly the same thing but with helicopters.

>>2083394
I hate Henry Helo so much

600-800 is the peak ELO
any higher you have sweatstack
any lower you have people still learning how to play the game and hasnt fully settle in yet

>>2083351
>Joe infantry, HOLDING THE LINE by putting infantry into every buildings on the map

>>2083398
Sweatstacks don't start before 1400 elo in this game.

>>2083382
but you get to use your su-57 for other thing with mig35 on sead duty
I feel like SEAD is the safest mission that you dont really need stealth for
just fly almost half way into the map
press V then B when the SEAD missile count hit 0

>>2083406
>you get to use your su-57 for other thing
Like what?
>SEAD is the safest mission that you dont really need stealth for
It's not about safety it's about not giving the enemy any time to react.

>>2083408
like a2a fighter role which is what I asked

>>2083411
Can you use Su-57 as an ASF? Yes.
Is Su-57 a good ASF? Yes, with the 2xR-37 and 3xR-77 loadout (you can fire both missiles simultaneously).
Should you use Su-57 as an ASF? No, because it excels in other areas like no other Russian plane. It's a superb SEAD and it has PBK-500U with self laser. The mix of it is its best loadout.

>>2083226
The Carl G reloads at the same rate as APS so you always waste the first 4 shots 1v1.
This is why the first thing this thread tells you, repeatedly, is that AT infantry must work in pairs and 2v1 vehicles at the minimum to win. 1v1 the vehicle gets full value from APS and gets to point front armour at the sole damage source.

>>2083374
Both too expensive. You don't want to spend over 1/3 of you opener in airtax.
Felon is a stealth plane, which makes it the most survivable strike craft in your air tab. Use it to deliver payload to frontline targets, either the cluster cruise missiles (with SEAD to cover) or the cluster glide bombs.
Make a cheap plane for your airtax, so that it doesn't cripple your ground rollout too much

>>2083351
>Jimmy Delta, currently sending his third Delta Force to fight an immobilized T72
Im this one, but I still dont get it. I once sent a delta + maaws rangers into the forest and they literally melted 2 panicking ruskis tanks. But anyway, I usually get harassed a lot by enemy artillery, even if I can handle enemy armor, meaning, im not very good at this

>>2083506
MAAWS are america's best AT squad and will fuck up a lot of shit. Their pen is high enough to kill the super cheap shitter T-72s frontally unassisted
Delta have no weapons with which to attack tanks, even from the rear, so they were literally just cheerleaders in that engagement.

Generally speaking infantry is underused right now and most players enormously overuse deltaforce--a pure anti-infantry specialist squad--when there's nothing really for them to fight. MAAWs and Rangers RRC (close range loadout) are the units that make SF infantry so good. Delta just need to exist so that all your actually useful and impactful AT infantry don't get shut down by a squad of Ingenery.

For the record, MAAWS + RRC together is an absolute power pair. You can fit both together into an AMPV, RRC provides the vision, can duel most similarly-priced infantry and their own AT launchers shoot really fast so they can eat through a high-tier tank's APS charges for the MAAWS to get through.

>>2083429
>The mix of it is its best loadout
yes other thing

Thinking about it, it's weird how the US has pretty good infantry overall, but pretty much all of their 'mainline' squads from each specialization are terrible
>Mech. Rifles
Probably the worst squad in the game. Too weak to fight even the weakest infantry, loses 1v1 to Manpads squads. 4x AT4s aren't enough to even kill moderately-armoured IFVs.
>Marines
These guys actually were good in the betas but have been nerfed so much since then. With no squad weapons they rely entirely on their squad size to win infantry fights, but will just lose 1v1 to better-equipped squads. 6AT-4s can kill an IFV but that's 95pts of anti-tank firepower to maybe force away a 65pt vehicle. They don't even make sense as a 'meatshield' to support other damage-dealer squads now because they're just so expensive you really don't want them to be absorbing damage.
>Troopers
In practice these guys are just a CAAT Javelin team with worse small arms and less ammo. Having a Javelin for a discount is good, but only having 2 shots on a Javelin means they can't really fight effectively as an ATGM team, and as a mainline they're just Mech. Rifles with 3 extra bodies for 40 more pts.
>Rangers
You get to choose between having 1 slow-firing launcher with AT-4 stats--making it the worst anti-tank weapon in the game--or turning them into a specialist anti-infantry squad that's so bad at their job they lose consistently to any real anti-infantry squad, even ones that are significantly less expensive.
>Airborne
Probably the only notably effective one just because they come with Carl Gs, but they completely overpay for the privilege and their small arms are total ass, so you end up paying elite premium infantry prices for a squad that can just barely kinda sorta duel a tank in pairs under ideal conditions.

The recurring issue here is the AT-4 (and I guess the RAWS) because the devs for some reason think 4 shots with 450 pen is good enough, and it's really not.

>>2083526
Rangers are actually good, though. They have enough AT to be a threat to APCs, and they have enough anti-infantry to be a threat to most non-anti-infantry squads. Use them as you would force recon.

>>2083530
Rangers have the literal worst AT in the US faction, contender for the worst in the game.
A normal AT-4 squad shoots faster the more launchers it has, but generally expends all of its ammo in around 8-10 seconds (that's ~2.5 seconds per shot for Mech. Rifles, for example)
The RAWS fires the same AT round, with the same pen and damage, but fires 1 shot every 5-6 seconds, so around half of the rate of fire and a lower RoF than APS.

Aside from the bare minimum baseline of "better than literally nothing" the only real value this launcher provides to a fight is that it will eat an APS charge as long as the RAWS shoots before the real AT. In ambush conditions all launchers have a random aim time range that makes it hard to ensure the bad launcher eats APS for the good one.

I guess to try and illustrate the point a little better:
>They have enough AT to be a threat to APCs
An AMPV with nothing but its armour upgrade has 400 CE armour and 16hp for 65pts.
A RAWS will deal 4.75 damage every 5-6 seconds, requiring 4 hits to kill it over 20-24 seconds. But in practice it gets even worse because the AMPV can shoot back, and will suppress the RAWS after a few volleys (roughly 10 seconds of actual combat), reducing its fire rate enormously. Or, y'know, smoke and leave instead of sitting still for half a minute. A Mech Rifles squad has exactly enough ammo to kill this target and will do so in half the time or less.

Against the 'standard' APC armour used by up-armoured M113s, BMP1s, BMP2s, BTR-82s etc. you'll take 3 hits to kill or 15-18 seconds vs 7.5 seconds with AT-4s.

Long story short: Rangers (standoff) have half the DPS of the next worst anti-tank weapon in the faction, taking twice as long to kill the vast majority of targets.

>1st game of the day - 2 teammates disconnect before our starting ground convoys even reach nearest capzones, rest of us just sell everything and wait for sudden death
>2nd game - exact same shit, but both teams agree on an anti-air vs SEAD fight near our spawn until sudden death comes so get 10 minutes of fun
>3rd game - enemy team loses 1 before deployment is even over, we're spawncamping them with arty by phase 2 and win by sudden death shortly after
>4th game - again 2 teammates disconnect early, we coordinate to roleplay anti-air vs SEAD again
1.5 hours of my life wasted on this dogshit, I've had enough for today

>>2083588
On the bright side, leaver penalties and surrender votes are confirmed for the next patch. I just hope they also fix the root cause of the issues that fuck someone out of being able to connect/reconnect.

These decks looking okay now? Finally able to hop back on.

>>2083557
>Deploying a single ranger squad
There's your issue, dumbfuck. You deploy rangers in pairs of two in forests, so they can delete any enemy infantry and threaten any APC they come across. That's their dual-purpose role.

>>2083645
So what you're saying is that in order to adequately threaten 65pts worth of APC in ideal terrain and circumstances I need either:
160pts worth of Ranger
Or 50pts worth of Mech. Rifle

Hmm.

Since there's a silly argument about anti-tank going on I got curious about how much the armour upgrades on light vehicles, or the stat differences between RPGs actually matter.

To kill a 14hp vehicle (most combat uniots without upgrades) in 2 hits you need to deal at least 7 damage per hit after mitigation. To kill a 16hp vehicle (most vehicles with up-armour) in 2 hits you need to deal at least 8 damage post-mitigation, or to kill in 3 hits you need to deal at least 5.34. No launcher can oneshot a target with more than 8hp. I tested the RPG-26 (450pen, 7.5 damage), AT-4/RAWS (450 pen, 8.5 damage), RPG-7 (500 pen, 8.5 damage), MAAWS (600 pen, 8.5 damage), RPG-27/RPG-30(650 pen, 9 damage) and RPG-28 (900 pen, 10 damage)

>Booker: (800 armour)
RPG-28: 3 hits
RPG-27: 5 hits
RAAWS: 6 hits
RPG-7: 7 hits
AT-4: 8 hits
RPG-26: 9 hit
>AMPV (400 armour)
RPG-28: 2 hits
RPG-27: 3 hits
MAAWS: "
RPG-7 4 hits
AT-4: "
RPG 26: "
>Stryker (250 armour)
RPG-28: 2 hits
RPG-27: 3 hits
MAAWS: "
RPG-7 "
AT-4: "
RPG 26: "
>Sprut (200 armour)
RPG-27: 2
MAAWS: 3
RPG-7 "
AT-4: "
RPG 26: "
>BMP1/2 (180 armour)
MAAWS: 3 hits
RPG-7: "
AT-4: "
RPG-26: "
>M113 (160 armour)
MAAWS: 3 hits
RPG-7 "
AT-4: "
RPG 26: "
>BTR-82 (150 armour)
MAAWS: 2 hits
RPG-7: 3 hits
AT-4: "
RPG-26: "
>AAVP (100 armour)
RPG -7: 2 hits
AT-4: "
RPG-26: 3 hits

which support artillery do I use?
I tried using one of them and they dont kill jackshit

>>2083678
what are your deck specs

What the fuck is wrong with these people?

I'm so tired of the sentinel its unreal.
And iron thunders.

Every match is the same spec-armour shit.

>>2083679
US Tank Air

>>2083718
see >>2083707 and you'll have your answer

I fucking hate dam map so much
fucking forest everywhere and scout everywhere the fucking map is just artillery play ground

What US plane ammo can deal with tanks? I tried JSOWs and It takes 3 direct hits to kill a fucking BMD-3.
Tried rockeyes and a full bombing run does like 2/3s of their HP, which isn't good enough.

>>2083720
I want to like thunder but since you can only bring 3 the time to kill anything is too long,
the only time I ever kill anything in that is with laser painted
or I hit supply spot
with rockets you can just cluster the tank blob away

>>2083725
2000lbs JDAM or Rockeyes

>>2083725
maverick is pretty good
many US planes can fit ton of them for cheap
there is storm breaker too but that shit is hard to use well
or just bring fat plane and spam dozen of cruise missiles (or nuke)

>>2083723
Same, but because it's cursed for me. Not a single time has my team contributed anything of worth on that god-forsaken map. It's always me in a 1v5.

>>2083675
Conclusions:
The RPG-26 can't ever 2-shot a 16hp vehicle because its base damage is less than 8 but it would twoshot a hypothetical 14hp vehicle if its armour was 100 or less.
AT-4s twoshot any 14hp vehicle, and any 16hp vehicle with 100 armour or less

Outside of this lowball threshold the RPG-26, AT-4 and RPG-7 are more or less the same. The RPG-26 tends to shoot fastest because it comes in sets of 5. 2 RPG-7s (VDV Dsh) shoot as fast as 4 AT-4s, roughly.

RPG-27, 30, Vampyr and MAAWS perform the same on most targets within this range. 30 is just a 27 that pierces APS. Vampyr is reloadable and shoots more slowly than other reloadables so its performance in practice is slightly worse than the others. I guess the noteworthy thing is that this bundle of russian launchers will 2-shot any of the russian IFVs except the BMP-3, while the MAAAWs performs the same as the AT-4 on targets <400, >150 armour.

RPG-28 shits on everything.

Tank side armour varies between Booker-tier to Stryker-tier but with different hp totals so the data here isn't directly applicable.

How 2 marines + striker?

>>2083707
The hard counter to the Sentinel is to just have a loitering fighter in your backline.
Fighters, with their 12k air optics can spot and kill stealth drones well before they get close enough to the front to actually start spotting things and can do this without needing to fly over enemy AA.
A pair of cheap fighters alternating can have 100% uptime to spot and intercept the Sentinel and there's really no counter to this except for the enemy team to spawn their own planes and try to dogfight you over your team's AA. The drone has no ECM or flares so AMRAAMs/R-77s have 100% accuracy and always oneshot it.

Only one player on the team needs a loitering fighter rotation to invalidate 5 decks worth of Sentinels. Obviously some specs have better options than others but almost every combination can throw together a sub-300pt fighter with 4-6 missiles and 240s uptime.

Radar on the Commanche. Yes or no?

>>2083753
The Stryker ATGM is actually great because of its top-attack capability. Bring a few of them and mix with other IFVs (with Jav) have them completely saturate enemy APS, and finish with your top down jav
The CAAT TOW can be upgraded to top-attack TOW, giving it even better range than the Javelin, worth it if you want the upgrade. Personally, I just bring both since everyone’s spamming tanks these days.
For mortars/artillery: Either go all-in or skip them entirely unless you’re using them for smoke, then go ahead.
Planes are all personal preference.
i'd would ditch the m10 for more Abram personally then get the MGS/ATGM but you do you
the stryker can fight everything but they need number cause they are replying on their ATGM
you need to bring them in a group of 3-4 minimum
the MGS is the only exception since it has normal gun instead, which you should bring in your squad of strykers mostly just for popping other IFV with APS

>>2083756
I've been trying to perform this but have had very poor success on fighters being close enough to see the sentinel but not get tapped by AD.
Do they need to be high alt or something?

>Blow up backline depot with iron thunder
>Guy on the enemy team accuses me of wallhacking
>He doesn't even know I have a stealth drone active

>>2083797
I think it's a toss up, at least I cant think of any breakpoints from the extra 400m vision range.
Stock it's like recon infantry with sniper levels of vision, radar just pits it on equal footing with top tier recon vehicles.
Radar si still good because it makes it a better scout though.
Pretty sure even without radar the comanche can still output AD with active radar though.

>>2083753
In theory? You have worse tanks than Armoured SF and worse infantry than Armoured SF but you have a much wider breadth of options, especially in Support and Air, so versatility is your main advantage
>Recon
Don't sleep on IFAVs. 55pt TOW launcher with recon optics and stealth.
I think 4 RVs is probably too many. They're expensive and you only need 1 on the field at a time be the optics for your army.
>INF
I don't know why you would take 135pt Javelins instead of just taking the 90pt Javelins instead.
>Support
You probably don't need 4 M-SHORAD.
Consider the MML. With Sidewinders it's basically a TOR, with Hellfires it's like an Apache on a truckbed. Pretty inexpensive for what it does.
LAV-M Dragonfire is basically just the Stryker MC but a little cheaper.
Consider LAV-Ls to pair with your PLS. You can use them to quickly ferry resupply to your frontline units in small batches so you don't risk a big dump close to the front and don't have to cycle your strykers all the way back every few shots.


Heli and Air are honestly up to preference but some things to consider:
The Harrier can be a cheap fighter or a cheap Maverick launcher
The Night Harrier can be a cheap Cluster bomber.
The F-16C can be either a maverick launcher, a cluster plane or a fighter but is kind of more expensive at each than the Harriers because it's faster
The F-16V can either carry 4 JSOWs to instagib tanks, or 2 big JDAMs to be anti-everything. JDAMs can kill tanks if they're dropped directly behind them to strike their rear armour but it's less reliable than just using clusters.
F-35s can be used to do the low alt bombing trick from last thread but it's mainly just for killing air defenses in combination with SEAD

It just depends on what combination of strike types are important to you.

>>2083803
Yes. At high alt you use your high alt vision, which for most fighters is 12,000km. This gets cut by the drone's stealth down to ~6,800km, just inside AMRAAM range. You don't even need to right click the drone, just loiter back outside of AA range and it will automatically sling a missile when it spots the drone without moving out of position. Since the drone's vision range is 4.5k, you kill it before it can see anything. Just be sure you aren't using one of the old coldwar planes with only 6k high alt optics.

At low altitude, a plane uses its low-alt optics to see, which drops its vision down to 4,000km, which is only like 2.200km with the stealth.

>>2083797
As a general rule radar on helis is good because their altitude means they see over a lot of line of slight blockers, so they're amazing at spotting things where ground recon would struggle.

For the Comanche specifically I wouldn't bother. The main thing that makes the Comanche good is that it can get close enough at low-altitude to fire its Hellfires before being detected by radar SHORAD, letting it nibble at a tank blob from the periphery. The extra optics doesn't really make it better at doing this, and your Apaches already get the extended optics for free.

RU vs RU > RU vs US.

>>2083846
RU vs RU is just an artillery spam duel.

>>2083848
It looks like a MOBA but with T-90s as creeps.

>>2083811
>I don't know why you would take 135pt Javelins instead of just taking the 90pt Javelins instead.
They have twice the missiles and an M2 Browning

>>2083811
Never ever use a Harrier as a fighter. It doesn't have the speed needed to outrun missiles, which should be 80% of your micro during the opening stage of every game.

>>2083729
>>2083740
F16C with Mavericks sorted out my issues. I run 3 of those suckers with 2 F16CJs with HAMS.
T14 can suck my falcon

>>2083818
>You see the drone at 6.8km
>AA with radar range is 8km+

Why does upgunning the Barbaris give it worse and less missiles?

Disturbing lack of cool webms

>>2083972
The Ataka missiles fly super fast, so it's much harder to evade them by smoking when the missiles are in flight.

>haven't bought a full price game for years
Is it worth it? Does the matchmaking and current state make multiplayer viable for a total newfag to this subgenre? Not keen on the pain it would be to try SD2 or Warmo as a newfag solo.
Maybe I should just get WitE 2 instead because that game is never going on sale.

>>2083951
The discrepancy doesn't actually matter, because the drone can only see ~4.5km ahead of itself. Here's a helpful little illustration. Because the radar AA necessarily must be a little behind the frontline, and because the drone has to move a considerable distance forward from that AA in order to see anything, it will pass into range of the fighter before it sees anything, and the fighter doesn't need to enter AA range in the process.

Even if you did have to enter AA range, which may be the case if your ally is pushing forward, your fighter can enter AA range with afterburners to kill the drone, turn, dive to low alt and flee to safety. Anything short of ~2km deep into the AA net and you'll be able to outrun the missile on evac or break lock before it goes terminal.

>>2083972
>>2083987
I've thought about this too, but in what world would I take two times less missiles, even if they're faster? Resupplying over and over is already a pain with them

>>2083990
WARNO is that bad as a newfag as long as you play 10v10s and are just playing for fun.
if you wanted to play WARNO, i'd play with you :)

>>2084001
isnt that bad* lmao

>>2083999
In practice you wouldn't. The upgrade used to be super OP in the betas and it got nerfed to shit. Now the base version is better. The missile only having 2 shots didn't matter back then because the Autocannon was overpowered and could duel tanks at close range, so you only used the missile to panic or force a smoke so you could close the gap. They fixed that, thank god.

>>2083985
Zooming in to take cool videos is enough time to let the enemy fuck you over. Sure once they add a replay feature we will see some cool webms

>Have to sweat my ass off against 600 ELO retards because it's a 3v5
>Barely manage to pull out a victory
>+7 ELO

>>2084011
>when you start the game with your team outnumbered but you stomp someone's shit so hard they ragequit and even it up
There's no better feeling.

>Send fighter plane at enemy drone like the thread told me to
>It launches an R-77 at the drone
>The R-77 misses
>Enemy fighter kills my plane before it can even turn

I got sick of limiting it is trying to build an air tab with like 1000+pts of SEAD tax. So I said fuck it.
The F-35s have one ARM used to find a SAM, and 4 stombreakers to bomb it.
The Raptors have 2 500lb JDAMs to zip in and bomb SAM sites I've already seen shoot. They also double as my fighter because they get 4 free A2A missiles.
All 6 are exclusively to be used for low alt bombing cheese.

The Nighthawks carry 2k Jdamns for general purpose CAS to take advantage of dead AA
The Streagles carry 6 heavy clusters to blast tank blobs at low attitude.

I will spam air. I will kill your AA. I will have game impact. Fuck Prowlers.

>>2084015
>Sending 300+ point suicide bombers to destroy 150 point SAM sites
My cheap shit AA will be eating good.

What are Stryker decks supposed to do against this thing? It's cheaper than a Stryker, has a better gun, moves at the same speed (if you up-armor the Stryker), has 4APS and it's in the most meta Russian battlegroup.

>>2084018
I'd say "you volley 3x javeils at it and oneshot it" but that's genuinely a waste of ammo because the fucking thing has paper armour, so you just shoot it. Shitter vehicles like this are why the MGS exists but you're equally well served just dunking it with a Booker Autocannon or whatever fire support vehicle your other spec offers. It has 14 health and like 80 CE armour so it gets two-shot by anything.

>>2084019
It fires two missiles at a time at Strykers, so even a single one of them can overwhelm APS. And if you have two Strykers, they have two APCs plus some spare change. Your Stryker will also die to two hits.

>>2084026
One missile is fire and forget and the other isn't. Guess which one has the advantage in a shootout?

>>2084001
I wouldn't mind 10v10s if it gives a chance to actually learn the game and get better as well. Guess I'm just projecting from complaining on R*ddit. I'm also an Ausfag but it seems like there are enough players at the right times according to SteamDB.
I guess its just the matchmaking that's making BA seem easier to start but 75AUD + potential DLC is an expensive investment (for me).

>>2084029
The Russian one.

>10vs10
>Actually it's 3vs3 with the other fourteen people playing support and air decks

>>2084016
Okay smart ass let's test that.
I've thrown together a simulated AA network on real 5v5 map to roughly represent what real game conditions would look like.
There are 3 SAM sites (two S-300s, one S-350), two Osas and two Tors all with radar on clustered into 1/2 of the map and pushed up to the median line. I've checked each site individually to make sure they all have clear line of sight and work as they should.

One of the S-300s is at the back, near the spawn. I will fly my ass past everything and kill this one SAM site on the far side of all their AA and get out alive to make a point. If this setup can't stop an F-22 then no realistic multiplayer team setup will either.

>>2084036
I am waiting for this result

>>2084036
>>2084016
Un-fucking-touchable.
I'm going to enjoy bombing shitskins this weekend.

>>2084039
Fake news, it would have been spotted by frontline units allowing the AA to fire from further away and your scenario has none.

>>2084043
The flight path goes directly over an Osa with radar on and it doesn't spot the plane. Frontline units aren't a problem.

>>2084030
the matchmaking is pretty good right now, but there's a decent amount of leavers/disconnections and chink cheaters. i imagine chink cheaters will be even worse in Australia since you're close to them.

>>2083990
desu it is only worth it now because there are still so many players playing it
all the bad one mostly
I'm 100% sure they all will be gone in couple months leaving only the sweatiest one
maybe once it goes on sales you will see a little bump in casual players but it wont be like now

>tfw everyone are so used to moving their artillery around after fire shot that you might as well just pick random spot near by and have higher chance to actually hit them

I dont even want to play because I get so mentally exhausted. Think I will just wait for more single player scenarios to pop up

>>2084079
i queue my arty to move after fire :)

>>2084093
thats the point
there is no reason to try to counter arty cause they just move it after anyway
you better off targeting behind or the side of where they shot instead
usually you would have 1/8 chance to land depend on which direction they move after you fire
most of the time people only move backward or to the side so you can cut that down to 5 directions to pick from

Stop talking about MP and talk about what everyone cares about: single player. How's the SP campaign? Worth getting the game for?

>>2084101
No, the story is nonsense, missions are meh, difficulty curve is schizo and you can't save so you have to listen to 10 minutes of yapping because you didn't know the mission has a hidden timer

>>2083972
you get two super fast missiles that fire simultaneously so you take the upgrade to actually kill shit
the base version is just APS bait

>>2083996
More often than not I'm seeing the enemy AA net operating on top of the sentinel.
>inb4 just blow it up
got no long range artillery to do so in my deck, but even so suppression works to help penetrations not full game circling.

>Be playin match, havin fun
>See an enemy tank advancing, position to flank it
>It pops 300m forward in an instant
annoying but whatever
>moving vehicles forward to probe
>suddenly they take damage from nothing
>huh.webp
>the smoke trail from the ATGM spawns in a second after the damage tick
>more unit popping the whole match
won without much trouble cause sir artillery and T-14s can't handle a swarm of BTRs driving at all his artillery
but man the quantum teleporting was fuckin bad, dude wasn't even chinese. I haven't seen anything like that before.

>>2084101
Custom scenarios might be, but the SP in the game unfortunately is not.
The story and characters is serviceable, nothing spectacular but not horrendous. World in Conflict this is not.

The mission design is terrible. Balance and difficulty is all over the place. I've completed like 10 missions, and simultaneously felt like I was doing really shit and getting rolled but struggled to lose.
You get no say over your decks for missions, and deck building really is one of the big draws of the game.
Triggers work really weirdly, most missions consist of just the AI spamming higher quality units than yours at you endlessly while you eek out an advance with 2 mobiks, tin can and a mortar older than you.
AI has sight beyond what it should in several mission as well. I've had tanks that can't see my recon units, they're not firing so its obvious they have no vision, path directly to them and chase them around the woods.

If you get the game for MP its worth giving the SP a spin, its not worth getting the game for the SP.

I just realized its better to have either at least one dedicate anti fighter fill with bunch of Sidewinder/short range missile or AA heli group
like just bring one of that is enough, separate it from the air superiority plane it only cost like 250 at most
sometime opponent will really make some 4D chess keikaku to try to take out shorad then they will bring in horde of Helos and ran over your front
i had 3 shitty bird with 4 aim-9 each saved my teammate from being run over by guardians
Shorad and manpad really arent enough these days
when everyone are running 2-4 SEAD plane each

>>2084061
>all the bad one mostly
? You mean its not as good as the Eugene games? To me it seems like MP would be more fun and much easier to start with, not punished so hard from single mistakes, smaller scale, not so much meta developed yet, etc.
>I'm 100% sure they all will be gone in couple months leaving only the sweatiest one
Even though its peak is 2× the player count than Warno and current players is sitting around Warnos launch peak? Seems like a lot of hype developed just because of the new publisher though..

>>2084057
>since you're close to them
Even worse: same timezone. All they would have to do is introduce some China bad reference and it would be banned.

I guess I would be better off just getting Warno on sale and reconsidering BA if its still doing well later. Not the best thread for this but am I right that Warno doesn't have any "required" DLC because none of the extra units are broken? I'm not keen for paradox style new DLC every month. At least only the host needs them for pdx games.

>>2084131
none of the WARNO dlc give you absolutely OP divisions (except right after a new dlc is released lmao), but some of the divisions in different DLC are better than what you get in the base-game. good base-game divs may be A-B tier while good DLC divs would be S-A tier, but there are plenty of bad/only use for fun divs in both dlc and base-game that people play.

>>2084137
Ah thanks.
Is there anything that would be a good "just get" while its on sale? The pass?

>>2084139
besides the free reinforcement packs (free maps), i'd probably recommend just playing a few games with the base-game divs to see what you like to play since the sale still lasts for awhile you have time to decide. also if you end up not liking the game and play for more than 2hours, you aren't out as much money.
i only have the early access pack, and swap between divs from that pack and the base-game with no desire to purchase other dlc.

>>2084101
it's okay. not great, not terrible. difficulty varies between missions. lack of save game feature sucks but it's manageable unless you're a huge tryhard and feel the need to max out every mission.
I'm pretty sure people both in this thread and on steam complaining how the campaign is absolutely shit are mostly mad because they're used to games where hard difficulty is the baseline, and feel insulted and insecure about their skill level when the game doesn't offer them all the gold medals on a silver platter just because they have basic reading comprehension.
Also, there's a scenario editor and from what I saw so far it seems pretty powerful, even allowing things like adding custom sound lines and avatars, so it's quite likely that people will develop entire new campaigns on their own.

>>2084101
game has all the right ingridients to make a great campaign, soundtrack, voice acting, cutscenes, 1d characters, interesting missions but they fumbled so hard that most people hate it because it lacks basic fucking functions

This is sort of my problem.
In this scenario the sentinel has 2km of penetration with it's sight past the line of contact. Easily enough to get significant vision on a lot of your assets for strikes and predict any advances coming.

The enemy long range air defence just has to be within 3.5km of the front to cover that, and is out of range of most artillery. Your heavy artillery would need to get into range of their short range assets such as light arty, helicopters etc to strike it.
Presuming you have koalit/smerch, if you don't get fucked.

Your AD needs radar on and to be within 2.5km of the front to see the sentinel. Dangerous vs HARM spam, but you can get away with having radar on a lot if you use ZSU to distract SEAD. At risk of being hit by enemy battery though.
Iron Thunder just need to get within 2.5km of the LoC, safe from your short range assets, to counter you. PrSM only 5.5km, GMLRS 4km.

Often in my experience the enemy AD will have a launcher positioned even closer, but is unlikely to have radar on. RU is generally lacking in SEAD as effecient as prowlers, but you're likely to fly into PIVADs/SHORADs if you do. Its not unresonable for the opponent to keep at least 1 radar on a patriot to cover the sentinel.

And this isn't even touching on that your plane can only see the sentinel at the closest point of their circles, 99% of the time they won't line up like that, you'd want to see a bit of the sentinel's circle from a significant part of yours, which requires you to be even closer.
If the enemy is aware of what you're trying to do advancing a heavy AD forward and flicking it's RADAR on every now and again to scan for you is more than enough to shut down the entire strat. Or noticing your idling plane with any of their planes that come in for strikes.
If you loitered a stealth plane it'd work better, but then you're expending an SU-57 for this and his stealth sucks.

>>2084147
Also, the sentinel doesn't even have to be this far forward, he could still be useful another 0.5 or 1km back, which significantly exascerbates how hard it is to deal with him.

Facts shitters are not willing to accept:
1. There is no "Russian bias"
2. Infantry is plenty strong if used correctly
Any more?

>>2084150
>infantry is plenty strong if used correctly
and what scenario is this?

>>2084152
Putting them in cover? Using them as part of combined arms?

Really big fan of this game actually including ballistic missile launchers, never seen that before despite SCUDs being old as fuck

is Marine Raider stand-off worth it or is the CQC better?
it doesnt even get flashbang so I dont know if I want to bother with CQC

>>2084156
They're cool but they need to be more expensive so people cant spam them the whole game without sacrifice.
Theres enough shit to coordinate a defense and offense without your dudes getting blown up randomly from a million miles away.

>round starts
>enemy team has 7+ jets in the air
>"ok I guess they have no ground units
>get to the first point
>its full with infantry and tanks

>>2084147
You can dip into heavy SAM range to launch a missile if you immediately dive and afterburner away perfectly safely. Long range A2A missiles have terminal guidance, SAM missiles do not.

>>2084079
I see people do this, queue up their volleys onto the nearest road assuming the arty will fast move after firing.

>>2084174
CQC Raiders are the strongest anti-infantry squad in the game outside of a building.
Standoff Raiders are one of the only US squads with 600pen AT launchers. It just depends on what you need

>>2084197
>Long range A2A missiles have terminal guidance, SAM missiles do not
Why?

>>2084213
Fox-3 active radar missile have build in radar receiver
so the missile will actively follow the locked target by itself without needing any input from the plane beside the initial launch
meanwhile the plane itself already duck down so the SAM lose the radar contract

>>2084197
yes but this only work if you know the drone is coming
in this case you dont
the whole point of this is for you to have loiter interceptor planes that will take down drones automatically
I guess you can queue bunch of order by having your fighters fly near the front, duck, reverse (afterburner optional) then rinse and repeat

>>2084215
What's stopping someone from putting active radar homing on a SAM?

>>2084218
they do
which is why you see bunch of those clips where pilots sweat their ass trying to crank SAM

>>2084218
They exist, but it's basically an issue of range. The further away the target, the weaker the radar return, so the stronger the emission needs to be. At some point the emitter gets too big and heavy to be worth putting on the missile.
Surface sights need to have extremely long range, because their job is to be area denial. If your SAM was outranged by a plane's payload then there would be no point.
So instead most SAMs have a fire control radar that guides the missile, and a small terminal radar on the missile that's effective at a much shorter range, to serve as a backup if the surface guidance fails.

They basically model this in BA. SAM sites need to guide their missile for the first few seconds of flight. After a few seconds, and once the missile gets within roughly 2km of the target, its own guidance takes over and can continue to follow on its own. If the SAM loses lock too early in the missile flight, or if it loses lock before the missile gets close enough, it just flies into the ground.

SAMs are generally most effective at intercepting targets diving into their range. A target fleeing their range, or tiptoing in and out is mostly just a waste of missiles.

Another thing to know: the missile launched by a SAM only accelerates for a brief window to reach its top speed. After the acceleration phase is over, it's just drifting on momentum. Missiles lose speed to turn, and you can bleed their speed out by making them follow you through a curved trajectory, since the plane can accelerate out of the turn and the missile cannot.

>>2084039
>In my fake setup with no recon units around I win!
Try this in my 1400 ELO lobbies. I dare you. I will shit so hard on you, you'll come crying to the thread.

>>2084150
The betas had absolutely extreme russian bias but most of those balance issues were fixed. The current state of the game seems to favour the US side in terms of top-tier meta sweat but only because both sides have a single overpowered spec combination and the US one is slightly more overpowered.

Infantry is definitely weak. The fact that the best infantry working in groups in ideal conditions, in very specific terrain unique to certain regions of certain maps can technically kill isolated tanks by expending all of their ammo and nearly dying is not good enough. We've been flagging this for the devs since the first beta but they really just don't get it.

>>2084241
It's funny seeing how stealth planes working as advertised instantly triggers some kind of ethnic inferiority complex

>>2084250
>working as advertised
(but only with zero units around to detect it)
You seem to be projecting your inferiority complex a lot. Just don't smash the internet café PC when I curbstomp you, okay lil' buddy?

>>2084252
I think he meant that the planes are working as they do in real life.

>Retard on my team nukes an empty point
>Right afterwards six enemy tanks come rolling through

>>2084233
i actually never tried but can you notch and crank missiles in BA?

I want to try playing RU now
what are the metawhore spec and what are some contrarian spec that is actually decent?

>>2084287
The meta combo is Guards + Motorized. You spam T-90Ms and Barbaris and use rocket arty to clear the ground in from of you. The combination has all of the best units in the spec except for helis, where it's second-best so you can basically play it any way you want.

The hipster spec is Coastal. Morskaya are cost-effective and spammable and it has a lot of unusual but strong tools and synergies

>>2084137
56th VDV was absolutely turbo broken.
But it was probably an accident, usually DLC divs are more specialized and not as blind pickable as the divisions that come with the game.

How did these people get to 1K MMR?

>>2084291
I second this. Costals aren't bad but they are a bizarre collection of weirdass shit so there's lot of hipster choices. The one weakness is that it has no ground transport outside of fat slow arctic warfare tractor. On the upside it cares not for roads and it's amphibious so it can crawl it's way across the map in a straight line.

>>2084291
>>2084316
Nta but what would be the whackiest/least standard combo for coastal?

How are you suppose to use SPG-9?
I tried using them and it doesnt feel like they do anything
it it wasnt interceptable it would at least be decent to fight IFV

>>2084330
Isn't it mostly an anti-infantery team? Technically they can deplete some aps but ultimately they are more like long range thermobaric SMAWs

>>2084330
They fuck infantry and IFVs
Use them like AGS teams with longer range

>>2084147
I tested ingame, I really shouldn't have just presumed people that can't do basic math knew wtf they were talking about.

Planes can see 12 kilometres from low altitude, so you can detect and engage a sentinel from 6km away even while sitting at low alt, while the AA needs to be just over 4km of you to engage you.

ok I think I'm falling in love with sheridan
this thing shit all over every IFV

>>2084315
Below 1k you gain 30-50 elo per win and lose 5-10, so you have to be genuinely atrocious to not reach 1k before too long

>>2084330
IRL isn't SPG-9 obsolete (and the entire heavy recoilless rifle concept) and replaced by Metis-M?

>>2084330
It has enough range that it can fire at things without revealing itself. Throw a pair of them in a building with good sightlines and they're really annoying. They suppress tanks very fast despite not being able to hurt them, which makes it something you can't really ignore that's annoying to root out.
As a protip: keep a cheap transport behind the building with your SPG (or ATGM, etc.) teams so once they start taking fire they can just directly hop into the transport and ride off to a new shooting position.

>>2084330
I hate that this thing is intercepted by APS, literally bullshit.

>Create 10k supply ammo dump for my back line
>Some retard parks his artillery on it and starts shooting from it
1.4k ELO is fucking hell.

>>2084461
Click the ammo dump and disable sharing it with your allies

What do I put on Air tab for US Tank Air spec?

>want to use Bradley
>all mech squads suck dick

How the hell does this even happen?

>>2084490

do any of you use mortar?

>>2084471
Mech squads are deck tax for Bradleys.
Bradleys kinda suck compared to Russian IFVs though.

>>2084471
If you combine Armored with Marines or SOF you can load Force Recon/Rangers RRC into them.
>>2084498
Yes, but I use smoke a lot more than HE.

>>2084490
Planes can crash and kill themselves

>>2084466
looks good to me

Coastal + Armored or Coastal + Motorized?
I like infantry so I want coastal to shit out morskaya constantly

>>2084466
You want to be spending your points on tanks and not planes, so basically your air tab just needs to contribute cheap fighters and maybe 1 cluster plane you can throw out when your opponent blobs too much.
I'm an advocate of doing a max air opener with tank decks since the slight delay in rolling out your ground opener doesn't really matter, your opener was already slow anyways. But it basically guarantees you win the opening air battle, shuts down cheesy shit like nuke openers and lets you cuck all the guys trying to roll out in helis.

>>2084540
Coastal+guards is probably the better pairing objectively but coastal+mot would have a pretty kickass air tab and that's worth considering.

Will ECM on a tank even help against shit like Javelins on TOW

>Round start
>Air combat begins
>See an IL vdv transport
>Committing and blowing it up
>Dude ragequit
So, I guess this is a viable win strategy?

>>2084557
>Round start
>Win air combat
>Keep two fighters in the sky
>Enemy late-spawns a cargo plane
>Shoot it down
>Enemy ragequits

>solo queue
>enemy team is obviously a stack because they had an absurdly coordinated air opener
>2 teammates quit
>alt tab until I hear the game end in the background
Is there an AFK timer or something? Or can I just sit here for 40 minutes

Actually maybe I should help out, tabbed back in and my team is leading on kills even though we only have 1 zone. I can call in all of my tanks at once since I have just been pooling points in the background this whole time

>open with killer eggs
>stingers and machinegun
>enemy quits when they hunt down their opening helicopters and use the machinegun to finish off anyone who landed
killer eggs are cool

>>2084576
Little birds are kinda crazy good.

Just stomped another "stealth bomber" cuck. They never learn.

well at least I got an achievement out of it

How the fuck do I transport people around as Russia? As the US I get access to fast transport helicopters, and they are all fucking cheap.

Russia sometimes gets an mi8, 100+ points at minimum. and cant even bring that many.

>>2081789
Single player for a game like this was a mistake anyways. Every minute of dev time devoted to the single player is a waste.
Regenerating reserves instead of a limited deck like in WG also blows ass because it means making challenging plays like sniping high value units don't really matter, since the opponent only needs to wait a couple minutes to spawn a replacement. The penalties for playing like a retard are minimal so everyone just throws power units into the grinder.

Quick fixes this game actually needs:
>a better way to differentiate teammates and their units than slightly different shades of green borders
>a cooldown for the pink button to throttle "helpful" retards
>custom profile pictures so I can be a kawaii anime girl during WW3

Also, the idea of light vehicles like Strykers needing three hits from a fucking 120mm is jokes. Buff tank guns.

>>2084656
Strykers are the future of ground warfare old man

>>2084498

If the mortar has laser-guided ammunition they are surprisingly good as antitank units because they aim faster than artillery and can catch tanks.

Does Mechanized have anything that stands out as good? I want some cheap transports for infantry spam with Coastal Infantry, and BMP2's are only 55 points plus they come with ATGMs

>>2084692

The main strength of Mechanized is spamming fully decked BMP-2 with kornets, T-72s and laser-guided Tuplans. It's a mecha spam deck.

>>2082429
>>2084692

>>2084692
I just had 4 wins in a row with Mech/coastal
Tulpans are fun and the guided rounds 1 shot helis and 1-2 shot abrams if they're lazed
Pantsir is great, and Sosna is good too
The T-72s w/ APS aren't bad
BMP-3s are pretty great too

>>2084649
in a t15 of course
sure you come late but when you come everyone runs

Does a plane need to be at high altitude to shoot at a ground target with its guns

>T14, T15, Guard Motostrelki
snooze
>Derivatsiya
coom
this is why I bring guards. only 130 points and helicopters get their assholes pounded from over nearly 2km away

Do Russian have any HEAT cannon light tank (not launcher) like Sheridan?
I been trying US Tank Air and I'm really enjoying the sheridan immensely
it will delet any light tanks that relying on APS
mix it with couple of M8 it was fucking great
lately I feel like everyone have APS these days

>>2084715
BMP-1's, though they only have 400 penetration on their guns. But they do only cost 35 points and you can bring dozens of them. 45 points and you get an ATGM

>>2084710
It can fly in at low alt but it'll ascend near the target and dive them to strafe.

Are some weapons designed for strafing only?

>>2084131
my point is this game is decently popular right now and you can do random matches and still find other shitters to play with and enjoy the game without losing to sweats (yet)
desu I think the 5v5 format actually benefit the casual players as well
it give you some lee way to be shit and have 4 other people carrying you (or the other way around)
if this game focus on real competitive sweatfest or spit the match making between 1v1 2v2 or even 3v3 like starcraft
no one would be left playing it now
having it be MOBA style 5v5 only is the right call
also with smaller team having someone ragequit is bigger deal than having some faggot leave in party of 5

Osa or Sosna?

made a mechanized/motorized meatwave deck, loads of BMP2 and shitty infantry. Though the Motopekhota cant fit in the BMPs so I will just use trucks to bring them to the front.
I may switch to BMP1 just so that everyone can fit into armored transports but first I will test it out in a game tomorrow

will new faction/spec be p2w dlc?

>>2084733

Osa is an amphibious discount Tor.
Sosna is premium Strela.

Do you want a mainline SAM with inbuilt radar or an infrared ambush one?

>>2084464
I imagine that won't stop the retard from shooting on top of his dump

>>2084739
US Special Forces Command Command

>>2084656
>Regenerating reserves instead of a limited deck like in WG also blows ass because it means making challenging plays like sniping high value units don't really matter
Wtf I can't just use my artillery-clogged deck to shoot the enemy's SHORAD once and I win???? Fuck off, retard. Regenerating reserves are awesome. They allow for comebacks while being punishing enough to allow for swings and breakthroughs.

>>2084715
Spurt is probably the Russian equivalent of Sheridan
I guess they are both on the air tree too
PT is little bit too weak against any combat vehicles imo

are drones just flying pinata?
I feel like can just always just use helicopter instead

>>2084787
Helicopters have shit vision compared to even the 50 point vatnik drones

You sacrifice them to spot ammo dumps and mark support assets that can then be hit

>>2084787
Mostly yeah, if you're not happy about sending your plane on a risky mission of baiting rockets then a drone can be a reasonably cheap way to find enemy sam position

>>2084787
I love it when US players spam their stealth drones. +340 points with every fighter I send out.

>>2084649
If there's cover or the AD is bad, or just far enough back, MI-8s can slam in a decent amount of guys. Bigger helicopters are available as well but they'll have to drop pretty far back.

If you have access to BTRs they bus people to the front pretty quick. Kamaz VDV also not bad at just getting dudes close rapidly.

>>2084787
Weapons on drones are a waste, they are a disposable recon unit not attack helicopters. Different use case

>>2084718
BMP-1 is absorbed by APS.

>>2084806
So? You can get like seven of the things for the price of a tank, and they all fire missiles.

do sniper show up on enemies screen when they shoot if you have them use suppressed load out?

Explain the F35 with Stormbreakers to me.

People keep saying, "click precision strike 8 times". But won't that cancel the previous order to queue up the newest order?

Shift-queuing up the strikes only launches one bomb, then it starts trying to aim the next one.

How do I get it to drop all its bombs at once

>>2084833
click precision strike 8 times

>>2084834
ok...

so if I have couple of tanks and some IFV pushing to capture a point
then I park the weapon squad team/MANPAD/Recon somewhere near by, not even on the point itself, not even on the same building since my tanks need to rearm/repair
what would stop the enemies from artillery shelling all my squads?
should I just not bother with defending the point anymore and grab extra tanks instead?

>>2084833
Press P 8 times
Click your target 8 times
It will drop 8 bombs

>>2084833
yeah its too hard for me too I just use jdam instead
actually even that is too hard so I not only use retarded bombs

>>2084833
Forget about "smart" bombs, take the dummy pill!

>>2084739
For me, the shoe-in DLC to add is PMC spec for each side with elite infantry, irregular armaments (eg Russians using US gear), drone teams and cheapo convict meat fodder brigades.
Infantry w small drones will be the main selling gimmick with the downside of having very low vehicle/supply/hel/air slots per vehicle.

People will bitch about the infantry drones being p2w until it quickly becomes apparent that you will never be able to field enough of them in this sort of game for it to matter against tanks, helis, artillery, cruise missiles and bombers.

>>2084837
You don't need to defend the point itself, just the approaches to it. Often there will be more defensible terrain around a point than in it.
I like using cheap recon vehicles, like Humvees or IFAVs to move forward after a successful attack and probe just how much ground I can safely take before I hit resistance again. Since usually if you take a point it's because you killed of crippled someone's main army, you can often move up quite far afterwards to establish a new position, then leave tripwire forces in that forward position while your tanks and IFVs go rearm.

>>2084829
The sniper will eventually reveal itself but it can shoot a lot before doing so. The suppressor reduces the noise penalty but doesn't remove it entirely. However the tracers from it's shots are visible, so an attentive enemy can go root out the sniper based on that.

>65 cent plastic frame glass bubble "killer egg" can tank random fire including an interceptor strafing run
>meantime can shit out a ton of missiles and drone pack hunt against fully decked military choppers

Some of the bullshit in this game ticks me off.

>>2084739
What else would they be? Nobody but German nationalists (lol) and werhaboo LARPers would shell out ~20 bucks for the right to play Germany.
In practice most western countries you could reasonably add will be using the same or inferior equipment to the US and most shitholistanis are just using the stuff from RU Mechanized. How do you market that without bending the rules to make their units patently stronger? We're going to end up with Chinese T-62 knockoffs that have Armata-tier armour and apocryphal APS and Javelins on every outdated baltic IFV.

>>2084888
The big issue is that even small countries can scrape together enough indigenous designs to fill out a mechanized spec but few produce high end systems so what do you do about other ones. Even if you put 5 yuropoors together as a coalition if none of them has an airforce or it consists of older model f-16 at best you have nothing to put in the airtab.

>>2084885
The Killer Egg is based as fuck but normal planes are terrible at killing helis because they fly too fast. Use slow shitter planes like the Harrier or the old soviet one in Coastal for your heli hunting. Because they fly so slowly, they just keep shooting their gun the whole pass and will tend to kill even Apaches and Alligators in a single try.

Also most SHORAD and manpads will actually oneshot Killer Eggs. I think only the shitty iglas mounted on RU helicopters take 2 shots and that's obviously deliberate.

>>2084893
They're 'shooting skinny's in Mogadishu' based not 'tanking iglas and being a conjoined flying fortress' based.
Unfortunately I only have fast planes in my deck, which still doesnt explain why my VDV choppers get popped instantly when that one interceptor from the enemy team decides to commit. I guess its a bigger target would be the excuse.

are side armor worth it?

>>2084892
Here's how I would do it
>"European Army" faction
>1st spec is "Baltic Defense Force" with a tonne of infantry, mechanized and support assets but no air force. Basically the equivalent to RU Mechanized but with more recon in exchange for no air
>2nd spec is "German Armoured Corps" with shitter infantry riding Marders & Boxers as well as Leopards and heavy artillery. Includes a 500pt air tab with a few different Tornado variants. Basically Guards/Armoured but with some air in exchange for less recon.
>3rd spec is "French Cavalry" that's high mobility but lightly armoured with all their zaney wheeled stuff crammed into a massive Recon tab and a beefy air tab full of Rafales and Mirages, but only 2x Leclercs. Basically Motorized/Stryker but with less Support stuff
>4th is "Commonwealth Brigade" with a whole hodgepodge of assets drawn from the UK, ANZAC, CAN forces with the unique aspect that each infantry squad is tied to the transport options of its home country and a very limited availability of each (choice between M113s and Redbacks for Aussies, LAVs for Canucks, Warriors for Brits). Basically the USMC jack-of-all-trades equivalent with a weak support tab but a little bit of everything else.
>5th spec would the "Allied Rapid Reaction Corpse" with a bunch of the aerial and special forces assets of all the member countries thrown together with no tanks or IFVs. Basically the Special Forces and Airborne specs combined.
I think this is the best approach because none of these countries individually have enough ground vehicle or aircraft variants to fill out a faction on their own unless you're going to start pulling decommissioned 1960s garbage out of storage. You end up with a lot of different IFVs and tanks but you can just limit availability to prevent every spec from playing like armoured.

>>2084900
Alright then retard lets make this realistic, one hit from a tank and if it pens the target explodes. Infantry squad caught my anything above autocannons is wiped out 1 second. Your heli hovering stationary within ATGM range gets oneshotted by it in 3 seconds. Every match US starts with additional 1500 single-use points to use on air.

Want realism so bad then just go outside and enlist to die for Isntreal

>>2084919
Alone? Usually not. However most armour upgrades increase max health and that can be very worth it. For tanks they can go all the way up to 19 hp, and since most things only deal 1-2 damage through a tank's front armour that extra HP usually nets you at least 2 extra hits of survivability.

For IFVs your mileage may vary. Their HP usually goes from 14 to 16 which is just enough to survive an extra hit of an AT-4 but not much else. However the all-around CE armour will tend to make them less vulnerable to artillery which can matter if for example you're using a cheap APC to shelter your inf.

>>2084929
You know what, I think this is pretty good. Shows off hardware without going into outdated garbo, still in line with ru and us spec design philosophy. You can work with this

>>2084945
Not him, but ATGMs should be able to shoot at helis. It's gay and bullshit that they can't,

>>2084945
Come on man, dont cop out like that.
Its an authenticity matter. Killer eggs can be plenty good shitting on non-AA troops and distant basic IFVs. Im not asking for the pilots to get instakilled by small arms fire through the windshield.
Having them be hard to kill by planes and seeking missiles whilst also being a legit threat to gunships is simply stupid.

>>2084739
Next faction if/when it happens will almost certainly be china and USA will get a navy/marines2 spec with navy seals, JLTV, superhornets and other shit that i already in the game but got removed since early USMC previews. The spec is pretty much open secret, insider fags on discord talked about it even before release. I think how the campaign ends also hints at that and it's going to be a continuation.
Based on that maybe euros vs russia continuation war could also happen. You get euros and 6th RU spec, probably some internal troops shit.

>>2084945
Unironically would make for a better game.

US decks should start with default recon drones, free Warthog and two FA18s

Why *can't* javelins shoot at helicopters?

>>2084984
To prevent hurting the feelings of the Russian people.
IRL it has longer range than TOW, but in this game it's completely gimped. Only 1300 m is a joke, less than a range of tanks' cannons.

>>2084984
Because Helis have flares + ECM so ATGMs would miss a tonne of shots and waste ammo/firing cycles on helicopters instead of their intended target. Being able to decoy all of a Javelin's ammo away with a Kiowa would be cancer.

There's a good reason the "anti-everything" hellfires on some SHORAD platforms are terrible.

>>2084984
It's crazy that it has a minimum range despite it's direct attack option which is modeled.
At close range the Javelin will direct fire instead of top attacking.

>>2084996
Flares/ECM wouldn't work on the guided ATGMs in the game like the TOW and Kornets.

>>2085003
ECM is available on tanks and IFVs and works exactly the same on wired-guided missiles as it does on aircraft. And it would be absolute silly if ATGMs had 100% accuracy anti-helo missiles while actual AA gets fucked. Nobody would ever use Manpads again.

>>2084996
Well that and hellfires take 2-3 times as long to aim compared to stingers which sucks absolute ass.

>>2085007
Shoulda said shouldn't instead of wouldn't.
And Helos should have an easy time avoiding ATGMs.

>>2085001
I think that's a technical limitation more than anything. I don't know of any weapon in the game that behaves differently depending on range it is fired at.

>>2085010
It is implemented in game. The javelin will switch attack mode to direct fire for close range shots.
It just also has a 200m min range for some reason.

>start the match
>no one on my team paid air tax, but no one use air transports either, just simple ground vehicles with some SPAA
>sure I will shit out 2 migs for everyone
>opponent spam the fuck out of planes and heli in phase 1
>literally spend the entire phase 1 building SAM sites in middle of the map
>since I have nothing to do cause I spend all my point on SPAA I start micro them and push pantsir and ZSU deep into front line within their Arty range
>shot down bunch of SOCOM's transport heli, some on the way in some on the way out
>spend most of the game playing whack a mole with their arty shuffling my SPAA around and resupply
the fact that the metawhore deck for US side is Tank SF, some people just ditch all the ground transport and use helicopters as their only transport vehicles
so this is what being support player feel like

>>2085001
There was a heated argument with the devs about this after the 2nd open beta. Basically people argued infantry-carried Javelins should fire like an RPG at close range/in forests (as it does in reality) to plug the gap in America's short range anti-tank options. The devs were vehemently against it, one because the US being starved of good RPGs is deliberate, and two because they didn't want any ATGM team to lack the close range/in forest weakness or else they thought they would become too difficult to approach.

>>2085012
TIL

>>2085016
One support player is nice. Three support "players" is a problem.

>>2085016
There's some very bad advice circling around that "Bradleys are bad" and insisting the optimal way to play tank/sf is to exclusively spam Abrams and SHORAD and bring in a few squads of recon inf and delta force in helis that you make walk everywhere.
It's bad advice. To be honest a lot of the top 100 have terrible advice because they live in this little meta bubble where every match is them and 4 friends speedrunning a 3v5 against soloqueue randoms 400 Elo below them.

>>2085017
>US being starved off good RPG
dont they have MAWWS and RAWS?
heck I think even the CAAT Dragon is pretty good

>>2085024
Bradley is nice
but the fact that you have to bring dogshit mech unit is the problem desu
I mean while they are pretty cheap but you could get another tanks with those points
personally I just use mech AA to get 4 pimped brads

>only 1000+ elo
>running into games where either the players are really perceptive at countering me even before they've sussed my deck or they're just cheating

Yeah nah, these matches go too long for me to put up with the occasional cheater. If thats going to be the norm my interest is going to die real quick.

>>2085016
I wish I could get support players that knew how the fuck to play.
Instead I just watch them eat counterbattery and airstrikes to all their clumped artillery all game.
And still end up with a 2.0 KD.

is pantsir worth 50 pts over tor?

>>2085036
Technically he can one shot helicopters while TOR can't, TOR can engage more targets at once though.
For Coastal I think no, the pantsir has weirdness with its aiming and from my experience due to non-direct hits he usually takes as many shots as TOR to down targets.

>>2085036
Not really.
Pantsir better vs missiles, Tor better vs helis. If you have the S-350 you don't need more missile defense.

I LOVE US HELI SPAM
I DEMAND MORE HELI SPAM
PANTSIR HUNGERS FOR GOYLEM HELI SPAM

>>2085099
Henry Helo strikes again. It's a gimmicky meme strat, really. If they can take out all of your SHORAD in the early game, you lose. Else, you get a strong network backed up by MANPADS and you win.

>>2085025
RAWS is a reloadable AT-4.
MAAWS is the best the US has but its still a straight downgrade to the RPG-27, which is the midline russian launcher. Two RU specs get RPG-28s with literally double the pen of the AT-4.

Why are the maps so big and the number of units you can bring so small?

I feel like they could simply increase the number of points given to the players by 50-100% and the game would just be better for it

It's not 'tactical' it's just kind of a cocktease and lame to micro around like only 4 vehicles

How do you outfit your Su-25s?

>>2085169
just 8 clusters for SM because it has only 6k spotting range
Vikhrs, Kh-31P and radar for the T
use em both for countering armor convoys, and personally dont bother with ECM because I always have a billion snipers behind enemy lines and 3 Malkas plus the occasional sneaky BRM-1K hunting SAMs and SPAA

>>2085160
Have you tried buying cheaper vehicles?
I'm regularly having to juggle 20+ units.

>>2085160
>Why are the maps so big and the number of units you can bring so small?
Because that's how modern armies operate. A small number of units hold large swathes of territory using patrols and tripwire units. You don't fight to defend low ground or open fields, because everything in modern warfare moves fast, shoots far and sees farther.

If you could just fill the map with a solid continuous line of units and never need to touch them again the game would get stale as fuck and devolve into frontal tank bashing like Warno.

so when will they buff infantry?

>>2085334
They wont

>>2085335

Basic bitch Mech. Rifles should be upgradable with a Jav.
Or they need a Gustav.
As it stands, I bring all my brads on Mech rifles with AA and MMG teams, Rangers supplement lacking infantry AT.
That Guardian is fuckin broken, I'm bullying Chinese children all day.
Please, send another wave of BMPs down the road.

>>2085337
The AT-4 and RPG-26 just need to be buffed.
The devs just don't understand that all infantry AT needs to be a threat to tanks or else they're worthless. The low-tier launchers don't deal enough damage to threaten tanks so they might as well not exist, because tanks are what's going to be pushing.

>>2085346
If every match wasn't 5 guards vs 5 armoured this would be less of a problem.
Standard infantry launchers are honestly OK, the big issue with them is rearming infantry in frontline conditions is at best a big micro tax, at worst impossible.
IFVs and such being able to carry small amounts of supply, or some other way to get infantry on the front refilled easier would make this a lot better.

AT-4s and the like are for countering lighter vehicles and they do that job fine.
The effectiveness of smoke + APS and how easy it is to poo on ATGM infantry is a big part of the problem.

>Infantry should be buffed
What can infantry not do? They can threaten tanks with ATGMs, they can destroy APCs with RPGs, they can threaten helicopters with MANPADs and they can fight other infantry. They are reasonably tanky when placed in buildings (unless faced with overwhelming firepower), and they are reasonably sneaky when placed in forests. They can trade point cost efficiently with just about anything in the game save for long-ranged artillery or planes, and they can dictate the terms of engagement due to their ability to hop out of any part of a building.

>B-but my one singular ATGM squad couldn't kill an Armata on its own!!!
Okay? Four ATGM squads have no problem dealing with an Armata. Hell, even four Spetsnaz GRU can take out an MBT in an instant.

anyone figured out how much you can correct your bombing/ strafing run without the jet saying "nuh uh"?

>>2085358
3 of 5 RU specs have a heavy tank
2 of 5 US specs do, with a 3rd being kind of a border case
Tanks are not a rare entity and they're never going to be a rare entity. A big part of why "the best tank" is the top spec for both factions is that they can plow through infantry and almost nothing answers them except a bigger tank.
>equating GRU to fucking Mech Rifles.
Oh you're just retarded.

>>2085373
>and almost nothing answers them except a bigger tank.
Or a plane. Or a helicopter. Or three ATGM vehicles (which are still cheaper than the tank). Or three ATGM teams. Or cluster artillery. Or cluster rocket artillery. Or a cruise missile. Or three decent APCs.

>>2085360
>What can infantry not do?
Infantry rely on being upper tier AT squads and good engagements to have success vs tanks(Which are very ubiqutous). The trades are usually even as well rather than being 'effecient'.
Are difficulty to resupply.
And are difficult to reposition to avoid artillery fire.

>>2085373
>>equating GRU to fucking Mech Rifles.
>Oh you're just retarded.
I did no such thing, you're literally inventing nonsense.

>A big part of why "the best tank" is the top spec for both factions is that they can plow through infantry and almost nothing answers them except a bigger tank.
thats my point
Tanks are effectively only countered by other tanks, and top of the line AT launcher infantry. Helicopters do OK but are very very slow to kill large blobs and it's pretty easy to ward them off with air defence. Planes are probably the only other option, but they work vs blobs not so much isolated incidents.

Just remove APS from the game, infantry is viable now.

>>2085362

Don't force planes to do 90º turns, they can't. Give them time so they can get into position and strafe right away. Otherwise, they will waste a lot of time turning, realising they don't have the right angle, turning again and may even get shot down in the process.

>>2085362
As a rule of thumb, just don't. Planes are really finnicky about it.

>>2085378
Skill issue.

Welp, encountered my first cheaters

>decide to try playing an air deck
>things are going pretty well
>start to lose helis and planes to AA
>send in a drone
>the entire enemy frontline is nothing but like 18 different SHORAD units and MANPADs everywhere
>they have no actual land units, just Tors, Sosnas and Pantsirs
>allies have actual land armies across from them but refuse to push
>one guy walks a single delta force squad forward, gets shot by a Pantsir's gun and goes back to not moving
>we lose on caps because nobody wants to drag select their tanks and A-move against an essentially empty front
Hell is teammates.

>>2085461
And you did nothing because...? You realize that even in an air deck you can bring some infantry, tanks, APCs and other things, right?

>>2085475
Well you didnt spend 10,000 points on planes, helicopters, and AA nigger so where are your ground troops in this scenario?

woopss wrong replied to wrong post but the question still stands

What's the point of Metis squad if you already have Kornets?

>>2085486
Metis has a machinegun as well so its like a mediocre AT that can defend itself against infantry

>>2085475
>>2085476
The specs that have the good air units don't have any ground vehicles. I could hold my side of the map but I didn't have tools to push because that's what you sacrifice to do air.
I thought this would not be an issue, because I am 1 player out of 5, and everyone else brought tank/sf and then chose not to do anything with them.
Lo and behold, we lose because I did the most but could not do everything. Such is a team game.
>next match I deploy with another teammate whose running tank/sf
>he throws a few units and then just stops playing
>I'm alone 2v1 and slowly pushed back
>look over to the other side of the map
>3 players have amassed a colossal amount of units just loitering in the middle of nowhere
>leading on kill score but losing on zones (again) and allies just won't fucking A-move their tanks to cap zones.
>lose by 1 point in the end

I go full airtax every round, as do my two friends i play with
Three people in full F-15/F-22 spam ALWAYS win the air war
>best case
900000000 enemies packed in helos die
>normal case
Enemy loses three jets and like two helos
>absolute worst realistic case
We lose like one jet, enemy loses one, we dont find any helos, RTB for 90% refund and almost no lasting econ hit
Its absurd how well its been working, once 3/5 of the enemy players instantly quit after losing two jam-packed Il-76s and four helos.
As a bonus, you can freely helo your own infantry for early caps because again, 3 people in air retard mode cannot lose when no SAMs are up yet.

>>2085160
Starting to quite prefer things being that way, I feel as though you can never properly build up for an assault while holding a frontline.

>>2084984
Same reason they dont let you use hellfires against helos, (except one unit lmao) same reason they dont let you ise HARMS as GPS bombs, same reason they dont give stormbreakers their irl range, same reason stealth doesnt affect missile tracking, same reason autoloaders are modeled as a direct upgrade with no downsides…

Im having too many get fucked moments past few matches.

>I try to play heli point capture, get fucked by airplanes
>I play soft and pay the airtax, my planes die, enemies planes dont even though mine are interceptors long range missiles and backed with a radar ground AA
>teammates zones are unguarded and easy captures, my zones get sniped
>i play attack chopper to counter enemy quick capture, it get shot down by a plane
>my heli strays an inch close to shorad, it gets lit up with 12 missiles and dies in a second
>enemy choppers can galivant about while my dudes take 2 weeks to land more than 1 missile on it
>artillery takes 2 minutes to kill one of their units but only one missfire to blow up half its own battery
>i stop playing like a pussy and send in an assault, it gets raped by a swarm of tanks and cruise missiles

Some of these matches feel like some fucking voodoo shit with someone on the team running grudge curses on me.
Not even talking about cheats, thats a seperate issue.

Trying to build an urban assault/artillery deck.

>>2085542
Just dont get caught with your pants(ir) down

>>2085542
why not swap one of the spec for coastal?
you get the maine which is the best mainline unit
also tornado rockets

CAAT dragon or Javelin or TOW2B?

>>2083224
how about all?

This is so wrong, bros. That little skull popup when you kill shit gives me so much dopamine.
I'm pretty sure the KGB had something to do with it.

>>2084731
Ah I understand.
>if this game focus on real competitive sweatfest
They've said a lot of game design decisions have been made because of >esports.
I think being open to casuals isn't about game design anyway its the rest of the package: decent matchmaking, a casual mode to practice, YouTube, etc. Just look at how CS has been stuck in a rut with the exact same subpar game for the last 20 years and yet is doing better than ever.

>>2085627
>no visibility
>still get popup
Ah yes only the most competitive of gameplay.

>>2085627
they should show the point cost instead like in the good old days

>>2085647
The rate at which my planes kill themselves is frankly frustrating

I just realized that afterburner fucking matter a lot
you can go from trading 1v1 at best to be able get at least 2 or even 3

>me airspam deck
>also me when enemies are spamming a lot of planes/heli
sorry guys I only bought bombers and CAS

>>2084101
The SP campaign is a mess. The one mission that would be improved by calling in units has you not able to call in any as it's the theme. Narva would have been fun as fuck if I could call in cheap rubbish. Instead I crept towards the point, using recon with a tochka to hit things until a trigger hit and convoys were running to the point you needed to take.

>>2085446
Infantry takes more effort to do things that vehicles can do, worse than vehicles, for more points.
Pic related.
VDV kornet team pays more for the same number of shots at a time(2), no anti-infantry option, no smoke, worse optics, significantly less maneuvreable(Unless you park a transport with him but thats another 30-40 points), less ammo.

His only utility his higher stealth rating, and he does better in more urban environments cause vehicles can't hide in buildings.
And he can be more survivable despite the lack of smoke due to having a lot of HP to work through.

>>2085517
Heli RNG is so fucked I'm absolutely certain there's some server bug going on.
>Two double stinger Shorad with radar on
>Enemy heli wanders into range
>8 missiles later, it takes one single hit
Meanwhile
>Guardian wanders into range of a Stinger
>Immediately gets hit twice and dies
>Every time
The one that really fucking gets me is losing a stealth plane to a fucking Shorad unit. For some reason when it's a high altitude target moving at the speed of sound with flares and ECM the little stronger that could decides it will have perfect accuracy and follow you for 6km past it's max range. I've lost more planes to Tors and M-Shorad than I've lost to patriots and S-300s.

>>2085688
Not to mention there are just so fucking many things that screw over infantry. Get caught out by a tank at the wrong range? Fucked. Little Humvee with an HMG has an unexpected angle on you? Everyone is suppressed and has to pop their one smoke and sprint to escape. Grenade launcher team in a building somewhere? Literally unassailable, this little shit will stop a whole tab of infantry solo.

You can't get anywhere without an armoured transport protecting you, you can't win most fights without fire support and even in ideal circumstances you're barely out trading units that require no thought or effort to use.

>>2085698
In the cases where infantry can do OK it requires dramatically more micro attention to keep them doing well than other units. I've only got so much APM, if I'm focused on keeping infantry functional that's attention I'm not using on my tanks, artillery, air defence etc.
This opinion has been around since the betas, the devs are clearly not gonna change. Infantry are stuck in this spot where you bring them cause they have a bit of niche value, but they rarely achieve much other than helping to enable the vehicles, helis, artillery etc to do the work.

Also its insane how quick Abrams tanks can mince infantry with the twin 50 cal.

How do I kill heavy tanks if I don't play tank spec?
Line infantry is slow and their RPGs have low penetration
ATGMs get intercepted by APS
Sideshots with light tanks don't do enough damage to kill
Planes and helicopters get shot down by competent AA

>>2085730

ATGMs spam to overwhelm APS.
RPG squads. No, no line infantry or ATGMs (though some line infantry have good RPGs), but rocket squads that can spam rockets hit harder than regular line infantry.
Laser-guided mortars will hit tanks where it hurt the most.
Cluster bombs.
AT/ATGM rockets on planes/helicopters.

Also, use SEAD and artillery/MRLS or land attack missiles/cruise missiles to destroy SAMs or force them to spend ammo once identified.

>>2085730
ATGMs, but you need to concentrate them to saturate APS. A single ATGM on its own is worthless, but a pair will always get damage through. 3 Javelins or TOW2Bs will overwhelm APS and either force a smoke or instantly kill the target vehicle, every volley. 3 Bradleys cost about as much as 1 tank, outrange a tank, can tank multiple hits from a tank each and have more ammo than a tank has smoke.
Because of the built in anti-overkill system, you need to manually tell your ATGMs to all fire on the same target otherwise they will automatically split volleys or hold fire. ATGM behaviour always assumes the target doesn't have APS. This game is a lot like Wargame, Warno etc. where tanks are actually bad at long range and tend to lose shootouts across open ground against similar cost in missile vehicles. They need to close range to excel. But right now using missiles well takes a modicum more micro than tanks, which can just kind of A-move and will autosmoke to save your dumb ass when you overcommit, so tanks tend to do very well.

Helicopters are the strongest counter to tanks. Something to keep in mind is that the SHORAD behind protecting the tank costs as much as the tank does and has very limited availability. Fast recon vehicles and cheap IFVs can easily slip past the tank blob to threaten those mid-line assets, forcing them to separate from their tanks momentarily or just outright killing them. The maps are often deliberately much wider than they seem, with tonnes of covered roads away from the main mass of capture zones that you can use to circumvent the narrow frontline presented by a tank blob.

You can also throw a cluster plane to instantly delete a whole tank blob. Yeah, 9/10 chance the plane dies in the process but if it kills even 1 tank it trades up, and it's likely to just kill every vehicle on the field. The cluster suicide bomber is the ultimate anti-blob. And best of all, it's the one key tool that the meta Armoured/SOF deck lacks.

>>2085730
You have to pretty much overwhelm em with missiles. Play some tricky micro, smoke on the unit they are shooting at while your other units shoot from the side.
Barrage with arty.
For planes ive had success on afterburner, low alt, drag-bombing. That can get you a huge win if someone stacked those tanks in one spot or driving down an obvious roadlane.

>>2085730
>How do I kill heavy tanks if I don't play tank spec?
Depends if you're US or RU.

If you're US you want things like MAAWS from SOCOM and SMAWs from Marines. Javelins are pretty good cause they do a shit ton of damage even to the front of a heavy tank, need them in multiples though due to APS. Airborne get the dual javelin team which can do alright.
RU you want Motors- oh wait thats the tank spec.
RU you want Spetsnaz GRU, Morskaya Pekhota.
Also on either side you want cluster artillery and airstrikes to combat blobs. Helicopters work great ofr a lone tank or other vehicle trying to run through and kill backline assets, or firing a few extra missiles into the mass in a big push, but gotta be very careful of shorads or pantsirs/tors.

ATGMs are not reliable, even massed if the opponent has their brain turned on you will run out of ammo before you've killed them, it causes the enemy to have to be cautious though, will get a few hits in. You need backup units to support when the tanks get onto the ATGMs if the enemy commits, ideally your ATGMs are really spread out over a wide area and all covering the same approach but thats not always possible

>>2085730
the infantry RPG works but you really need a side shot
you really need to be crafty to put your infantry right on their tank
you can smoke the shit out of the place an have IFV with 2 AT squad yolo into it, or have your infantry hide in building/forest nearby and ambush a tank, usually much easier if you use some of your own vehicle as a bait
or
ATGM the fuck out of it
or
laze painted and mortar/arty/rocket
or
attack heli
or
plane

personally I think ATGM is the easiest way
US have a lot of top attack ATGM so if even one single of them get through that tank is a toast
on Russian side they have those ripple fire ATGM for like 100 pts each that shit out like 2-4 at once
bring like 2-3 of that shit and watch even the heaviest tank pop their smoke and cover away

>>2085750
>Laser-guided mortars will hit tanks where it hurt the most.
This is a big one that gets slept on.
A lot of specs have a frontline combat vehicle with a laser designator, like the Stryker RV. A pair of mortars with guided shells aim quickly (only a little slower than a tank does) and you can just designate a tank when the shooting starts and the shells will seek its top armour with perfect accuracy.

Regular Mortars deal ~4.5 damage a hit to SepV3 top armour so a pair of mortars will delete half its HP in the first shot. For some reason, russian tanks have literally double the top armour so guided mortars only deal like 2 damage a pop to them.

The Tulpan is the notable exception, It's a special mortar that still gets guided shells but they have double the pen and damage of regular mortars, so they almost oneshot US tanks and cleanly two-shot russian tanks. I've heard people here claim the Tulpan is the best unit in mechanized and the main reason to pick that spec and I think I agree with that. When you get used the controls, guided Mortars essentially become Javelins with twice the range that ignore LoS and APS. The best part is that the target doesn't know they're being targeted until the first pair of 100% accuracy shells land on their head.

I think the killer egg is bugged or something, units will miss them way more than they should, even when chaff isn't involved.
Watched BTRs unload at killer eggs for 30+ seconds at close range and achieve 0 damage.

>>2085500
I fucking hate the opening air battle so goddamn much
>spawn two F-22s
>enemy F-16 spotted
>right click with both planes
>they start flying towards their target
>neither of them fire any of their AMRAAMs for some reason
>one gets hit twice by the F-16s AMRAAMs and dies
>the other passes, eats a sidewinder and starts a turning war with th estill intact F-16
>finally fires 1 single sidewinder off and then tries to shoot it with its gun, misses
>SAM starts shooting, so I hit afterburners, dive low and recall
>1st SAM misses
>once I'm almost back to spawn a second SAM randomly fires from their spawn, crosses the entire map, follows my plane offmap and oneshots it
>proceed to get fucked on the ground for the entire 1st phase because of how much of my opener was wasted on bugged planes that just fuck around and die
Never making that mistake again. Air combat in this game is peak slavjank

I did it reddit.
vdv and mechanised to level 4.
Thousands of men died so I can paint my hardware in a different color. Well worth it.

>>2085779
I've given up on the airtax, even though I was big on it a long time ago.
No one else is usually interested, and even if they try US air generally wipes RU air.

Spawn an airdefence system, flick the radar on and off to get some kills without dying to sead, spawn in a wave of BTRs with enough shit to kick through whatever came out of the helicopters the enemy rushed to centre map.
Although in most of my matches the team that committed to air, is either too scared or too poor to spawn anything to actually capitalise on gaining full air supremacy so my BTRs roll through unopposed most of the time.

>>2085752
Pic related for the effectiveness of the drag bombing counter. Disadvantage to those heavy tanks is they're committing a ton of points to a few vehicles.
That'll be half their load gone off the map and not much left to make any moves for a couple of minutes.

>>2085500
this is why my air tax is also my asf loiter, i will leave mine up until it ran out of missiles/fuels or die
and most of the time people will just send out drones or heli soon right after

>>2085810
This is really the big thing about tank blobs.
Tanks need to fight together and with all their support elements to be effective. Alone, they can be overwhelmed or sniped by a helicopter.

But when you have 2-3 300+ pt units backed by 1-2 SHORAD and some recon concentrated in one sector that's like 2/3s of your income tied down in upkeep in one narrow front.
If you get got in a cluster bomb or a cluster MLRS strike, or lose a battle that's a huge amount of your overall land strength that's removed from the field for a good 5-10 minutes. And while you've got this narrow fist to try and punch through to the next zone there's all this wide space you can't cover, where a smart player can stream 55pt vehicles past you and start killing artillery and AA, back-capping rear zones or even cutting off your reinforcements.
Tanks can become a cost trap, because players naturally fall into thinking that the only thing that beats tank is bigger tank, or more tank and try to arms-race each other only to end up with all their income tied up in an arm wrestle over 100m of grass while their flanks and rear are wide open.

>>2085816
Also if you deflect the tank blob, there is generally little to no reserves to stop your own push through.
Don't even need to flank, just make sure you have something to stop the helicopter response force and go in.

Often times when I feel like I'm getting rekt by tanks I realise its a 1v2 or 1v3 situation.

As a guards/mechanised, what should I use my planes for? So far Ive been trying the Su-25 but I'm not sure if to turn it into a drag bomber, missile strafer, napalm bomber, or missile truck (SEAD included). I can also use a Su-27

The ATGM Strykers are surprisingly good.
TOW-2s have a bit of extra range but most importantly, they have a magazine of 2, so they fire the 2nd missile as soon as the first finishes. On top of that, it has twice as much ammo and also a few of the anti-infantry missiles. Not being F&F and requiring stationary to fight are downsides, but an ATGM carrier with 1600 range top attack and enough survivability to take multiple tank hits is pretty noteworthy.

>>2085790
I kind of wish we got the SU-47

>>2085826
It's viable, but the Javelin is just better because you can stay on the move with it. The first ATGM volley is going to be smoked anyway, but with three Strykers, if the enemy tank doesn't respect them, will volley off one tank every launch once their smokes are spent with focus fire

>>2085826
its pretty good on the field with little bit of micro
you mix them with other ICV javelins, have them move around burning enemies's APS while the ATGM one stay behind to dunk with its top attack tow

>>2085493
>The enemy has nothing but AA!
>Look at my stupid team, they're not pushing!!!
>Why am I not pushing?
>Uhhhh....
You deserved that loss. Get a better deck. There are no battlegroup combinations that are incapable of pushing, only poor decks that are incapable of pushing.

does jammer on ground vehicle actually work?

>>2085852
>There are no battlegroup combinations that are incapable of pushing
Airborne + SOF.

>>2085856
Incapable of pushing might be exaggerating it for Airborne + SoF but it certainly is really easy to make a shit deck with them.

What loadout do I use on Su-34?

>>2085860
There's no IFV, and no ground transport with thicker skin than a Humvee. Your only actual combat vehicles are a handful of thin-skinned M8s and TOW humvees. There's no way to cross open ground that won't get mowed down to the minigun attached to a Pantsir.

Which is fine. Not every member of a 5-person team needs to be able to push forward, because there are 5 of you. As long as your deck is holding ground so the others aren't spread thinner, and as long as it's actually doing something and killing units and contributing to the team it should make it easier for the team as a whole to push. And if 4 aren't pushing then one guy pushing solo isn't going to get very far regardless. But it's definitely frustrating doing everything possible as one player to enable 4 others and then those 4 players just politely decline to click their mouse and you lose the ensuing 1v5 because that's obviously not winnable. I had almost as much destruction score as the entire rest of my team combined.

>>2085856
>Waaaah I can't push without muh heavy tanks
Skill issue. This is all you need to push. Learn how to smoke, and quit crying about your team when you are too worthless to do what you are weeping about them being incapable of doing. Typical of an airshitter not to know how to play.

>>2085871
Actual retard

Which one vatniks?

>>2085875
The Mikhail Gorbachev should just carry 8x LMURs because it's the best missile in the game and more is better. The missile oneshots any SHORAD platform (2 for a Stryker with APS).
Use the Alligator for your versatile anti-everything platform or just as cheap, tanky rocket helos.

>>2085873
Winning games against airshitters like (you) since the first playtest. Thanks for feeding me juicy air kills, retard. Keep thinking you're not the issue.

>>2085877
well I want one all-rounder heli so and other option was going to be my SEAD helicopters
I guess I only need 1 SEAD heli
then I will bring one lumurmaxxing then +2 alligator

>>2085688
>His only utility his higher stealth rating, and he does better in more urban environments cause vehicles can't hide in buildings.
They have a minimum range too. So in an urban environment, a tank closes in on the Kornet and the kornet cant even fire while the tank just unloads its MG and cannon into them at point blank.

>>2085875
Mi28 with all LMUR

are machine gun team any good?

>>2085898
They are decent at anti infantry since they outrange most basic infantry, and the MGs will suppress enemy infantry really fast.
But AGL does it better. I use Mech MMG as a discount AGL team for holding a back cap from sneaky fucks. Or plugging gaps in a line to stop enemy recon infantry slipping through.

>>2085898
They're basically a tripwire unit you use to cover a wide front. They'll suppress infantry before they can get close and do surprisingly high damage to helicopters but they will lose a shootout with literally any squad that can shoot back and die to a stiff breeze.

I don't really understand why 4 bodies with a pair of Brownings is 50pts but a pair of bulletproof M113s with Brownings is 2x30pts. It feels to me like a lot of these small team support units are just completely overpriced and it's just generally more cost effective to bring your fire support in vehicle.

Who is better at intercepting SEAD spam between tor and pantsir?
S350 really isnt enough
also is A222 Bereg any good at shooting heli?

It's so over vros

>>2085937
>better at intercepting SEAD spam
Tor, without any doubt
Tor 2, so upgraded guard and the basic coastal one, can shoot at 4 targets at the same time, pantsir only 2.
Tor is also cheaper and has more missiles than the tunguska pantsir.

Not sure if it matters for missile interception but tor also has a bigger blast radius which helps for near misses doing damage.

>>2085937
zsu 23

>>2085937
It's actually the Pantsir. Main issue with the Tor is that it launches vertically, then turns, then accelerates towards its target. The Pantsir, like most other missile defense, fire their missile straight, so it's automatically on a collision course with the incoming missile. The Tor will frequently fail interceptions, because the missile has to intercept at an angle and has a 'deadzone' where a missile is too close to intercept.

Being vulnerable to SEAD is the Tor's like main weakness. That's typically why the Coastal Tor is so strong, its got enough HP to survive a SEAD hit and is paired with the S-350 for missile interception.

Speaking of SEAD I had the weirdest shit happen yesterday
>SEAD missile is incoming towards my SAM
>SAM fires an interceptor
>interceptor collides with SEAD missile, destroys it
>a second later my SAM just explodes to nothing
>post game record claims the SEAD killed it
I guess latency can fuck up time-sensitive interactions like that but it seems weird for a game with dedicated servers to have that kind of issue.

>>2085962
>or is that it launches vertically
huh, never noticed not that I was watching the tor ever

I really want to use diversanty ambusher with its meme zook but GRU is already so fucking good at that role there is really no point
and they are from the same spec too

Fuck your tank, fuck your backline, fuck your infantry and fuck your pick-up truck.

>>2086046
>and fuck your pick-up truck.
Well now you've gone too far!

>>2086046
There's no better feeling than when you make that breakthrough and put their entire backline to the sword.
Total support player death

Note to self: don't shoot into a building assault.

>>2086117
Assaulting with Troopers is certainly a choice

>>2086124
It worked until it didn't

>>2086124
I send my basic shit infantry like motopekhota into assaults when it is anything besides specialised anti-infantry squads
Though I do have 8 motopekhota and 8 motostrelki in my deck so I throw them away constantly

Another day.
Another retarded slamming NGWS squads into doorkicker roles so my basic ass infantry squads can eat them.

Anyway, SSOs. Close quarters or stand-off? I know these fill different roles really. But I struggle to feel the value of the stand-off loadout, the anti-infantry kornet seems like something a vehicle could just do and you lose the 30 second sprint and go from 4 smokes to 1. And pay 5 points for the privilege.

>>2085881
sead goes into the same tier as cruise missiles for helos
absolutely worthless

>>2086215
I use the standoff SSO and just sit them in a building, they will win a firefight between buildings easily. Just think of them as building clearing unit like the close range variant, except they clear buildings from a distance. But with the downside of not being decent at forest clearing since 3 of their weapons require the unit to be stationary.

>One retard spams nothing but planes
>One retard spams nothing but artillery
>Lose
A tale as old as time. "Support" players need to neck themselves.

>>2082429
Ive tried to take the Tulpan-pill but it feels like it needs too many stars to align to have the guided mortars work.

>recon with laser guidance far enough in front but not getting caught up in the fighting
>Tulpan up close but not at risk of being rushed and not too stationery to be bombed or artied
>enemy armor to approach close enough to be in mortar range but not so close to get blocked by buildings or disappearing into smoke/trees

Tried to do it in my last game but there was only one moment where i got a lasered shot aligned.. and the ifv was moving the whole time so it just ended up behind a building.
Feels like its just easier to drive an AT car or sneak a chopper angle in most circumstances.

MATV Javelins

>>2086285
Are the same price as Troopers but have better optics, the javelin has 1500m range instead of 1300, one more shot with that javelin, have a .50 cal sniper rifle with 1200m range, and can take a grenade launcher or M2 browning so they can still deal with infantry. Not to mention they are fast, dont rely on the added point cost of a transport to ferry them around

>>2086295
The reason that infantry is nice sometimes is that they aren't targeted by ATGMs, and tend to take longer for tanks to kill, in addition to having higher stealth. It's good to have a mix of infantry and vehicle ATGMs so you're not all countered by the same thing but generally low-durability ATGM vehicles like ATVs and tow Humvees are difficult to use effectively because heavier vehicles can shoot back at you and will probably win that shootout.

A 90pt M-ATV sounds cute until you realize 90 pts would also get you a 400 armour, 17hp Bradley with a TOW2b, autocannon and machine gun. The ATV occupies that awkward place where it overpays for survivability and is too expensive to be expendable, but isn't survivable

>>2084735
Well my meatwave deck is not going well. Delta Force can easily wipe the floor with 3 Motopekhotas at once. BMP2s get easily taken out by even shitty tanks. And while the infantry swarm can deal with 1 or 2 tanks, a big armored push will just roll over them because APS exists.
The T72's I have are not bad, but SEPv3s show up and will stomp them easily and I typically dont have all 3 out at once.

On the plus side when I have an entire company worth of infantry on the field at once, I always manage to get multiple squads to slip through gaps and they can usually take out something expensive before dying.

>>2086382
>BMP2s get easily taken out by even shitty tanks
I will clarify, the ATGMs go so fucking slow that a tank can destroy the BMPs before the ATGMs hit. I am obviously not expecting the autocannon to deal with tanks

What's the best plane loadout to rape entrenched infantry?

>>2086382
I would skip motopekhota and bring something else desu, maybe more AT or other weapon teams cause you cause you are getting run over with tank spam
maybe bring few of those cheap ATGM tanks instead of cheap T-72
those things can shit out so many ATGM at once, 2 of them is able to kill even the biggest tanks if they dont smoke
just spread pairs of them everywhere to support your infantries
sure you might not get a kill cause smoke but it will make anyone think twice to force push with their tanks when they see gazillions of ATGM flying at them
also why arent you using diversanty?

Do you prefer to use diversanty as informers or ambushers?

>>2086428
I really want to use the ambusher but GRU is in the same spec and is the GOAT of RPG squad in the entire game, sure ambusher has its niche with APS bypass launchers so its probably better to ambush IFV with
but informer is also the strongest 3 stealth squad in the game cause you have 4 people instead of 2-3, so if you duel with other lone sniper squad in the woods it should win most of the time
but if your other spec has regular sniper squad to bring then I guess you could use that for sniper role, so you can bring couple of ambushers or maybe
give GRU mixed loadout as well?

>>2086417
>also why arent you using diversanty?
I want laser designation, and the ambusher variant doesnt have a laser. Snaipery has the same 2000 optics and 3 stealth but is only 75 points instead of 90. Less armor and health, but thats fine since I put them on hold fire all the time anyways and just use them to scout and laser designate for my artillery.
>>2086428
Informers because they are 3 stealth and 2000 optics and have a laser designator. The only other units with that are VDV Snipers (dont use VDV) and the snipers from mech infantry (which fulfill the role for cheaper)

>>2084777
Nigger a push in WGRD required careful probing and prep work. Regenerating reserves enables snowballing. It also makes counter-battery almost pointless because that artillery-clogged deck can easily replace any guns you manage to destroy.

>>2086522
>Artillery-clogged deck
Doesn't work in high ELO. It'll just get stealthbombed.
>a push in WGRD required careful probing and prep work
Push in blind against my wall of ATGMs, MANPADS and 900-pen RPGs. I dare you. If you like Wargame so much, how about you fuck off back to it while letting us normal people enjoy the better game?

>>2086283
Its good for picking off units that are idling insight of your recon, things the enemy thinks is safe but you can pick off. The value of this vs anything else trying to do it is there's no defence, unless they realise wtf is happening and smoke or run(basically never do). Other methods provide a lot more chance for the target to live, APS will eat a round, auto smoke may save him for a while etc.
It doesn't work against an attack, especially a massed attack.

And he provides good damage vs infantry in buildings.

>>2086522
>It also makes counter-battery almost pointless because that artillery-clogged deck can easily replace any guns you manage to destroy.
He has to respend points on the artillery, which is points not spent on units.
He has to wait for the artillery to regenerate, which can take a while of freedom.
You earn kill points to score.
Killing your enemies is in fact the path to victory.

>Nigger a push in WGRD required careful probing and prep work
what makes that untrue here? Cause you can lose all your shit and wait 10 minutes then try again?
You don't win by failing pushes cause you blindly drove a blob into a well setup position.
That just feeds the enemy ground, therefore capture points, and kill points.

>>2086522
Counter battery is pointless because aim time is deliberately longer than salvo duration, so by the time you see something shoot it's already too late to order counter battery before it can just move to safety.
To kill artillery you need to use drones to spot it during downtime or have a plane already loitering to bomb it.

>>2086682
its basically like air tax
once you go higher enough people would stop trying to counter battery cause they think its pointless
just like how people would stop using helo/para drop opener making all the air tax a waste of time
so you can basically just shoot at the same spot for 2-3 times before they realized you haven't moved once then they will start shooting you
but desu instead shooting 3 targets with short salvo I usually do a mid/long salvo for line/creeping barrage instead

>>2086428
Informers are a laser designator squad for 90pts. Personally I don't love them. Snipers are largely cheaper and have more ability to impact the battlefield with their silenced sniper, but Informers only have normal-ranged guns and are too weak to fight in those ranges. If I just wanted a pair of eyes with a designator I'd take a sniper squad 100% of the time. But since Guards/moto has no sniper, Informers are a consideration there as a 'better than nothing' solution.

Ambushers are honestly pretty good. Their launchers are basically the Morskaya RPG-27 but with APS-piercing. A pair of them fit into a Bumerang and can mulch a lot of otherwise powerful vehicles very fast. I just think they're a little redundant in Guards/Moto because you already have so many top-tier AT squads between your GRU and Gvardii.
>>2086215
SSO are like the 3rd best CQC squad in RU. If you're in Guards, bring shotgun Ingenery. They are just better for cheaper.
Standoff SSO are underrated. They carry a sniper rifle, so functionally they offer the same combat power as sniper teams for the same price, but as an 8-man squad. The Kornet has enough pen/damage to seriously threaten transports and lighter vehicles, not just infantry. Against tanks it still eats APS charges at 1800m and best of all, deals as much suppression to a tank as a real atgm would. It makes these fucks super annoying to fight against.

I would only bring SSO in their CQC loadout if you really lack any other credible CQC infantry.

Whats considered harder, playing central or playing flanks?
Bar a few games where i forced back into a support role, ive always been on the sides.

>>2086735
Depends on map. Maps with wide areas away from the points are hard since you have guard them so nothing slips into your backlines. Often your teammates won't recognize this and complain you are doing nothing.

>>2086735
It should depend on the map but in theory more players will tend to concentrate towards the most impactful sectors of the map, ie either where the most capture zones are concentrated or where it's easiest for a breakthrough to happen that undermines the spawn road. And those areas with heavy close combat from multiple players are the hardest to play well in by far. It's not necessarily always the geographic center of the map.

The rest of the map can typically get by with 1 person per sector and your contributions are most ancillary unless you absolutely shit on someone and break through to the backline solo or feed to hell and singlehandedly give up the kill score for your team.

I say 'in theory' because in practice most players still can't read the map to determine where it's most important to concentrate forces and you can end up with two tank players pushing through dense mountain forests towards a single zone while your VDV/Mot guy is holding the central city with 4 zones solo. And like yeah, holding back two tank decks in a forest solo is nightmare mode but you losing your fight there probably won't impact the outcome of the game much. In top-level sweaty games they often completely ignore one side of the map during initial rollout in favour of concentrating force towards a more important sector.

>>2086735
personally I enjoy playing center more
its always fun urban map
with wide flank there are always that fucker who send troop hugging the edge of the map
if its real wild with forest something will always sneak through

>>2086735
>Play center
>Either right or left flank fails
>Now you get raped from that side

>Play flank
>Center fails
>They just beeline for your spawn instead of attacking your flank

And my absolute favorite:
>Play center
>Flanks do nothing
>All flank artillery fires on the center instead

>>2086786
>be centre with another random
>winning the 2v3 biggly
>right is failing
>one of them even quits
>move to help a bit, the situation actually recovers when one quits and the other guy gets more income
>look at the left
>hes getting spawn camped

It took 3 T-72B1s and a pantsir to roll over everything camping him on their own and take back all the points on the leftside in the third phase, while he tried to backseat game me from the chat and spawn more artillery. Thank god the other player in centre with me could hold ground outnumbered or we woulda been fucked that game.

>>2086797
>Play centre
>Right fails
>Go to right
>Right stops failing
>Left fails
>Go to left
>Left stops failing
>Center falls in the meanwhile
>Left and right retards yell at you for losing teh center

>baltiisk
>we lose initial fight for the H point over on the island
>2 players are feeding points trying constant heli assaults
>meanwhile I am getting rolled by 2 guys on center
>tell them to stop sending suicide missions to H, just leave it and fight for mainland
>>no
>I get rolled back to spawn because the 2 guys fighting me are coordinated
>they flank the other teammates on the mainland
>we get raped and sudden death in phase 2

>>2086856
Either you capture the island at the start of the game, or you ignore it for the rest of the game.

So, are these guys basically a cheap, steandoff version of Engineers Assault Troops?

>>2086877
They're basically crowd control.
Their small arms are ass and their launcher deals tickle damage so even despite having 10 armour they just lose most infantry shootouts, especially vs real CQC squads.
But 600m MG and 600m RPG means they will suppress most squads from outside of firing range. Their job is to be annoying while avoiding a proper shootout.

It's a decidedly niche squad, especially when Guards get Ingenery for 10pts more than are one of the best CQC beatdown squads in the game. But it's the cheapest squad that comes in BMPs and you can bring 8 of them so I guess you can use them as a deck tax to get IFVs.

>>2086856
Fighting for the island like a retard is the most fun part of playing Baltiisk.
When they add China we better get a map that's just a chain of disconnected pacific islands where you need heliborne/amphibious units to get anywhere. Fuck tank decks.

>>2086806
If you're winning your side hard enough to start looking elsewhere, it's better to try and break through to the rear, start killing the backline shit and cut their reinforcements, or wheel around and back-cap the zones behind them than it is to just to roam to a failing flank and start backfilling.

Reinforce success, not failure. If you leave your side, the player you were beating will regenerate his losses, ball up a tank blob and retake the ground.

>>2086910
not him but I just cant dare getting deck taxed that way
I rather get tax in something like using worse AGL/AA squad instead
like I'm using mech AA team to get gucci Bradley instead of mech rifleman cause that shit is so ass and I would never use them

>>2086856
>we get raped and sudden death in phase 2
GOOD
This is superior to dipshit players just dragging the game out by just camping on the last one or two zones and getting absolutely hosed on points.

>>2086911
I want to see something that is Florida Keys style which is just a bunch of islands connected by bridges. Let the tanks try and drive across narrow strips with ATGMs and cluster arty/planes waiting for them.

I want US navy
I want SEAL
I want DEVGRU
I want Tomcat
I want Super hornet
I want Crusader

So, why does the game seems to start with a bunch of frozen teamate units sometimes?

>>2086979
If you mean they are just sitting at the spawn road not moving, it is probably some retards that deploy that long range AA the moment it spawns. It blocks the road and every unit behind it cant find

>>2086979
If all of their units are frozen it can also be a connection issue.

is it just me or are these guys fucking useless?
should I just use them to laser shit?

>>2086932
Yeah I think this is the main thing holding mechanized back as a deck right now. There is not one single squad in the infantry tab worth bringing except the AA team. In concept their transports are inexpensive, cost-effective and spammable so their strength should be in numbers, but you either take Igla dudes and get 4 BMPs or you take a bunch of dogshit poop infantry as a deck tax so you can have a million BMPs and nothing worth putting inside.

Motorized has a similar issue except you have 3 GRU and 4 Diversanty in the recon tab and another 3 SSO to get all your Bumerangs. Motopekhota and Motostrelki are just so badly outclassed for their price you'd never willingly pay to field them.

>teammate uses a marker to bring attention to something
I check the marker and decide if I can help or not
>teammate spams marker 20 times for that issue
ignore, fuck you annoying faggot.

>>2087006
Same. You can have up to 3 pings if you are trying to denote an area or a cluster of interesting things. But more than that and I ignore.

>>2086992
They're the cheapest RU squad with a laser designator so yeah, that's basically their purpose. In a standing fight they're fragile and low DPS so they'll just lose, but they do have a pair of silenced 700m DMRs so they can ideally plink away at squads from a safe distance without revealing themselves.
Probably best to just disable their weapons and use them as designators.

another day, another goylemstani heli spammer buck broken by the Pantsu

lasering shit is too much micro. Frontline shit moves around too much and constantly loses LOS. Backline shit you have to spend 20 minutes walking a sniper team into place

>>2087013
Skill issue

>>2086992
the blur version is aright for fire meme
if your deck has no real sniper or you do but you want to turn your sniper into ambusher squad
the only reason to use that role is you play support heavy deck and need extra laser painters

As an ~1050 elo player I thoroughly enjoy being matched againstfull stacks of 1350-1400 elo.
Also, why the fuck is it not possible to send reports in the aftermatch screen.

>>2087071
It takes a fuckload of wins to reach 1100+, especially if you're just an average shmuck with a 50% wr.
For most of the playerbase doing a casual couple of matches a week, it'll take months to get there. The majority of folks above 1k right now are sweatstacks no-lifing the game hard, and since there's so few of them up there they constantly get forced to punch down by matchmaking.

Gonna start in a few, have a couple empty spots if anyone wants to play
https://share.brokenarrowgame.tech/invite/ew0KICAicyI6ICJ7XHJcbiAgXCJJbnZpdGVUb2tlblwiOiBcIlxcXCJabWhyTTNNd1p6UHU2bG16UlBValF5NktQN1lUdHp0OWp1WnJYa0paVit1dC9rUlA4WFpxRDBmYTJxKytTaHlxSXBYbmNhZnJJVFgzZlpLNnFhMnZRNDlKTm9zRzNoMXVxSVpwYzA3bGtVQzU5dXNzUjN5dzF1TnpjVHhPNXRHQWZPSEtCV0NRVXNjV3JSeDRzd2p0UWxjRW4rc2lrU3QwbjNCajAzTjFLMVREMXdqa3E1UTdIMUJoWGloeHl2c3F6MVNINEZzQU5TTVpsLys2YUREUFIxL2RYaVprMmdOYlxcXCJcIlxyXG59IiwNCiAgImxuIjogIkFyYXZhbidzIGxvYmJ5IiwNCiAgInVuIjogIkFyYXZhbiIsDQogICJ0IjogMTc1MTgzNzMwNw0KfQ==

>>2086992
The Bur loadout is not the worst recon assault unit ever. The launchers are good, reloadable, and they get a 30 second sprint. So they can kind of roleup other small squads really well, and vaguely provide a bit of extra DPS supporting other units, but ofc in real fights they will disintegrate. Depends what your other recon / infantry options are how useful they could be.
Laser designator loadout is fine for just getting a laser designator.

>>2087006
Sometimes the purpose is incomprehensible and I wish they would type something.
Had a dude spam ping my tanks that were watching over a point in the last few minutes of the game. We owned the point. They physically couldn't get to any of the points we didn't own. This point is certain to get hit a little by last minute push.
They were spaced out, in good sightlines, ready to jump on point and die if needed to keep hold of it. I really cannot comprehend wtf he wanted them to do that needed 20+ pings.

Anons, if you could've witnessed my match, it was utterly insane. It started as a grim, boring mirror match – US vs US. Then, we clutched the opening air battle, killing a stealth bomber and transport choppers, and began seizing ground. After, nuclear bomb obliterated my teammate to my right, then another one just 2-3 minutes later, and by the 10-minute mark, he'd been hit by three nukes. Five minutes after that, another nuclear bomb dropped right on me. They were losing points hard from those downed planes and couldn't establish any control, relying almost exclusively on infantry, some janky jeeps, and pathetic support artillery. The match saw a couple more nuclear strikes, with two final ones at the very end. It genuinely felt like a full-blown nuclear apocalypse. Is this kind of nuclear bombardment even a normal thing?

>>2086993
>There is not one single squad in the infantry tab worth bringing
You shut your fucking mouth. FAGOT is great.

>>2087181
Upgrade to Faktoriya is the only reason to take it, then they are decent