RAF tanks

Do you have a balancing problem or do you want to make a suggestion for the game? You are at the right place.
User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 5161
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: RAF tanks

Post by Warhawks97 »

Krieger Blitzer wrote:
06 Jan 2022, 21:11
Redgaarden wrote:
06 Jan 2022, 20:05
Price difference is quite huge 3 28mm are cheaper than 2 tetrarchs.
I can't think of anything that the tetrarch can survive that the 28mm can't.
i think the difference is rather in armor type.

The scout car is a scout car that dies to HMGs.
Tetrach is technically a light tank that doesn't die to HMGs, not even with HMG AP rounds active.

I wouldn't be so sure about it. I think it uses Daimler armor and I think that one dies to HMG AP. Would need a test though.
Build more AA Walderschmidt

Consti255
Posts: 883
Joined: 06 Jan 2021, 16:12
Location: Germany

Re: RAF tanks

Post by Consti255 »

ehh, wouldnt say so. IIRC id get damaged by AP rounds.
Nerf Mencius

User avatar
CGarr
Posts: 676
Joined: 16 Apr 2018, 21:39

Re: RAF tanks

Post by CGarr »

I like the Tulip idea. Not sure how I feel about a flat buff to pen on tetrarchs, but I could see an ambush ability on Tetrarchs potentially addressing some of the issues with RAF's usefulness late game if the Tulip suggestion isn't implemented.

Suggestion:
===========
- For RAF, rename the global Littlejohn upgrade to "Light Armor Upgrade Kits".
- Set description of said upgrade to "Provides 40mm Tetrarchs and Daimler Armored Cars with Littlejohn adapters, giving them a substantial increase in firepower against enemy vehicles and tanks. Camo netting is also provided to Tetrarch crews"
- When the "Light Armor Upgrade Kits" is purchased, give the 40mm and 76mm (HE) Tetrarchs the Ambush ability. The 40mm Tetrarch gets the Little John adapter.
- When the "Light Armor Upgrade Kits" is purchased, Daimlers get the Littlejohn, but do not receive ambush capabilities (essentially leaving them unchanged).
===========



Counterbalance suggestions:
=========================
- If the global upgrade "Light Armor Upgrade Kits" is purchased, 40mm Tetrarch fuel costs are increased to 30 fuel, maybe 35(?).
- Post upgrade fuel cost for 76mm (HE) Tetrarch is adjusted as deemed fitting by devs, if changed at all. I'm leaning towards no change, but I am not opposed to an increase.
- Post upgrade MP cost for both Tetrarch versions is adjusted as deemed fitting by devs, if changed at all. I'm leaning towards no change, but I am not opposed to an increase.
=========================



Reasoning for 40mm Tetrarch change suggestion:
=========================================
It'd make 40mm Tetrarchs a bit more useful against mediums since they are small enough that hiding spots wouldn't be hard to find, allowing them to get some shots on rear armor of medium tanks/TD's, or to get a near-guaranteed quick kill on a light vehicle.

This isn't a massive buff, as their damage is still pretty low and they'd likely still have some difficulty actually killing a medium. Additionally, spotters and inf could negate this ability's usefulness quite easily, and it wouldn't be all that useful on the offensive.
==========================================



Reasoning for to 76mm (HE) Tetrarch change suggestion:
==============================================
76mm (HE) Tetrarchs would also benefit from having ambush. You can not always rely on exclusively on your inf on all maps to fend off Axis inf in the late game. Sure, RAF inf is extremely strong, but inf combat in general is quite reliant on the presence of cover, something which can be quite problematic when facing docs that have a lot of indirect fire options on maps where there is little cover available.

If you only have a limited number of places you can position your inf, the enemy player likewise only has a limited number of targets for preemptive shelling/bombing/strafing to take into consideration. This allows them to more easily push you out of a position without even entering direct combat, something which almost always heavily bogs down RAF players in the late game.

The 76mm (HE) Tetrarch having ambush would not rid RAF of this vulnerability (thus maintaining viability of intended counter-play options), but it would make things a bit easier on the RAF player late game, as they would be less vulnerable to arty spam.
==============================================

User avatar
idliketoplaybetter
Posts: 346
Joined: 26 Feb 2016, 19:55

Re: RAF tanks

Post by idliketoplaybetter »

Imo no change required. Tetrarch is a decent unit, that unless you are playing against PE does things very smoothly.

Why should Tetrarch be more usefull against Pz4? Who knows. It just as not effective as I want it to be, therefore let's make it stronger. Tiering and CP wise, what for would u need AT commandos and so on for the RAF then? Who knows.

Combination of AT boys and tetrarch works amazing most of the time against any ATscout car, funny thing though, I'd want to ask about 28mm Scout car maximum range?

How far can it shoot? Hmmm.

PE ATscout car is just silly by itself and make any unit (including sherman75) to a degree feel obsolete.., in some occassions.


Tulip is supposed to be the least intuitive solution to anything. Although, Splash no brainer 1click ability again requested to fix the game. Pls never add it.

The most agressive and fun doctrine for the CW will become only more passive with it. Hidden camo strong INF units around tank that shoot rockets and supposed to randomly crit-Imobilize panther : D

Then u blob rush into it and wow so good.
"You can argue only with like-minded people"

Consti255
Posts: 883
Joined: 06 Jan 2021, 16:12
Location: Germany

Re: RAF tanks

Post by Consti255 »

CGarr wrote:
13 Jan 2022, 01:24
I like the Tulip idea. Not sure how I feel about a flat buff to pen on tetrarchs, but I could see an ambush ability on Tetrarchs potentially addressing some of the issues with RAF's usefulness late game if the Tulip suggestion isn't implemented.

Suggestion:
===========
- For RAF, rename the global Littlejohn upgrade to "Light Armor Upgrade Kits".
- Set description of said upgrade to "Provides 40mm Tetrarchs and Daimler Armored Cars with Littlejohn adapters, giving them a substantial increase in firepower against enemy vehicles and tanks. Camo netting is also provided to Tetrarch crews"
- When the "Light Armor Upgrade Kits" is purchased, give the 40mm and 76mm (HE) Tetrarchs the Ambush ability. The 40mm Tetrarch gets the Little John adapter.
- When the "Light Armor Upgrade Kits" is purchased, Daimlers get the Littlejohn, but do not receive ambush capabilities (essentially leaving them unchanged).
===========



Counterbalance suggestions:
=========================
- If the global upgrade "Light Armor Upgrade Kits" is purchased, 40mm Tetrarch fuel costs are increased to 30 fuel, maybe 35(?).
- Post upgrade fuel cost for 76mm (HE) Tetrarch is adjusted as deemed fitting by devs, if changed at all. I'm leaning towards no change, but I am not opposed to an increase.
- Post upgrade MP cost for both Tetrarch versions is adjusted as deemed fitting by devs, if changed at all. I'm leaning towards no change, but I am not opposed to an increase.
=========================



Reasoning for 40mm Tetrarch change suggestion:
=========================================
It'd make 40mm Tetrarchs a bit more useful against mediums since they are small enough that hiding spots wouldn't be hard to find, allowing them to get some shots on rear armor of medium tanks/TD's, or to get a near-guaranteed quick kill on a light vehicle.

This isn't a massive buff, as their damage is still pretty low and they'd likely still have some difficulty actually killing a medium. Additionally, spotters and inf could negate this ability's usefulness quite easily, and it wouldn't be all that useful on the offensive.
==========================================



Reasoning for to 76mm (HE) Tetrarch change suggestion:
==============================================
76mm (HE) Tetrarchs would also benefit from having ambush. You can not always rely on exclusively on your inf on all maps to fend off Axis inf in the late game. Sure, RAF inf is extremely strong, but inf combat in general is quite reliant on the presence of cover, something which can be quite problematic when facing docs that have a lot of indirect fire options on maps where there is little cover available.

If you only have a limited number of places you can position your inf, the enemy player likewise only has a limited number of targets for preemptive shelling/bombing/strafing to take into consideration. This allows them to more easily push you out of a position without even entering direct combat, something which almost always heavily bogs down RAF players in the late game.

The 76mm (HE) Tetrarch having ambush would not rid RAF of this vulnerability (thus maintaining viability of intended counter-play options), but it would make things a bit easier on the RAF player late game, as they would be less vulnerable to arty spam.
==============================================
Cool idea,
i would like such Tetrach changes.
Nerf Mencius

User avatar
idliketoplaybetter
Posts: 346
Joined: 26 Feb 2016, 19:55

Re: RAF tanks

Post by idliketoplaybetter »

Yes, change it and then we will see even more stalling RAF against PE, therefore PE players will come and ask for something to counter Tetrarch.

It is all fine now, just the literal stage of headache since RAF was braindead doctrine. How long it passed since the recent Update? How many games you guys had with the doc? Any other significant units tried in contrary of what was used?
Yea..
"You can argue only with like-minded people"

User avatar
Krieger Blitzer
Posts: 4754
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, living in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: RAF tanks

Post by Krieger Blitzer »

Not in favor of allowing camo for Tetrach, and RAF is now fine.. just 1 Tulip or 2 could be nice for this doc.

User avatar
Redgaarden
Posts: 479
Joined: 16 Jan 2015, 03:58

Re: RAF tanks

Post by Redgaarden »

Yeah, not a big fan of either stealth nor tulips.
Rifles are not for fighting. They are for building!

tarakancheg
Posts: 120
Joined: 26 Aug 2020, 22:19

Re: RAF tanks

Post by tarakancheg »

Redgaarden wrote:
13 Jan 2022, 22:35
Yeah, not a big fan of either stealth nor tulips.
+1
Camo HE tetrarch will be a mobile leig basically and camo little John tetrarch won't even pe mediums and get 1-shot most of the time. It's only purpose is to be a HE vehicle killer in a backline.
For killing medium tanks RAF has achiless (which is awfull) and 4 at squads against any vehicle. RAF does not lack AT, it lack options against bunkers with and aa guns and to counter that field gun may be given "fire at defences" ability (like 105 Sherman). Tulips are RE exclusive thing and I don't want to see it in any other doc tbh because it had 100% pen against any tank and is an ultimate weapon that can engage ANYTHING except air of course for a cheap price of 75+35(?) For each shot.

User avatar
CGarr
Posts: 676
Joined: 16 Apr 2018, 21:39

Re: RAF tanks

Post by CGarr »

Love it when nobody (except presumably Consti) reads the reasoning for my suggestions...

I never said RAF (in its current state) is lacking options to kill mediums.

The thread topic is RAF tanks, so I made a suggestion to change a couple RAF-specific tanks to make them more useful late game with the tradeoff of increased cost. The change I suggested can be completely ignored by just not purchasing the global upgrade, or not spamming tetrarchs if you do purchase the upgrade (it wouldn't affect daimlers, just use daimlers if you really need cheap 40mm car).

Tetrarchs have such little impact on the game that I guarantee most players who can win with RAF can do so without using tetrarchs (aside from the free ones that come with the heavy glider).

The 40mm Tetrarch is relatively useless late game since it gets smacked by armor and inf with ease, you're just wasting MP most of the time if you drop behind enemy lines and trying to push through the frontline with a tetrarch is just donating vet to your opponent unless they are already losing hard.

You are acting like the ambush ability can only be used as an offensive tool (to get the first shot on an enemy tank), but it can just as easily be used as a defensive tool to hide from enemy units, especially on such a small tank. Let the threats drive by and wait for the high value squishy targets or for an opportunity to take rear shots.
tarakancheg wrote:
13 Jan 2022, 23:44
RAF does not lack AT, it lack options against bunkers with and aa guns and to counter that field gun may be given "fire at defences" ability (like 105 Sherman).
I wouldn't mind this idea, although as far as I've seen most axis players tend to use AA vehicles, not emplacements. Not sure how useful said ability would be against PE 20mm truck spam or WH AA tanks / 20mm cars. If we want to address this issue, why not make a thread specific to said issue?

User avatar
idliketoplaybetter
Posts: 346
Joined: 26 Feb 2016, 19:55

Re: RAF tanks

Post by idliketoplaybetter »

Your Reasoning has no presupposition of why Said unit must be changed in a first place.
Just - how we change it and hopefull result.
Sake of the change is to make Said unit just stronger with New Strategical impact ability (camo).

No situation when/how anything goes wrong (aside of saying blant Late game sucks for Tetty).
In your latter post you hopefully add up on topic with 20mm Car spam and so on. Which again, Initial Tiger's post was about lack of breakthrough capabilities for the Doctrine itself.
Add on this that you've said urself that RAF has no issues with AT..(That was exactly Markr response to initial post of tiger).

If you want critical response to non-sense changes, okay.

Why give camo to just Tetty? There are plenty of same scale units that are waste in late game and could have funny 5 seconds in camo before diying. Why just Tetty?

How do u counter Tetty with Axis? As this was initially debated be vsPz4 issue - let's give Pz4 recon ability or better aiming/crit chance against de-camoed Tetty.

Unit that already works and has it's situational place with a tricky upgraded crit chance cannon, somehow appeared to be problematic.
But how, I don't know.

I am constantly asking What was the idea/reason behind the fkn post at all? Some units late game are left behind, it's nature of the game.

See watch:
CGarr wrote:
14 Jan 2022, 06:11
The 40mm Tetrarch is relatively useless late game since it gets smacked by armor and inf with ease, you're just wasting MP
"The Pz4 is relatively useless late game since it gets smacked by armor and inf with ease.."
"You can argue only with like-minded people"

User avatar
Krieger Blitzer
Posts: 4754
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, living in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: RAF tanks

Post by Krieger Blitzer »

The idea to add camo for Tetrach might sound creative (which i don't deny is a cool idea) but it might also be an unnecessary buff, although i actually wouldn't be frustrated to see it being implemented at all.. tho, just not in favor.

Also, i think RAF is doing fine vs emplacements thanks to the 75mm howitzers (surprisingly a single barrage is enough to destroy a flak88 emplacement with no improved fortifications unlock) but could be struggling a bit vs bunkers.. nevertheless, i think now SAS (or some other Commando units) can get satchels? The TNT also one-shots bunkers, iirc.

User avatar
idliketoplaybetter
Posts: 346
Joined: 26 Feb 2016, 19:55

Re: RAF tanks

Post by idliketoplaybetter »

How is it creative again?

Let's try to count how many early-mid game CW-RAF would have in non-imaginery game.

ATrifle squad - 360degree camo.
Commando squads of varius type.
57mm Truck.
57mm ATgun.
2inch mortar.
MG squad camo.
Dingo camo ability.
Piat.

All build either within 1st truck right on, or 2nd truck preety cheaply. You may seperate those by AT needs or not by ur will, obviously creative solution.
I would not even start anything on the Price changing. Making Tetty + upgrade more expensive would only vanish it from the choose list. Cause why?

It is underpowered compare to 57mm Truck in camo and won't be needed since mid-late game blob with AT is there.

But again, I am not even arguining this by itself, just Why? How much more midgame Camo gameplay is required?
"You can argue only with like-minded people"

Consti255
Posts: 883
Joined: 06 Jan 2021, 16:12
Location: Germany

Re: RAF tanks

Post by Consti255 »

Late game = midgame ok. (-:
You should read, the reasoning.

Dicky said it now the 3. time. It is an idea to make tetrachs in the later states valid.

Why ? Its a core elemt of the doc dropping gliders in enemy territory. Aswell as troops and tanks.
So it changes the fact, that the heavy glider isnt just a mobile factory (which CW already has 4 playing as RAF), and the Tetrachs get worth dropping even in later stages with the possibility to upgrade. You are NOT forced to upgrade it if you are happy with your midgame camo solutions.

Why bothering about a change, that doesnt affect your gameplay ?
Nerf Mencius

User avatar
idliketoplaybetter
Posts: 346
Joined: 26 Feb 2016, 19:55

Re: RAF tanks

Post by idliketoplaybetter »

That is exactly the point, realistically speaking there will be no place for it in the late game and this option will be used within Early-midgame stages. This changes won't affect anything but.., early and mid.

Again, CW has units that fill the role of mid-late game AT capability - Achilles and variety of ATguns + 57mm Truck. Rocket plane. Ambush ATsquads.

Why Tetty?

You are missing the point once again. There is no such thing as change without affect of gameplay, this unit is not in a vacuum.

What it will cause for Axis playstyle? What to counter it with? How strong in a "late game" it must be? Why is it supposed to be strong in a late game.., at all.
"You can argue only with like-minded people"

Consti255
Posts: 883
Joined: 06 Jan 2021, 16:12
Location: Germany

Re: RAF tanks

Post by Consti255 »

so you mean a camoed 40mm wont pen stubby HE panzer 4s or PV F2s? Which are arguebly the best solution against Commandos?
Or maybe Hunting down AA and not costing you upkeep after yoo did that ?

Idk why you always say "i Am MiSsInG tHe PoInT".

There is no point, its a solution against medium spam, while keeping the doctrine to its core, increasing the reasoing behind a upgrade which is rarely purchased and a doc specific unit.
Which in my eyes is a banger.

Axis playstyle effect? Simply use infantry? Bigger tanks?
wait, SPOTTER ! that sounds like a good solution, they are even unlimited now. Maybe AA aswell for shooting down the heavy glider before it drops.
Nerf Mencius

User avatar
idliketoplaybetter
Posts: 346
Joined: 26 Feb 2016, 19:55

Re: RAF tanks

Post by idliketoplaybetter »

Consti255 wrote:
14 Jan 2022, 13:14
so you mean a camoed 40mm wont pen stubby HE panzer 4s or PV F2s? Which are arguebly the best solution against Commandos?
Where did I say that? You have full 2nd truck of tools against it PZ4 and so on already, aside of simple fact, that Tetty can hit and dmg it those even now.
Consti255 wrote:
14 Jan 2022, 13:14
Or maybe Hunting down AA and not costing you upkeep after yoo did that ?
- no clue what it is about at all. How Tetty aint capable of that now?
Consti255 wrote:
14 Jan 2022, 13:14
There is no point, its a solution against medium spam, while keeping the doctrine to its core, increasing the reasoing behind a upgrade which is rarely purchased and a doc specific unit.
- What spam? Again, plenty of unit's to deal with anything already. It is simply Tetty chosen for dmg upgrade, especially that even you all agree that RAF has no AT issues.
Consti255 wrote:
14 Jan 2022, 13:14
Axis playstyle effect? Simply use infantry? Bigger tanks?
wait, SPOTTER ! that sounds like a good solution. Maybe AA aswell for shooting down the heavy glider before it drops.
- Cringe
"You can argue only with like-minded people"

Consti255
Posts: 883
Joined: 06 Jan 2021, 16:12
Location: Germany

Re: RAF tanks

Post by Consti255 »

Consti255 wrote:
14 Jan 2022, 13:14
so you mean a camoed 40mm wont pen stubby HE panzer 4s or PV F2s? Which are arguebly the best solution against Commandos?
idliketoplaybetter wrote:
14 Jan 2022, 13:24
Where did I say that? You have full 2nd truck of tools against it PZ4 and so on already, aside of simple fact, that Tetty can hit and dmg it those even now.
Are they dropable and a RAF doc specific unit? And are a unit that gets upgraded in later stages in HQ truck ?
Consti255 wrote:
14 Jan 2022, 13:14
Or maybe Hunting down AA and not costing you upkeep after yoo did that ?
idliketoplaybetter wrote:
14 Jan 2022, 13:24
- no clue what it is about at all. How Tetty aint capable of that now?
read further. :)
Consti255 wrote:
14 Jan 2022, 13:14
There is no point, its a solution against medium spam, while keeping the doctrine to its core, increasing the reasoing behind a upgrade which is rarely purchased and a doc specific unit.
idliketoplaybetter wrote:
14 Jan 2022, 13:24
- What spam? Again, plenty of unit's to deal with anything already. It is simply Tetty chosen for dmg upgrade, especially that even you all agree that RAF has no AT issues.
Reason why this thread was made?
Consti255 wrote:
14 Jan 2022, 13:14
Axis playstyle effect? Simply use infantry? Bigger tanks?
wait, SPOTTER ! that sounds like a good solution. Maybe AA aswell for shooting down the heavy glider before it drops.
idliketoplaybetter wrote:
14 Jan 2022, 13:24
- Cringe
You asked it, you got it.
Nerf Mencius

User avatar
idliketoplaybetter
Posts: 346
Joined: 26 Feb 2016, 19:55

Re: RAF tanks

Post by idliketoplaybetter »

Consti255 wrote:
14 Jan 2022, 13:31
Consti255 wrote:
14 Jan 2022, 13:14
so you mean a camoed 40mm wont pen stubby HE panzer 4s or PV F2s? Which are arguebly the best solution against Commandos?
idliketoplaybetter wrote:
14 Jan 2022, 13:24

Are they dropable and a RAF doc specific unit? And are a unit that gets upgraded in later stages in HQ truck ?
Why should Tetty be upscaled further? Is it incapable of doing it's job now? Cause it completely fine. If not, there are alternative units to confront anything early-mid game Axis can give.
Consti255 wrote:
14 Jan 2022, 13:14
Or maybe Hunting down AA and not costing you upkeep after yoo did that ?
idliketoplaybetter wrote:
14 Jan 2022, 13:24
- no clue what it is about at all. How Tetty aint capable of that now?
read further. :)
Consti255 wrote:
14 Jan 2022, 13:14
There is no point, its a solution against medium spam, while keeping the doctrine to its core, increasing the reasoing behind a upgrade which is rarely purchased and a doc specific unit.
idliketoplaybetter wrote:
14 Jan 2022, 13:24
- What spam? Again, plenty of unit's to deal with anything already. It is simply Tetty chosen for dmg upgrade, especially that even you all agree that RAF has no AT issues.
Consti255 wrote:
14 Jan 2022, 13:14
Reason why this thread was made?
Yes, false presupposition to get Firefly - transformed into Tulip rockets or alternative Tetrarch upscale. And that is..no backstory for why? No explanation because, just "The more I think about it".

How are these even laid together as a logical conclusion on the thread.
"You can argue only with like-minded people"

Post Reply