2 HOURS vs Mr.Nobody

[Krieger Blitzer]

1vs1 of complete MADNESS...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xeh81S-O2Q

Thumbnail

One of the MOST epic games I have EVER had in my entire Bk Mod history.

Enjoy!

[Viper]

immobilized

[Warhawks97]

I think you dominated the game very well in the first 20 mins of the game.

My questions.

1. Why never using snipers as a rear defense against enemie rushes and cap attempts
2.Why never getting more than one Puma at a time? Its quite usefull sometimes to have two of them. High flexibiity and you can do double attack, flanking moves or one in battle the other taking repairs. I did well having two of them.
3. Why going for a terror tiger on a urban 1 vs 1 map against inf doc which can actually lock down tigers by AT emplacments and attacking it with M6A3C bazooka and long tom. I would have never even considered building a tiger in such a game. During the time waiting for tiger and not spending res you have lost the controle of the battle. I just watched untill the tiger came now.
4. Use more AT squads in urban maps, esspecially when you have own tanks in town. The M10´s played with you. Minute 43 onwards is hopefully a lesson.
5. Rely more on speed rather than brutal armor and gun power. Panther and Puma is the best combo. You can perhaps send your Puma in first to detected ambushed. Better lose a Puma than a tiger+ the speed perhaps enables it to bypass enemie AT guns before they shoot or to reveal them at least.
6. Min 46: check point 4. In the open back your tanks with 50 mm AT and schreck. Light tanks are your biggest threat usually. You leave your vulnerable tanks too often exposed. Perhaps instead only having Panther and Tiger you could use Panther and stug. That would work much better. Where are your famous Stugs btw?

Lets be honest, that game is an example of axis Stereotyp. When Tigers and Panthers cant handle it, get bigger stuff. If they fail as well, the balance is broken. You did much better when you relied a lot more on Stugs and stuff. You did great games with them. Why didnt you do it now as well? Instead ST and KT on a urban map with rather low res with lots of squishy cheap and mobile units rather than big strongholds that need to be overruned.

[Krieger Blitzer]

1 - Snipers from my side weren't really an option due to the infiltration Ranger squads.. spotters keep dying and thus it's too risky to have a sniper.
2 - I've used more than 1 Puma at the same time, but didn't really focus on making many more of them for some reasons.
3 - Tiger1 probably wasn't a good choice on this game.. yes, but I think it wasn't a bad choice either.. just that I was too unlucky with immobilization.
4 - Ya, those M10 Wolverines were a pain... Some more AT teams could have been an option indeed.
5 - I noticed my Pumas were a lot easier to hit.. at least much more often than usual.
6 - Stugs.. hmm, well. idk.. usually I use a lot of Stugs when I am Blitz doc.. but somehow didn't manage to do the same as Terror, not sure why.

Thanks for the insights though.

Lets be honest, that game is an example of axis Stereotyp. When Tigers and Panthers cant handle it, get bigger stuff. If they fail as well, the balance is broken. You did much better when you relied a lot more on Stugs and stuff. You did great games with them. Why didnt you do it now as well? Instead ST and KT on a urban map with rather low res with lots of squishy cheap and mobile units rather than big strongholds that need to be overruned.

Well, if anything.. then I would say that this game is actually a very nice example how this "Axis stereotype" is in fact ineffective most of the times.
Thus, this explains why I wasn't happy when heavies became weaker on the beta versions, as it's not like heavy tanks instantly lead to victory...

[Shanks]

I think that with the bk doctrine you would have had a sure victory in 40 minutes

[Warhawks97]

1 - Snipers from my side weren't really an option due to the infiltration Ranger squads.. spotters keep dying and thus it's too risky to have a sniper.
2 - I've used more than 1 Puma at the same time, but didn't really focus on making many more of them for some reasons.
3 - Tiger1 probably wasn't a good choice on this game.. yes, but I think it wasn't a bad choice either.. just that I was too unlucky with immobilization.
4 - Ya, those M10 Wolverines were a pain... Some more AT teams could have been an option indeed.
5 - I noticed my Pumas were a lot easier to hit.. at least much more often than usual.
6 - Stugs.. hmm, well. idk.. usually I use a lot of Stugs when I am Blitz doc.. but somehow didn't manage to do the same as Terror, not sure why.

1. Ehm? Excuse me? That way you can say that you never use snipers whenever you face sneaky inf units (rangers, commandos, sabotage squad, stormtroopers). With all respect but thats nonsense. If you know what comes then you can adjust. In such cases i keep for example producing schwimmwagens (or bikes bc in late game the cheap cost of the bike is a big advantage over schwimm and better spotting range).
2. Puma is for me a key unit. I would never get anything bigger than a tank IV without having a Puma as well. I consider the Puma to be the best support (with inf) for heavy tanks.
3. Well, i think it was bc you have missed the point at which you could have increased the pressure massively with stugs and other unit spam (grens with stgs, Pumas, stugs) or to get the upper hand in the sniper duel and recon duel.
4. Thing is you usually have many schrecks and Stugs, just this time not.
5. Well, i couldnt see that claim to be honest. Tanks have afterall a very bad chance to hit a moving target which is the reason why M10 as Puma defense is kinda pointless. Currently 57 mm AT is the best counter to Puma vehicles.
6.Yeah, why?:D

Well, if anything.. then I would say that this game is actually a very nice example how this "Axis stereotype" is in fact ineffective most of the times.
Thus, this explains why I wasn't happy when heavies became weaker on the beta versions, as it's not like heavy tanks instantly lead to victory...

yes. Thing is that axis stereotype is just going big and that should be supposed to fail with all respect. No unit, no matte its cost, should be a lone rambo unit. And despite many unlucky moments with your tanks they still managed to whipe out stuff that together had cost more than one of these tanks. Let alone that Panther that stood there in front of enemie base and still shredding lots of enemie units.

I think that with the bk doctrine you would have had a sure victory in 40 minutes

Thought the same, even earlier. He could have used the res used for Tiger in an exzessive and aggressive Tank IV spam.

[Shanks]

Yes, bk doc is good in this map

[mofetagalactica]

You should stop playing that map, all the terrain and edge rows makes the tanks move slower than they actually are in that map. Thats why your pumas moves so slowly and get easier to hit.

[Krieger Blitzer]

I think that US infantry doctrine is simply unstoppable whenever the game goes over 1.5 hour(s), regardless of the map.
And not just because of this game, but I can tell that based on many games I've played with and against infantry doc.. just a flood of units.

[Warhawks97]

Flood of units? Well, inf doc doesnt have a unit costing 1000 MP so what else they shall do? You could have flooded the enemie with volks, Puma, Stugs and even schwimmwagens as well during the first part of the game.