So, Israel DLC is dropping soon. >https://www.youtube.co

Not sure if this thread really belongs on /k/. Regardless, I'm still trying to get a feel for which decks I work well with. I've been trying variations of Blue Dragon decks so far, and I've found their mech to be pretty good at most things. As for current balance overall, I don't have many grips other than the obviously broken naval system and how annoying aa choppers on both sides are.

File: 1475272905286.png (685KB, 539x720px) Image search: [Google]

685KB, 539x720px

>>31520302
/v/ is too toxic
/vg/ it dies
only /k/ gives a shit about this precisely enough for an occassional thread to be worthwhile
it's on topic so long as we sperg over the weapons innit

Blue Dragons is pretty underpowered right now. Never play naval, use SPAAGs.

>>31520291
Spikes and Lahats

that's literally it, Spikes and fucking Lahats

could be worse.

>>31520291
I'm looking forward to it. I'm just happy the game is seeing development again, variety is always great for games like this and I've been having fun with the last nation pack.

>>31520363
apparently if you don't buy the Netherlands DLC, you won't get the Israeli Apache, its a bug but I wouldn't put miserly bullshit past Eugen tbqhwuf

>>31520379
I just wish they'd fix the American apache longbow so it doesn't ripple fire its missiles, wasting half of them. That's how the newer 16 hellfire apaches work, one at a time, but the longbow still fires them two at a time at the same target, and the second shot is almost always wasted. So annoying, if you don't want it to waste ammo you have to babysit it and turn its missiles off after the first one is off the rack.

>>31520291
nice
although I kinda wish they would make a campaign DLC, instead of just adding more nations for multiplayer

or even better, a (late) WWII mod
all you need is german tank models, couple of prop planes and towed artillery (easiest way would be having infantry with comically big guns)

>>31520291
Between red / blue, the balance is pretty damn good for teamgames.

Blue probably edges it out in 1v1 small scale games.

Israel will screw over everything. Basically, you gotta airspam them or die.

>>31520585
It never gets old to me playing multiplayer and having people bitch about how I use too much air power when I beat them.

I actually had one team claim that my team using a combined air offensive to completely devastate his ground units was cheating because they didn't put up any more than a token air defense and I should have recognized that and not attacked them with air units.

It's also always fun seeing the enemy team argue with each other after the match over who fucked up and didn't defend certain areas or put up enough SAMs or something. Literally had someone dismount his infantry en mass and try to walk them into a town I was holding and then started bitching at me when I just bombed them all.

>>31520801
>People fight like it's the first world war
>People then complain when you use the doctrine that the first game is literally fucking named after, airland battle
I don't get it.

>>31520395
It is a godsend against SovKor heavy tank spam on the other hand. Let it pop off two missiles at a tank, target the next 140+ tank and laugh as the opposition cries bitch tears because they forgot to bring a Tunguska.

isreal has some bullshit recon unit that has a god-tier atgm.

they also have a fucking full blown heavy tank as an infantry carrier

>>31520819
First game is European Escalation m8.

But yeah, people are dumb asf senpai

>>31520868
Second game then. Fuck. You know what I mean. One of the defining traits of the Cold War was the massive increase of importance of the air from being a thing that happens to the core of the entire battlefield. How could people bitch about the effective use of airpower? It's their own damn fault for not bringing some reasonable AA, it's not like it's hard to contest airspace in the game if you know what you're doing.

>>31520878
>tfw my USSR mech strat is just spamming 10 pt motostrelki everywhere and wherever they encounter resistance, buy the appropriate plane, starting with Su-27M.

Feels good man. Since your motos can see everything, you can snipe any AA they buy as well.

I'm still extremely disappointed with the naval combat in the game. It's what I was looking forward the most to with RD and it turned out to be utter garbage. No point in even buying tiny riverboats to go along and shoot at shit with grenades and autocannons

>>31520916
It's basically a game of who runs out of missiles or who masses fire enough to overcome CIWS first.

File: our hinds will block out the sun.jpg (599KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

599KB, 1920x1080px

>>31520819
>>31520878
I dunno what the mentality is behind it. But it's one of the most common complaints me and my buddies used to get. We'd be bitched at for 'spamming' air units, but it seemed that 'spamming' was code for any amount of air units that was capable of defeating their defenses.

People would put up a token air defense of one or two radar units and then allcaps bitch at us when we ran through SEAD to kill them immediately followed up with bombers to wipe their offensive off the map, or how any number of choppers more than 2 at a time was apparently cheating.

Just fucking scrubs who are expecting you to keep to the 'fair' houserules they've written in their heads.

>>31521145
It's one thing if you're cheesing it on game mechanics or maybe bugs that don't work as they should, but you're just effectively employing textbook air tactics that really should be kept in mind. I think a lot of these people understand 'fair' to mean 'playing the exact strategy and tactics I assembled this over-specialized deck for'. I mean really, you are providing the argument for air power's importance on the modern battlefield and they're acting just like those that reject technological advancement in real warfare.

File: shit....jpg (343KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

343KB, 1920x1080px

>>31520916
>>31520933
The problem is scale.

All the ranges of unit movement and firing is reduced in Wargame, but to a relatively even factor, but the naval combat is scaled down to a MUCH greater degree to try and fit it on the same size map and it just doesn't work properly.

The most success we've ever had with my team using combined land/naval is to have our best naval player wreck the enemy and make them panic enough to throw hundreds of points into a naval fight and hope they didn't realize that winning or losing the naval combat had absolutely no impact on actually winning or losing the match.

>>31520291
It's not too badly balanced, but the balance encourages stupid gameplay that just isn't fun.

>"Soviet Union employs large groups of cheap decent tanks"

So it says on the wargame website, but there are people who have played this game for a year and don't know you can make squads of units, because using this feature is playing the game wrong, you have to use singles for most things.

>>31521201
I tend to keep my tanks in units of 2, line infantry in units of 4 and vary everything else as needed.

>>31521340
I have every single non infantry unit in 1s.

In EE i had tanks in groups of 4, and basic tanks like M60s and T-55s were effective and useful units to get when used right.

>>31520853
America is kinda similar.

America doesn't have 'recon' units, it has 'hunter-killer' units, because Americans think that it's silly to send a unit into enemy territory to find enemies and then have someone else come kill them when you could just bolt Hellfires and TOW-2s to the unit you're sending out in the first place.

>>31521405
Well it's nice to have a recon who can protect itself.

File: Flickr_-_Israel_Defense_Forces_-_13th_Battalion_of_the_Golani_Brigade_Holds_Drill_at_Golan_Heights_(8)[1].jpg (3MB, 3872x2178px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3872x2178px

>>31520853

>they also have a fucking full blown heavy tank as an infantry carrier

That's true though.

>>31521405
It makes sense if you have the resources to do it. Why send one guy to point and another later to shoot when the guy that does the pointing can also do the shooting?

>>31521464

no, the tank in game is a Merkava with a full blown turret and gun, it carries a squad of inf too

>>31521574
Article said it's a 105mm gun troop carrier hybrid that will suffer by having very limited ammo for the main gun, also probably lowered availability.

Wargame is very unrealistic with how the troop carriers can always carry any squad of any size, you can pack a 15 man squad into the back of a bradley.

>>31521591

like i said, bullshit

>it's a whoever gets map position first wins episode

>>31521574

Alright I agree that's bullshit.

Been playing this for about 50 hours and all the decks I want are basically just themed, I don't bother with anything other than picking units that look like they're good. I want to min/max a red deck and a blue deck. Could someone post some of the best units that currently are around?

>>31521591
you forgot 15 komandosi in a fucking mi-2

>>31521617
No other IFV though, low ammo and probably nerfs your squad count per card, so I probably won't even use it. I'd rather bring tanks to be tanks.

>>31521623
I miss those days. Clown car infantry deployment.

I don't get the anger though, it's a game, there has to be some level of simplification for gameplay mechanics and that's what they're going for. I think it's something to be pointed out and understood but I don't get being mad about it.

>>31521637

im still mad about the Marder 2 having 10 front armour. fucking medium tank inf carrier

File: Alexander Alexandrovich Morozov.jpg (479KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

479KB, 1920x1080px

>>31521620

here take this deck, you can't lose

>>31521620
No such thing as a best unit. Synergy between your units is more important.

File: Screenshot_20161001-091840.png (1MB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1440x2560px

CAN'T READ ANYTHING

>>31521733
MAYBE YOU SHOULDN'T BROWSE 4CHAN ON YOUR PHONE

>>31521574
>>31521617
You guys realize that the Merkava has the engine in front, and by removing the ammo racks in the back, you can fit a bunch of infantry in there, so they can disembark through the rear door?

>>31521762
Just because it could POSSIBLY be done doesn't mean that it ever WOULD be done. It's simply not done, despite whatever people like you think.

File: Batman.gif (408KB, 500x345px) Image search: [Google]

408KB, 500x345px

>>31521762

No I did not realize that actually. Very interesting.

>>31521772
Merkavas rarely or never carry full ammunition load. There will always be space to carry the crew of another disabled tank or APC/IFV, since Israel is able to put out more tanks than competent tankers. The idea is being able to pick up a stranded crew and continue fighting with them in the back, without them being sitting ducks in their own knocked out tank.
>>31521780
The rear compartment of a Merkava holds spare rounds for the main gun as well as racks with cans of .50 and 7.62 for the M2 and FN MAG. It's rare that a tank would have all the modular racks in place, unless it's doing a long-duration attack that needs it to be able to fire off a lot of rounds without resupplying.

Obviously, if you take out all the racks to make it a temporary troop carrier, there will only be the loaded shell as well as 6? spare in the turret. I assume the one in WG:RD will have a severely reduced main gun ammo load as a penalty for carrying the squad.

>>31521810
>Merkavas rarely or never carry full ammunition load. There will always be space to carry the crew of another disabled tank or APC/IFV, since Israel is able to put out more tanks than competent tankers. The idea is being able to pick up a stranded crew and continue fighting with them in the back, without them being sitting ducks in their own knocked out tank.
Nope. If that is required, then they will dump the ammunition necessary, but until then, they carry the near enough the full ammunition load.

And THAT is the purpose of it existing. It isn't meant to carry troops. It never was. The ammunition load would be too low to even be useful.

>>31521810
>Merkavas rarely or never carry full ammunition load.

Except they do, and it was confirmed multiple times by Merkgunner before.

>>31521810
>I assume the one in WG:RD will have a severely reduced main gun ammo load as a penalty for carrying the squad.

It gets 14 rounds for the main gun, full ammo for the AGL and the MG, and pretty much only carries line infantry or specialist teams.

Given that you can get 15 point AGL weapon teams (equivalent to the Czech Granatomet) in the 80 point Merkava IIA with 18 front armor, an extra AGL and a cannon carrying any halfway usable amount of ammunition, it's a little disgusting.

Also, it's not prototyped so you can bring it in mixed mech decks.

>>31521941

>not proto

fucking french jews

File: 1437947276-merkava-iv-ammunition-stowage.jpg (839KB, 1152x2048px) Image search: [Google]

839KB, 1152x2048px

>>31521762
>bunch of infantry

I don't like this meme. You need to strip out ALL storage to accommodate, what, three or four people? It's obviously not going to matter in a game where you can fit fifteen Komandosi in an Mi-2, but it still irks me when people spout that shit.

It'll suck dick in game. At most it'll have two or three rounds for the main gun, just like how an IFV only has three ATGMs.

File: 1437947319-merkava-mk-iv-17-rounds-on-each-sides.jpg (2MB, 2581x1936px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2581x1936px

>>31521976
Looks snug to me. I'm sure you can fit an entire infantry squad with a full combat load in there and still find stowage space for fourteen 105mm rounds.

>>31521724
I hope you know, this deck is really bad

>>31521351
Airland was the best
RD is not so good

>>31522034
not if you're a fan of the kharkiv design bureau

File: 1474291544623.jpg (369KB, 1024x1027px) Image search: [Google]

369KB, 1024x1027px

>>31520291
I've always wanted to try this series, but it seems like a very high barrier for entry.

Where would I even start?

>>31522035
>ALB

Yes. I, for one, loved it when the entire UK national deck lacked a 2800m range AA option because reasons. ALB was shit and Eugen were absolutely clueless about game balance. It took *years* for Spetsnaz to be nerfed and MBTs to be buffed.

>>31522058
Watch youtube videos of decent players. Play the game for yourself. Know basic tactics.

>>31522090
Does it come with versus AI useful in-game tutorials?

Why no Hamas faction?

>>31522167
The AI is pure retard and it will not help you train against a real player.

File: Hamas-fake-tank.jpg (65KB, 598x340px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 598x340px

>>31522187
because cardboard

>>31521976
Pretty sure it's about 50% of the ammo racks to fit 4 people.

>>31520395
That's because AGM-114C is F&F, whereas the other Apaches use AGM-114A. The ripple firing is a nerf from a while ago, it's intentional. Quite handy for picking off heavy tanks from the front though

>>31522223
They took the notion of 'road wheels' a touch too literally.

>>31522035
I liked EE gameplay the most for it's time, but i played ALB the most.

>>31520291

Meh, that game is pretty dead. The balance is skewed to shit and the game has been "solved" the only people left are the ones who run hardcore meta decks and are tryhard as fuck.

Noone wants to run shit for fun like moto or airborne and actually enjoy the game.

Oh also naval has sucked dick since day 1.

>>31520291
I miss world in conflict. That game was so fucking fun

>>31522034
1v1 me right now bitch

As retarded as the AI is, I kind of wish Eugen would do more DLC campaigns. I just want a more refined version of RD's Asia campaigns in Central Europe.

>>31520853
the merkava transport comes woth reduced ammo so what

>>31520302
>Not sure if this thread really belongs on /k/.

It doesn't.

File: 1472626283974.jpg (23KB, 430x286px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 430x286px

>>31522569
Pls
I know how you feel, I wish people were more fun and if they were I wouldn't want more campaigns.

Also
>tfw you land marines in Korea and stick it sideways to the Norks and Chinks

>>31523198
Yeah, I just read through Red Phoenix and now I have a sudden urge to play through the Second Korean War again. Wish they'd do something with Taiwan as well, though admittedly it's hard to think of a good roster for them because it's all pretty much American hand me downs.

>>31522058
If you do get it, mention it in thread and I'll play a couple matches with you.

Taught plenty of new players how to play, once you get the basics down it's not that bad.

>Muh balance

You people realize that balance is stupid and unrealistic. In real warfare, you exploit anything that would increase your probability of success.

>>31520395
its like... a side-grade, if you will

sure, it wastes more ammo against anything a single Hellfire will kill

but you literally need to double-tap superheavies like the T-90, and in that case it's actually an OP hard-counter

>>31520410
>a (late) WWII mod
no, but I hope the next Wargame has a re-thought Cat system

Cat A - 1992 era
Cat B - 1985
Cat C - 1975
Cat D - 1962
Cat E - 1953

>>31520905
>Since your motos can see everything
what

>>31526724
I suppose that's fair.

>>31521724
this is the worst deck i've ever seen

>>31520334
Don't forget infantry in tanks.

>>31522058
Watch Razzman, Firestarter, Priyad, (and Steel Balalaika for Slavlols)
AI is retarded, but if you purchase European Escalation the campaign is actually alright, with the right amount of scripting of enemies to make things seem... sensible

stay away from 10v10 Destruction games, and low point tactical servers

4v4s will be good at first, then you work your way from there

>>31522187
>>31522223
>no SAA faction
fug

>no ATGM teams
>FIST teams instead have ATGMs

>>31526904
Grenade Launcher FIST teams outside of Czechoslovakia, and GL's out the wazoo on AFVs

bomb truck planes too

not too bad

is there going to be a half-assed Israel campaign against a Soviet/WP army on variations of the Korean Rocks map?

File: wic 2016-09-19 18-33-52-50.jpg (245KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 1920x1080px

>>31522470
pray for burger :D
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHKP6fQCxzU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRJvoztQIOQ

what went wrong?

>>31528512
>>31527057

>you will never ever get a sequel

also I don't get why infantry FIST teams can't have mortars in this game

>>31520291
>With Yugo you no-go

Dude man Yugo's are going to have the best Cat B T-72's in the game.

>>31522223
This was actually an IDF tank Hamas claimed to have captured.

Keep in mind that according to Hamas, it shot down 4 F-16's, 6 Apache's, sunk a missile boat, struck the Dimona reactor, and killed 1,000+ IDF soldiers (including 150 tank kills) in the latest conflict

>>31526761
>buy decent tank
>80 pts

80 pts is the equivalent of 5 motos. The idea is to just send them everywhere, including where he can't afford to be. Then you just use them as "recon by suicide" or go as far as you're comfortable with, set their ass down overwatching a road or something. Then you wait a bit so you can by the exact tools you need to always counter his shit. Works a bit for me in 1v1.

>>31530585
do you use MT-LB or BTR?

>>31530793
USSR MT-LBV, it's 5 points, 60kph offroad.

>>31520291
wish they did terrorist or vietcong decks/units it would have been intresting to see unconventional/gurella warefare units go against preofessional army

>>31530839
no
>>31530826
>>31530585
>>31520905
sounds like literally what every decent player does with Razvedka in trucks

why not have SEADable Perimeter surviellance recon units? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perimeter_surveillance_radar

>NAR-10 "Jaguar" (stantsiya nazemnoy artilleriskoy razvedki) - with 1RL-127 ("BIG FRED") Ground surveillance radar in a large rotating turret. Range: 16 km. Old NATO designators are MT-LB M1975 and MT-LB SON.
>SNAR-10M "Pantera" - upgraded, automated system with a range of 40 km.

>>31530875
>>31530839

imagine a suicide charge by 100 man team

or a boby trapped supply base or a suicide charge charge by a truck on your HQ

or better yet a forrest is covered by vietcong some infantry go in they don't see them they vietcong completly kill em all and you can't do anything with arty cos you will hit your own guys it would be crazy

>>31530886
>imagine a suicide charge by 100 man team
you can do this, especially with reservists
>or a boby trapped supply base or a suicide charge charge by a truck on your HQ
you can do this with empty supply trucks/landing helos next to enemy units; the former "switch sides" and your forces can shoot them, the latter get shot and explode right where you want them
>or better yet a forrest is covered by vietcong some infantry go in they don't see them they vietcong completly kill em all and you can't do anything with arty cos you will hit your own guys it would be crazy
you sound mentally retarded and 9 years old

>>31530883
because the way SEAD itself works lackluster at best.

File: tumblr_m0et4yyjHn1qfggsro1_500.gif (987KB, 500x245px) Image search: [Google]

987KB, 500x245px

>>31530893
>you sound mentally retarded and 9 years old

such savagery

was only trying to think of some thing new

>>31530875
>Razvedka in trucks
Yes, but no. Raz are limited in quantity, are 5 man and cost 15 points. Raz are strictly for observation.

But a moto squad? Shit, his job is to walk forward until he gets shot at. I.e.: The best kind of recon. If he dies? Another will take his place. Raz aren't so easily replaced.

File: 1382659268356.jpg (501KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

501KB, 1920x1080px

Good times.

>>31531277
all old maps aviable in RD when?

File: 20160928191625_1.jpg (489KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

489KB, 1920x1080px

>>31531297
Perhaps sooner than you'd think fellow stalker...

>>31531172
Razvedka are for getting discount helicopters.

File: image:313661.jpg (3MB, 2208x2398px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2208x2398px

>>31531277
Indeed.

Anyone have any kind of idea when the finns and yugos will drop?

Does anyone else like to pop up Hueys and Cobras up from behind cover suddenly?

Post decks

>>31521623
I always loved that - imagiend it as half of them being packedi n like sardines in a can and the other half hanging on for dear life on the outside.

>>31533664
Which USSR transport helos are worth getting? The mi24s look like trash but I don't know I'm not exactly experienced.

>>31533869
They ballparked it in the December/January range. There'll be fewer brand new units to design from scratch for those two, and since the modeling takes the majority of the time and effort that means they won't take too terribly long.

There's a new 10v10 map coming out between the two, which is less important for the map itself and more important because we'll definitely get a patch of some kind with it. Hopefully it'll have some of their redesign ideas for the Dragon coalitions in it.

Just chiming in to say how much fun this series is. I dearly wish there might be a sequel. Wargame: No Boats. I'd buy it for more maps and more SP alone.

Also is there anything better than watching enemy helos fly into a well laid AA defence then you turn all that radar dakka on and all those lovely expensive choppers fall out of the sky? Marksmen best men.

>>31535388
Mi-8MTVs
Ka-29s
Mi-8TVs
Mi-24Ds

MTVs have the same rockets the Mi-28 does. All the others have decent rockets and the Ka-29 has a minigun.

>>31535388
The Mi-24D is better than you might think. The gun had to get its damage cut by 50% because it was disgustingly efficient at carving through infantry and lightly armored targets alike. The rocket pods can stun just about anything in the game if you can get in range, the ATGMs are just extra die rolls for bonus anti-vehicle damage, they have resistance to infantry small arms thanks to their 1 armor, and they have 10 HP so they can't be reliably one-shotted by anything. And they are the fastest helos in the game. Put a card of Spetznaz GRU from the recon tab in there at veteran and use a couple early on to disrupt your opponent's deployment.

The Mi-8MTV is also a complete and total nightmare for your opponent. Those 4HE rockets do far more damage than you'd expect and you can get tons of the things if you want. Bring a card of command infantry in them and potentially even throw in another card of VDV '90 if you want more.

The Ka-29 has an excellent gun which has the downside of being fixed forward, not on a turret like the Mi-24D, but it gets more powerful rockets than the Hind and is a bit more survivable than an Mi-8MTV. Something of a middle ground between the two.

There really isn't much reason to use anything other than the Mi-24D, Mi-8MTV or the Ka-29 for transport helos. The others (Mi-24A and the Mi-8s with the inferior rockets) are all mid- to low-tier.

>>31538259
You are a good and smart person. Please talk more.

>>31538259
I wouldn't throw out all Mi-8s with lesser rockets. The one that has gazillions of them is a pretty good asset which shreds infantry and will stun everything else. I think that's just the Mi-8TV? I'm horrible with remembering which is which.

Which forums would anon recommend for me to really get my autism on about this game?

/k/ does it really well but it's too damn slow and infrequent. The steam forums as always are pathetic, reddit is embarrassingly attempting to call a wet fart byronic wit, and /v(g)/ might as well not exist.

I seek fellow grognards with pipes and battle-armchairs which have seen conflict in at least three wars across four theatres.

>>31538953
Eugen forums

>>31538572
>I wouldn't throw out all Mi-8s with lesser rockets
They're not bad, but Mi-8MTV is godlike. You recognize it by, as he said, 4HE rockets. That means tons of splash damage and potentially killing 4 squadmembers each hit. They are outstanding if you can get them to supoort a city fight or support from range without getting shot down.

>>31522047
Then where is the T-55 (closest to T-54) :^)?

Also T-34's is needed since kharkov baby.

Israel looks stupid powerful but I'm glad eugen is still supporting the game.
The update when Israel comes out will include an MG and IFV rebalance, among other things, like NK getting Chonma Ho V

>>31538259
Gorno 90 in Mi-8MTV is a good combo.
Even better is Czech Spooky Jedooki 90 in Mi-8MTV escorted by Mi-24 DHS

>>31542445
>gorno 90 still regular with STAT LMG
why