/sdg/ - Steel Division General

it's good, but what the fuck is up with the filters?

Friendly bump.

Can you play this already?

>>173254297
It's in (((open beta))). You can play it early, with a limited content roster, if you pay full price up front.

>>173255458
>not playing the beta and refunding when it releases

File: JSdia050.jpg (4MB, 5000x3352px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 5000x3352px

>>173257523
But it's a fun game though and
>ww2 wargame with an interesting way of balancing the lack of helos/atgm/AA missiles
Despite the lack of freedom to completely move around in the map, Recon units are actually a lot more useful because the units really are almost blind because >lmao shit optics

I wonder if eugene will release another wargame under their own name like previous games or if this is what they will be considered their next big release under paradox.

>>173239743
The German battlegroup with the firefly is so fucking op. The same tank microing from wargame is in here and you can min max the fuck out of it in phase A and no at gun or tank is gonna deal with it.

File: 1434122971.jpg (98KB, 588x663px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 588x663px

I've played three games of this and I am more or less ready to refund. Main points:

> The models and effects. They're just ugly. In Wargame I always liked looking at them during lulls in the fighting, in this I very much stay away.
> The decks. It's just 1/2 units per 'Phase' and most of the units are the same. Sure, it's WW2 so it did not have that much variety, but they could have at least tried. Give different units different specialties or something, I don't know. Maybe this little sub-unit of Panzer Grenadiers is brand new and shit, and this one has experience from the Ostfront and is better at fighting tanks, or anything.
>All the battles I've played seemed to rest mostly on Phase A. Very few comebacks were made in Phase B let alone C.
> Recon seems superficial. Most of the actual fighting seems to rely on having a good Field of Vision, not actually going out and scouting. I don't know if this is because I had enough of it for the whole game but I never lacked for it. Also I joined one 10v10 and literally no one but me bought more than one recon card.
> AA seems worthless. The sky lit up with all sorts of tracers but the Enemies JU-88's just flew by, twice. Taking zero losses. Something equally stupid in Wargame would have resulted in him losing all his planes.
> Why are my tanks being forced to withdraw by some shit artillery. Artillery seems way too strong. My calliope basically stunned/pinned an entire player's army and I rolled in to destroy all of it. He had no chance at counter-arty because I just moved my Calliope.

Overall it feels like a slow paced less varied Wargame. I like the way you can see what your units will do/what path they'll take and the little visibility checker but apart from this I will likely refund the preorder pretty soon.

File: 1476416356366.gif (1001KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

1001KB, 640x480px

Pretty shit compared to Wargame Tbh
>mfw massing invincible jumbos

Also the planes look like they are always at roughly 30m of altitude

File: 1475081575102.jpg (23KB, 258x245px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 258x245px

>mfw you can fly a plane across the width of the 10v10 map at phase C and it won't get shot down
How the fuck was this not caught in early testing?

File: 1435334372778.gif (523KB, 374x354px) Image search: [Google]

523KB, 374x354px

Wargame Planes
>Make sure no hecking SPAAGs lurk in the back
>Make sure you have a target that justifies sending in an actual plane
>Make sure you can support the plane
>Send in SEAD and hope the enemy is too stupid to turn off radars
>Send in ATGM plane for that ONE shot at the enemy Superheavy
>ATGM misses
>Single North Korean infantry shoots plane down with lucky MANPAD shot

Steel Division
>Buy Ju88's
>Brave Hanz flies in
>Bounces off AA rounds back into the AA guns, killing the crews
>Flies at treetop level in 2 engine bomber to show off his Aryan courage
>Eats Flak for breakfast
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1teoC2aMVtY
>Carpet bomb half the map

>>173239743
>matchmaking
>mods
>proper campaign
but
>ww2
>no vehicle HP (wtf?!)
>can't heal infantry
>noob-friendly simplifications that are just hidden stats

fucking eugene

>>173257523
this. just play it now, refund in a month

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Germans get a firefly in phase A
HOW IS THIS FUCKING BALANCED

>nothing but wehraboos taking the firefly deck
>cant even play Germany because everybody switches to Germany because MUH WEHRMACHT
>Germans have unkillable without AT guns panthers
>Germans have a 17 AP ALLIED TANK at the start of the fuycking game that has more armor than anything besides Infantry can pen

Why do people join team games than proceed to not help team mates or get mad when helped? Just stay in 1v1

>getting wrecked by Phase A German captured firefly because for some reason that was a good idea
>teammate is pushing ahead to my right
>he has perfect chance to flank it
>tell him to flank
>he tells me to deal with my own problems
>Late Phase B
>finally killed Firefly after losing most of my units
>Proceed to push and pass my dick teammate from earlier
>start encircling his enemies
>HEY FUCK OFF THIS IS MY FRONT

Also I have literally never seen Germans lose

Navigating hedgerows with vehicles is a fucking chore.

The unit diversity is what kills this game for me. In Wargame I can select a dozen different units for eveyr category; some are bound to be worthless but hey.

Meanwhile in this you basically end up making the same "deck" every time, with maybe the exception of a slightly different variant of a Tier B tank.

I'm pretty sure that they went for 'divsions' instead of nations so they could be lazy cunts and not have to design entire nations; they will i
nstead release units piece by piece as DLC.

As someone who has had his games ruined by paradox once before I am scared as to how they will ruin this. And I know they are only publishers, but they will still have shitty influence over Eugen.

>>173278982
More like this way they can balance the damn game. The kind of decks that you have to play if you tried to play ALB or RD remotely seriously were fucking sickening.

I still remember ALB and the meta where NATO reservist spam made PACT unplayable, two guys managed to ALMOST make it work. But that's it, and they were pretty much the best players in the entire game.

>>173280613
>balance
>Germans get a captured Firefly in phase A
>can one shot everything until phase C
>only thing it cant one shot is Jumbos, which are extremely limited
>by that time they can get Panthers anyways

>>173280759
From the games I've played the firefly is the only thing that stops them getting utterly rolled over in phase A. It's too cost efficient but I think it's something they do need.

And hopefully when more decks are in the various matchups can start to balance out a bit better.

>want to refund this trash
>already played 4 hours

File: 88s in action.webm (1MB, 600x338px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 600x338px

>>173271187
Its almost as if WW2 AA was significantly less effective than cold war AA.

>>173288253
desu the AA does more to prevent attacks than it ever did in ALB/RD

>>173272907
Brits get AVRE in phase A. Clapistan get shit tons of Jumbos (21 armor) in phase B and C

Finally got a chance to use flamethrowers.

incredibly disappointing.

File: 1405614121499.jpg (150KB, 714x476px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 714x476px

>play as german infantry
>hold the town in phase A and do decently
>phase B and C hit
>mfw the American blitz hits
>mfw Jumbos eating my anti tank shots
>mfw m4A3s
>mfw crocodile churchills

>>173305514
At least if your SS you can somewhat hold it off with Fireflies. Luftwaffe gets jack shit.

File: 1477283462571.jpg (154KB, 750x714px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 750x714px

>>173305767

>Luftwaffe gets jack shit.

that's who I played as. Luftwaffe has 0 anti tank capabilities to counter jumbos unless you control the towns and forests and even then you will still get thoroughly fucked.

>everyone else picked SS and I was wondering why they would do that
>game starts and at phase B the rape train comes and my marders and AT guns do nothing
>mfw the rape train didn't stop

File: 1406313879101.jpg (259KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 1920x1080px

>>173305960
I know that feel buddy. The best counter I've found for Jumbo spam as Luftwaffe is 88s and FWs. The FWs almost never outright kill the Jumbo, but they'll force a retreat so you can reposition the 88s.

>>173305960
Right now a couple things are really making the jumbos too good.

The maps are just a bit cramped for what people are doing so they get to sit in nice corridors and just eat shots to the face and 2, there's a lot of stuff missing, I think when more divisions with more options for dealing with them come out they'll be a lot less of an issue as their guns are shite.

>>173272907
Firefly only has AP, meaning they can't shoot AT guns. Huge weakness if you ask me.

So it this game really worth buying at 49.99$? That seems really a lot for a beta. I don't care much about the graphics (gtx 660 here anyway) but more of a interesting gameplay. Is it arcadey game? I like Graviteam games and MoWAS so things like HP for vechicles and no realistic penetration/angling mechanics are a minus too.

File: Untitled.png (83KB, 956x850px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 956x850px

>>173308047
Move to third world countries :)

>>173308047
> Is it arcadey game? I like Graviteam games and MoWAS so things like HP for vechicles and no realistic penetration/angling mechanics are a minus too.


due to the new steam things you could buy the game and try a skirmish mode and see the very basics before refunding.

personally I'd say it's worth but I have an inherit bias as I have played all of the Eugen games since RUSE. and RTS games like this are so rare that I have nothing really to compare this one too except the predecessors of Eugen Systems.

>>173308363
I have Wargame: European Escalation by Eugene. I haven't played it that much because I've stupidly bought it long after it was released and multiplayer was dead already but how much would you say Still Division is simliar to it in terms of gameplay?

>>173309080
a lot of the basics are pretty similar but more refined in SD, and obviously more WW2.

>>173283605
Pretty sure you can raise a support ticket and get it refunded no matter time played due to it being a pre-Order

All of these fucking retards complaining about how specialized divisions aren't good in every catagory.

Whats OP, is it german fireflies or fucking jumbos or arves?

They havent even released a 5th of the divisions that are going to be included in the full release but people here seem to disregard that.

>>173311087
Really?

>>173280613
>More like this way they can balance the damn game.
They learned how to balance the game in wrd after they started listening to players and looking at tournies. If they just figure out how to deploy patches more often than twice a year, we could have both lots of units and balance.

>no one posting decks

>>173316013
I mean with the tiny amount of choice it's not like it matters

>>173316380
It matters whether you have one Jumbo or six :^)

>>173239743
Will the beta run up to launch or will it end soon? Been wanting to buy it but see no point if it's just a few days of a buggy beta.

>>173316741
It's far from feature complete. No tutorial or single player campaign yet. Only 4 divisions (like nations in Wargame) present in the game.

>>173269845
>recon
absolutely essential, their view distance is way higher than other units

Anyone feel the maps are too cramped? In Wargame it's few units vs few units in any given area of the map, but here it's just giant blob vs another giant blob.

I-i don't really like it.
>The graphics look like shit, looking at the game is fucking depressing.
>vehicles are FUCKING SLOW and it takes all of the pleasure of armoured combat away from the game
>pure RNG tank combat instead of health
>can't replenish troops or fix vehicles
>infantry are a lot better
>AA does literally nothing half the time and if you get too close to the other guys spawn you just end up getting bombed to shit because your planes can't get there fast enough.
>deck building may as well not even exist since there's so little choice
>none of the tanks can fire on the move for some reason
>UI less clear than RD
>madmat is still a cunt

It's pretty ok. i was really looking forward to this game though.

>>173317273
I agree, it's telling that even phase A is so static despite starting with half as many units as in wargame.

though they gonna keep doing modern warfare, so sad, guess ill never see the urban battle.


>>173317728
>pure RNG tank combat instead of health
blimey, is this game even worth the money or our time?

File: SteelDivision_2017-04-07_12-53-37.png (2MB, 913x783px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 913x783px

>Spend 25 minutes fighting phase A firefly that refuses to budge
>Spend 10 minutes hunting German units that are behind my lines racking up thousands of points
>Finally kill the Firefly
>Finally kill those units
>Finally with the use of two jumbo's encircling and with a P47 helping kill the Panther
>Push the Germans all the way back to the Saar
>Game lost by 70 pts

It feels like 70% of the game is decided in Phase A. You can absolutely crush the enemy in Phase B/C and still lose. Units that are cut off really shouldn't generate that many points.

>bombers remove all my AT guns under the fire of 5 bofors and 2 tri posten
Epic.

>>173316741
It runs up to launch. It's really just early access.

>>173318541
Get some towed AA; they can't really kill things but they rack up suppression very quick so they're very good at stopping enemy movement. I've had two Bofors routing two Panthers.

>dead
Well that was short. Farewell Steel Division, you were too shitty.

>>173318541
How did they manage to make it look worse?

>>173318406

It's not any more RNG than in Wargame, they just dropped the health bars following the logic that tanks didn't usually get hit several times by shells which penetrated their armour and keep fighting, so now it's OHK

>>173327412
>they just dropped the health bars
WAAA we're so original we shit on decades old conventions

I think the AA/Plane balance is alright considering how planes are a lot less dangerous to ground units than in Wargame. In Wargame a plane could clear an entire urban zone of an enemy infantry platoon with a single bombing run, here you'll maybe kill 3 people and suppress the rest. Seems balanced to have AA be kind of shitty against that, otherwise there would be no point to even use them since the dedicated anti-tank planes often cant' even destroy their targets and will just suppress.

>>173327963

Eugen's last game was literally "90's RTS nostalgia cash-in" and it flopped, Wargame worked because it broke with RTS conventions and its uniqueness allowed Eugen to get away with incompetence, same here.

>>173328257
Get fucked either way, huh?

>>173328047
AA in its current state works really to either deter planes or support your own planes. Having AA on your side makes fighters wildly more effective at killing other planes.

>>173328337
I hope they get fucked; MadMat is an asshole.

>>173327963
I don't mind the OHK kill system honestly. Tanks aren't built to be shell sponges. Granted, I'm somewhat new to this series so I don't know how well the system worked in previous titles.

>>173328835
Who?

>>173325740
They reduced texture quality all round and attempted to stylise it lightly with somewhat pastel like colours, especially with foliage. Supposedly to improve performance for toasterfriends.

>>173328047
Bombers delete all towed units, in wargame they would only kill some dirt-cheap infantry and even then might be dodged. Now you can systematically drop dumb bombs on AA units, which would've been a retarded proposition in wargame.

AT planes are weaker but it's less that they're bad and more that they were godly before.

I hate the scale and feel of this game. I feel like I'm moving tiny little toys and making explosion sounds with my mouth instead of actually playing a ww2 game.

File: 1409258456114.jpg (27KB, 599x400px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 599x400px

dead division

>>173317728
>none of the tanks can fire on the move for some reason
Almost all tanks in WW2 did not have stabilizers (Besides some later variations of the Sherman, and even those were mostly for the gunner to not lose sight of the target as opposed to shooting accurately on the move), so shooting on the move didn't really make sense unless you were driving at slow speed over very flat ground.

File: ss+(2017-03-26+at+05.45.01).jpg (163KB, 687x452px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 687x452px

>>173327963

Graviteam has no health bars for units and the game works fine, faggot. Arcade health mechanics are fucking shit and you should kill yourself for liking them.

>>173333653

I mean, how does that differ from Wargame though?

>>173339129
Even if you hate arcadey stuff, the no HP thing combined with a lack of malfunctions leads to similarly arcadey situations like high-armor tanks getting continuously bombed and pushing on without giving a shit.

>>173341138

I just see it as the bombs not hitting the tank directly, since CAS in ww2 was hilariously inaccurate to say the least, you cannot expect airpower alone to stop an armored push. Also malfunctions are a thing, not every single penetrating hit causes a kill, you might just lose your transmission or get your driver killed.

>>173341395
>not every single penetrating hit causes a kill
And that's what an HP system simulates and why having units not care about previous hits until they suddenly die looks silly.

Sure, you can model it even more accurately by adding malfunctions, but they're very unpleasant to play with.

File: more stukas.webm (2MB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1600x900px

>>173342074

An HP system simulates a unit being a sponge that can soak x amount of damage until it suddenly goes from 100% effectiveness to dead at an arbitrary cut off point. The current system might look silly but that's how armored combat works, you shrug off hits that don't penetrate your armor until you don't anymore and then it's all over; It doesn't work with you soaking penetrating hits until that last bit of shrapnel from the 9th penetrating hit suddenly decides to bounce around the skull of every single crewman that was uninjured by the 8 previous penetrating hits because the magical aura of HP protected him.

Even in Graviteam with its superb tank damage model Stukas have a hard time bombing tanks to death. Dumb bombs just aren't that effective against armored units.

>>173342995
>that's how armored combat works, you shrug off hits that don't penetrate your armor until you don't anymore and then it's all over
You yourself just earlier said that that's not how armored combat works, if you get shot at enough you're likely to get a malfunction that forces a stop. An HP system might not include the actual malfunctions, but the stops it forces give it some amount of legitimacy over SD's system of pushing at 100% effectiveness after an arbitrary amount of 200kg bombs have exploded around you.

HEAT can also be modelled pretty elegantly with an HP system, you get hit once and then your standoff plate is done for. It's not a perfect simulation of course but it's a good compromise between gameplay and realism.

File: 20170326184916_1.jpg (492KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

492KB, 1600x900px

>>173343830

>You yourself just earlier said that that's not how armored combat works

A penetrating hit having 100% chance of causing a malfunction or death is not the same as a penetrating hit shaving off an arbitrary amount of hitpoints from a unit until you reach a pre-established threshold at which your unit suddenly dies from a stray machine gun round. HP systems also suffer from invulnerability and field repair syndromes seen in Wargame, where a tank would advance until it took sufficient fire to drop it to 1-2 HP and then it would be pulled back and repaired to full health in a minute by a supply truck.

Case in point, the tank in the image has been hit multiple times but hits failed to penetrate the armor, only mobility killing it, in an HP system it would either be completely ok or destroyed; Since for a hit to apply damage it would have to shave off HP, causing even low damage hits to eventually destroy it.

Men of War did tanks right

>>173318541
>fighting Firefly
>hunting Germans

The fuck?

Is this some sort of alternative history FFA?

>>173344850
Germans have a number of captured tanks. These captured tanks are superior to the allied tanks, and the allies dont even get them. Why the fuck does it make sense for Germans to have a captured Firefly, but the allies to not have a Firefly at all? Was it the only Firefly on the entire front?

>>173344850

Hon hon hon, Mon'Amie in le game the Allemands have captured une Firefly so they get it but the britaniques don't. :^)

>>173344571
I don't disagree that a malfunction system is more accurate than an HP system. But that's not SD's system. SD's system is at best a sidegrade to WRD.

>>173344639
I've heard stories about people doing fun stuff like pushing metal sheets to reinforce their armor, but I find the game unplayable due to the zoomed in camera and small scale.

I have literally not seen Germans lose one single time since I purchased this garbage

File: SteelDivision_2017-04-07_16-19-16.png (162KB, 976x96px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 976x96px

>>173345367

Git gud?

>>173345565
nice edit

>>173345159
>Why the fuck does it make sense for Germans to have a captured Firefly, but the allies to not have a Firefly at all? Was it the only Firefly on the entire front?

only british/canadian armored divisions have the firefly.

unfortunately the allies currently have a US armored division, and a british infantry division. The canadian armored division will definitely have them.

File: 1390771841570.jpg (33KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 300x300px

>>173345159
>>173345201
What the actual fuck. I had hopes for this game. My mistake, I guess.

>>173345956

Less than a quarter of the divisions are currently in the beta, I'm sure there will be plenty of Fireflies on the allies side

Isn't the game going to have a free french division?
If so, is french bias still a thing with Eugen? I didn't play RD but I remember back in the ALB days people were going on about it pretty hard.

Also, is there any watchable gameplay anywhere? All I've seen so far was so glaringly bad that I couldn't bear to watch it long enough to get an actual impression of the game.

>>173346512

Yep, 2eme armee I think its called

>>173345159
Unless it's a stand-in, I don't see why they need them either. It's not like the Germans lacked for AT capability in WWII.

>>173346730
Isn't the only axis power in the game germany? They'd need all the variety they can get if half the divisions are to be german.

>>173346512
France/Eurocorps spent most of RD being a second-tier deck

>>173346730

They're going off of historical T&OEs for the divisions, some indeed fielded captured and converted units in Normandy, they have Beckers Funnies in for example

Luftlande Division is fucking trash, has no AT at all

>>173347091

>20AP hollow charge for the pak 36
>marders galore
>10 accuracy, 250m range AT weapons in every paratrooper squad

Just don't try to play an airborne division in an open field and expect to do well, they work just fine in urban areas.

>>173347091
Even your scouts have a fucking panzerschreck wehraboo

>>173347517
marders are shit

20AP pak 36 round only works at 300m or less

>>173346897
>France/Eurocorps spent most of RD being a second-tier deck
Did they really? All I remember from the first few months is autistic redfor screeching about them.

>>173347517

>play as airborne on collembells
>get put on the fucking eastern end with the tiny ass town and nothing but fields
>while the tank divisions all go for the town
>I had to face an american tank division

we somehow won and I had most points and most deaths due to suicidal tactics.

Is it worth buying Deluxe Version for +20$ to get those additional Aces? Do they give any actual advantage in the game or is something cosmetic?

>>173350131

it's just skins, don't bother. You'll have plenty of DLC to buy after the game is released considering Paradox is publishing it.

>>173350321
Thanks, and true on Paradox

>>173327963
>huh my apcr isnt doing any damage ive shot them same spot like 20 times wtf lol?!?!?!?

>>173350131
Purely cosmetic.

>>173333653

>He doesn't realize that most wargames boil down to that exact thing

>>173350321
>>173350452
On the units as well or just in the deck maker on the unit card?

>>173350913
>On the units, but nobody ever zooms in far enough to notice

File: absdisgust.jpg (71KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 600x450px

>>173350131
>mfw I thought the deluxe edition meant you got all future DLC for free - like a season pass
>instead you get 4 more aces
>for 20 more dollars
>20
>dollars

>>173357158
Directly from Steam:

The Deluxe Edition of Steel Division: Normandy 44 comes with the following extras:

Art Book:
A detailed look at the art and making of Steel Division: Normandy 44
Tactical Guide:
A digital book getting you up to speed with the terrain and tactics of the game.
Six Exclusive in-game aces:
Historical personalities you can deploy on the battlefield
Ernst Barkmann (Germany, Panther A tank)
Joseph Priller (Germany, Bf109A fighter plane)
Dick Winters (USA, Paratrooper battalion)
Wilfred Harris (UK, Sherman Firefly tank)
Leo Major (Canada, sniper scout)
Kurt Knispel (Germany, Tiger II)
Battle Log:
Major maps of the game and how to fight them
Deluxe avatar and icon for the Paradox forums
Unique ringtones and text message sounds
Wallpapers:
Artwork from Steel Division you can use to decorate your computer desktop
Streaming Overlays:
Steel Division themed overlays for those who stream on Twitch or YouTube.

>>173358345
I know that now ya goober, I meant when I first saw there was a deluxe edition.

>>173338650
They still did it.

>>173346897
My ass they did. They never had super units like the US and to a lesser extent the USSR but when it came to bread and butter units eurocorps had the best in almost every category.

>>173358452
Are you retarded or is English your tertiary language? Where do you get FOUR (4) aces from?

According to Steam you get

SIX (6) aces,

a tactics guide,

a map guide,

an art book,

wallpapers,

ringtones/text message sounds,

Stream Overlays and

Avatars for their forum.

Where is our miscommunication?

>>173359679
My bad then. I assumed you got 4 more aces alongside of the regular aces making 6 total - rather it's 6 new aces alongside the other 2. As for what I said earlier my point stands, all that is not worth 20 extra dollars.

>>173359961
Deluxe editions are never worth it imo. Always just a way to squeeze a few more shekels out of overhyped nerds.

>>173329638
Mad.at is the community manager or something, he was also in charge of balance for wargame RD.

>>173359961
Eh. Comes down to how good the art-book and guides are.

File: 20170408013346_1.jpg (97KB, 1211x265px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 1211x265px

The tank that won the war (even though we totally lost thanks to my teammates suiciding planes into German AA)

File: 1459047033001.png (81KB, 251x289px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 251x289px

>>173364879
>panther G kill

>>173269845
Visibility checker?

Where can I find this valuable tool?

>>173365924

Hold C

>>173365990
This is really helpful. Thanks!

File: 1491330797660.png (117KB, 268x322px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 268x322px

What's the best mode boys? Destruction or Conquest? (My vote is Conquest)

>>173366513

Conquest now that it doesn't depend on holding a bunch of specific zones with command vehicles.

>>173364879
>Panther
noice

>>173269845
>Maybe this little sub-unit of Panzer Grenadiers is brand new and shit, and this one has experience from the Ostfront and is better at fighting tanks, or anything.
They do have that though. Germans have some volks shit that take 5x suppression when under fire

>AA seems worthless. The sky lit up with all sorts of tracers but the Enemies JU-88's just flew by, twice. Taking zero losses. Something equally stupid in Wargame would have resulted in him losing all his planes.
Wow its almost like in WW2 they did have SAM's with missile tracking and planes had much more survivability

> Recon seems superficial.
Recon is much more important in this game than Wargame

>>173366513
Conquest, although i kinda wish there was a display that could tell you what % of territory you own

>>173370057
there is

>>173368213
When you have literally all the AA you can get firing at a plane and it doesn't go down i feel that's kinda ridiculous.

>>173370187
This. If I have 3 Wirbelwinds and an 88 focusing on a single P-38 flying directly overhead, it shouldn't be able to fly back home after being scared off.

>>173370187
>Some Luftwaffe analysts were dubious about the huge effort involved. It was very difficult to shoot down a bomber. One Luftwaffe study estimated it took over 3,300 88 mm shells to successfully shoot down a bomber.

http://histclo.com/essay/war/ww2/air/eur/sbc/gd/flak.html

I'm just happy that this game exists

File: 1482308510334.jpg (91KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 400x400px

>17 pounders

I've played a shitload of wargame, but this game feels totally different somehow

>>173374607
yeah it's boring af

>>173380654
No way man, it's very chaotic due to there being so much to manage at once

>>173381000
there's objectively significantly less micro in this game than wargame

File: Untitled.png (473KB, 1207x225px) Image search: [Google]

473KB, 1207x225px

You'd think they'd learn

File: tgmwjZEzlUQ.jpg (237KB, 992x992px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 992x992px

>played 11 games so far in 10v10
>only won 4
mfw
I've come out positive in terms of kills/deaths though

>buff/change AAA deterrence to strike craft
>buff tank/ATG accuracy across the board
>give infantry defensive bonuses when pinned/stationary in open territory
>defer early quitter's units to an AI
>Cherborg map
>Caen Airport map

fixed the game

>>173271187

Tradeoff is Wargame planes reload in probably a third of the time as SD planes, and SD planes are considerably more expensive than their WG counter parts.

Are there any tactical servers? :^)

>>173273135

>nothing but wehraboos taking the firefly deck

There's all of two deck choices and the other one is shit

It's not much of a surprise

>>173348253

That was mostly because 10 point Jagers could steamroll everything else pointwise.

Then they got turned into 15 point infantry and that was it.

File: 1424739177226.jpg (301KB, 1024x819px) Image search: [Google]

301KB, 1024x819px

88s are love desu

>>173386494
>not playing 9th LL Div to git guud

>>173386718
Don't forget all the crying about the Leclerc.

>>173387276
88s tickle Jumbos

>>173387308
>>173386718
>forgetting the biggest unicorn of all, Fallschirmjäger '90

In fact, the only reason Chinese deck is usable is because they have French units.

>>173387547
well jumbos are busted, so it really isn't the 88s fault

All these Luftfags and none taking a Panzerknacker in Phase

Its almost like you dont want an ugly ungainly 7.5cm autocannon toting warbird plinking Stuarts and Shermans to death

File: NAJN8JTZ6php2vwqSb87G41Jo1_500.jpg (41KB, 500x434px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 500x434px

>>173388908
>Phase A
You can get one, and it is glorious

File: 20170408151831_1.jpg (574KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

574KB, 1920x1080px

My first deck. I'm so happy they included captured French tanks, I hope to see some B1s. Russian guns too!

Thoughts?

>>173389091
>Playing fallshirmjager division
>Not a single unit of fallshirmjagers

>>173389091
B1s are in. You can see them in the trailer. I doubt Russian guns were moved to the Westfront.

No Fallschirmjäger.
Not enough supplies.
No 88s.
No recon plane.

It's like you want to be facerolled.

>>173389091
>no firefly
enjoy losing

>>173389602
Please use your eyes.

>>173389091
let me copy this deck share it bud

>>173389675
>playing as a division without a firefly

File: 20170408154006_1.jpg (578KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

578KB, 1920x1080px

>>173389363
Are recon planes that important? I figured foot-scouts would be enough.

My logic with the infantry is that they're just there to soak up damage with the officers behind, while everything else does the killing. I'll pop a new in.

Will try fitting in more 88s and supplies. See attached.

>>173389681
Here you go buddy

Hx6SYpJykoKUQpRyk6KWIZXRleGT0ZVxlIGWEZPxlgGVUZUxlLGVQpQBkuGTAZMRlkGSwZQRlCGUMZTSlbE=

And for this new one I've tried out in the pic

Hx2SYpJykoKUQpWxlHGSwZOhlcGV0ZXhk9GVcZSClhGT8ZMilVGVMZSxlUKUAZLhkwGU0pQRlkGUMZKS

>>173389363
Paratroopers are a waste of points

>>173389363
Oh and the sfh 396(r) under Artillery is the Russian M-30 (r for Russian). Not a lot for sure but they're there.

Where are the 10v10 servers?

File: deck.png (3MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1080px

>>173390246
Damn man. Your deck looks practically the same as mine! I'd recommend picking up some MG34s for area denial but if you can make the Ersatztruppen work then keep using em.

>>173390713
Check your filter. There are only four and they could be in game.

File: 1491530109543.jpg (21KB, 446x373px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 446x373px

as always the 10vs10 map is utter shit. retarded frogs can't be assed to make a map that isn't just a flat rectangle with 10 lanes

>confirmed no full Urban maps
GO HOME BOYS CAEN AINT HAPPENING

How the fuck am i supposed to deal with american transport spam in villages? The lack of buildings makes i really hard to move up on them. and the buildings shields them from outside AT guns.

>>173391452
Infantry-based AT of course

>>173391452
Use arty to stun them. This will push up your front line, then you can commit your own infantry. If they happen to not have a commander nearby, you can capture them all.

>>173391667
any half-decent player will screen with infantry and hold the halftracks out of range. the only viable counter is bring light tanks

overall airborne decks are useless because of this

>>173391452
>how to deal with vehicles in urban environment
Gee I fucking wonder if anti tank weapons are useful in towns haha

>>173392136
>>173391662
No they aren't, they're too short ranged.

>>173392252
So the vehicles are in this perfect space where the buildings are close enough to block long-range AT, but far enough apart that short-range AT doesn't work?

Sounds uncommon. If that 'does' happen to occur you can just pull back and fight on the other 95% of the map.

holy shit luftlande HS129 is great

>>173392494
I was in one of the towns on sword that extends from north to west.

>>173392819
>on a 1v1 map
>have HS-129 at my bottom-right corner
>see enemy has called in a spitfire
>ahh he's on the other side of the map I'll be fine
>immediately evac
>attend to other things
>'HS-129 lost'
>see it was shot down on the grey part of the map

Exactly how damn long does it take to evac?

good job at making it to one day

>>173393021
>Firing at Halftrack with it
>area to the left is friendly
>area to the right is enemy with 5 AA guns
>evac order because it didnt kill the halftrack in one run
>it turns right to turn around, going directly over all the enemy AA guns

>>173394405
That's just bad luck

File: 90mm gun normandy.webm (2MB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 480x360px

My biggest complaint with the game thus far has definitely got to be the inability to see whats inside transport vehicles

I do appreciate the "what can my unit see?" button

File: Untitled.png (721KB, 1201x336px) Image search: [Google]

721KB, 1201x336px

Leave tanks and commanders to us!

I fucking love the way my opponent can just bomb all my aa because they don't even scare away planes and arty them because they move ridiculously slowly.

>>173395406
If only this game had fighter aircraft that, in conjunction with AA, absolutely murder any aircraft facing them

File: 960a1385bd18965943feef3274627680.png (52KB, 280x350px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 280x350px

I think I found the problem with AA. The problem is in the targetting. The way AA targets is as follows:

1) Shoot plane until it's dropped its load
2) If there are planes that have not yet fired, shoot at them
3) If not, shoot at a random retreating plane

So what happens when a convoy of 3 planes comes is:
-Plane 1 gets shot a bit, survives long enough to drop its payload
-The moment it drops its payload, AA stops shooting it in favor of plane 2
-Plane 2 drops its payload
-AA starts shooting at plane 3
-Plane 3 drops its payload, AA keeps shooting it on the way out
-It takes as much damage as Plane 1 did on the way in (not enough to kill it)

If they switched it so AA kept on firing at its target, this would at least kill a single plane instead of just scratching most of them

>>173391162

I mean, Normandy is flat aside from like 2 strategically important hills.

>>173395636

Nah dude, 40 point AA should be able to shoot down 200 point airplanes no problem, that's balanced.

File: 1477915184842.png (793KB, 685x632px) Image search: [Google]

793KB, 685x632px

So you are saying that the two hours gametime limit for refunds does not apply if it's a beta?

>>173395636
>2 fighter planes
>they have to fly all the way from the middle of the map if you're on the wings
>they cost 140 points
>you already have reduced income

>>173395741
500 points of AA should be able to shoot down a plane

>>173395970
I got mine refunded past 2h

>>173348253
their infantry which was their only real strength could be found in other coalitions, and then later got nerfed to fight mixed decks without buffs to make up for it

>>173350451
ww2 had heat too you know

I'm trying out this Luftwaffe division against the English, but it's hell at stage A!

>one(1) useful AT gun against these high-armour tanks
>no useful tanks
>HS-129 dies in seconds against Spitfires
>Spitfires take out all my field guns

If the enemy engages me at a distance of >300m then I've already lost

>>173359112
Here are some bread and butter categories EC was bad in:
Their fire support loses to btr-90/bmp-1/cv90/kafv, all of those units except bmp-1 have been around for the majority of the game. Marder 2 is the only IFV that can fight, and early in the game's lifespan it got nerfed to cost as much as a tank. They're also behind on efficient HE lobbers like the 10pt scandi thing or the CS or the CEV or an AGL. Most of the game they were stuck with the super retard for AT.

What bread and butter units did they have "best"? Only infantry, and leo 1a5, and the mirage 2000. Early when those were untouched, the coalition was arguably tier 1. Then they got nerfed, or comparable/better units were introduced for everyone else.

>>173360270
I think the idea is that there's a segment of gamers for whom money is not an object, so by introducing expensive categories with marginal bonuses, you tap into that group. Think of people who only shoot gold in WOT or who convert free XP.

>>173386380
Everything is more expensive in SD, on top of income and starting points being lower. Not having to buy CVs makes up for some of that, but ultimately it still results in less units on the field. I don't like it.

>>173400775

Wargame was a bit on the spammy side, instead of buying tanks in platoons of 2-4 you buy one tank at a time, the level of strategy doesnt' really suffer from that.

>>173257523
Can you do that?
I thought it wouldn't allow you to get a refund over a certain number of hours played.

>>173401394

That's only when you buy a game, as the game isn't out yet what you're doing is pre-ordering it and getting a beta as a reward, you can cancel a pre-order at any time before release and automatically get a refund, doesn't matter if you enjoyed the pre-order bonuses.

>>173401394
the refund timer starts on the release date

File: 20170405233340_1.jpg (611KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

611KB, 1920x1080px

At least the maps are more interesting to look at than Wargame's copy-paste industrial zones and suburbs.

File: 1448532458800.jpg (83KB, 632x655px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 632x655px

>mfw having played hours and hours of wargame
>mfw no idea what to do in SD

JUST

>>173401671
I know this feel exactly

>600 hours played across all the Wargame titles
>still can't win a single game on very-hard as the Luft Germans

>>173401671

To be fair, if you compare Wargame and SD side-by-side they show an actually realistic evolution of military hardware that happpened during the cold war. The battlefield of the 1980's would look very differently to the battlefield of the 40's, optics are shit, targetting computers are nonexistent, plane payloads are tiny, missiles are glorified fireworks, infantry AT is usually a big hand grenade, sloping tank armour at an angle is considered a huge leap in innovation.

Rule of thumb, use more infantry, they're the king of the battlefield in this a lot more than in Wargame.

>>173401576
nice meme. wargame had actual terrain

File: 1408068806865.gif (2MB, 550x374px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 550x374px

>>173401576
>someone spent time making different buildings instead of fixing the UI

File: 2014-03-21_00001.jpg (548KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

548KB, 1920x1080px

>>173402140

You mean "flat fields/desert with occasional mountains that are impassable to vehicles and are there to just funnel units into corridors", that terrain?

>>173402140
guess what, the first one only had steps in terrain. and i bet my ass the next dlc or game will feature just that+east front

>>173400643
I think i'm talking about a much earlier period because the majority of the time i spent playing rd was before the marder 2 was in the game.
But
>very strong inf in solid transports with good atgms
>rafale best fighter plane
>lots of mirage 2000
>Leo2a5 was top tier
>2 secondary superheavys in the leclerc with crazy rof
>strong lineup of bombers
>super nintendo was among the best tink killers
>ceasar
>best manpads
>strong helicopters not as strong as us/ussr though
>mistral recon
>cheap mistral aa helis
>pretty good armoured spaags
Only place i remember them lacking was radar guided missiles.
It was very solidly the best deck in the game for a while, every match half of nato or more was using it.

>>173401849
The german divisions are a lot harder to play in this because the allies are so much more well rounded tbf.

>>173382794
Spam=/=micromanagement

You control less units in this game but since there aren't groups you must control each unit separately so you end up microing the same amount.

Also, because you don't have as many units you have to actually be careful with your units, you can't just helo rush and jet spam like wargame.

File: __the_fox_and_the_grapes___by_megawolf77.png (410KB, 1024x670px) Image search: [Google]

410KB, 1024x670px

Is this a completely new engine or did they just take the Wargame:EE engine and tweak it a lot?

>>173402925

IRISZOOM has been their engine since RUSE, they've tweaked it with every game as far as I can tell.

>>173341138
>pushing on w/o giving a shit
Have you seen what a AT gun or AT gun does to heavily armored tanks in sd?
I've never seen inf not oneshot even jumbos. AT guns are also punishing to those who dont use arty or planes to fuck it up before pushing.

Jagdpanzer for life

>>173402925
>a lot
I wouldn't even say that, it's basically the same.

File: 1350594293765.jpg (111KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 500x500px

Would town "sectors" like in ALB and RD be a good or a bad thing in SD:N44?

>>173403648
The towns just aren't big enough for it to work imo, teleporting infantry was annoying anyway.

>>173403648

Having units occupy individual buildings rather than sectors makes more sense for the smaller scale

>>173402262
no i mean large forests, hills, mountains, rivers, lakes. you know, "terrain". the only thing this game has going for it is the color palette, and that's only because RD was so shitty

>>173403648
I think the current system is fine but clicking the buildings is a bit too fiddly, they need larger hitboxes or something.

>>173403487
The point isn't that tanks are unkillable [obviously], it's that it's too binary. No matter how big the strike is, either you die or you're fine without a scratch.

>>173390246
Ground Recon is much slower in this game

You are mainly an infantry force. You are there to rush into and hold cities or forests.
Such strongpoints are easily cut off, but Fallshirmjägers don't care about that.
All other units take huge morale damage making them useless very fast.


Looks perfect, by the way. Time to play some games to figure out what you need for your style of play.

>>173390282
See above. You pay for extra capability.

>>173390337
Whoops. Seems I'm blind.

>>173404201
But chance to penetrate is percentage based on the slope/angle of armor and the chance to actually hit.
The only time when My tanks get knocked out immediatly are when they face an AT gun or get struck from the sides.
Just be smart with your tanks and you can ensure that even lightly armored tanks can survive against superior tanks.

>>173404201

But it's not binary at all, any sort of attack on a unit causes stress, even if it does no damage. A .50cal can cause a tank to retreat under pressure of constant fire even though the bullets just bounce off the armor, if the enemy fields superior armor you can absolutely keep it pinned, or at least make it shoot like shit

>>173404201
Wait, are you saying that tanks are either killed or not killed? God damn, they are totally missing purgatory from their system.

Wtf eugene...

>>173395373
It's really weird the Scottish get Challengers and not Fireflies considering that Challys were really rather rare and most of the ones that made it to Normandy ended up with the 7th AD, or the 11th and GAD Armoured Recce Regiments, not with the Independent Armoured Regiments or 4th Armoured Brigade that would've been supporting an ID like the 15th.

A single unit of Tri postern shot down my HS 291 in a single pass

Hmm

>>173404604
I also find it strange that the 15th only get "Wolverines" Achilles as opposed to a mix of standard 3 inch armed and 17 pdr Achilles TDs.

>>173405206
That's not that far fetched to be fair, 3in M10s were pretty common in Normandy with the Brits, and iirc, the Armoured Divs got priority on the 17 pounders as a rule, meaning the Infantry and Tank (Churchill) units often got the 3 inchers in greater proportion. Them not having any access, even limited to 17pdr M10s is a bit dumb though and I hope they do some work on the 15th before release to give it a more accurate lineup.

>>173405470
Nvm, it wasn't that the ADs got priority, it was just that IDs could only bring in Achilles of either type as Corps level support from an Anti-Tank Regt while ADs had those at the Divisional level.

>>173405670
It's been a while since I've read much about Normandy but from memory the Tank Brigades had Achilles support frequently since Churchill's were rather deficient in the anti tank department.

On top of that the Achilles were used on the offensive rather than as a mobile AT that was replaced by towed artillery.

I really should read up about the Scottish corridor again.

>>173406008
The Brits called both 3 inch and 17 pounder armed versions Achilles admittedly, but yes, the Tank Brigades did often receive a lot of support from their Corps' AT Regiment/s.

As for them having an offensive vs defensive role it was variable, they were often assigned to offensive actions, being more mobile than towed guns and therefore able to keep up with tanks and mechanised infantry but there are plenty of examples of them being used in more defensive roles as well. More than being particularly offensive their usage was just representative of their great versatility and mobility compared to towed guns.

>>173406454
They differentiated the 3 inch from 17pdr by adding a "c" to the number, same with Sherman's.

For instance

Achilles II
Achilles IIc

Sherman V
Sherman VC

From my understanding Achilles units were mixed between the two types.

>>173406683
Achilles didn't start being used as the official designation until '45 I don't think, during Normandy it was something like 3 in/17 pdr SP M10/M10C depending on the variant respectively, but a lot of the time when mentioned in reports, memoirs or other historical accounts they just called them "Achilles" or self-propelled anti-tank guns without regard for which gun version they mounted unless it was important to the specific engagement. Can make it hard to tell which ones were used by whom exactly.

And yeah, they were mixed most of the time, generally 2 towed Batteries, 1 17 pounder Battery and 1 3 inch Battery.

Anyway, I feel like we lost the point somewhere in this exchange and I think we're both basically agreeing that the 15th should get 17pdr Achilles and also probably Fireflies, even if it is more limited than what an Armoured Battlegroup has access to.

>>173407096
Basically yeah.

Also do you feel that the Dingo should be in the recon slot as well? I find it really odd where it currently is.

I'm also not sure whether the Guards armoured will have the AEC armoured car which is a disappointment.

File: Daimler AC I Firing, Tripoli.png (344KB, 480x502px) Image search: [Google]

344KB, 480x502px

>>173407341
Dingo probably shouldn't be in Recon for the 15th, as the 15th Recce Regt used Humbers (both IVs and LRC IIIs) and Universal Carriers, the only Dingos the Division would've had would've been those used as staff cars for various officers and the like.

I'm not sure what other Divisions are coming, dunno if there's a list of them out there somewhere but I'm just hoping I can bring Daimler ACs from either the GAD or 7th AD's Armoured Car Regts as Recce for them, because I adore those little buggers.

>>173407641

Here's the full confirmed list of divisions on release

Allies-

101st Airborne (American)
6th Airborne (British)
3rd Canadian Infantry
1st Polish Armored
2nd French Armored
15th Infantry (British/Scottish)
2nd Infantry (American)
3rd Armoured (American)
1st Guards Armoured (British)

Axis-

12th SS Panzer 'Hitlerjugend'
21st Panzer
Panzer Lehr
116th Panzer 'Windhund'
352nd Infantry
716th Infantry
17th SS Panzergrenadier 'Gotz von Berlichingen'
3rd Fallschirmjager Division
91st Luftlande Division

File: Tetrarch with LJA.jpg (40KB, 564x450px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 564x450px

>>173407929
> No 7th Armoured
RIP my dreams of Cromwell decks. Maybe we'll get them in a Caumont Gap DLC down the line. Least I can hope for cute 6th ABD Tetrarchs.

>>173408089

Was in the VIP beta where the 6th Airborne was playable, can confirm cute Tetrarchs.

>>173407929

So basically the impression I'm getting is that the airborne divisions will have the infantry focus, the armored the tank focus, and the infantry divisions are the balanced middle-ground? Might be an issue, if it's anything like Wargame it'll be the jack-of-all-trades divisions which will be the most viable unless you have some proper teamwork going on where you can back up each other's shortcomings instead of simply committing to your own lane.

>>173408089
What does the 1st guards armoured have? I was hoping for the same thing.

>>173269845
AAA will suppress and make planes flee, if you want to kill them get fighters.

>>173408502
They're going to be modeled after whatever they had irl

>>173408651

Here's a stream showing them off
www dot twitch dot tv/videos/132230163

>>173350321
And the power creep in the dlc thanks to eugen.

>>173394405
You know you can turn off auto evac right?

>>173407929
>No big red one.
Why?

>>173408681
Only the 7th Armoured Division was equipped entirely with Cromwells as its primary tank, while the Guards and 11th Armoured Divisions received Shermans (mainly IIIs and Vs). All three Divisions operated their tanks in the same organisation at the Troop: 4 tanks in a Troop, one of which has a 17 pounder. The main difference is that Shermans are slower and substantially larger than a Cromwell, but with more effective armour, though if you wanted to get into the nitty gritty there's obviously a lot more to pick apart between the two.

GAD did have Cromwells in both its Divisional HQ units at some point during the war and also in their Armoured Reconnaissance Regiment the 2nd Battalion, Welsh Guards, who used Cromwells, at first in 3 tank troops with no 17 pounders, though by OMG they'd switched to basically the same setup as the 7th Armoured's regular Armoured Troops, 3 Cromwells and a Firefly, or a Challenger if you were lucky.

>>173408735
Well this looks cool too.

>>173409184
Oops, should be be in reply to >>173408651

>>173409047
Read again.

>>173408735
> Humber IIIs and IVs in the GAD, which never used them.
2nd Household Cav who acted as GAD's Armoured Car Recce in Normandy used Dingos and Daimler ACs, neither of which are available it seems. Technically they weren't part of the Division for sure, but they were attached to the GAD for basically the entirety of the campaign by the Corps and would be reattached to them officially in '45.

File: 060517-F-1234S-029.jpg (201KB, 1800x1194px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 1800x1194px

>>173366513
Conquest was always better than destruction, they just made it even better by getting rid of the arbitrary zones that confine all fighting to a few small areas of the map.
>>173370057
Look under the minimap you mong.

>>173404201
>No matter how big the strike is, either you die or you're fine without a scratch.

>what is stress?
>what are non-fatal criticals?

File: PTGjN9n.jpg (930KB, 1942x1190px) Image search: [Google]

930KB, 1942x1190px

>>173403648
Current system seems fine, prevents infantry teleporting in order to go sanic speed though cities too.

Will we have support/arty focus decks?
That was my biggest enjoyment in red dragon, just sitting behinde destroying everything with my smerch and msta.

>>173411030
Kill yourself.

>>173411030
Allies-

101st Airborne (American)
6th Airborne (British)
3rd Canadian Infantry
1st Polish Armored
2nd French Armored
15th Infantry (British/Scottish)
2nd Infantry (American)
3rd Armoured (American)
1st Guards Armoured (British)

Axis-

12th SS Panzer 'Hitlerjugend'
21st Panzer
Panzer Lehr
116th Panzer 'Windhund'
352nd Infantry
716th Infantry
17th SS Panzergrenadier 'Gotz von Berlichingen'
3rd Fallschirmjager Division
91st Luftlande Division

So, no. Though I imagine infantry divisions will have fucktonnes of arty slots.

also this:
>>173411173

>>173411030
>>173411173
>>173411216

The airborne decks definitely have a lot of airpower slots and given how powerful planes are against AA right now there's a good chance you can be the airspam faggot who has total aerial supremacy but loses because he forgot to actually capture territory.

>>173411173
are you mad or baka whyte boi?
>>173411216
that is pretty lame considering how much of an impact artillery actually had during ww2.

File: 8f6f64454a6b933331962c2e4d647766.jpg (24KB, 460x368px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 460x368px

>>173411387
>that is pretty lame
That you can't just be the faggot who only takes heavy tube artillery and thinks he's helping?

kys

>>173411387

Oh no, you can bring quite a bit of artillery with you, Eugen balanced it by making the artillery have quite short range though. You won't be leaving 25-pounders in your spawn area to fire across the map, you have to actually drag the things within a few km of the frontline to hit anything where they're exposed and in danger of being destroyed. Same with the artillery observers for off-map artillery, plus those things have 3 uses each.

>>173411464
How is it not helping killing several 180 points worth of tanks or killing dozens of command vehicles?
You sound like you got tubed without getting lubed.

>>173411567

This isn't Wargame, artillery doesn't kill tanks and command units aren't that critical to the game.

>>173411547
sounds like I will avoid this game.

>>173411651

I'll miss you anon

File: 2uussn00alny.jpg (67KB, 575x868px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 575x868px

>>173411567
>How is it not helping killing several 180 points worth of tanks

>being proud of killing a few tanks
>in a game where you win by pushing a frontline
what did be mean by this?

>>173411651
Good. Less useless baggage.

>>173411730
thanks I'll miss you too, hugz and kizzez

>>173411764
>does not know what value is
>losing up to 800 points in ONE attack to units that cost half the price

File: floxEwI.png (525KB, 767x1036px) Image search: [Google]

525KB, 767x1036px

>>173411951
>support deck retard seriously thinks he's being helpful

>>173411951

Just to be clear anon, are you actually playing the beta and applying your theorycrafting to the game or are you basing all of this off of what Wargame did?

>>173412037
the latter.

>>173412090

Then maybe you should realise that SD actually changes quite a bit of the meta from Wargame.

>>173413009
see
>>173411030

I hated this game at first but its grown on me.

12th SS Panzer 'Hitlerjugend'

Need help with deck =/

>>173414634

Post it

File: 20170408174237_1.jpg (568KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

568KB, 1920x1080px

>>173414634
>>173414696

>>173414860
A bit much infantry.
Lose the Pz4s. Get the Firefly. Get more vet Panther.
Take some phase A AA.
More arty.

>>173414860
>no firefly
what the actual fuck are you doing

File: fa5.jpg (125KB, 1024x577px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 1024x577px

>>173417646
>>173417535

Which arty?

>>173417798
Doesn't matter. Just more. You will needs guns and you will need them to fire all game.

Guys Im pirating this out to try out the singleplayer. Should I even do that?
Im not happy about Paradox getting a small part of my 40 Euroshekels but Im thinking about buying this, should I?
Keep in mind I buy around 1 game per year.

File: 20170408163818_1.jpg (590KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

590KB, 1920x1080px

anyone suggest any improvements?

>>173418463
buy now, refund when it comes out

>>173418520
don't play airborne decks

>panzerfaust bounced off a Churchill
Literally what the fuck

>>173418648
its not airborne though
>>173418704
>Churchill
>Not dissolving like wet tissue paper when hit

>>173418781
you have unarmed transports and shit tanks. might as well be

>>173418520
How will you kill plane?

>>173417535

Nah, the PzGrenadiers in halftracks are very good early game, the .50 cal support really helps during the opening game when the 12 SS is weakest.

>>173419094
Polstens are enough

File: 1411744606079.gif (902KB, 400x328px) Image search: [Google]

902KB, 400x328px

>>173419160

>Polstens are enough

Anyone tried this on toasters with integrated graphics?

File: 1459112327415.jpg (145KB, 1002x1600px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 1002x1600px

>tfw being completly overrun by jumbospam
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufk7JzW5SZk

I have no idea why you guys are complaining about AA, maybe it's inconsistent but the AA shoots my planes down with a single unit more than half the time

>>173419316

Supposedly works on HD3000

File: 20170409015208_1.jpg (352KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

352KB, 1920x1080px

I can't do it, I just can't fucking beat the VH AI!

He took about 350pts worth of losses in exchange for 650 of my own, 200 of which was the HS

I don't fucking know what it is!

>>173418543
can you refund it when it come out?

File: be3.jpg (40KB, 623x414px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 623x414px

>>173419295
>in a game earlier today
>4 Bofors +humber behind front line
>BF 109/rockets flies over
>AA shoots at it
>ToT 30s
>Doesnt get shot down
Explain this please

>play as Americans
>my planes can attack ground targets and leave no problem
>play as Germans
>Planes ALWAYS get shot down by AA, no exception

File: 1486501746293.jpg (99KB, 908x714px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 908x714px

>its another naziboo episode

File: Wehraboos.gif (2MB, 1064x734px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1064x734px

>>173420469

>>173418520
the crocodile is the second best tank anybody can get in phase A. it trades poorly with fireflies (the AVRE does better there, being impenetrable and having a shitload of suppression damage), but it's worth considering over the second card of supply trucks in my opinion. I barely use any supply in SD so far at least, a lot less than in wargame. also, a card of challengers might be a good idea for the mobile 17 AP, but you have enough towed 17-pounders that it's probably fine if you don't.

>>173419094
>>173419160
>implying there aren't perfectly fine multiroles in the deck
the rocket typhoon is faster than the fighter spit and has better air-to-air guns. you lose experience and maneuverability, and it costs more of course, but it's not dead weight if the opponent isn't using air.

File: 1447241420527.gif (2MB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 400x300px

>>173420469

>YFW the German singleplayer campaign will be from the POV of the 12th SS and will star actual teenage warcriminals

>>173420568
Is that supposed to be anti-German with half of it actually being true?

>>173420871
i hope eugene and paradox get mossad'd

>>173420727
i only take supply trucks because my 25 Pdrs run out quite often, and i often need spare ones as quite a few get destroyed in counter battery fire. not sure about the challengers, i prefer the Wolverines for mobile AT

>>173420727
experience is really important for fighters, doubly so for fast planes that can't tail indefinitely

>>173421035

Keep in mind supply trucks can tow deployed assets so you may want to keep them around just incase you feel like repositioning an AT gun fast.

Should i be asshole that goes into multiplayer without beating AI?

>>173421434
Yes. AI plays completely differently to players.

>>173421434
Haven't played SD yet but if the AI is anything like Wargame's it's pretty fucking dumb and playing against it a lot can actually build bad gameplay habits.

>>173421434

If you're playing 10v10 it won't matter one bit what you do

File: THIS.gif (1MB, 400x286px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 400x286px

>>173421538

>>173421538
>>173421573

To be fair the AI plays much better than in Wargame.

>>173421205
in my experience, they almost always get the kill either way

I do use the fighter spits for the lower price and 2/card, but I don't think it's at all unreasonable to rely on fighter-bombers for AA. I do that with rocket jugs in the 3rd armored, partly because they only get 3 air slots, but still.

>>173419809
I think part of that might be that americans get a lot of incidental .50s, which can target air. they really add up later on.

Anyone know how the Panzerwerfer compares to the Wurfhamen in game?

Is this more casual than Wargame? I like the gameplay of the Wargame series but I like to look at my planes blow shit up and not get carpal tunnel from microing

>>173422845

It's smaller scale so it feels like there's less APM involved, in terms of actual depth and strategy involved it's not any more casualised.

>first game in multiplayer
>oh look 4x4
>2 guys in your team left on second minute of the game.

File: 28342722416_cc6e98587a_h.jpg (604KB, 1600x1305px) Image search: [Google]

604KB, 1600x1305px

>>173422845
It's less micro intensive and slower paced. It can still be pretty intense but there are a QoL bunch of features to help you;
>can issue orders during deployment
>can give a 'fastmove and unload at this loaction' order
>can give 'only return fire' commands
>can press R to retreat a unit if it's getting pounded
>there's a tool to see LoS exactly, so you can tell if your tanks are out of the way of an AT gun, etc

However I don't think it's any more casual than WG, in some ways it seems less so;
>no more clown cars, small transports can only carry small squads
>separate HE, AP & smoke ammo
>can't repair critical damage to tanks, ie: if you're detracted or have broken transmission then you're stuck that way
>can't reinforce infantry squads

and probably loads of other stuff too

Anyone else have biases for and against tanks from playing games like War Thunder? I keep expecting my Churchills to be indestructible.

>>173424559
>I keep expecting my Churchills to be indestructible.
desu they're pretty fucking tanky from the front. And the Jumbo is just insane.

File: craters.png (1MB, 1190x529px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1190x529px

>>173422145
did some quick testing. they each fire half their ammo in an uninterrupted barrage (10/20 for the panzerwerfer, 6/12 for the wurfrahmen). they have similar spread at similar range. the wurfrahmen seems to have a significantly faster aim time, which you don't see on the cards.

the wurfrahmen only has 1 more HE on the stat card and fires fewer total rockets, but the AoE score being almost twice as much makes a huge difference, allowing more of the rockets to deal damage and setting a larger area on fire. in the screenshot, the craters on the left are wurfrahmen, the right are panzerwerfer. and of course, the wurfrahmen gets that MG, which is actually something in this game.

in short, the wurfrahmen seems to be a hell of a lot better in all but range, which makes sense given it costs more and comes out a phase later.

File: 1459128280952.png (384KB, 526x526px) Image search: [Google]

384KB, 526x526px

>it's an air superiority achieved episode

File: 1429923853301.jpg (105KB, 334x290px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 334x290px

how do i get gud using AT guns?

>>173428508

Hide them in bushes, have recon near them.

>>173428508
Place them in the middle-furthest defence line, inside a bush. Hold down C to ensure you have line of sight.

Also have recon infantry in your front line set to return fire.

>>173239743

I really like it so far. Even more than Red Dragon

>>173428508

Have a command unit near the more important AT guns, it provides something like 15% increase in ROF, aim improvements and resistance to stress, all things you absolutely need for a slow-firing AT gun that has to kill on the first shot.

It also helps if you have an MG unit nearby to nearby (but not too close) to both draw enemy fire and stress the tanks you're going to fire on. Those support tab units are pretty useful.