Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
I generally find that the only good Light AA are the Shilkas, even though they are more expensive, they have the rate of fire to make a dent in most Helicopters, and can still take on light vehicles.
For tanks I think I prefer the T-72s, again they are more expensive, but they are very effective for their cost in my opinion.
For infantry I will always try to get them in BMPs, BTRs aren't much good for anything other than being Taxis. IGLAs are much more effective in the AA role than STRELAs are, but if you don't want to field Russian Infantry to get them, then STRELAs are still enough of a threat that they can't be disregarded.
For Air Support, I agree with the choice of Mi-24s, Mi-2s are too expensive in my opinion. I generally prefer some of the later variants though, with Gsh30k 30mm cannon, and the more accurate Kokon Missiles.
I always use 4 FOBs and Mi-26s as supply carriers.
At Arc.
As for the first post about the tanks mainly, I have 72 and T80s, which I deploy as needed.
My Next step in Helicopter is to get German Hinds and a armed recon helicopter. I never been a big fan of ground recon because of the limit of uses. I use Recon helicopters with my Ah64 when I go hunting. Allows for the Ah64 to use its ATGM effectivly. So I do the same with the Hinds.
At Nan.
The Skot Rush. I used Skots at one point, but switched to BTRs since they had a gun. My current tactic is to establish some form of line with fast moving units. It helps because some times you can catch some one of guard. Drawback (In my case) is that they have to be backed by some heavy hitters if they are bogged down.
At Ivan
As for the Nato AA, I use Gepards and SAS or Rangers. Rolands are usefull enmass (2-3 platoons) They work best against Hips and Mi2s. Mi28s (Havent fought them yet) I think can out range them with the AT missile like the Ah64 can do to the Osa.
Nato AT, I use M2 with some infantry attached to them. Plus some Marder AT guns. I also like using ATGM Dragon II (Barely upgraded to them) and the French counter part. Taank wise, the M8AGS is effective when backed up. M60s are good to. M1s are excellent, but require constant resupply in fuel.
That is the question, again about NATO. What marines do you use? M113 and VAB is certainly not bad, but the guns can not have that fire support, which sometimes need infantrymen. I am interested in price / performance ratio. By Dragon totally agree with you, a good thing.
And one more question, but off topic. I wonder how much is available, he explained to me in English? Manages to convey the idea that all right? I just Russian and English ability is not very good, and that's worried. Thank you in advance for your answers
My Infantry are mostly Rangers, SAS, and AT units. BMP are really good, with the infantry being ok, as rpgs are unguided. I like using mechinized russian infantry for the cheapness and the amount you can put out. My other Pact AT is the German looking Halftrack from Czech.
As for availablity, I assume you mean unit numbers.
For example, the Dragoon 2 in Airborn form, is for eample 12. You can deploy up to 12 platoons of two squads with any of the helicopters from the UH1 to the Uh60.
Same with tanks.
24 Leo 1 then 20 Leo 1 A and so on. Tanks can be deployed by variants. I can deploy 24 Leo 1 and then 20 Leo 1 A since they are diffrent models.
As for your english, Its very good. Its better than some people who speak english 1st.
I like to lay emphasis on exploration, you can see the maximum action opponent. The tanks, I prefer to take the "cool" designs (T 80 for ATS and Leo 2 - Abrams for Nato), even get them a little bit (up to 6), but when they lit to smash all to pieces. I take out the artillery 3 pieces (for NATO 3 - 4 mortars based on M113), and keep it close to the front line, so more accurate and mortars not beat) Well, of course half-close defense for ATS as already written - in BUKm1 knock any tip from the first time, most often fall under attack reconnaissance helicopter (it was for this reason that I do not often use the reconnaissance helicopters, as Roland and Chaparral are not asleep). If possible, cut off the supply (especially on a road map to Hell and Full Throttle), and slowly, until the opponent tries to punch me on the main line, gather the troops at his base (there sent special forces to drive the artillery), if you are lucky to find his CV no attack just covering artillery.
Clearly, not always like that, before I even win-loss ratio was 1/6, which disappoints me, as my favorite RTS genre (here it is necessary to think, not to click on the speed), but in recent years begins obtained, and trying to coordinate with allies. Even noobs with competent tip a dangerous weapon))
My Pact Decks, are all the same with minor details.
I usually rush with mechinized infantry in 4 convoys with 3 of the convoys using T55s or T72s.
The fourth un-armored assisted unit is my rapid response force. Mi24 A and Mi2 make up my air support.
Both Pack and Nato are very unique, as with Pact I can field lots of units while Nato has expensive but powerful and multirole units/ The MBT70 is a great example, as I have seen them kill Mi24s when they get to close.
Other tactics I use is Motars in the M113 chassie. They make great anti helicopter units (If they can hit a stationary hovering or landed helicopter it is one shot kill).
For Pact Arty, I use the Dana (It looks like a large truck with a multi role gun) but its not to accurate in my opnion.
----------------------------
1. well, the most important thing is to have a plan depending on map & gamemode.
e.g. you can win destruction by war of attrition killing more pts than the enemy in the timelimit. you can force a quick decision by rushing the enemy CVs right from the start. you can force a decision by infiltrating/flanking enemy lines and kill the CVs. on some maps infiltration works good, on others a rush. a war of attrition also depends on the map - some areas are easier to defend than others - depending on the units you chose. but all these plans also demand a specific selection of units. "having a plan" doesn't mean that you're not reacting to things your enemy does, it means a specific course of action that gives you guidance when you have to make decisions (and you will have to make a lot of them!) ... in a war of attrition you'll likely want to stop at the first sign of enemy contact, in a rush you will want to bypass an enemy force as quickly as possible, in an infiltration you will want to bypass an enemy force as stealthy as possible.
2. a combined arms approach doesn't mean that you're moving with a diversified force down a road. it means that you use different units to their fullest potential. infantry might be slow and weak - but they are stealthy and the kings of the forests. moving them with a column of tanks might not be the best idea. (expensive) vehicles on the other hand should stay out of forests - even with friendly infantry nearby it happens often enough that some infiltrating infantry is killing your expensive tanks before you know what's happening. ATGM is great against heavily armored targets, against bigger groups of vehicle tho they are worse than a few cheap tank guns and autocannons. helicopters can be decisive - or a waste of points .. depending on the quality of your recon and the amount and type of AA your opponent fields. AA can be decisive - or a waste of points (either because the enemy doesn't field helicopters or they bypass your AA) ... instead of bunching AA together, spread them out in single units near/behind your frontline - also use the synergies between AA systems ... e.g. chapparal fires fast and at long range but has low ammo and low accuracy, roland fires volleys of two with long reload, but has a decent amount of missiles.
my tip if you want to see which units work and which don't - take a look on escalation.eu. there you can find replays of matches - i recommend here esp. matches of the Clash of the Clans tourney - as here the major clans and some of the best W:EE players participate. sure, sometimes teams fu**-up royally ... but overall the quality of the shown matches is very high. while you likely won't be playing under similar circumstances (3 players closely working together), you see lots of different tactics and ideas regarding deployment and usage of units.
Very interesting comment. I wonder how you are an experienced player? I am now very interested in that, for example when playing a team (3 of 3) (provided that it is really a team), is whether the division into classes (such as in the World in Conflict)? Well for example, I am responsible for artillery and supplies, John is responsible for the ground forces, and Mac - the air? And not it be easier to create about
in W:EE you will usually take a sector (or several) on the map (hopefully one that is important enough ;) ) and reinforce it/push from there onwards. this will depend on plan, gamemode and map.
actually the best example in this case would be rivers of blood: if you're fighting in the golf/hotel/india area you will have to rely a lot on infantry (forests, short engagement ranges) with a quite small amount of tanks and ATGM. if you're fighting in the charlie/delta/echo area you likely want more tanks and ATGM as there isn't that much cover for infantry and the engagement ranges are longer.
another example would be dual field. it has a prominent town in the middle. going to the middle without a healthy amount of infantry usually means that you won't be able to clear the town (unless your opponent doesn't bring infantry himself). as this town is so important (high value zones in the center of the map with lots of roads connecting it to other zones) you don't want to ignore it - either you take it in force or atleast deny it to the enemy as good as possible. if you're on the flanks on the other hand you'll likely will need less infantry and more long ranged units.
It really depends on how you play I guess. I play conquest alot and I like to establishdefensive lines.
As for flanking, Helicopters are what I use. I let the enemy attack the ground, and the Helicopters attack from the side.
Steath, I only use when gping after CVs, in which I use SAS and Rangers to kill them.
PACT wise, I use any infantry and Hinds, since they can support each other to a degree.
With my convoys, they are made up as such to make use, like you said, of each units cabalties. Infantry will move into a town first, while the tanks and AA wait behind, maby in a neart by forest or a hedge row. Once the route I want to use in the town is safe, i send the tanks and AA on.
I like hiding below a ridge so that when the enemy comes across it and has to start moving down hill, I can use my ATGMs on them.
I normally like the 2000 pt max because it makes for faster fights in my opnion. There is normally 1 major fight that determines the out come of a fight if no one brings Airborn infantry or risks a gunship to look for the cv.
Ill go higher point wise once I start using Leo 2 and Challangers to replace the Amx32 and Leo1.