Ridiculously weak PACT (political correctness of Eugen system?)

[filip227]

The truth is that PACT is much weaker than NATO. It's a shame because you won't enjoy the game. (♥♥♥♥♥♥ political correctness for 36 euros - the Eugen system). PACT has inaccurate AT missile systems, it's practically a miracle if they hit anything. They don't stand a chance against the USA or Germany in open area. Tanks... that's a joke xD PACT tanks are so inaccurate that sometimes one Abrams can destroy three or four PACT tanks T80. Of course to make it look cool the PACT tanks got AT missiles, but those missiles with sub 50% accuracy will hit absolutely nothing. PACT has much less helicopters available compared to NATO. PACT helicopters are more inaccurate and expensive.

so in short: the PACT army is absolutely inaccurate and incapable. NATO vehicles destroy PACT vehicles like on a shooting range. (because NATO vehicles and NATO missile vehicles have around 60-65% accuracy, where PACT barely achieves 50% accuracy). PACT has poor air support because NATO has three to four times as many helicopters. PACT AT infantry + vehicles is woefully inaccurate (around 50% accuracy), so it's almost useless, but NATO AT infantry has around 60-65% accuracy (NATO AT infantry can stop almost an entire column of PACT tanks).
What it means: when you play against AI and want a balanced fair game, you have to set PACT's AI to HARD/VERY HARD and NATO's AI to EASY/MEDIUM to make the game balanced omg. loool

[Vyllis]

AI is unfinished and is absolutely not indicative of balance. Play vs real human to get anb idea of balance.
I play a lot of PACT, my favourite side, and half your problem seems to be L2P and the other half is the current meta which is in bad state.

Also if you know how to use PACT tanks you'll know you are going to win or trade most short to medium range. With fire support you'll win long range or drawn safely, even if they have their own fire support.

Turn off ATGM when they come into you, turn them ON when they are static or slow to move can also help.

Against ATGM use mostly the 120mm guns because the 150 aim too slow, suppress area before moving in, the Uragan is the best efficiency-price artillery of the game.

Etc.

[filip227]

Originally posted by Vyllis:

AI is unfinished and is absolutely not indicative of balance. Play vs real human to get anb idea of balance.
I play a lot of PACT, my favourite side, and half your problem seems to be L2P and the other half is the current meta which is in bad state.

Also if you know how to use PACT tanks you'll know you are going to win or trade most short to medium range. With fire support you'll win long range or drawn safely, even if they have their own fire support.

Turn off ATGM when they come into you, turn them ON when they are static or slow to move can also help.

Against ATGM use mostly the 120mm guns because the 150 aim too slow, suppress area before moving in, the Uragan is the best efficiency-price artillery of the game.

Etc.

thanks for the advice, I'll try the artillery as support. But PACT's weak AI makes me a problem, because I won't get support from it on big maps. On large maps, PACT AI is decimated by NATO troops

[Tekay]

Make your own decks for ai an just give them the better stuff they can get - should help

[Drug Tino]

Originally posted by filip227:

Originally posted by Vyllis:

AI is unfinished and is absolutely not indicative of balance. Play vs real human to get anb idea of balance.
I play a lot of PACT, my favourite side, and half your problem seems to be L2P and the other half is the current meta which is in bad state.

Also if you know how to use PACT tanks you'll know you are going to win or trade most short to medium range. With fire support you'll win long range or drawn safely, even if they have their own fire support.

Turn off ATGM when they come into you, turn them ON when they are static or slow to move can also help.

Against ATGM use mostly the 120mm guns because the 150 aim too slow, suppress area before moving in, the Uragan is the best efficiency-price artillery of the game.

Etc.

thanks for the advice, I'll try the artillery as support. But PACT's weak AI makes me a problem, because I won't get support from it on big maps. On large maps, PACT AI is decimated by NATO troops

In general, friendly AI is always rather unhelpful unless it has a very strong deck advantage (for example having an armored deck against an infantry division in open terrain etc.).
Try playing more 1v1 against AI, you could in fact have an easier time.

[thugnightly]

Funny becuause PACT tanks and helos are way more effective and cost efficient than NATO in this game. Yeah the armour isn't as good but you get better supporting units to cover your tanks on PACT especially with AA. NATO tank divs (especially 3rd armoured) rely on close range AA that can't really keep up with your tanks let alone the lack of competent infantry.

T55 and T55AM2 come in much higher numbers than Abrams and Leo's and murder them at close range and in forrests. I'll take 3 T55s over 1 Abrams any day.

[Japoński Anon]

Look at 39. Motorized Guards and compare it to any B-list Nato division. PACT has better, cheaper tanks, more heli gunships, hands down the best AA in the game, and they can spam amazing IFVs-APCs like no tomorrow. Plus, their infantry overall have better AT weaponry. No joke, overall PACT decks seem to have an easier time getting air superiority AGAINST NATO due to how insane the KUB and Strela are for their price. Don't let the bad AI get you down. You goal as PACT is to trade better than NATO and overwhelm them in the long run. In ranked multiplayer, it does seem that NATO decks are favored, but it's generally because of the heavy tank-heli meta and planes being ♥♥♥♥ overall.

[FREEZED]

different troops need different tactics , if you try fight on your opponent terms it will end badly, you should fight way which suits for your troops better than it does for enemy.

[[ING] Ingvarplay]

This is not surprising, because this game is a NATO army simulator. You will discover a lot of new things if you try to compare the indicators of ECM, the availability of units on the card and the cost of supplies. Waiting for the release of the Broken Arrow

[soldier6661111]

It's the same "AI"

Pact equipment truly just is well...you know

[Kamikaze Velociraptor]

PACT equipment is okay. Try using combined arms. Too many players depend on hero units. This isn't COH or wargame where you can use a super hero unit to destroy enemy positions. As pact use NLPM arty to remove NATO defenders and the plentiful MI-8 and MI-24 attack helos as cover. BMP 1 should give you enough suppression fire to allow infantry to move up. If you need smoke use howitzers or mortar teams. T-80s are cost effective for their price to attack NATO lines. If you see an M1A1 then you need to come back with numbers. Warno is forcing you to play with all your units. Unlike in wargame where you can clutch with a few hero units.

[Torec]

Originally posted by filip227:

The truth is that PACT is much weaker than NATO. It's a shame because you won't enjoy the game. (♥♥♥♥♥♥ political correctness for 36 euros - the Eugen system). PACT has inaccurate AT missile systems, it's practically a miracle if they hit anything. They don't stand a chance against the USA or Germany in open area. Tanks... that's a joke xD PACT tanks are so inaccurate that sometimes one Abrams can destroy three or four PACT tanks T80. Of course to make it look cool the PACT tanks got AT missiles, but those missiles with sub 50% accuracy will hit absolutely nothing. PACT has much less helicopters available compared to NATO. PACT helicopters are more inaccurate and expensive.

so in short: the PACT army is absolutely inaccurate and incapable. NATO vehicles destroy PACT vehicles like on a shooting range. (because NATO vehicles and NATO missile vehicles have around 60-65% accuracy, where PACT barely achieves 50% accuracy). PACT has poor air support because NATO has three to four times as many helicopters. PACT AT infantry + vehicles is woefully inaccurate (around 50% accuracy), so it's almost useless, but NATO AT infantry has around 60-65% accuracy (NATO AT infantry can stop almost an entire column of PACT tanks).
What it means: when you play against AI and want a balanced fair game, you have to set PACT's AI to HARD/VERY HARD and NATO's AI to EASY/MEDIUM to make the game balanced omg. loool

You have 0 clue about the game, since 39, 7th panzer, 79gv, are top tier divisions from pact. Lets also say tanks with autoloader get 10 rpm. You act like a fool crying about pact being weak

[filip227]

Originally posted by Torec:

Originally posted by filip227:

The truth is that PACT is much weaker than NATO. It's a shame because you won't enjoy the game. (♥♥♥♥♥♥ political correctness for 36 euros - the Eugen system). PACT has inaccurate AT missile systems, it's practically a miracle if they hit anything. They don't stand a chance against the USA or Germany in open area. Tanks... that's a joke xD PACT tanks are so inaccurate that sometimes one Abrams can destroy three or four PACT tanks T80. Of course to make it look cool the PACT tanks got AT missiles, but those missiles with sub 50% accuracy will hit absolutely nothing. PACT has much less helicopters available compared to NATO. PACT helicopters are more inaccurate and expensive.

so in short: the PACT army is absolutely inaccurate and incapable. NATO vehicles destroy PACT vehicles like on a shooting range. (because NATO vehicles and NATO missile vehicles have around 60-65% accuracy, where PACT barely achieves 50% accuracy). PACT has poor air support because NATO has three to four times as many helicopters. PACT AT infantry + vehicles is woefully inaccurate (around 50% accuracy), so it's almost useless, but NATO AT infantry has around 60-65% accuracy (NATO AT infantry can stop almost an entire column of PACT tanks).
What it means: when you play against AI and want a balanced fair game, you have to set PACT's AI to HARD/VERY HARD and NATO's AI to EASY/MEDIUM to make the game balanced omg. loool

You have 0 clue about the game, since 39, 7th panzer, 79gv, are top tier divisions from pact. Lets also say tanks with autoloader get 10 rpm. You act like a fool crying about pact being weak

okay, I didn't want to count it so you could understand, so I took a comment from another user, here it is (PS. so that's why the lobby in online games is empty on the Red side, because Red is perfect xD ? open your eyes) :

Soviet 39 div. has LESS amount of comparable tanks, than US 3rd armoured.
US deck has 36 M1A1 (240pts), while Soviet deck only 30 T80BV(235pts).
The Soviets have 6 T80UD(320pts) (even to fact, that they are looking more interesting), while US have 12 M1A1(HA)(310pts). Overall, US will have 17 top tanks, while Soviet Union only 13.
And I am not even talking about the fact that US have 12 — TWELVE — M901A3 ITV.
12 TOW2 rockets each. 100 PTS.
Soviets can't even counter this.
But, yeah: Soviet armoured div. have... 12 T62. FOR THE PRICE OF M901A3 ITV (almost).
Which are also almost useless.
And yeah, US div., additionally, may have 12 reconnaissance, forward Bradley units(120pts), with additionally 12 — twelve — TOW2 rockets EACH. And very good optics.
The same thing is about 4 Bradley CP unit. But with 6 rockets each.
I want to specifically calculate this moment: US may have, potentially in the beginning of the match, 312 TOW2 missiles. 65% accuracy. One hit kill almost definitely. 312 pieces.

And to this number we can add 9 M901 ITV with I-TOW. Which are worser than TOW-2, but still better than ANY Soviet ATGMs, and have 12 missiles each. For 80 pts. Which giving us 420 TOW missiles. Small facts.

And I am not even talking about Bradley M2A2 IFV or AT units with TOW-2, or Apache and Air Cobra helicopters and complete superiority in artillery department. How exactly any armoured force can survive THIS?

The same thing is about AA, cause BlueForces have overall better air forces. If Pact would have also awful AA units — there would be no point to play them at all. Because it had been already outclassed in every single department, besides some meta units and meta «tactics» where you can't use your tanks as assault machines, and must spend all your time waiting some one in bushes.


This is simply amazing. The Soviet divs are nerfed to hell.
They are barely playable. Or even unplayable in some scenarios.

[Medoc]

Originally posted by filip227:

We had two bags of grass , 75 vials of mescaline , five bags of d-lysergic diethylamide or LSD acid , a salt shaker half-filled with cocaine and a sea of ​​multicolored amphetamines , barbiturates and tranquilizers ...

I want to watch this battle when you buy all these tanks 36 (30) tanks per match ))
The reality comes down to the fact that you do not have enough points to ensure a real start of the match with expensive units.
And an experienced player will not allow you to play with tanks alone.
In every bush and house, a useless Red ATGM will be waiting for you. And you will just lose all your expensive units from an accidental hit in the side.

Also, do not forget that NATO has helicopters in only 4 divisions and for what price. When the PACT has a helicopter with an RCT in each division.

I win equally with cheap tanks on 5 tank France, as well as on 39 and 35 red. And to say that NATO is strong because they have ABRAMS and TOU is ridiculous. It is only important to impose a fight where the enemy will find it hardest to resist you.

[filip227]

Originally posted by MedoC:

Originally posted by filip227:

We had two bags of grass , 75 vials of mescaline , five bags of d-lysergic diethylamide or LSD acid , a salt shaker half-filled with cocaine and a sea of ​​multicolored amphetamines , barbiturates and tranquilizers ...

I want to watch this battle when you buy all these tanks 36 (30) tanks per match ))
The reality comes down to the fact that you do not have enough points to ensure a real start of the match with expensive units.
And an experienced player will not allow you to play with tanks alone.
In every bush and house, a useless Red ATGM will be waiting for you. And you will just lose all your expensive units from an accidental hit in the side.

Also, do not forget that NATO has helicopters in only 4 divisions and for what price. When the PACT has a helicopter with an RCT in each division.

I win equally with cheap tanks on 5 tank France, as well as on 39 and 35 red. And to say that NATO is strong because they have ABRAMS and TOU is ridiculous. It is only important to impose a fight where the enemy will find it hardest to resist you.

For NATO, I always use a frontal attack from an ambush in the open (ATMG supported) against RED, because RED never hits with ATMG. (so much for the ATMG in the bushes) Easy tactics. Furthermore, NATO has cheaper AT helicopters and there are more of them on board (AH-1F TOWCOBRA = 130 points omg., and there are 2x in one field of the deck)

(The reality comes down to the fact that you do not have enough points to ensure a real start of the match with expensive units) - M3A1 BRADLEY CF has 12 TOW rockets, it is a survey, and at the beginning it covers every open space and RED doesn't even get to him. Against artillery, it is enough to move them to other positions. (I don't understand your game how can people play so statically where artillery destroys their vehicles lol)

Look, I don't know why you're all so horny against RED.... We were occupied here by the USSR for 40 years (I also hate the Bolshevik ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ utopia). But this is a game and I want to have a balanced experience. The only thing that is needed is for RED to be a little more accurate, especially ATMG. I have no problem facing Blue with Red army, but Red AI as a companion is absolutely incompetent - this is my problem. I want to have a full-fledged skirmish there. That's it, don't tell me about tactics anymore.

[mndbsd]

This post makes no sense.

Pact weak cuz AI cant play it? did i miss something?