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
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Being hit by arty is somehow unavoidable, and you need to take care of your troops, like avoid stack up(make your troops less attractive to arty) and maneuver your atgm and AA.
If your troops stay in fire too long, it's hard to move anymore, but if your reaction is fast, then they are likely to escape from it.
BM21 NPLM is powerful, but your can still avoid getting much damage by your operation.And you can easily counter battery since BM21's firing time is relatively long.
KDA is now pretty balanced in rank, it's really weak in the first 20 min(unless doom stack), but powerful in the late 20 min. But due to they're weak in the first 20 min, they're likely to lose a lot of points.So it's a challenge for KDA to take down a point before it's too late.
KDA has 2x BM-24(HE), 2x Smerch, 2x Malka, and an assortment of towed guns.
I don't comprehend how everyone skips right past that, and "no we need the imba unit only!"
I agree that bombard the spawn point is totally toxic.
Anyhow, regards to KDA, it's arty is too heavy and could be costly in price and in supply if you use them all.And, If you're complaining that his arty is powerful, i can only say that it's just KDA's feature.
In rank, KDA's arty is relatively slow and expensive, and I doubt that whether KDA can get that much information to perform a crushing strike with arty.
A. I thought it was a BM-24 this entire time. As an example of how infrequently I use imba units.
B. There were other posters above who suggested that BM-21 NPLM was the only thing KDA can use in order to succeed. I thought you were going to state a similar argument.
C. The cost argument is specious. KDA's unit costs are much lower than 3rd armored, yet, 3rd players always manage to afford M270's. While I guess KDA suffers a greater need to replace losses, I don't think Smerch and Malka are unobtainable.
D. I'm stating that this napalm tube is a 2,000m auto-kill on anything trapped within 3/4 of its circumference at the time of impact. No other artillery is that effective. Why only this one? And for simplicity sake, why not just be rid of it, instead of trying to alter the rest of the game to include it? It's 1 unit, in 1 div. Just freeze off the wart yo...
How often does this thing shoots exactly? It's reload time is insanely high, and it's the only pact div having quality MLRS, lets not nerf it, so many nato divs have the MARS that it's almost comical in comparison to pact MLRS distribution
BM-21 NPLM is a buckshot ghetto ATACMS right now. It's cartoon giga-jib. It breaks whole maps. And according to War-Yes, you can use it every 300 seconds.
And I still don't understand how 2x Smerch and 2x BM-24(HE) is somehow lacking in quality.
In regular games, those two are not that useful for the trade-offs you need to do. The Smerch is neat, but very much a gimmick weapon as it can only cause damage to vehicles, which in turn are by far the easiest to spread around so that the Smerch loses its usefulness, especially when you have to use up a slot just to get one in a otherwise limited selection of tools.
All tube arty being towed is a big bad, because it takes a lot of micro away from the front due to having to manage transports, not to mention a single hit from counter-arty can very easily kill an entire gun in one hit.
Meanwhile the BM-24 is very much a joke. 12 HE rockets that deal 2.27 damage with 14k range in a frame that dies to a sneeze. You get very few moments where that thing can actually do something, unlike the MARS (HE variant specifically) which can safely snipe from the other end of the map, fire the full volley and move before counter-fire has any hope of landing near it, even if the enemy holds their arty close to the front. BM-24 has to constantly stop their volley mid-barrage to avoid getting blasted.
As I mentioned prior, I don't think the BM-21 is the linchpin of the whole division, but it is one of the bigger incentives to use the division over the alternatives. The BM-21 however does offer the division something unique over the other divisions in general. It is akin to the Berlin Command and their Nighthawk, or the 119. tactical nuke level LGB in that sense.
Personally I don't know exactly what could be done to fix the thing really. At the end of the day, it is one singular launcher which doesn't overperform in regular games from what I have understood. It is only a menace in the mode that is irrelevant to balance, as the mode is designed to be unbalanced from the get-go. Simultaneously, I am not against changing it, just don't have any clue how to fix it.
A. There is no difference in balancing between 1v1 and 10v10. Eugen presents "a battalion sized force" to the command of the player. Deck creation is a personal preference therein. And for the record, "omg muh 10v10 is unit spam!" is very lmao.
B. Arguing that the Smerch is useless is absurd. The BM-24 and the MARS both have 2.27 HE and a 12 round magazine.
C. Towed guns are cheap for a reason. Just spread them around so that CB feels insulting to your opponent and they'll last longer.
D. According to everyone else in the thread, it is the linchpin of the division... But it was and still is my contention that they're wrong. That they're just trying to save the giga-jib unit.
E. Nighthawk and SU-24M(LGB) can be shot down by AA, BM-21 NPLM cannot be counter-battery.
--------------------------
They could just remove the BM-21 NPLM.
Right. They have the same balance, sure. A big change must have happened since last I checked the mode, because the maps must have gotten six times as larger since. Considering that in 1v1, (and the other regular sizes up to 4v4), players are needed to cover their front of the line with steady flow of units, this has been quite the change then in 10v10, because last time I witnessed the mode, you don't need more than 5 players to have the front covered with defensive units, and the rest can basically go all in on artillery, planes, tank stacking, etc.
Eugen has stated a thousand times over that the game is not balanced for 10v10. 10v10 is a meme mode, it is meant for those that want to do PVP, but don't want to stress by having to deal with responsibility of having to carry their weight in the game. As a friend of mine puts it neatly, it is a mode for those that don't want to play against the AI, but don't have the skill to play the regular modes in PVP.
The rest of your points (aside from D) are just amusing for the most part. Thinking that 54km range is no factor vs 14km range, or the fact that one dies to a sneeze, and the other can survive at least a round landing in the same zip code. Also saving 25pts to get the same gun as you'd get in other divisions has on tracks instead is not what I'd call 'cheap' when you consider the amount of micro you need to keep those guns alive, when you also need to maintain your front by yourself.
I am in for modifying the BM-21 NPLM, but I am against removing it. It is a unique unit, and I do not like the removal of unique units. Try it in a 1v1 and showcase a kill tally comparable to your 10v10 screenshots. Shouldn't be a problem since you have the skills for it, yeah? After all, your 10v10 strat should work flawlessly in 1v1, the balance is the same.
A. The idea that the number of units available for deck creation matters between 1v1 or 10v10 is non-correct. Deck creation is something the player does. The player is free to min/max or try this/that, at the risk of reward.
B. All of these games have been loosely based on "a battalion sized force." They just smooth off the edges. For example, a 1980's Soviet motorized battalion consisted of approximately; 47x BTR with dismounted infantry (like half having either an SPG or PKM weapons team), 9x BRDM/BTR recon vehicles, 15x ATGM units (both infantry deploy and Spandrel counted), 9x BRDM-2 Strela-2 or MTLB-Strela or Shilka, and 8x mortars. It was also possible to have attached companies of tanks, communications and logistics, or heavy artillery and stuff. I googled this at some point in order to make cooler Arma missions. As you can see, that's basically what we got. If anything, they gave us a little extra. Except with regards to tanks. But if all the armored decks had 40x tanks each, we'd be playing a very different game.
C. Can you link the 1,000 times Eugen has said that? Or like I'll settle for 1 time.
D. Smaller map = less micro. Smaller teams = less micro. Less points = less micro.
E. Towed howitzers are like 60-110 points (if refund transport). SPG's are like 150-260.
F. "Muh u can just counter-battery the wheeled MLRS with 63km/h movement speed."
G. So you feel that the Smerch is horrid? Also that the BM-24 is horrid, despite having the same damage and salvo as the M270? That therefore the BM-21 NPLM is the KDA's only hope of victory?
H. I don't even do any strat. I just try to play the right units in the right places. You can do that in whatever lobby size.
Oh, you sweet summer child.
Maybe the god of RM-70 / BM-21 / Lars needs a word with you to show you the way.
These are oooooold posts as a side note, but considering that very little of their philosophy on many other things have changed, I still very much base it on these comments.
https://steamcommunity.com/app/919640/discussions/0/1753519941883881122/?ctp=3#c1745639844024634088
https://steamcommunity.com/app/572410/discussions/0/1290690926862921619/?ctp=4#c1290690926868335898
Now, to add as a site note, there was another comment made by MadMat about overall balance, in which they take in numbers from all sizes, including 10v10, however, balancing is done with division vs division, and worked from smallest to biggest, so 1v1 balance is focused on first, then 2v2 and so on.
Spoken like a true 10v10 exclusive player.
So you are looking to lose them immediately after firing then? Because they won't be moving anywhere fast enough before counter fire lands on them without their transports, thus as it is done in regular game sizes where you do in fact have to keep them alive if you are using them, the transport is part of price, hence the extra points because you ain't selling it. Those units are valuable, as is everything in regular games.
Gotcha, you do ignore the range, you could have just said that. No point in explaining why this matters then.
No, I consider it niche, like the TOS-1. Powerful if the enemy doesn't either A) expect it, or B) playslike ***. However, weakened severely if the player knows it is there, and they react accordingly. I am pretty sure we have agreed before on the TOS-1, so you should understand the comparison. It is cool, it is powerful, but extremely easy to make feel overpriced.
Which, again, only further proves that you don't actually play in smaller lobbies, because you are using strategies. However, you cannot apply the same strategies in a 1v1 game or even a 2v2 game than you can in a 10v10 game, all due to the volume of players. Unless you'd like to prove me wrong of course and do an all arty opening with 0 frontline units as is very common sight in 10v10 and show me how you get comparable numbers that you do in your 10v10 screen caps. I would be utterly delighted to see that get pulled off.
A. The links you posted don't actually show what you're suggesting they do. These threads are people asking about 10v10 antics, and the dev is like "yeah, happens."
B. Going smallest to largest, isn't the same as focusing on the smallest.
C. I literally do just leave towed howitzers around the map. Also, at least half the time, I just leave them on AI control. I notice that you have no 10k's to post. So it would seem that my arty plan works better than yours.
D. The TOS-1 is high risk / high reward. It is literally vulnerable to ATGM jets. The BM-21 NPLM is impossible to CB, and therefore immune to all harm.
----------------
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1870389520
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1870346766
All 10v10 players are like, "no 1v1 is fun too."
All baddies are like "no muh 10v10 is unit spam, u r bad at whole gaem if u like 10v10 reeeeeeee!"
Sooooo you just ignore the fact that they are threads complaining about balance, especially in 10v10s, where a dev then proceeds to response that using 10v10 as a basis for balance is a bad idea? Right. I don't exactly know what kind of evidence you want posted beyond a signed memo from all the dev team that dictates this is their design philosophy, but you do you, bud. Though I know the answer to this one already.
Along the lines of "One where the dev specifically states that we do not balance the game around 10v10, and no other iteration of that exact wording will do."
Sorry buddy, but this ain't going to work on me. My ego is not that fragile. I am not even remotely insecure enough that I need to plaster my public profiles with my greatest achievements and use those in arguments to invalidate what the other is saying. It does however say a lot about you. Reminds me of that time you pulled my SD2 hours in the other argument we had here in WARNO to try and invalidate my point since you ran out of counterpoints.
How did the Smerch turn into the BM-21 here? I never, not once, referred to the TOS-1 to be similar to the BM-21. I compared it to the Smerch specifically as in my original comment, don't know if the confusion comes from the second response I give you when you say I 'considered Smerch horrid' (which I still don't, I consider it niche as stated).
Again, please showcase to me you pulling an all arty start in WARNO 1v1 like you CAN do in 10v10, and then we can discuss. You are the one making the claim that you can use the same strats no matter the size, so you are the one with the burden of proof, not me. I am simply stating that they are totally different kinds of modes with different approach you must take due to the design. You don't play the same way in 1v1 as you do in 3v3, nor do you play the same in 2v2 as you would in 4v4.
The statement you made was extremely funny when you stated "I don't use strats", because you contradict it in the same sentence. You claim you don't use strats, you just... employ the best possible strategy at that given point. Do you genuinely think that a strategy refers only to what a guide would for example state is the best opening and line up or something?
No matter what you are doing in the game, you are employing a strategy. Yours is reactionary to the enemy by the looks of things, that is a strategy. You don't plan ahead so to speak, you react to what the enemy does if that makes sense. This shows another great example of the lack of experience in regular modes, because you can in fact, very easily to boot, sneak units to the enemy's backline and artillery enemy backline arty, it is just night impossible when every square inch of the map is covered by 10 players on the opposite side.
I don't understand the complete disregard to scale difference and how much that matters for balancing reasons. In a 1v1 situation, if I pull off a breakthrough on your flank as an example, do I need to fear possibly 20+ planes suddenly appearing to halt that offensive? No, because you physically can't have that many. It is gameplay-wise utterly impossible You can, at most, have 9 planes waiting for me. In a 10v10, that only requires each player on your team to have 2 planes in the bank. That is not spam, that is just the scale of the mode. You need to take into consideration that you multiply everything x10 in 10v10, as you do based on the scale. 1v1 is by far the easiest to balance for this reason, which is why they START from there (note, this does not mean they ONLY work on it). When you put 2v2 on the table, now the devs have to consider the balance of 2 divisions vs 2 divisions, and the combinations are obviously larger, 3v3 is the same thing, and it does not change in 4v4, it is still more combinations to consider. Want to know the amount of variations you can have in a 10v10? 3,628,800. And that is just raw division vs division combination, we don't even consider the player skill variation.
It is simple math. 10v10 is not 'just spam units' like you want to think I believe it to be. I just see the damn scale for what it is. You can have 20 Strike Eagles in that mode on one side. Do you think Pact AA was balanced around the enemy team having 20 Strike Eagles harassing one front? Do you think it is even possible to balance 20 Strike Eagles going after one player?
By nature that mode is meant to be a meme. That is not an insult to the mode, it is ARAM of the WG series. It is there, you can play it, but it is neither the primary mode most people play, nor is it meant to be considered for the overall balance due to how big of a skip we have from 4v4 to that alone.
I again circle back to the comment I made prior. 10v10 exclusive players tend to be those that don't want to play against the AI, but aren't confident enough to do the regular modes against players. I have no qualms with 10v10 crowd, as long as they fully acknowledge, and understand, how big of a difference it makes when you have 10 people covering a front that is the same width as the front covered by 4 players in 4v4 in great many circumstances. Out of the 12 maps for 10v10, 5 maps are exclusive to 10v10, the rest are sector alterations of 2v2 to 4v4 maps. (Not counting them double here since Conquest and Destruction variations don't physically change the size of the map.)
You genuinely try to say with a straight face that 2 players can cover to the exact same capacity as 10 players the same width front while still pulling off the unit choices they do in 10v10? And also that those 2 players will have LESS to micro than when they are playing with 10 players? Again, this just showcases why some things seem impossible in 10v10 while perfectly normal tuesday in smaller games. Sneaking units through the enemy lines is one of the first things you learn in regular games, because you know the enemy has to either invest heavily into covering all the gaps, or they put their stuff in the most likely routes and hope to catch the enemy Recon unit currently making its way to your spawn. That in turn is how you take out things like the BM-21 and 24. Because you go spot it.