Установить Steam
войти
|
язык
简体中文 (упрощенный китайский)
繁體中文 (традиционный китайский)
日本語 (японский)
한국어 (корейский)
ไทย (тайский)
Български (болгарский)
Čeština (чешский)
Dansk (датский)
Deutsch (немецкий)
English (английский)
Español - España (испанский)
Español - Latinoamérica (латиноам. испанский)
Ελληνικά (греческий)
Français (французский)
Italiano (итальянский)
Bahasa Indonesia (индонезийский)
Magyar (венгерский)
Nederlands (нидерландский)
Norsk (норвежский)
Polski (польский)
Português (португальский)
Português-Brasil (бразильский португальский)
Română (румынский)
Suomi (финский)
Svenska (шведский)
Türkçe (турецкий)
Tiếng Việt (вьетнамский)
Українська (украинский)
Сообщить о проблеме с переводом
>wolverines are a hit and run unit (ie slap the hell out of any and all infantry units and GTFO if any armor is around)
>titans are a weaker version of the GDI MBT and should only be used in vehicle fights
Can wolverines fire on the move?
I don't play online, but have used ST to successfully clear most every map against Brutal AI. Double pumping Titans from War Factory and having a few Wolverines helps a LOT. I usually start with 5/5, then pump more Titans and replace or train a new Wolverine here and there to keep things balanced until I can move into Behemoths.
Good to Hammerhead hit and run against enemy Harvesters (AI doesn't replace lost harvesters, only refineries). Behemoths are the best all around defense/attack hybrid, having a faster RoF than the Juggernaut
It's partially because yea.. they didn't want off factions to completely replace any other factions or force metas in multiplayer; EA wanted CC3 to be an esport of sort but the game didn't have a big following since every RTS is dead nowadays.
What OP is saying is that they are bad within their space.
Wolverines definitely have drawbacks. Lacking a rotatable turret, they have to turn and face their target. They can't reverse move. They can't carry infantry like the Guardian APC. They can't place mines. They lack air attack. They have a shorter range than the Guardian APC. They are costly. They seem fragile (APC has ~20% more HP but a lighter armor type so I'm not sure which is actually more durable; I imagine the Wolverine is not only slightly less durable but that the lower range on it and the need to face the target gets it killed more though). This shows more if you don't micro manage as much and leave them to their devices.
But they have some perks. They are one of the stronger anti-infantry vehicles in the game (at default, almost as strong as an upgraded Guardian APC, and far above it if upgraded itself). That's, uh... sort of it really. It's stronger at the cost of many drawbacks.
Overall they seem far too costly for the drawbacks they have (especially the 20% loss of range versus APC) just for the advantage of increased strength. I'm pretty sure most infantry have range comparable to the APC as-is, let alone that of the lesser Wolverine; the extra strength means nothing when you're even more lightly armored and have to get closer to your counter than it does to you anyway.
They dont feel any stronger at all.
I think the lack of turret rotation has always been an oversight in CnC games.
Perhaps if they were also faster or did extra damage considering they have two guns instead of one they would make up for the drawbacks to an extent.
Walkers as an idea fail to justify their existence in the franchise.
This is seen in full with the Titan and Wolverines in Renegade X.
As mentioned, extra strength means little in practice, and doesn't get to show itself when the unit is more fragile and has such a low range that it dies faster while not putting out more damage in the end to notice. All you'll notice is that if you don't micromanage it, they just die on you. It seems like they tried to balance it with the idea of making it stronger than the APC but worse at everything else (durability, range, utility, cost, etc.), but it's just TOO disadvantaged at that everything else (which is far too many things) to make it a worthwhile unit.