|
|
|
I know its expensive, hell.. I don't even touch it much. But when you look at it and compare to say, a Sherman. It might be worth it..
Consider this...
50mm gun on Sherman is 100 munition PER sherman
On Stug, if you get Veterancy 2 you get a Gunner for your Tanks.
100/30
300/50 (not sure of exact costs, to lazy to look up)
For permantly having upgraded stugs everytime they come off the factory floor, no upgrade times.
If I am going to invest that much into upgrades, then I wont be using StuGs...I'll have P4s.
But yes, veterency upgrades are great.
If im fighting alot of at I will get level 1. Level 2 is only the hmg and to expensive. To get the building and the upgrade at level 1 is only giving up one stug.
For tanks yes.But yes, veterency upgrades are great.
That's all.
Not really...
~Infantry: makes your infantry damn near impossible to kill. I'll take it.
~Weapon teams: various bonuses, depends on the team, though. Very useful, usually.
~Vehicles: Usually vehicles are not used much, but if they are, like pumas, these upgrades are great...various bonuses depending on the unit.
~tanks: Good
Demonic Spoon, I assume you have a replay of a competitive 1v1 where you use the Axis upgrades to your advantage and still win? Please post said replay.
Too expensive to be of real use in a competitive game. It better jack me off for that much fuel.
Pretty much. I'd rather have 2 panthers than 2 upgraded panzer IVs for the same amount of fuel.Originally Posted by 0mar
Infantry damned near impossible to kill?
Wha?
Volksgrenadiers don't even get an upgrade at Rank 2, forcing you to stop at Rank 1 for the pathetic .0016 health regeneration or go to Rank 3 for an amazing +20% to squad health. If Grenadiers are your main unit, they may stand a more decent chance against an enemy Rifle squad, but they'll still get insta-pwned by a Sherman.
Heavy weapons upgrade I can actually see getting, they are pretty useful.
Vehicles, namely the Puma, don't NEED upgrades though. They get their job done as it is very quickly, why waste fuel on an unnecessary upgrade? Especially because it doesn't actually do anything that will save a Puma. They'll still die to Shermans (which the enemy will have if you intend to research veterancy) from any possible range, even at Rank 3.
Even tanks, the most useful one out of the four, is highly questionable to get in a competitive match. At Rank 2 you'll have an -15% penetration to incoming rounds and the MG, but that isn't going to help at all against a Sherman with the M1A1C 76mm upgrade or smoke.
Infantry veterancy works well with better units, though. I was taking out large amounts of airborne troops and some Shermans with a few squads of upgraded stormtroopers.
I usually play team games, so I usually try to get atleast a few levels in there if I have the extra resources. It can be just the edge needed to overcome a stalemate.
It's viable in team games agreed, but as stated, 1v1s it costs too much.
Yes they do. Read Buggo's veterency post.Volksgrenadiers don't even get an upgrade at Rank 2, forcing you to stop at Rank 1 for the pathetic .0016 health regeneration or go to Rank 3 for an amazing +20% to squad health. If Grenadiers are your main unit, they may stand a more decent chance against an enemy Rifle squad, but they'll still get insta-pwned by a Sherman.
And yes, Sherman guns are powerful (too powerful), but if you have some AT guns in the area, he wont be able to stop and shoot long enough to kill them.
Guess it's a matter of opinion then. I am pretty sure it increases the accuracy of the Walking Stuka, and I'm not sure what it does for the puma...but either way, a boost to the puma is always useful.Vehicles, namely the Puma, don't NEED upgrades though. They get their job done as it is very quickly, why waste fuel on an unnecessary upgrade? Especially because it doesn't actually do anything that will save a Puma. They'll still die to Shermans (which the enemy will have if you intend to research veterancy) from any possible range, even at Rank 3.
Not if the boosts to the Puma affect the penetration of enemy rounds (rank 3), the health of the Puma (rank 2), and the incoming accuracy of enemy fire, none of which matter against the Sherman/M10 because even with only 75% penetration/115% health/85% accuracy the Puma is sliced through like paper. For the Skd.251 it has the exact same upgrades that the Puma has, as far as I know.
And the Volksgrenadiers get NO bonuses at Rank 2 at all. I even went back and doublechecked the code to make sure.
elite Grenadiers rock.
'nuff said. People say things like "but they'll still get insta-pwned by a Sherman." but I often doubt that they have attempted to regularly get their Grenadiers to vet 3.
Yes, because most 1v1 players realize that trying to get Grenadiers to Rank 3 is pretty much handing the win to the Allied player.but I often doubt that they have attempted to regularly get their Grenadiers to vet 3.
In team games, Unit veterancy can be a game winner for the axis, however the costs to put out a kampkraft center and to tech your units up is too high in competitive 1v1 games.
That's one big machinegun you got there.50mm gun on Sherman is 100 munition PER sherman
Usually, I find lvl1 veterancy worth it, especially if I'm going tanks.
It's only 100 30 (same for kampfkraft) and it gives a health or armor (can't remember which) bonus to tanks at lvl1. Would help offset upgunned shermans i think.
It gives a penetration modifier to incoming rounds so that they are only 85% as effective, I think.
Not helping a whole lot when the Kampf + Tier 1 are just 40 fuel less than the M1A1C upgrade which will penetrate that extra 15% with no problem at all in most cases. The only exception is the Panther which will just reflect damn near everything with an additional penetration modifier. But do you really want to spend 200/60 to make your Panthers reflect shells (which they already do on a constant enough basis that a Panther needs to be taken out with artillery or AP rounds from a 57mm)?
Damn near impossible to kill infantry? Lol, what a joker.
I'd like to see a situation where the resources spent on veterancy wouldn't be better spent on more units. It's not like the unit cap is easy to hit.
axis veterancys suck. period.
they are not worth getting, only maybe in 4vs4 games
the only axis unit that gets nice upgrades is the sniper...
Veterancy is for long games, 1v1s are short and thus veterancy won't get used there. I think we should only compare usefulness for team games instead of 1v1s. Still doesn't make the upgrades worth it, though.
Axis MG42's get a nice bonus on the first veterancy rank
But is it worth spending 60 fuel on? I think not, cause that will mean you will only have an accurate MG when that sherman pops up.
many games 2v2+ you have just too much fuel and too little manpower, veterancy for axis have its place
Upgraded tanks? Pah! I just fought against some dude who took out 6 level 3 stugs. I would have decimated them if it wasn't for his cunning infantry tactics and lucky shots. Though, I did blow up a panther with a mortar..
I play 2v2s almost exclusively. You're right that you get too much fuel not enough manpower. Too bad those upgrades cost manpower too. I'd rather save up for another tank than upgrade them slightly.
thats also a way to see it.
But i agree axis vet should be slightly offensive too, thats why peopl edont get them, they dont kill stuff faster, they just live longer, and noone cares about that
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
