|
|
Post by stoic on Nov 28, 2020 4:01:27 GMT
About Rommel/Guderian. The fact that I like Rokossovsky doesn't play any role when we are evaluating Axis generals, since they don't have KV6 at their disposal. But what Rokossovsky and Rommel do have in common is their chance for repeating attack. It provides players with unique tactical options we don't have otherwise. Survivability on the other hand is of secondary importance because:
1. We have other means to sustain the health of our generals.
2. We don't have missions like "keep full health of your generals", but rather like "take this or take that". If they are accomplished remaining health doesn't really matter.
Since I have Rommel I could compare both in Barbarossa middle campaign. And I say that I was impressed by Rommel more than by Guderian, though in some other missions Guderian's skills could win the day. But for now I can't name a mission where I wished I have Guderian instead of Rommel...
|
|
|
|
Post by eeeeef on Nov 28, 2020 5:16:30 GMT
About Rommel/Guderian. The fact that I like Rokossovsky doesn't play any role when we are evaluating Axis generals, since they don't have KV6 at their disposal. But what Rokossovsky and Rommel do have in common is their chance for repeating attack. It provides players with unique tactical options we don't have otherwise. Survivability on the other hand is of secondary importance because: 1. We have other means to sustain the health of our generals. 2. We don't have missions like "keep full health of your generals", but rather like "take this or take that". If they are accomplished remaining health doesn't really matter. Since I have Rommel I could compare both in Barbarossa middle campaign. And I say that I was impressed by Rommel more than by Guderian, though in some other missions Guderian's skills could win the day. But for now I can't name a mission where I wished I have Guderian instead of Rommel... I think that panzer leader is the worst of the leader skills simply because tanks already have a chance to attack again after defeating an enemy but I do agree a small chance to double your output can be really powerful and puts Rommel ahead of guderian when it comes to commanding heavy tanks |
|
|
|
Post by metalleater on Nov 28, 2020 12:23:29 GMT
All praise for Rokossovsky - it looks like an attempt to justify the purchase of the general only for one company in 1941. He doesn't even have 4 stars in armor.
He only has one good skill - Anti armor (Lvl2). And then I would prefer Accuracy strike, it gives more damage and gives more targets. A general cannot be called great with only one good skill.
Panzer leader is an overrated skill and almost useless for a super tank. The super tank is meant to be annihilated, not hoped for 24%.
I tested the Panzer leader skill. And I didn’t get 2 free attacks at once after annihilating 1 unit. This means that only one skill can be triggered per attack. 60% and 24% don't give us 84%. In the best case, we have a chance of triggering a Panzer leader after the main attack fails. But it looks like there are no double checks in the game, and these events are independent of each other (which they are), and Panzer leader 24% can be triggered during the attack, not just when the main attack fails. This reduces the usefulness of this skill even less!
Conclusion: the probability of the outcome of the event (repeated attack) is counted once per attack. If both worked (60% and 24%), you will still get one re-attack. This is nothing and is not worth this skill. Rokossovsky is a good general but not worth his money only for Anti armor (Lvl2) and 3 stars in armor.
|
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Nov 28, 2020 13:43:25 GMT
All praise for Rokossovsky - it looks like an attempt to justify the purchase of the general only for one company in 1941. He doesn't even have 4 stars in armor. He only has one good skill - Anti armor (Lvl2). And then I would prefer Accuracy strike, it gives more damage and gives more targets. A general cannot be called great with only one good skill. Panzer leader is an overrated skill and almost useless for a super tank. The super tank is meant to be annihilated, not hoped for 24%. I tested the Panzer leader skill. And I didn’t get 2 free attacks at once after annihilating 1 unit. This means that only one skill can be triggered per attack. 60% and 24% don't give us 84%. In the best case, we have a chance of triggering a Panzer leader after the main attack fails. But it looks like there are no double checks in the game, and these events are independent of each other (which they are), and Panzer leader 24% can be triggered during the attack, not just when the main attack fails. This reduces the usefulness of this skill even less! Conclusion: the probability of the outcome of the event (repeated attack) is counted once per attack. If both worked (60% and 24%), you will still get one re-attack. This is nothing and is not worth this skill. Rokossovsky is a good general but not worth his money only for Anti armor (Lvl2) and 3 stars in armor. Are you representative of ET? Do you know exactly how the game mechanics work? If not it is something you "believe" is true. But don't expect others follow your beliefs. And there are few things so annoying than when someone is trying to teach you with a mentor voice. I completed all ET games with one exception of GoG 2. I don't know you and have no reason to respect your opinion, especially if you are not even trying to understand what I am saying. You can have your personal opinion, and I am not trying to convince you. I am trying to demonstrate how I personally plan to complete the game. We don't know anything about game mechanics, so all attempts to present your personal opinion as a "science" are laughable at best. I can repeat once more what I am saying. 1. Rokossovsky has a PL ability. No matter what someone "believes" it is an independent ability to repeat attack. This probability is 24 percent. So it is reasonable to believe that Rokossovsky will attack more often by 24 percent than a general without PL. 2. Rokossovsky has bonus against armored units. 3. Rokossovsky can use KV6 as a special force. So, Rokossovsky is one best generals for commanding a heavy tank, since he will use this AOE attack more often than generals without PL by 24 percent and that makes his damage against armored troops even more efficient. I am playing with Rokossovsky now and I see how effective this combination is. And all "rules of thumb" who is worth medals and who isn't are only good when someone completed the game and earned his right to express his opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by zabadanov86 on Nov 28, 2020 14:44:57 GMT
Rokkosovski and Patton will be useful as a team so don't think we should choose only one tank general. But will there be 1945 Soviet campaign?
|
|
|
|
Post by eeeeef on Nov 28, 2020 14:49:16 GMT
Rokkosovski and Patton will be useful as a team so don't think we should choose only one tank general. But will there be 1945 Soviet campaign? I hope so because that will give us epic campaigns like the battle for Berlin and will give more worth to the soviet generals |
|
|
|
Post by puchao on Nov 28, 2020 15:04:05 GMT
Rokkosovski and Patton will be useful as a team so don't think we should choose only one tank general. But will there be 1945 Soviet campaign? I doubt it, they covered the majority of important battles between axis and ussr in the campaing, if they ever add battle of berlin as soviets, i think it will be part of cold war campaing. We will play battle of berlin as US for sure, in the western front campaing. |
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Nov 28, 2020 15:04:38 GMT
My guess that there will be something more than we have now. In GoG 1 there was an imaginary campaign (unfortunately only with 2 missions) when Nazi Germany retreated to Antarctica and established aa base there.This was quite an exciting campaign with a large map and around 30 generals on it  In GoG Pacific we had Middle East crisis with 4 missions on each side. Again the maps were huge and the number of generals enormous. I think such campaigns are an opportunity to good to miss it to keep the game alive and popular for a foreseeable future |
|
|
|
Post by eeeeef on Nov 28, 2020 15:09:24 GMT
My guess that there will be something more than we have now. In GoG 1 there was an imaginary campaign (unfortunately only with 2 missions) when Nazi Germany retreated to Antarctica and established aa base there.This was quite an exciting campaign with a large map and around 30 generals on it In GoG Pacific we had Middle East crisis with 4 missions on each side. Again the maps were huge and the number of generals enormous. I think such campaigns are an opportunity to good to miss it to keep the game alive and popular for a foreseeable future Also War master has a video where he showcased some leaked futuristic navy models which I think is for like an alien or terrorist naval unit which would be really fun to see comeback as the absolute power of the aliens/terrorist and the brutality of the gog series would make a fun combination |
|
|
|
Post by metalleater on Nov 28, 2020 15:10:23 GMT
All praise for Rokossovsky - it looks like an attempt to justify the purchase of the general only for one company in 1941. He doesn't even have 4 stars in armor. He only has one good skill - Anti armor (Lvl2). And then I would prefer Accuracy strike, it gives more damage and gives more targets. A general cannot be called great with only one good skill. Panzer leader is an overrated skill and almost useless for a super tank. The super tank is meant to be annihilated, not hoped for 24%. I tested the Panzer leader skill. And I didn’t get 2 free attacks at once after annihilating 1 unit. This means that only one skill can be triggered per attack. 60% and 24% don't give us 84%. In the best case, we have a chance of triggering a Panzer leader after the main attack fails. But it looks like there are no double checks in the game, and these events are independent of each other (which they are), and Panzer leader 24% can be triggered during the attack, not just when the main attack fails. This reduces the usefulness of this skill even less! Conclusion: the probability of the outcome of the event (repeated attack) is counted once per attack. If both worked (60% and 24%), you will still get one re-attack. This is nothing and is not worth this skill. Rokossovsky is a good general but not worth his money only for Anti armor (Lvl2) and 3 stars in armor. Are you representative of ET? Do you know exactly how the game mechanics work? If not it is something you "believe" is true. But don't expect others follow your beliefs. And there are few things so annoying than when someone is trying to teach you with a mentor voice. I completed all ET games with one exception of GoG 2. I don't know you and have no reason to respect your opinion, especially if you are not even trying to understand what I am saying. You can have your personal opinion, and I am not trying to convince you. I am trying to demonstrate how I personally plan to complete the game. We don't know anything about game mechanics, so all attempts to present your personal opinion as a "science" are laughable at best. I can repeat once more what I am saying. 1. Rokossovsky has a PL ability. No matter what someone "believes" it is an independent ability to repeat attack. This probability is 24 percent. So it is reasonable to believe that Rokossovsky will attack more often by 24 percent than a general without PL. 2. Rokossovsky has bonus against armored units. 3. Rokossovsky can use KV6 as a special force. So, Rokossovsky is one best generals for commanding a heavy tank, since he will use this AOE attack more often than generals without PL by 24 percent and that makes his damage against armored troops even more efficient. I am playing with Rokossovsky now and I see how effective this combination is. And all "rules of thumb" who is worth medals and who isn't are only good when someone completed the game and earned his right to express his opinion. Do you know exactly how mechanics work? You are not even the topicstarter, and I did not answer you. I don't care about you, I express my opinion. It's funny that you think someone needs to finish all games ET to write his opinion on this forum(although this is a little strange, lol). Now I started north africa 1941. And I have experience using panzer leader. I agree with the previous participants: the panzer leader is much below average. And in the end, Rocko has only 3 stars and 1 good Anti armor skill. Its really bad for the best tank. If you are a fan of Soviet generals, and cannot finish 1941 Eastern Front without second Soviet tank general, you can сonsider Vatutin. He is 105 medals cheaper than Rocco, has 4 stars and attacks much stronger(thanks to his top skill Tide of Iron). And if my previous post touched you, then I am 100% right, and in the depths of your soul you realized this and you answered me quickly. But don't worry, maybe your Rokosovsky will still show his effective result, maybe ... |
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Nov 28, 2020 15:33:29 GMT
My guess that there will be something more than we have now. In GoG 1 there was an imaginary campaign (unfortunately only with 2 missions) when Nazi Germany retreated to Antarctica and established aa base there.This was quite an exciting campaign with a large map and around 30 generals on it In GoG Pacific we had Middle East crisis with 4 missions on each side. Again the maps were huge and the number of generals enormous. I think such campaigns are an opportunity to good to miss it to keep the game alive and popular for a foreseeable future Also War master has a video where he showcased some leaked futuristic navy models which I think is for like an alien or terrorist naval unit which would be really fun to see comeback as the absolute power of the aliens/terrorist and the brutality of the gog series would make a fun combination Anyway I think that this game is far from being finished . Most likely we'll have a couple of big updates. |
|
|
|
Post by eeeeef on Nov 28, 2020 15:40:29 GMT
Also War master has a video where he showcased some leaked futuristic navy models which I think is for like an alien or terrorist naval unit which would be really fun to see comeback as the absolute power of the aliens/terrorist and the brutality of the gog series would make a fun combination Anyway I think that this game is far from being finished . Most likely we'll have a couple of big updates. Yeah I hope the updates will be large like the gcr update that added many campaigns and 2 conquests h*ck maybe even larger than that like adding new generals and special forces! Anyway I think we should discuss this in the "hopes for gog3" thread since this is a pretty inappropriate place to be discussing this topic |
|
|
|
Post by Erich von Manstein on Nov 29, 2020 3:18:42 GMT
Best allied tank?
Govorov on Pries.
|
|
|
|
Post by kanue on Nov 29, 2020 13:18:41 GMT
About Rokossovsky: He deals dmg lower than Vatutin no matter the tank (about 7-10 better dmg at the heavy tank on Rokossovsky's side against tanks if you won't count Vatutin's Tide of Iron - then 2-5 more dmg to Vatutin. I might say they're equal. But while fighting all the other units, Vatutin has an advantage of 5 points always and 17 when attacking. About the Panzer Leader: the game is checking tanks' ability and generals one by one, so while Rokossovsky kills one unit every time he attacks (which you suspect while commanding heavy tank), then he has actually got 69,6% chance of next attack (instead of sum - 84%), which is not even 10% above the regular one. On medium tanks he doesn't manage to take down one unit all the time, so his bonus gets somewhat bigger (13-18% I'd say), but it's not enough to offset the fact that Vatutin will manage to kill one unit most of the time with his +17 dmg, so the percentages are perhaps even closer together for these two (lower than 10% difference). The only big advantage Rokossovsky really has is speed - which isn't amazing either - 2 compared to 0. Vatutin is just awfully slow. :/ About Rommel-Guderian - I have Rommel and have played with Guderian on my friend's account. And on desert maps, Rommel is better than Guderian by a fair amount thanks to his skill. But I can't really say that about normal terrain, where Guderian with his Tank-killer skill and blitzkrieg has got more to offer (especially when fighting tanks - the reason why you like Rokossovsky  ) So imo: Rokossovsky isn't probably the best on his own, he just offers decent dmg with decent speed. Vatutin has got great damage with no speed. Patton is good on mt, but worse than these two on ht. Allies just lack the all-round great tank general. Also, you can't just say, that Rokossovsky is the best non-IAP, while commanding heavy tank, because it all depends on KV-6 XDDD Yes, it all depends on KV6, I said it many times. We don't evaluate generals in a vacuum it would be foolish to do so. All theoretical thinking is only as good as means and options we have in real missions. Besides we should know exactly how we are planning to use our generals. I don't think your math is correct either, We simply don't know how interrelationships between a chance for a repeating attack and a chance to attack again after destroying a unit work together. It is all guess work until we are sure about mechanics. What we know exactly is that Rokossovsky will attack more often than generals without PL by 24%. This combined with his 24 percent bonus armored units and KV6 makes him the best allied tank general in the game in my opinion. One more point to add. Both Rokossovsky's anti-arnor and panzer leader skills do scale with better stat. This is even more crucial on a stronger unit, may it be a special force or with an end-game tech. Valutin has a flat 17 damage over Rokossovsky which is significant at the beginning but this will eventually lose it edge. Patton is a very good tank general but if he is on a heavy tank then his blitzkrieg skill will lose it value. So for a heavy tank I will choose Rokossovsky but for a normal tank I choose Patton |
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Nov 29, 2020 14:02:31 GMT
Yes, it all depends on KV6, I said it many times. We don't evaluate generals in a vacuum it would be foolish to do so. All theoretical thinking is only as good as means and options we have in real missions. Besides we should know exactly how we are planning to use our generals. I don't think your math is correct either, We simply don't know how interrelationships between a chance for a repeating attack and a chance to attack again after destroying a unit work together. It is all guess work until we are sure about mechanics. What we know exactly is that Rokossovsky will attack more often than generals without PL by 24%. This combined with his 24 percent bonus armored units and KV6 makes him the best allied tank general in the game in my opinion. One more point to add. Both Rokossovsky's anti-arnor and panzer leader skills do scale with better stat. This is even more crucial on a stronger unit, may it be a special force or with an end-game tech. Valutin has a flat 17 damage over Rokossovsky which is significant at the beginning but this will eventually lose it edge. Patton is a very good tank general but if he is on a heavy tank then his blitzkrieg skill will lose it value. So for a heavy tank I will choose Rokossovsky but for a normal tank I choose Patton I just completed North Africa as Allies and in most missions we could deploy 2 heavy tanks. One at the start and one as reinforcement unit. Besides Allies have two special forces for heavy tanks. KV6 is definitely better but the other is not a total waste either. And it also can increase speed, survivability and fire power of our second heavy tank's commander. |
|
In GoG Pacific we had Middle East crisis with 4 missions on each side. Again the maps were huge and the number of generals enormous. I think such campaigns are an opportunity to good to miss it to keep the game alive and popular for a foreseeable future 
) 
