|
|
Post by Port on Mar 31, 2021 21:28:12 GMT
Vatutin is good, Vatutin is by no means bad, If Vatutin is bad Rokossovsky will also be bad, and Patton will be mediocre. In my humble opinion Tide of Iron is extremely overrated skill. Don't get me wrong skill is good. But it is far worse than Panzer Leader. In the very beginning of the game when You have low tech this skill shines. No competition. BUT! When You progress and Your tech level increases value of these 12 additional damage is less and less valuable. You can easily check it by Yourself. Take the tank with no general, attack infantry for example. Then take Guderian or Vatutin (just to evaluate ToI skill) and compare by attacking the same infantry unit after restarting the mission. In case Your tech level is quite high enough already You won't be impressed with the difference. That is why stats like mobility and tactical skills like Panzer Leader start to shine in mid to end game. But in the early game skills like Tide of Iron are sweet of course and You start to think that it is forever. But it is not. I had absolutely same discussion in WC4 times like Rumor vs. Plain Fighting. I easily trade some amount of raw damage for tactical advantage just because I (as a player) can easily convert it into much more damage. Still there is no denying that Vatutin is a good general. |
|
|
|
Post by andrei on Mar 31, 2021 21:31:59 GMT
In my humble opinion Tide of Iron is extremely overrated skill. Don't get me wrong skill is good. But it is far worse than Panzer Leader. In the very beginning of the game when You have low tech this skill shines. No competition. BUT! When You progress and Your tech level increases value of these 12 additional damage is less and less valuable. You can easily check it by Yourself. Take the tank with no general, attack infantry for example. Then take Guderian or Vatutin (just to evaluate ToI skill) and compare by attacking the same infantry unit after restarting the mission. In case Your tech level is quite high enough already You won't be impressed with the difference. That is why stats like mobility and tactical skills like Panzer Leader start to shine in mid to end game. But in the early game skills like Tide of Iron are sweet of course and You start to think that it is forever. But it is not. I had absolutely same discussion in WC4 times like Rumor vs. Plain Fighting. I easily trade some amount of raw damage for tactical advantage just because I (as a player) can easily convert it into much more damage. Still there is no denying that Vatutin is a good general. All tank generals can't be good. In case there are 3 allied generals that are better than Vatutin than he is bad, bacause those are: great, good and mediocre among those three. You can't rate all 4 gens as good. There is no any point in such evaluation. You can easily complete all the missions with bad generals but it doesn't mean they are good. |
|
Grigory Kulik
Captain
"What the hell do we need rocket artillery for? The main thing is the horse-drawn gun."
Posts: 53
|
Post by Grigory Kulik on Mar 31, 2021 22:10:07 GMT
Still there is no denying that Vatutin is a good general. All tank generals can't be good. In case there are 3 allied generals that are better than Vatutin than he is bad, bacause those are: great, good and mediocre among those three. You can't rate all 4 gens as good. There is no any point in such evaluation. You can easily complete all the missions with bad generals but it doesn't mean they are good. , andrei , Vatutin is overrated in my opinion. The only good thing about him is output. He has no move stars and ToI is only useful in the endgame in conjunction with panzer leader/blitzkrieg. In the end game where most missions have 2+ heavy tanks available it is more optimal to have Patton and Rokossovsky instead. |
|
|
|
Post by Port on Apr 1, 2021 0:55:59 GMT
Still there is no denying that Vatutin is a good general. All tank generals can't be good. In case there are 3 allied generals that are better than Vatutin than he is bad, bacause those are: great, good and mediocre among those three. You can't rate all 4 gens as good. There is no any point in such evaluation. You can easily complete all the missions with bad generals but it doesn't mean they are good. Well, I can say that he is better the Montgomery. Ace forces is useless and it ends up being Maxed Tide of Iron and Anti Armor vs Panzer leader and Mechanist, Vatutin wins. |
|
|
|
Post by Port on Apr 1, 2021 0:56:17 GMT
All tank generals can't be good. In case there are 3 allied generals that are better than Vatutin than he is bad, bacause those are: great, good and mediocre among those three. You can't rate all 4 gens as good. There is no any point in such evaluation. You can easily complete all the missions with bad generals but it doesn't mean they are good. , andrei , Vatutin is overrated in my opinion. The only good thing about him is output. He has no move stars and ToI is only useful in the endgame in conjunction with panzer leader/blitzkrieg. In the end game where most missions have 2+ heavy tanks available it is more optimal to have Patton and Rokossovsky instead. But you can change that with the upgrades. |
|
|
|
Post by HangryBird on Apr 1, 2021 1:14:04 GMT
Port , andrei , Vatutin is overrated in my opinion. The only good thing about him is output. He has no move stars and ToI is only useful in the endgame in conjunction with panzer leader/blitzkrieg. In the end game where most missions have 2+ heavy tanks available it is more optimal to have Patton and Rokossovsky instead. But you can change that with the upgrades. We don't even know what the upgrades do. |
|
|
|
Post by Port on Apr 1, 2021 1:33:13 GMT
But you can change that with the upgrades. We don't even know what the upgrades do. Then how do you know they will put Vatutin at a severe disadvantage. |
|
|
|
Post by Port on Apr 1, 2021 1:33:48 GMT
But you can change that with the upgrades. We don't even know what the upgrades do. I have to go to sleep now. |
|
|
|
Post by HangryBird on Apr 1, 2021 1:39:04 GMT
We don't even know what the upgrades do. Then how do you know they will put Vatutin at a severe disadvantage. The argument is that Vatutin is a three-star general, so he has three stars alloted to him, which is one less than gens like Roko. However, I don't think one star will really make that big of a difference, so I still like Vatutin. |
|
|
|
Post by zink on Apr 1, 2021 2:05:53 GMT
Then how do you know they will put Vatutin at a severe disadvantage. The argument is that Vatutin is a three-star general, so he has three stars alloted to him, which is one less than gens like Roko. However, I don't think one star will really make that big of a difference, so I still like Vatutin. Well just cuz a general is 1 tier above another doesn't mean they're better it just means they are more expensive A great example is Monte who got doggyed on this poll |
|
|
|
Post by HangryBird on Apr 1, 2021 2:43:16 GMT
The argument is that Vatutin is a three-star general, so he has three stars alloted to him, which is one less than gens like Roko. However, I don't think one star will really make that big of a difference, so I still like Vatutin. Well just cuz a general is 1 tier above another doesn't mean they're better it just means they are more expensive A great example is Monte who got doggyed on this poll I'm just explaining the upgrade argument. A new update is coming where generals will be upgradable. The amount of times that they can be upgraded is equal to the amount of stars in their rank. The picture that easytech released shows 4-star generals like Donitz having 4 stars allotted to them and 3-star generals like Konev having 3 stars allotted to them. So the argument in favor of Roko is that he has one more star allotted to him than Vatutin. As I said before though, I still like Vatutin because I don't think one star will make that much of a difference. |
|
|
|
Post by andrei on Apr 1, 2021 5:44:55 GMT
The argument is that Vatutin is a three-star general, so he has three stars alloted to him, which is one less than gens like Roko. However, I don't think one star will really make that big of a difference, so I still like Vatutin. Well just cuz a general is 1 tier above another doesn't mean they're better it just means they are more expensive A great example is Monte who got doggyed on this poll The vote is a great example? Really? I am pretty sure people vote having in mind high Monty price which means absolutely nothing when rating real gameplay value of the general. Same about upgrade cost. Who cares the cost when we speak about performance? I can beat the game with cheap mediocre gens, I just don't want to. But there are player who like to do that for testing or when replaying. I fully understand this approach. It is not bad but it doesn't mean that it makes these generals better. And it is not the case of our discussion. We RATE generals. We normally don't evaluate PRICE/PERFORMANCE otherwise low tier gens would be in top of the rating. |
|
|
|
Post by andrei on Apr 1, 2021 6:29:15 GMT
All tank generals can't be good. In case there are 3 allied generals that are better than Vatutin than he is bad, bacause those are: great, good and mediocre among those three. You can't rate all 4 gens as good. There is no any point in such evaluation. You can easily complete all the missions with bad generals but it doesn't mean they are good. Well, I can say that he is better the Montgomery. Ace forces is useless and it ends up being Maxed Tide of Iron and Anti Armor vs Panzer leader and Mechanist, Vatutin wins. Try to compare these skills not in separate from stats. And not in vacuum but in real gameplay. With Monty's 3 extra mobility I can place my Monty's Heavy tank whereever I wish on the map in such a way so my kills+Panzer Leader will give me almost guaranteed multiple attacks per round. And if Vatutin has damage advantage his mobility makes him worse as most likely because of the terrain (and terrain in GoG3 even worse than in any previous WC or EW game) he won't be able to reach best attack tile in most of the cases. So, in my opinion yes, he has higher output than Monty damage wise. But if we speak about damage per round during the whole mission/conquest. I highly doubt he can beat Monty. |
|
|
|
Post by Port on Apr 1, 2021 11:03:33 GMT
Well just cuz a general is 1 tier above another doesn't mean they're better it just means they are more expensive A great example is Monte who got doggyed on this poll I'm just explaining the upgrade argument. A new update is coming where generals will be upgradable. The amount of times that they can be upgraded is equal to the amount of stars in their rank. The picture that easytech released shows 4-star generals like Donitz having 4 stars allotted to them and 3-star generals like Konev having 3 stars allotted to them. So the argument in favor of Roko is that he has one more star allotted to him than Vatutin. As I said before though, I still like Vatutin because I don't think one star will make that much of a difference. Yeah just upgrade Vatutin 3 movements stars if possible. Problem fixed. |
|
|
|
Post by HangryBird on Apr 1, 2021 13:53:51 GMT
I'm just explaining the upgrade argument. A new update is coming where generals will be upgradable. The amount of times that they can be upgraded is equal to the amount of stars in their rank. The picture that easytech released shows 4-star generals like Donitz having 4 stars allotted to them and 3-star generals like Konev having 3 stars allotted to them. So the argument in favor of Roko is that he has one more star allotted to him than Vatutin. As I said before though, I still like Vatutin because I don't think one star will make that much of a difference. Yeah just upgrade Vatutin 3 movements stars if possible. Problem fixed. New picture released by easytech heavily implies that the stars are just health upgrades. |
|
