|
|
Post by JustANormalAccount on Apr 5, 2022 12:31:45 GMT
Rokossolovski >> Best Heavy Tanker in Allies, Best Tanker Killer Montgomery >> Best in Survivability in Allies, but not the best Tanker obviously Patton >> Yeah worst expensive brotha he's kinda failure And how these guys came here while we are just talking about Horthy? Manstein is still the best heavy tank/med tank for Allies/Axis tho |
|
|
|
Post by Erich von Manstein on Apr 5, 2022 17:17:36 GMT
Rokossolovski >> Best Heavy Tanker in Allies, Best Tanker Killer Montgomery >> Best in Survivability in Allies, but not the best Tanker obviously Patton >> Yeah worst expensive brotha he's kinda failure And how these guys came here while we are just talking about Horthy? No idea. You buy Horthy because you are swimming in medals and have nowhere else to spend them. If you feel the need to buy an axis admiral, that means Ozawa and Riccardi are not enough for you, which means you need to replace them with better generals, not worse. |
|
|
|
Post by 6Johnny23 on Apr 5, 2022 21:44:32 GMT
Compared to Roko, Monty offers less for more. I disagree. Montgomery's availability will help in Africa and Western 1944; you must have one of Montgomery, Patton, or Eisenhower to deploy 6 generals, and I don't believe the difference between Montgomery and Rokossovsky is significant enough for me to drop a general. His extra star makes him more consistent at eliminating infantry mob when KV-6 isn't fully upgraded and the tech isn't sufficiently high. It takes a lot of investment for Rokossovsky to completely overwhelm Montgomery as a mob eraser. Of course, Montgomery can never get close to Rokossovsky in terms of damage against ACs and MTs, which is why I think Rokossovsky can be a great complement to Montgomery as a pinpoint eliminator against MTs on T-28. If your KV-6 and tank tech are maxed out and you have Patton, then there's absolutely zero point of getting Montgomery. Conclusion: both of them have their pros and cons and are on the same tier. Monty will do it well, but HTs still have +30% damage against infantry. Using the general path threads, you can see that you will have Allied 4 generals by 1944, and you can always go dual HT tanks (1/2 inf, 1/2 MT, 2 HT, 1 arty). Roko will definitely have a space in the 4 free spaces. By 1944, KV-6 will probably be fully upgraded (at least to level 6). Tank tech and KV-6 will be at the highest priority. But that's just my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by KenKenGreatest on Apr 5, 2022 22:22:14 GMT
Rokossolovski >> Best Heavy Tanker in Allies, Best Tanker Killer Montgomery >> Best in Survivability in Allies, but not the best Tanker obviously Patton >> Yeah worst expensive brotha he's kinda failure And how these guys came here while we are just talking about Horthy? No idea. You buy Horthy because you are swimming in medals and have nowhere else to spend them. If you feel the need to buy an axis admiral, that means Ozawa and Riccardi are not enough for you, which means you need to replace them with better generals, not worse. I don't need him, I already have Donitz |
|
|
|
Post by Erich von Manstein on Apr 6, 2022 18:49:22 GMT
I disagree. Montgomery's availability will help in Africa and Western 1944; you must have one of Montgomery, Patton, or Eisenhower to deploy 6 generals, and I don't believe the difference between Montgomery and Rokossovsky is significant enough for me to drop a general. His extra star makes him more consistent at eliminating infantry mob when KV-6 isn't fully upgraded and the tech isn't sufficiently high. It takes a lot of investment for Rokossovsky to completely overwhelm Montgomery as a mob eraser. Of course, Montgomery can never get close to Rokossovsky in terms of damage against ACs and MTs, which is why I think Rokossovsky can be a great complement to Montgomery as a pinpoint eliminator against MTs on T-28. If your KV-6 and tank tech are maxed out and you have Patton, then there's absolutely zero point of getting Montgomery. Conclusion: both of them have their pros and cons and are on the same tier. Monty will do it well, but HTs still have +30% damage against infantry. Using the general path threads, you can see that you will have Allied 4 generals by 1944, and you can always go dual HT tanks (1/2 inf, 1/2 MT, 2 HT, 1 arty). Roko will definitely have a space in the 4 free spaces. By 1944, KV-6 will probably be fully upgraded (at least to level 6). Tank tech and KV-6 will be at the highest priority. But that's just my opinion. Yeah right. 1/2 inf (MacArthur, Leclerc), 1/2 MT (Timoshenko, Leclerc), 2 HT (Montgomery, Rokossovsky), 1 arty (Govorov). Makes perfect sense. |
|
|
|
Post by 6Johnny23 on Apr 6, 2022 21:28:48 GMT
Monty will do it well, but HTs still have +30% damage against infantry. Using the general path threads, you can see that you will have Allied 4 generals by 1944, and you can always go dual HT tanks (1/2 inf, 1/2 MT, 2 HT, 1 arty). Roko will definitely have a space in the 4 free spaces. By 1944, KV-6 will probably be fully upgraded (at least to level 6). Tank tech and KV-6 will be at the highest priority. But that's just my opinion. Yeah right. 1/2 inf (MacArthur, Leclerc), 1/2 MT (Timoshenko, Leclerc), 2 HT (Montgomery, Rokossovsky), 1 arty (Govorov). Makes perfect sense. Why Leclerc as an infantry? Why use Timoshenko at this point *coughs in Vatutin*? Ideally, you would use MacArthur, Roko, Govorov, and Vatutin/Tassigny along with Leclerc as they are some of the best. Monty only plays second fiddle to Roko, and always will. Even if you get Monty as a 6th general, you will put Roko down first and give him KV-6. Getting Monty for another (worse) Roko just to fill up the 1944 roster is not a good enough justification for getting him over Roko. What about Badoglio and Leeb? Timeohenko and Leclerc? |
|
|
|
Post by Erich von Manstein on Apr 6, 2022 22:51:43 GMT
Yeah right. 1/2 inf (MacArthur, Leclerc), 1/2 MT (Timoshenko, Leclerc), 2 HT (Montgomery, Rokossovsky), 1 arty (Govorov). Makes perfect sense. Why Leclerc as an infantry? Why use Timoshenko at this point *coughs in Vatutin*? Ideally, you would use MacArthur, Roko, Govorov, and Vatutin/Tassigny along with Leclerc as they are some of the best. Monty only plays second fiddle to Roko, and always will. Even if you get Monty as a 6th general, you will put Roko down first and give him KV-6. Getting Monty for another (worse) Roko just to fill up the 1944 roster is not a good enough justification for getting him over Roko. What about Badoglio and Leeb? Timeohenko and Leclerc? Leclerc as infantry because he's who we have in the 1944 lineup. In Africa this spot belongs to Alexander. You have no other free options. Montgomery's purchase opens up an empty slot and Timoshenko (or Chuikov, but you said 1 arty) is the best we have to fill it. Tassigny is not worthy of my medals. I was a Slim supporter before the promotion update and I still believe he is the second best allied infantry. Tassigny lacks consistency in damage. Also I said Africa AND 1944. I'm skill wise not a very good player so that extra slot Montgomery opens up does matter for me. I don't think the difference between Montgomery and Rokossovsky (which I think is less than a color code) is great enough for me to deploy 1 fewer general. If I already have Montgomery or Patton then Rokossovsky is indeed a favorable choice as a second allied tank general to purchase. |
|
|
|
Post by 6Johnny23 on Apr 6, 2022 23:46:05 GMT
Why Leclerc as an infantry? Why use Timoshenko at this point *coughs in Vatutin*? Ideally, you would use MacArthur, Roko, Govorov, and Vatutin/Tassigny along with Leclerc as they are some of the best. Monty only plays second fiddle to Roko, and always will. Even if you get Monty as a 6th general, you will put Roko down first and give him KV-6. Getting Monty for another (worse) Roko just to fill up the 1944 roster is not a good enough justification for getting him over Roko. What about Badoglio and Leeb? Timeohenko and Leclerc? Leclerc as infantry because he's who we have in the 1944 lineup. In Africa this spot belongs to Alexander. You have no other free options. Montgomery's purchase opens up an empty slot and Timoshenko (or Chuikov, but you said 1 arty) is the best we have to fill it. Tassigny is not worthy of my medals. I was a Slim supporter before the promotion update and I still believe he is the second best allied infantry. Tassigny lacks consistency in damage. Also I said Africa AND 1944. I'm skill wise not a very good player so that extra slot Montgomery opens up does matter for me. I don't think the difference between Montgomery and Rokossovsky (which I think is less than a color code) is great enough for me to deploy 1 fewer general. If I already have Montgomery or Patton then Rokossovsky is indeed a favorable choice as a second allied tank general to purchase. Leclerc has PL, however. Vatutin is a better option to Timoshenko. Tassigny is bulkier and hits harder than Skim (with VR). Small difference, but still a difference. Like Kuri and Rundstedt. |
|
|
|
Post by Erich von Manstein on Apr 7, 2022 2:47:07 GMT
Leclerc as infantry because he's who we have in the 1944 lineup. In Africa this spot belongs to Alexander. You have no other free options. Montgomery's purchase opens up an empty slot and Timoshenko (or Chuikov, but you said 1 arty) is the best we have to fill it. Tassigny is not worthy of my medals. I was a Slim supporter before the promotion update and I still believe he is the second best allied infantry. Tassigny lacks consistency in damage. Also I said Africa AND 1944. I'm skill wise not a very good player so that extra slot Montgomery opens up does matter for me. I don't think the difference between Montgomery and Rokossovsky (which I think is less than a color code) is great enough for me to deploy 1 fewer general. If I already have Montgomery or Patton then Rokossovsky is indeed a favorable choice as a second allied tank general to purchase. Leclerc has PL, however. Vatutin is a better option to Timoshenko. Tassigny is bulkier and hits harder than Skim (with VR). Small difference, but still a difference. Like Kuri and Rundstedt. He does. I'd much rather put him on an AC with Dragoon than on infantry, but you said 1/2 infantry so Leclerc is the only option for second infantry. Vatutin is indeed better but I'm assuming we only buy 4 allied generals at this time and I replaced Vatutin with Montgomery. Tassigny is bulkier, but I don't think he will hit harder. Let's say both of them are attacking a demoralized enemy. Tassigny's damage will be (stats + 15 + SF) * SF multiplier * (1 - reduction) + 12, whereas Slim's will be (stats + 20 + SF) * SF multiplier * (1 - reduction) + 6. Tassigny will at most deal just 1 more damage than Slim, if you are not attacking a countered unit. But if the enemy is not demoralized, then Tassigny's damage will be outclassed by Slim's. True, a small difference is still a difference. But different people evaluate the amount of this difference differently. If a player thinks Rokossovsky is better than Montgomery but he is better off deploying Montgomery and another general than Rokossovsky alone, he should still get Montgomery. |
|
|
|
Post by 6Johnny23 on Apr 7, 2022 12:47:59 GMT
Leclerc has PL, however. Vatutin is a better option to Timoshenko. Tassigny is bulkier and hits harder than Skim (with VR). Small difference, but still a difference. Like Kuri and Rundstedt. He does. I'd much rather put him on an AC with Dragoon than on infantry, but you said 1/2 infantry so Leclerc is the only option for second infantry. Vatutin is indeed better but I'm assuming we only buy 4 allied generals at this time and I replaced Vatutin with Montgomery. Tassigny is bulkier, but I don't think he will hit harder. Let's say both of them are attacking a demoralized enemy. Tassigny's damage will be (stats + 15 + SF) * SF multiplier * (1 - reduction) + 12, whereas Slim's will be (stats + 20 + SF) * SF multiplier * (1 - reduction) + 6. Tassigny will at most deal just 1 more damage than Slim, if you are not attacking a countered unit. But if the enemy is not demoralized, then Tassigny's damage will be outclassed by Slim's. True, a small difference is still a difference. But different people evaluate the amount of this difference differently. If a player thinks Rokossovsky is better than Montgomery but he is better off deploying Montgomery and another general than Rokossovsky alone, he should still get Montgomery. Tassigny is also an option, but you probably wont get him at this time. Just one but this proves that Tassighy can hit just as hard as Slim (sometimes), and even live longer. If you have Dowding if you use your flanking skills, demoralizing an opponent can be a trivial task. Situaltions like that can exist. |
|
|
|
Post by Erich von Manstein on Apr 8, 2022 1:49:52 GMT
He does. I'd much rather put him on an AC with Dragoon than on infantry, but you said 1/2 infantry so Leclerc is the only option for second infantry. Vatutin is indeed better but I'm assuming we only buy 4 allied generals at this time and I replaced Vatutin with Montgomery. Tassigny is bulkier, but I don't think he will hit harder. Let's say both of them are attacking a demoralized enemy. Tassigny's damage will be (stats + 15 + SF) * SF multiplier * (1 - reduction) + 12, whereas Slim's will be (stats + 20 + SF) * SF multiplier * (1 - reduction) + 6. Tassigny will at most deal just 1 more damage than Slim, if you are not attacking a countered unit. But if the enemy is not demoralized, then Tassigny's damage will be outclassed by Slim's. True, a small difference is still a difference. But different people evaluate the amount of this difference differently. If a player thinks Rokossovsky is better than Montgomery but he is better off deploying Montgomery and another general than Rokossovsky alone, he should still get Montgomery. Tassigny is also an option, but you probably wont get him at this time. Just one but this proves that Tassighy can hit just as hard as Slim (sometimes), and even live longer. If you have Dowding if you use your flanking skills, demoralizing an opponent can be a trivial task. Situaltions like that can exist. Tassigny is in the lineup for Africa. For 1944 you need Clark instead if you are going infantry. I don't think either one of them is good enough though. Slim's survivability is good enough for me. I can't appreciate Tassigny's damage when the enemy is not demoralized. I prefer Halsey over Dowding if I'm only deploying one air general. It does exist. I never said Montgomery and Rokossovsky are definitively better than one another and I never will, because it's all down to a player's lineup composition and preference. However, as game progresses Rokossovsky will slowly reduce the gap on areas where he is disadvantaged. |
|
