|
|
Post by Erich von Manstein on Oct 11, 2024 23:02:05 GMT
I don’t understand why Halsey is given fleet leader skill while he is designed for air raiding with carrier.. For “balancing.” ET hates perfect generals, especially perfect F2P generals. Except Guderian. Could also be the jerks asking for "historical accuracy," whose protests made ET nerf Darlan from gold to silver. |
|
|
|
Post by Erich von Manstein on Oct 12, 2024 0:08:16 GMT
If you think about it this way, with lvl 5 crit ribbon, Bock only increases 20% of your overall crit damage (even less for Manstein and Rommel), whereas IV is 20% on final damage. He's Rommel level good, but not Guderian level. I really can't see why. Most likely both of them will have 4 same skills and then we have IV and bonus for commanding elite units of Guderian vs. Bock's unique skill. If it only 20% damage increase altogether it is still of value because he buffs not only himself but his teammates as well. Guderian: 10% crit rate + 12 atk + 20% final damage Bock: 20% overall crit damage for himself and allies when in enemy territory Bock has limitations and needs at least one other teammate to beat Guderian. He’s pretty much Rommel with bio but without crossfire when fighting alone in enemy territory. Once you take the enemy city, he'll switch off. Remember, after all, Bock is F2P. Do you think ET will give us another Guderian? |
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Oct 12, 2024 5:30:32 GMT
I really can't see why. Most likely both of them will have 4 same skills and then we have IV and bonus for commanding elite units of Guderian vs. Bock's unique skill. If it only 20% damage increase altogether it is still of value because he buffs not only himself but his teammates as well. Guderian: 10% crit rate + 12 atk + 20% final damage Bock: 20% overall crit damage for himself and allies when in enemy territory Bock has limitations and needs at least one other teammate to beat Guderian. He’s pretty much Rommel with bio but without crossfire when fighting alone in enemy territory. Once you take the enemy city, he'll switch off. Remember, after all, Bock is F2P. Do you think ET will give us another Guderian? That's the point. We almost always attack in groups and almost always operate in enemy territory. I don't have Guderian because of my self-imposed limitations, therefore Bock is welcomed. I obviously don't have enough resources to promote him to orange level yet. But I still believe that his unique skill is one of the best (if not the best) f2p unique skills of the game. |
|
|
|
Post by journeykeen on Oct 12, 2024 15:28:40 GMT
I don’t understand why Halsey is given fleet leader skill while he is designed for air raiding with carrier.. For “balancing.” ET hates perfect generals, especially perfect F2P generals. Except Guderian. Could also be the jerks asking for "historical accuracy," whose protests made ET nerf Darlan from gold to silver. This raises an interesting question about what a good distribution of skills would have been if ET could design the game from scratch with what they know now. For instance, do they want every general to need the same 2-3 perks to be viable (at minimum, AA and PL or equivalents)? I for one, again with what we know now, thing it would be best if AA (and the medal) was built into the stars of generals, so their baseline attack is boosted merely by having the general: no perk necessary. Then, the other perks should be focused on being more unique and situational, requiring more skill to use rather than what we have now, where the optimal loadouts, other than rumor-stacking, is just to stack neutral damage perks, leader, AA, inferior victory, and inspiration. The current setup leaves little consideration for the optimal perks, despite what many in the community would have you believe. |
|
|
|
Post by tecnoghost on Oct 12, 2024 23:22:03 GMT
For “balancing.” ET hates perfect generals, especially perfect F2P generals. Except Guderian. Could also be the jerks asking for "historical accuracy," whose protests made ET nerf Darlan from gold to silver. This raises an interesting question about what a good distribution of skills would have been if ET could design the game from scratch with what they know now. For instance, do they want every general to need the same 2-3 perks to be viable (at minimum, AA and PL or equivalents)? I for one, again with what we know now, thing it would be best if AA (and the medal) was built into the stars of generals, so their baseline attack is boosted merely by having the general: no perk necessary. Then, the other perks should be focused on being more unique and situational, requiring more skill to use rather than what we have now, where the optimal loadouts, other than rumor-stacking, is just to stack neutral damage perks, leader, AA, inferior victory, and inspiration. The current setup leaves little consideration for the optimal perks, despite what many in the community would have you believe. Well, I have sometimes thought that it would be interesting if the skills, apart from the main bonus, offer other more individual advantages (sorry for the excess schizophrenia), for example: plain fighting +30 attack when fighting on plains, because apart from that it gives advantages depending on the type of unit being commanded, something like this armored +15% critical damage artillery +15% critical damage infantry +10% to unit defense (this following the logic that both artillery and tanks have better positions to attack while the terrain is not convenient for infantry) following the same logic fight in jungle +30 attack when fighting in jungle infantry 25% chance to attack without suffering counterattacks armored +5 defense artillery +10 defense street fighting +30 attack when fighting in cities infantry +50% defense artillery +5% defense and attack armored 30% chance to dodge enemy damage engineers, depot ship and replacement of casualties +15 (a very low bonus in my opinion but no way) +15 when in friendly territory +25% healing when inside a city (it would be more than 25% of the total healing between the healing of the city including the field hospital if it is plus the +15 base and the +15 for being in friendly territory) in the case of ships since the sea has no friendly territory +40% healing when in port +15% defense when in port Last example, fortification +15% defense (another pretty meh bonus) infantry: when in the city restores 30% of the city's HP +10% damage Artillery: +20% defense and +20% counter damage Armored: The unit's attack will not be reduced when it loses more than half of its health and gains immunity to critical damage Thus, with this system, it is possible to look for skills that fit your type of game and there will be more options so that you can create a commander that stands out in certain circumstances, for example Graziani, Paton, Model or Timoshenko that in principle would not work under a traditional build they could be useful either because their bonuses end up working well or because with the implementation of the correct skills they can do a pretty good job, which would also make the use of hybrid generals viable if you wanted to build one or simply want to someone all-terrain to meet any need that you cannot do in the absence of a specialized general |
|
|
|
Post by resiphius on Oct 15, 2024 15:12:03 GMT
For “balancing.” ET hates perfect generals, especially perfect F2P generals. Except Guderian. Could also be the jerks asking for "historical accuracy," whose protests made ET nerf Darlan from gold to silver. This raises an interesting question about what a good distribution of skills would have been if ET could design the game from scratch with what they know now. For instance, do they want every general to need the same 2-3 perks to be viable (at minimum, AA and PL or equivalents)? I for one, again with what we know now, thing it would be best if AA (and the medal) was built into the stars of generals, so their baseline attack is boosted merely by having the general: no perk necessary. Then, the other perks should be focused on being more unique and situational, requiring more skill to use rather than what we have now, where the optimal loadouts, other than rumor-stacking, is just to stack neutral damage perks, leader, AA, inferior victory, and inspiration. The current setup leaves little consideration for the optimal perks, despite what many in the community would have you believe. I don’t think it would be too different than what we have now in terms of skill variation, considering ET even added the super powerful Ace Commander to WC3 (wolfpack and guerilla don’t count because they are like the worst bunch of the whole skill selection even before Ace Commander existed) and most other later installments also have general skills that unconditionally buff damage or attack of a particular unit type. |
|
|
|
Post by Dorado St. Sebastian on Oct 19, 2024 4:19:21 GMT
Where can i find the Batons/swords?
Shop, items?
|
|
|
|
Post by nimrael on Oct 19, 2024 13:12:24 GMT
Where can i find the Batons/swords? Shop, items? Once per month a Shop is avaible. Starting next thursday, i believe. And it lasts for a week. You can get 4 swords an 2 battons for free |
|
|
|
Post by pevertpanda on Nov 2, 2024 17:34:03 GMT
Has anyone got the Ultimate Rundstedt? Can he withstand Manstein's, Kluge's and De Gaule's (1950) attacks?
|
|
|
|
Post by tecnoghost on Nov 3, 2024 3:47:41 GMT
It could be good about Kluge and De Gaulle if you give him a level 5 infantry ribbon that gives you +25% defense in general, but his 20% base is 40% which is no small thing, now against Manstein who has panzer excellence the The only way would be under the following scenario, first let three basic infantry units attack him so that his ability goes from 20% to 50% defense, which together with the ribbon gives you 75% defense and would have to be deployed in an RPG level 9 that reduces 50% damage from armored units, and just in case fighting spirit + active rocket attack, so you can counterattack and recover part of the damage received, and I still bet on Manstein
|
|
|
|
Post by resiphius on Nov 3, 2024 16:53:43 GMT
Has anyone got the Ultimate Rundstedt? Can he withstand Manstein's, Kluge's and De Gaule's (1950) attacks? I don’t know, I usually put him on phantom force and go phantom mode if I believe he is getting tons of hits in the upcoming enemy turn |
|
|
|
Post by YDE on Nov 4, 2024 9:18:27 GMT
I got three of the four, so I'll throw myself into the ring.
de Gaulle: Biggest glow-up, massive price tag, long time to wait till he's useable. If you wanna use de Gaulle, I'd recommend you have all the resources required to speedrun him to Orange banner, because he sucks even at Gold. He's very fun to use at orange, and that rumor skill works no matter what unit you're on, so you can use some pretty wild and unorthodox sets, like say blitzkrieg and guerilla, or maybe afl and arty leader and have him on Apache (purely bc of the 2 range) and still useful on arty. The loss of some power from insp (or VI ig) can help make sure de Gaulle doesn't get stuck from killing. So much versatility.
Bock: Bock's fine, average tanker. Good damage, naturally outperforms Guderian on enemy terrain and equal to him on allied terrain. Good support, can work well solo. Expensive like de Gaulle, but useable at silver stage and up. Less versatile than de Gaulle, less of a glow up, but he has the 3 main skills to be a good tanker. Oh, and Bock on T72 is a waste IMO. Just use him on regs, or your spare Pershing or something.
Se---... Rundstedt: Very fun and that defensive prowess is very useful on the offensive. Provocation is something I slept on, but it's actually really useful for a lot of scenarios. He makes infantry very tanky, just don't play him recklessly, or that bulk will seem weak to you. He requires more tactical movements compared to the others. I run him on Burgers. Less potential damage than Yamashita (was a big fan of Yamashita burgers), but his defensive abilities more than make up for it.
Halsey: I hate Enty. The other skill for basic naval attacks is also not too useful for me. I'd keep Halsey at gold honestly... or just not buy Halsey at all. Enterprise is an EF that I just do not like, a portable city for paras at best. Akagi outshines it, but a different discussion for a different time.
In terms of purchase path, I'd go with de Gaulle first, followed by Bock, Rundstedt, and honestly skip Halsey and wait for potentially new skins to come out.
|
|
|
|
Post by pevertpanda on Nov 4, 2024 12:47:58 GMT
Thank you everyone. I already have got Ultimate De Gaule, he is the best. Since I have got a lot of tank Generals and lack of infantry Gens, I want to upgrade Rundstedt so I want to ask about everyone's opinions of his usefulness in tanking and durability.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boss Tweed on Nov 4, 2024 18:03:12 GMT
Thank you everyone. I already have got Ultimate De Gaule, he is the best. Since I have got a lot of tank Generals and lack of infantry Gens, I want to upgrade Rundstedt so I want to ask about everyone's opinions of his usefulness in tanking and durability. Seen someone get only 120 crit damage from 1939 CC Kluge attack when using Rundstedt. |
|
|
|
Post by YDE on Nov 4, 2024 23:07:35 GMT
Thank you everyone. I already have got Ultimate De Gaule, he is the best. Since I have got a lot of tank Generals and lack of infantry Gens, I want to upgrade Rundstedt so I want to ask about everyone's opinions of his usefulness in tanking and durability. His defensive prowess is very effective, and he sacrifices little damage to get it (I run insp and leader), so I'd get him if you can. If not, Malin or Yamashita are fine candidates, and if you're willing to spend, Marshall is goated if you don't have him. Marshall has better initial defensive prowess (20% evasion from enemy damage + the defensive bulk from his EF bio), and Rund only gets a bit more when beign attacked multiple times. In terms of damage, they're roughly the same, but Marshall also has longevity (guerilla master again, no need to run inf medal). |
|
