|
|
Post by eeeeef on Nov 24, 2020 3:37:30 GMT
Why not both blitzkrieg and machinist? Remember you need rumor on him, so 3 defensive skills would be too much. You have deadline in scenarios, and more firepower means giving less time to the enemy to rearm. Fair point. Since in wc4 fire power and crippling your enemy is more important than survivability only guderian is capable of running them both |
|
|
|
Post by Erich von Manstein on Nov 24, 2020 10:56:06 GMT
And the terrorists can definitely deal more than 25. Problem solved? Remember, 25 is only average counter-attack damage, regular damage doesn't count because blitzkrieg only fends off counter-attacks. Also, blitzkrieg is useless if your [usually 4th] tank gen only attack paralyzed (rumored) enemies or infantries within 2 range. Then how about the 2nd and 3rd? |
|
|
|
Post by Sun Li-jen of the Glorious RoC on Nov 25, 2020 1:58:02 GMT
Remember, 25 is only average counter-attack damage, regular damage doesn't count because blitzkrieg only fends off counter-attacks. Also, blitzkrieg is useless if your [usually 4th] tank gen only attack paralyzed (rumored) enemies or infantries within 2 range. Then how about the 2nd and 3rd? 2 artilleries with gens and can cover that rumor-injecting role, I prefer that way. I'm planning to remove blitz from Rommel and give it panz leader. |
|
|
|
Post by journeykeen on Nov 26, 2020 21:27:35 GMT
So can anyone explain to me what makes Graziani so hyped recently? He has to sacrifice either good damage or survival ability. I don't see him making himself even into the non-IAP top 5. I respectfully completely disagree with the recent (well, starting in summer) Graziani praise. I see his utility in that he can last long, but I also see no reason for a general to last long. The slowest general conquests do not go past 40 rounds, and if they are that long then by that time it’s almost all Air Force anyway. Not to mention that the vast majority of the game does not involve super long conquests like Cuba-50’. |
|
|
|
Post by Sun Li-jen of the Glorious RoC on Nov 27, 2020 2:45:05 GMT
So can anyone explain to me what makes Graziani so hyped recently? He has to sacrifice either good damage or survival ability. I don't see him making himself even into the non-IAP top 5. Okay the, give an alternative for 3rd tank if so. Rokossovsky? He dies too fast. Monty? More offensive, okay. What else? Vatutin?? He doesn't stand a chance against Graziani. |
|
|
|
Post by Erich von Manstein on Nov 27, 2020 7:29:26 GMT
So can anyone explain to me what makes Graziani so hyped recently? He has to sacrifice either good damage or survival ability. I don't see him making himself even into the non-IAP top 5. Okay the, give an alternative for 3rd tank if so. Rokossovsky? He dies too fast. Monty? More offensive, okay. What else? Vatutin?? He doesn't stand a chance against Graziani. Rokossovsky. Give him AA and Blitzkrieg. |
|
|
|
Post by tristanknight on Nov 27, 2020 13:16:21 GMT
So can anyone explain to me what makes Graziani so hyped recently? He has to sacrifice either good damage or survival ability. I don't see him making himself even into the non-IAP top 5. I respectfully completely disagree with the recent (well, starting in summer) Graziani praise. I see his utility in that he can last long, but I also see no reason for a general to last long. The slowest general conquests do not go past 40 rounds, and if they are that long then by that time it’s almost all Air Force anyway. Not to mention that the vast majority of the game does not involve super long conquests like Cuba-50’. It's not so much about lasting long turn-wise, for me it's about lasting longer against spam. His machinist keeps his health up longer than if I had any other tank general going against the spam. |
|
|
|
Post by tristanknight on Nov 27, 2020 13:22:07 GMT
Okay the, give an alternative for 3rd tank if so. Rokossovsky? He dies too fast. Monty? More offensive, okay. What else? Vatutin?? He doesn't stand a chance against Graziani. Rokossovsky. Give him AA and Blitzkrieg. If Graziani wasn't an option, I'd go Rokossovsky. I have AA and Blitzkrieg on him. |
|
|
|
Post by journeykeen on Nov 27, 2020 19:42:56 GMT
I respectfully completely disagree with the recent (well, starting in summer) Graziani praise. I see his utility in that he can last long, but I also see no reason for a general to last long. The slowest general conquests do not go past 40 rounds, and if they are that long then by that time it’s almost all Air Force anyway. Not to mention that the vast majority of the game does not involve super long conquests like Cuba-50’. It's not so much about lasting long turn-wise, for me it's about lasting longer against spam. His machinist keeps his health up longer than if I had any other tank general going against the spam. But spam is easily countered by generals who can quickly kill them; AA, leader, + explosives/rumor leads to the highest damage. I also think you slightly contradict yourself in your statement; spam is only a problem in longer conquests, so typically when one takes a challenge by attempting obscure 1 Star conquests. The best way to counter this is, again, capturing cities quicker, i.e. doing more damage. If machinist is used to counter spam, then it obviously does it inferiorly to damage perks. Mechanist will not help my tank gens to kill 5+ units and to capture a city in one round of the general cannot one shot anyway. To retain health above 50% to therefore retain maximum damage, one can also upgrade general health, something that does not subtract from damage, unlike mechanist. |
|
|
|
Post by tristanknight on Nov 28, 2020 7:43:49 GMT
It's not so much about lasting long turn-wise, for me it's about lasting longer against spam. His machinist keeps his health up longer than if I had any other tank general going against the spam. But spam is easily countered by generals who can quickly kill them; AA, leader, + explosives/rumor leads to the highest damage. I also think you slightly contradict yourself in your statement; spam is only a problem in longer conquests, so typically when one takes a challenge by attempting obscure 1 Star conquests. The best way to counter this is, again, capturing cities quicker, i.e. doing more damage. If machinist is used to counter spam, then it obviously does it inferiorly to damage perks. Mechanist will not help my tank gens to kill 5+ units and to capture a city in one round of the general cannot one shot anyway. To retain health above 50% to therefore retain maximum damage, one can also upgrade general health, something that does not subtract from damage, unlike mechanist. Not as easy as one might think. I can have a general like Guderian lose more than 50% of health while dealing with spam, as opposed to Graziani maybe losing 25-35%. Especially dealing with the triple ranked units in 1950. Plus doing that can allow me to have Guderian's full, fresh health to advance on through with ease once the spam is gone. And Graziani can one shot a few on his own in a turn even with lower damage output, that's because I gave him both damage increasing skills, panzer leader and armored assault. In fact I like machinist so much I may even give it to Guderian. Though I'm going to try it out on a mod first. |
|
|
|
Post by Darth Nihilus on Nov 28, 2020 20:56:31 GMT
After using Graziani for a few months, I can say that he's probably the best meat shield general in the game.
Yeah that's all I have to say. Thanks for tuning in to my podcast.
Jk.
I think Graziani isn't necessarily a defensive general (there's really only a few of those in-game) but more of a supporting cast. I think I may have killed him a few times by accident cause I tried to throw him onto enemies. His best role served is to clean up stragglers, help defend artillery, and widen a path while Guderian's blitzkrieging.
|
|
|
|
Post by journeykeen on Nov 28, 2020 21:01:57 GMT
But spam is easily countered by generals who can quickly kill them; AA, leader, + explosives/rumor leads to the highest damage. I also think you slightly contradict yourself in your statement; spam is only a problem in longer conquests, so typically when one takes a challenge by attempting obscure 1 Star conquests. The best way to counter this is, again, capturing cities quicker, i.e. doing more damage. If machinist is used to counter spam, then it obviously does it inferiorly to damage perks. Mechanist will not help my tank gens to kill 5+ units and to capture a city in one round of the general cannot one shot anyway. To retain health above 50% to therefore retain maximum damage, one can also upgrade general health, something that does not subtract from damage, unlike mechanist. Not as easy as one might think. I can have a general like Guderian lose more than 50% of health while dealing with spam, as opposed to Graziani maybe losing 25-35%. Especially dealing with the triple ranked units in 1950. Plus doing that can allow me to have Guderian's full, fresh health to advance on through with ease once the spam is gone. And Graziani can one shot a few on his own in a turn even with lower damage output, that's because I gave him both damage increasing skills, panzer leader and armored assault. In fact I like machinist so much I may even give it to Guderian. Though I'm going to try it out on a mod first. If your Guderian is to lose more than 50% health early on than he would lost that with mechanist anyway. Once the spam is gone the health largely does not matter. |
|
|
|
Post by manstein69 on Feb 14, 2021 7:14:54 GMT
If you do the mission ROMMEL is cheaper, you even get medals from making Rommel cheaper, IDK why anyone would want to buy him
|
|
|
|
Post by Manfred von Richthofen on Jun 9, 2021 0:45:00 GMT
Who is actually better Rokossovsky or this guy (Graziani) so i can get either of them as my 3rd tank gen soon
|
|
|
|
Post by Gerd von Rundstedt on Jun 9, 2021 12:20:05 GMT
Who is actually better Rokossovsky or this guy (Graziani) so i can get either of them as my 3rd tank gen soon Montgomery. But If you are not going to invest tens of thousands of medals, get Rokossovsky. If you are going to invest quite a bit, get Graziani. IMO, Grazi can be better than Rommel. |
|
