>>1893519
Another open beta?
Last one was total shit performance wise.

Now it's total shit network wise, time goes on.
>>1893636

Adding Weapons Squads to an overall Armored Deck is a Yuge boon.
Are Mech. Riflemen still useless? I switched them out for Mech Riflemen with AA and loved it.
Performance is a LOT better, so is the UI design. I really enjoy the new gamemode, A solid mix of Conquest and Destruction.

All in all, bretty good.

File: Screenshot 2024-11-12 150206.png (248 KB, 559x286)

248 KB PNG

>>1893519

>>1893689
ebin memes you fag

>>1893656
>Are Mech. Riflemen still useless
They're better but still not good.

File: MARINES OOH RAH.png (307 KB, 1255x229)

307 KB PNG

SIR YES SIR OOH RAH

>>1893795
Infantry feels less shitty now that they buffed its survivability. I can recommended the US Marines or Russian Coastal specialization for all enjoyers of infantry blobbing, hiding in forests, ambushing tanks etc.

Where is my goddamn HIMARS? Was it stolen by gypsies?

>>1893860
They removed it from the Marines specialization and are going to put it somewhere else

>>1893656
Any mobile infantry with good survivable IFV's are goated. Marine raiders and RU engineer door kickers are also great for insta wiping squads in buildings.then smoking and driving out.

Weapons teams just sit in buildings or trees and die. not worth it imo

File: The first crabber's son t(...).jpg (245 KB, 848x900)

245 KB JPG

Played all the betas and got to 2300 ELO.
This one is actually in danger of making the game shit.
>Vatnik cope is off the scale
>T15 is both undercosted and overperforming, getting the toughness of a MBT with APS, smoke, 8 soldier transport capacity, a 57mm that shreds light vehicles, troops and helicopters with two quick-firing atgms that punch through APS
>The Bradley is a wet paper bag with slow-firing ATGMs that can't get through APS and the bushmaster does tickle-damage to entrenched infantry
>Vatniks gets cruise missiles from:
>five aircraft
>a helicopter
>iskander
>oh and their nuke is a cruise missile
>America gets cruise missiles on the F18D, B1 and ATACMs
>also HIMARS has been cut
>and their nuke is a gravity bomb, you WILL lose your bomber vs. the vatniks that can immediately evac after launching
>infantry is useless
>Maps are too fucking huge, like they're made for 8v8s
>the first beta you fought as a team, now you're fighting five 1v1s with little opportunity to help teammates being pushed without critically understrengthening your own frontline to fight a potential mass-tank assault
>Vatnik helicopters are made of magic and can eat 4+ stingers before going down, they are only at risk of damage with hold-fire stinger team stacks laying an ambush or your opponent isn't actually home
>not that they'd come close because they sit at 6km and spam even more cruise missiles at you
>only the Kiowa Warrior loaded up with stingers and the AH64D is even worth bringing, maybe a single rocketboat if you have the deck points to spend

1/2

>>1893899
2/2
>infantry cannot push whatsoever, at best they can occupy buildings, or expose firing positions for you to strike with other assets
>the only way infantry will actually kill something is if you stack up all your ATGM teams in a single building and hold-fire them, then nuke tanks at close range
>and you better evac and reposition immediately because four cruise missiles are on their way
>American SHORAD and cruise missile defense is ridiculous, your best defense against cruise missiles/HARMs are PIVADS spam
>shilkas can with some luck eat 3 cruise missiles/HARMs before it gets wasted, and sometimes it will survive with a single hitpoint
>speaking of HARMS, vatniks gets them on five different units, one of which is stealth, and helicopters
>the US gets two, one on the Prowler which is slow as shit and the F18D, fighting it over your ability to bring cruise missiles
So you either play Russia and watch the US team get frustrated and leave, or you play US and enjoy the afghan insurgency experience where at any one moment there are six missiles inbound towards your frontline, which you cannot defend against because there's two helicopters with HARMs sitting on low-altitude in total safety wiping out any radar-guided SHORAD you bring up (no, they do not engage missiles without radar)

If you dare to comment on this, Russian moderators will tut-tut and tell you that it is completely real and the Real Russian Army has this deployed. But out of all these gripes, the biggest one are the comically large, empty maps where you can't help anyone without leaving a critical weakness in your own sector.

It's all so tiresome.

>>1893899
Nigger you're complaining about asymmetrical balance because it's not asymmetrical

US get way more SEED missiles than RU so you need to use them to overload air defence. Prowlers carry something crazy like 4 HARMs each (I've seen three of these called in at once rape the entire air defence), RU planes only carry 2

Cruise missiles are easily shot down and nukes are a noob trap.

Bradley's are better than most RU transports and very survivable compared to shit like BMP3's or vdv BRDM's. Weapons teams on both factions are noob traps. IFV's are king

Tldr get good

>>1893909
Asymmetrical balance because it's not symmetrical*

Something is fucked up with the helicopters for sure. They will sit there eating missile after missile and take no damage. Then they BTFO your tank and slink away into the darkness relatively unscathed.

Americans get better airpower and anti-radar/AA

Russians get better AA and cruise missiles

Losing to cruise missiles spam just means you didn't build enough counters to cruise missiles. You should always have a koiwa or IFV driving around the map for easy AA/artillery kills, you said it yourself the maps are big and it's impossible to have a watertight defensive line everywhere.

So exploit that and dive their 2k+ investment in support units for easy kills with an 90 point ifv

>>1893918
Flares on helicopters give you a 30% dodge chance

So if you have shit luck he can survive multiple missiles until running out of flares

>>1893918
Supposedly there's a netcode issue right now that sometimes causes hits to not register damage properly, and it's exacerbated with AA specifically because of the new airburst mechanics they implemented.

if i like using infantry and artillery the most, is WARNO or Broken Arrow better for me?

>>1894016
>no shot
zoomer, get off my board.

>>1893909
ok so everyone will play russia and wait forever for nobody to play US, great game design retard.

>>1894018
Old man coping his military is now 3rd world tier. Time to wake up to the fact that China and Russia have outpaced your country's military development and now you're all using refurbished 80's weaponry. Luckily it's realized in-game. However, keep your circumcized 4-incher in your pants because USA will get more stuff in the full game (and so will Russia lmao)

I tried watching some streams of this but every time I look at chat there's someone having a meltdown about how it's unrealistic for russia to have a functioning military or something

>>1894027
Gayto fag cope
Thank God China is confirmed first DLC nation

>>1894025
>Time to wake up to the fact that China and Russia have outpaced your country's military development
Remind me who's currently enlisting fucking North Koreans for help lmao

>>1894016
>>1894025
Why are there SHITSKINS on my /vst/??
This is the White mans genre.

>>1893954
Warno is a campfest and boring as fuck. BA is more like world in conflict

You can spot the wargame players in BA because they cram 10 units into a tiny treeline and don't bother to micro any vehicles the entire game. Then they get wiped out by missiles/cas and cry OP

>>1894022
Terminators got their APS removed and you're here bitching that they're OP

Abraham's absolutely shit on 98% of RU vehicles and never die

>>1894041
Leave your politics and Ukraine shit posting on /k/ where it belongs

File: 1709459290845602.png (528 KB, 600x764)

528 KB PNG

>>1894049
>discover ant nest of random units hiding in forest in giant clump
>reach for my bomb truck plane, set up the bombing run
>carpet of explosions
>*bleep boop* player has disconnected

>>1894058
I'm pretty sure there's a bomber that carries something like 24 cluster bombs. You know the treeline next to the airstrip on the airfield map? I saw two guys lose like 12 units + 3 helicopters just parked in a perfectly straight line. One guy just obliterated their entire army with one carpet bomb. Interestingly the helicopters died too.

Most retarded play I've seen in the last ten years, so thank you warnotards for delivering high quality entertainment

What's the optimal opening call in to shit on noobs?

>>1894041
>have de facto alliance with a country
>bring in their people to observe modern warfare and learn from it
I hate 4th generation warfare and I hate the endless sea of bullshit that comes with it.
captcha: xysk (kys)

>>1894106
nuke

>>1894106
Ironically, a coloumn of T15s with all the upgrades (if you're russian), a tank and a helo counter like the TOR or LAV-AD. If you're mutts, 2 Abrams SEPv3 with APS. They spent all their money on planes and lost a bunch of them? Roll into the capture zone and take all their points, helicopter in ATGM teams and keep fortifying. You're so far ahead, it'll take several opponents to dislodge you. They paradropped? Roll your APS-equipped IFVs and support through them. They have no armour and just dogwater airborne close-range AT. They literally can't stop you.

Anyone got to play a scenario? I was in a lobby, and we couldn't find anything for 3 minutes.

>>1894106
Bring a single ASF and use it to spot enemy helis and airdrops and kill them. If they bought an airdrop it's okay to suicide your fighter to kill it. Otherwise just recall your plane for a refund.
Your initial deployment should mostly be fast ground units like Humvees or typhoons with recon units, manpads and some AT. Use them to quickly rush some forward points and dig in while heavier units make their way. If your plane didn't spot any opposing planes or if your team won the air battle, you can grab a transport heli and drop on one of the enemies points since you'll beat them to it.

Don't open with all your points in tanks or else you'll end up getting to the fight late and spending most of the game fighting to take territory instead of fighting to hold an advantage.

Helis are nuts right now so bring lots of AA always and abuse your own helis while your opp doesn't have all their AA in position yet.

is it more fun compared to warno?
is it more polished or feel more intuitive?
what are the pro cons vs warno

>>1894174
Try it out, it's free

>>1894049
Can infantry actually move in this game or if i want to do something I'm supposed to use gay (in a bad way) shit known as "armored vehicles"?

>>1894226
>he can't into combined arms
Go back to the 19th century

>>1894226
Like warno, the maps are big and there's a long trek from the spawn to the front. You CAN call in infantry on foot but that's insane. However if you don't want to transport infantry in trucks, APCs or IFVs you can transport them by helicopter.
All infantry squads have access to all transports in your deck (given there's enough space to actually fit the squad) so you have a lot of freedom there. Infantry is generally more mobile than Warno especially because individual squads have both instant-use smoke grenades they can use to break contact and a sprint button that breaks suppression.

However the economy of this game works a little differently from Warno. You don't have a limited number of units so attrition is more about trading point costs effectively. Whereas in Warno you can use your infantry as a meatshield horde because they're largely the expendable part of your deck, throwing infantry here can put you behind on points so you want to try and keep them alive and use them carefully.

Russian infantry is relatively weak in infantry fights but pack a lot of strong short range AT to ambush vehicles with. They rely a lot on vehicle support to win infantry fights but can zone out vehicles by occupying forests and city blocks. US infantry is much stronger but lacks good AT outside of specialized squads so they rely more on vehicles to fight other vehicles and use their infantry mainly to screen out enemy AT.

Has anyone actually got any use out of snipers, drones, rescuing pilots, grenade launchers or naval inf recoilless rifles

They seem like memes

>>1894284
Drones are incredibly good and disposable, a 100bux RQ9 can spot half the map while circling behind your front. The russian small drone is great to get spotting on something hiding on their front line, and you don't care if it gets shot down.

Snipers are completely invisible in forests while on hold-fire. You can have regular infantry run past at high-fiving distance and you'll remain unspotted. Extremely good for backline vision, as you just need to succeed once to get an undetectable asset that can keep tabs on their reinforcements, artillery, supply dumps and AA net. Do not stop trying to infiltrate sniper teams, and make sure they're on hold fire. Less OP in city maps, but still invaluable to sit in a highrise with good vision.

Grenade launchers are okay, but suffer from being mostly infantry-based or taking a weapon slot on something bigger. Recoilless rifles are dog water.

>>1894284
Snipers can mop up infantry BUT they also come with Laser designators, which can be used to call in laser guided (100% accurate) shells and bombs.

File: 1711579321022616.gif (1.8 MB, 320x180)

1.8 MB GIF

>enemy team is all lvl 15+
>mine is lvl 1-2
We got wrecked so hard that my ass started to hurt.

>>1893899
The game is essentially a fantasy RTS where war in Ukraine never happened and ruskie paper shit actually works.
It feels like a nostalgic look at 2018 /pol/k/a threads.

It is only missing Americans in exo-skeletons and Polish stealth-tank for full meme potential.

>>1894284
Drones are extremely good, bordering OP.
You can keep them far back enough to avoid radar AA and still spot the frontline, which fucks over enemy recon and inf hiding in treelines. You can also just suicide them into enemy AA to momentarily spot everything on the map and just bomb everything to shit, which is mainly what people do with them.

>>1894284
>grenade launchers
It's a "fuck you, this building and everything you hold dear inside" the unit.
The VDV version can clear out an entire block in seconds for dirt cheap.

>>1894331
You can find a 5-man team via the lobby system and then queue into matchmaking with it. It's really easy to just stack up with 4 bros and go seal clubbing since most of mm is filled with people that literally just dl'd the game.

>play US
>win some, lose some
>really struggle every match, relying overly on planes and helis to hold on and crumple once there's a strong AA net against my position
>inf fold to even basic vehicles, ATGMs have no sightlines to use their range, tanks are strong but job to helis, SHORAD can't fucking kill helis
>switch to russia
>comfortably win 6 games in a row, including a 4v5
They just have all the fucking tools in the world. This is absolute night and day

Two protips for air strikes:
When you order an air strike, your plane will automatically adjust to the altitude it needs to perform the strike and prevents you from changing altitude until it drops the bombs or you cancel the strike. This means for most bombs that you're flying in at high altitude where all radar AA can see you.

Instead, you can give a move order to your target, go low alt with afterburners on, and order your strike only at the last second when you're about to enter range (4km for most bombs). Now your plane will fly below the radar and only pop up at the last second to dump its payload, and you can immediately dive below radar again to give you almost no exposure to enemy AA.

The second is that while evacing from a strike, you can spam the V key to rapidly change altitude, which will fuck with missile tracking and increase the odds that a pursuing missile will go off course.

Doing all this basically nullifies air defense and lets you spam bombs with impunity.
>>1894343
The game began development before the war broke out and was envisioned as a Suwalki Gap scenario. It's just bad luck on their part that all the modernization that makes videogame russia a credible threat was tested in a real battlefield while they were making their game and found inadequate.

Why should anyone care what works and what does not in real life? This is a video game, not even a simulation.

>>1894354
You either play US and lose, or play Russia or watch the US team get frustrated and leave

>>1894361
it's because of CURRENT_CONFLICT
it's the number one reason I want the war to end, in the hope that the shitflinging stops and I can enjoy my vidya without people going mental over "real world capabilities"

>>1894052
He did not mention Terminators, he mentioned the T-15 which has 4 APS
Abrams die easily because Russia has multiple ATGM that ripple fire (task 2 ATGM at a time instead of 1 like all american ATGMs)
>>1893909
>US get way more SEED missiles than RU
SEAD
Russia gets MiG-35 with 4x ARM
SU-34 with 2x ARM
SU-57 with 4x ARM
US gets
Prowler with 4x ARM
F-15 EX II with 2x ARM
That's it, the F/A-18D does not get ARM, F-35 does not get ARM
So ignoring point limits Russia can have 32 ARM hardpoints with all ARM capable aircraft with maximum ARM loadouts while the US can get 20
>Cruise missiles are easily shot down
No they are not, at all. Are you thinking about ballistic missiles (the ones that fly up then down instead of hugging the ground)? Those are easy to shoot down, but cruise missiles absolutely are not.

>>1894361
Because every other russian-developed game this decade pretends that soviet shitboxes are gods of war and people get sick of it.

It's one thing to say "okay this fictional russian tank can fight evenly with US tanks for balance reasons" and another entirely to say "the RPG7 is superior to the entire US anti-tank arsenal and can pierce modern MBTs frontally."

I really don't understand the russian obsession with paper equipment.
The game does not feature BMP-2s or BMP-3s. The closest is a BMP-3F which is a special snowflake marine variant.
If I was a vatnik I'd want to be able to use the vehicles the forces I am a fan of actually use, not imaginary stuff like the B-10 or T-15. I don't want fictional US IFVs or tanks for example, I want Bradleys and Abrams.

>>1894361
>>1894371
one nation attacks with scooters and trucks, the other is the US

at a certain point the suspension of disbelief becomes impossible, the illusion shatters, and it's just tiresome

>>1894405
you forgot that Russia also gets HARMs on the mikaelovich (or however you spell it) helo

it can NoP up to your radar, pop up for a second to fire its HARMS, then dip down below the trees for total protection again and waste 1-2 of your radar units

>>1894411
Supposedly the real russian equipment is sequestered away to a mythic "motostrelki" spec that they've talked about extensively but never shown.

US does get some paper equipment as well. The M8 tank in the airborne list is technically a cancelled project and there are a few other paper units that were datamined a while ago (like the Comanche).

But obviously the choice to put all of the real russian equipment in a shitter spec that they never show to the public while spoiling you for choice of fictional or special snowflake gear in the rest of the roster was a deliberate choice.

>>1894427
The best part? The US also gets helicopter-launched HARMs except they do less damage, with less range, fly less fast, have less penetration and a smaller blast radius. And they're exclusive to the outdated, unarmoured navy helicopters. For "balance" reasons, the US ones deal exactly under the damage threshold to oneshot most unprotected AA, while the russian ones conveniently do exactly the same damage as their plane-launched HARMs--which will kill most AA platforms in 1 hit.

>>1894436
The Sidearm? I completely forgot about that, it's such a piece of shit weapons system that takes up Stinger slots. I am now even more mad about the dogshit balancing in this game.

Looking back, their reasoning to take HIMARS away from Marines was pure bullshit

>>1894361
MT

>>1894226

>>1894361
>>1894361
The seething generated by assmad Americans who have been informed of their own superiority due to the war in Ukraine is truly something else. I remember people being upset over French bias in wargame but never really to this degree. I have personally witnessed people attributing their failure to correctly predict line of site obstructions such as buildings (pretty sure the los tool is busted) to Russian bias because they are so personally booty blasted at the idea that a fictional Russian unit could kill one of their non-fictional units that they fail to actually analyze what went wrong in the first place.

A lot of the critisicms are completely correct in many regards of course and the game has issues with missile defense and how ATGM/APS is currently balanced in general and there absolutely is a fairly large gulf in units and what is available between the two but a lot of the screeching genuinely reads as some sort of onset psychosis.

Personally, I hope it gets fixed. Some of this shit makes the game truly frustrating to play and there seems to be a totally fanatical portion of the community that is willing to defend the dogshit balancing decisions of the developers at all costs.

A squad with 1 javelin can not kill a russian tank with APS by itself (carries 3 missiles, APS has either 2 or 4 shots at a rof of 5s per use)
A squad with 2 javelins can kill 1 and damage a second (carries 6 missiles, supposedly shoots 2 at once but rarely seems to actually do that, 2 volleys of 2 = 1 APS each and 1 hit each)
IFVs and APCs can't move supply
What did they mean by this?

>>1894495
The only real issue is the balancing, where you actually might see the Russian bias. If you compare (fully upgraded) Bradley to B-15, the latter has much better armament, more APS, is faster and costs only 10 more points.

File: 23_09_11.png (57 KB, 939x537)

57 KB PNG

New peak

>>1894518
Javelins are balanced by their low ammo because they're uniquely Fire and Forget while virtually all other atgms are not. However, their F&F behaviour is a little buggy right now so they're worse in practice than they should be.

Most singular ATGMs will never get through APS in practice because they'll just fucking die in the time it takes them to fire off 5 missiles. You always want to pair them. Cav scouts are expensive singular ATGM-carriers because they're also extremely stealthy recon units, meaning they can hide while firing and self-spot for their weapon. In their current form they can 2-shot any non-APS vehicle including tanks, which is honestly pretty good.

As the US you shouldn't necessarily need to rely on ATGM volleys to beat APS tanks. Your own tanks are better than the russian ones, so just use those.

>>1893867
>They removed it from the Marines specialization
what, don't the irl US marines have HIMARS as a main component of their warfare strategy?

>>1894610
The committee has decided that HIMARS does not fit Marines deck)))

>>1894610
Supposedly it was shifted to another spec for balance reasons. I get that it's silly considering the new force design, but I'll give the devs the benefit of the doubt in that making a faction based on the US army, and then having the US army radically reform mid-development kind of complicates things. I assume their decision will make more sense in context when we can see all 5 specs.

>>1894272
>US inf is stronger but lacks good AT
fug. i love spamming US inf squads with dragons/at4s/laws in warno.

>>1894771
It makes no sense that US AT is shit considering the Javelin is probably the best shoulder fired anti armor weapon on earth.

>>1894771
The US have some really good ATGMs, they just lack good close range disposable launchers for close quarters fighting.

>>1894228
>open combined arms game
>tank ballet inside
90% of military games
>>1894272
Can you hop from building to building quick and safely enough? Well I'm downloading the game anyway to check it out for myself.

>>1894407
>>1894424
Then just play any of the modern Combat Mission games, where OpFor can't do anything but die when faced with superior American everything.

Is air OP?

File: scout snipers dab on aa.webm (2.77 MB, 1280x720)

2.77 MB WEBM

>>1894284
snipers are breddy gud

>>1894961
Not in general but a few specific setups are extremely OP. VDV can get 4 Su-30SMs for 275pts each with a pair of KAB1500s and those bombs oneshot basically anything. Aim them directly behind a tank and they'll strike its back armour and instantly kill it despite their low pen.
US can bring 2 F-35s with either 500lb JDAMs or Stormbreaks for ~250pts. The payload is small but each bomb has exactly enough damage to oneshot a SAM, artillery piece or other backline support unit so you just fly in with stealth and kill 2-6 things every run and starve out their backline. They can also do something similar to russia using an F15E with 2x 2000lb JDAMs but it's a little more expensive and not as strong.

And both factions of course have access to spammable air launched cruise missiles that can overwhelm air defense and just flatten whole sections of the map. Russia especially gets 2x Tu-142 with 8 cruise missiles each

The main problem is that everyone can dodge AA by flying in at low altitude and only ordering the actual bombing strike at the last second, then immediately switching back to low alt. So even in places with heavy SAM coverage you can drop your payload and get out without losing your plane and just keep doing it over and over with no counterplay.

Nukes are so useless. You spend 1000 points to maybe kill like 2 units.

>>1895201
The russian nuke is arguably good because the plane is almost guaranteed to survive. The nuke itself only costs 600 pts and you're refunded the other 400 when the plane rtbs so all you have to do is kill like 2 tanks with it and it paid for itself.

The US one is 400pts but it's a bomb, and the turning circle on the bomber means that it's essentially guaranteed to die because it takes 3/4 of the map for it to turn around to evac and bombers are so slow that they can die to fucking manpads

>>1895337
I haven't tried to use one myself, I'm just saying that I've been nuked by other players probably 4 times with little to no effect on my army. Surely those points are better spent on almost anything else.

>>1895201
Nukes are only worth it if the enemy is blobbing.

>>1894411
It's not exactly paper. All that latest generation vehicles was produced but in very small numbers and only seen on victory day parade. Also nobody actually know it's exact characteristics because it's a military secret.

>>1895412
So it's paper

>try clusterbombs
>they're fucking worthless
Holy fuck who thought this was a good idea?

I actually think the T-15 is op

It's pretty funny gangbanging some lone Abrams with a few of them, all the auto canons seem to disable and suppress everything. Infantry jumps out for an easy kill on vehicles or team weapons in buildings.

Then you use your 4aps and 3 smokes to just reverse, resupply and do it all again. Like it's impossible to do that with BRDM's or BMPs

File: ampv.png (877 KB, 1473x555)

877 KB PNG

>New players flood in
>They play it like it's wargame/warno
>Columns of tanks drive directly into a crossfire of Javelins and TOW's.
>Helos just getting swatted out of the sky
Never had to run so many resupply missions, Love how fast Blackhawks can being replacements to the front.

>>1895526

>Columns of tanks drive directly into a crossfire of Javelins and TOW's.
>The tanks slaughter them because of APS and smoke

How the fuck are you supposed to beat Force Recon or Marine Raiders they are fucking OP

>>1895553
Use any vehicle

>>1895412
Seeing as any actual performance by their gear has been catastrophic, it's a safe assumption that it's all Potemkin type "Look at our modern equipment it's really good trust me )))))"

>>1895553
At a distance. Any weapons team destroys them.

If they're rushing APCs to disgorge them, fall back. If they're trying to ambush you in cities jumping from building to building, just walk away. Or kill them with vehicles, infantry AT is dogshit.

>>1895697
Sorry you're just retarded
I bet you think "crew comfort" isn't a meme.

File: proofs.jpg (17 KB, 720x522)

17 KB JPG

>>1895701

>>1895420
It's not paper, it's carton.

File: 1723599136720374.png (2.25 MB, 1280x720)

2.25 MB PNG

>>1895697
>Seeing as any actual performance by their gear has been catastrophic,
Are we going to apply the same standards to everyone then? Western guidance gets a 75% fail rate due to EW? You only get 4 javelin squads per game since replenishment time for stocks is measured in years?

This happens every time, Wehraboos become NATOboos in Cold War/modern settings and whine like a stabbed pig when their wunderwaffe doesn't autowin everything. The Discord is full of NATOids and Russoids shitting up balance discussion being valiant keyboard warriors.

>>1895716
>Western guidance gets a 75% fail rate due to EW
I actually would like to see EW in this game. In Warno it's simplified to accuracy debuff and radar spotter.

>>1895470
Yeah the t-15 is a problem. The issue is that it uses the Armata chassis, and the Armata is balanced to fight mid-tier us tanks frontally but lose to the sepv3. But then you can just bring hordes of these ifvs with the same armour and there are only 2 400pt tanks that can kill them.

>>1895716
>You only get 4 javelin squads per game
This is literally how it is in the game. And Russian vehicles all get 20-30 ECM for free so guidance fails plenty against them.

>>1895738
Russian jets are so much better than US jets (where airpower is like the US' one actual gimmick) it's comical

File: hornet goes hard.webm (2.59 MB, 1280x720)

2.59 MB WEBM

>>1895753
horny hornet dabs on stalinium plane

>>1895877
But that's the first beta that was actually fun to play

>>1895877
nice

>>1895553
Both come in 2 variants.
Force Recon can either be a generic recon squad with DMRs and AT. In this configuration they're kinda shit at combat and are beaten by any similarly priced russian recon squad, but they can kill IFVs and light transports with their launchers.
In their assault variant they have CQC weapons and anti-infantry launchers but no AT. These are one of the most cost-effective infantry killers in the game but they're short-ranged and have no AT. You can roll over them with vehicles, pin them down over open distances where they have to approach to enter their effective range, or duel them with your own specialist assault infantry (Ingenery). Black Berets also beat them straight up but mainly just because they're a fatter, more expensive squad.

Raiders are similar but they're stronger because they're a massive 14 man squad. In their CQC variant they're just a bigger force recon CQC squad. They still have short range and no AV but they'll beat their cost's worth of any other infantry in a forest fight. Just bomb them or kill them with vehicles. They cost as much as a Bradley.

In their standoff variant they outrange most infantry with a lot of firepower and have a slow-firing but high-pen AT launcher that can actually hurt tanks (as opposed to the AT4s, which are useless against anything bigger than a BMP). However, they're 120 pts. If you scout them from a distance you can pick them off outside of their range or bomb them, but up close you can beat them for their cost with a pair of Ingenery

The main weakness of the US on the ground is that their good infantry is big and hard to transport, and their good transports are small. Their small squads are terrible and their big transports suck. Thus it's hard for them to get their good infantry into the fight and hard to move it once they're there. Use AA helis and SHORAD to cut off helicopter transports and they struggle to maintain a position.

File: 1452849163151.jpg (61 KB, 759x481)

61 KB JPG

>nuke looks like shit
>ui still looks like shit
>performance is still shit
>network performance is still shit
yeah, i am done testing their shit game for free

>>1895952
I still gameplay itself, but those issues are so annoying. It's yet another test, but the game has barely improved.

I am absolutely weaponsteam stacking pilled and 4 stinger teams in one building teaming

I don't want to suppress your tank or shoo away your helicopter, I want it to fucking die.
Just make sure to relocate QUICKLY, as you will have pain incoming shortly

I like how big the maps are, but at the same time I also dont. So easy for enemies to jkust slip around where you have nobody, and you cant have enough men to watch everywhere.

But I love the long travel times to the front, and how units constantly need supply. Make every kill feel important since they cant just instantly shit a new unit into the area

>>1896128
Easy fix; Make maps narrower, not shorter. I just want to play with my team, not have everything ride and die on me holding the flank.

>>1896125
I had someone stack 4 stinger teams in a building and all get instantly suppressed and then wiped by a single rocket heli.

>>1896136
>4 stinger teams stacked up
>wiped by one helo
so he let them run out of ammo

sorry, but this highbrow strat does not allow for grugs

SOCOM specialization sounds cool, I hope they add in later in this playtest

File: viped.webm (2.64 MB, 1280x720)

2.64 MB WEBM

Who would win?
>patriot or cobra

>>1893899
>>1893902
>>1894343
>>1894360
Kek you NAFO troons still are delusional over wunderwaffen when in reality it is pure skill issues

>>1896142
It's not. The other 2 specs won't be in any of the betas and won't be fully revealed until release. They're basically saving them as ammo for the release marketing push.
But we basically know their rosters already because of a live event earlier this year where they accidentally had an (admittedly much earlier version) of the full unit roster visible in the army viewer.

>>1896196
>when in reality it is pure skill issues
>he says when vatniggers can't take over the poorest country in europe they border with in 2+ years

>SU57
For air superiority, loaded with AA missiles
>MIG35
SEAD, loaded with nothing but anti radiation missiles

What russian jet should I use for frontline bombing?

>>1896455
Nevermind I picked 2 SU30 with 2 FAB 1500s.
and had enough points leftover to take a single yak with a couple of small bombs

File: 1703269224812729.png (243 KB, 896x541)

243 KB PNG

>>1896311
>so fucking obsessed he brings up real life despite the anon specifically saying it was a game skill issue
Ok sure lets play your game: Surely you will apply that same logic to other conflicts, right? What happened to the Houthis finding out why the US doesn't have free healthcare? I think they're still waiting bro, go show them.

I think it's unrealistic that NATO can fight Russia when their coalition couldn't even fight the Houthis. Maybe they could make it so it's just Wagner alone fighting NATO? Would be more of a realistic matchup I think.

File: ffon.jpg (120 KB, 890x812)

120 KB JPG

>>1896507
houthis can only do their limpdick cope and seething at random civilian trade ships (who are still trading in the red sea kek) while the kikes are still committing their TPD agenda

American dickwaving is so tiresome
And the fact that they cannot comprehend different doctrines is even worse

>>1896516
Right, you created a coalition of nations to stop them for no reason at all, and you were chest-thumping about how the Houthis "fucked around and are now going to find out" purely as a joke. You definitely don't care about them making you look like incompetent retards on the world stage.

kek

>>1896543
Russia in BA is literally fighting with American doctrine. This is why this shit is so annoying. Because instead of getting to play with BMP2s and T-72s, you know shit that is actually in combat right fucking now, we get knockoff Bradleys (but better) and knockoff Abrams (but better) and an apache statclone (that's better). The game doesn't ask "what if Russian doctrine worked?" but instead asks "what if Russia just fought exactly like the US in Iraq, but better?"

>>1896274
I want a US Mechanized spec with a focus on ground mobility. Strykers, weapons teams, M1128s and maybe some prototype robots/UGVs. The ride hard die fast spec.

File: 10 int.png (165 KB, 303x311)

165 KB PNG

>>1896543
>different doctrines
>Every RU player spams stealth SEAD, cruise missiles and T15s
Russia is literally playing like AirLand Battle But Better

>>1896592
>>1896584
Yeah I agree about BA, the fact that Russia there uses equipment from times where balding retards in MOD were masturbating and imitating the West (despite not having comparable budget and conditions in general) is pure fantasy.
Just saying that I'm tired of literally every military game being infested with Americans who need to prove that their equipment is THE BEST!!!11

>>1896594
Nobody's complaining about US not having the best tech. It's that Russia's stuff is COMICALLY better, and they're better at what the US's gimmick should be; Airpower.

Is there even a point in bringing atgm squads? I can't reliably hold onto its own because APS is so common.

File: 1715497833552234.jpg (62 KB, 421x421)

62 KB JPG

>>1896594
>>1896596
>>1896592
This is a problem with the devs not getting their head out of their ass and wanting to favour quick, aggressive playstyle over defence. All factions have to be good at the same thing because the devs want the frontline to always be mobile, meaning constant back and forth assaults.

You can't make Russia rely on defence in-depth, suppression of air assets, and artillery superiority because the developers have said multiple times they don't want that kind of play style to "slow down the game". Trenches? Never. Mines? Forget it. So what's left? All that's left is to make everyone the same with minor variation because there's no room for other play styles.

This shit kills games, because what ends up happening is that the sweaties with high APM rush decks stomp everyone until they stop playing, but the sweaties themselves aren't numerous enough and the game death spirals. There's a vast graveyard of strategy games that tried to chase the esports playstyle as proof of this, but it seems developers never get the message.
>>1896625
See above, infantry is useless and will remain useless because of it. You can have a tank drive right up to infantry garrisoned in a reinforced concrete commieblock and the tank will wipe the squad (probably without even taking damage if it has APS). Even two ATGM squads in a reinforced building will have a hard time against a single tank with APS, in fact the tank will generally win if the opponent is microing it (on the other hand there's very little micro you can do on the ATGM squads).

>>1896625
Stack 3+ of them in a building and you can onetap the most expensive tanks. It's a huge risk for bombs, but works reasonably well on city maps with building whack-a-mole. If you don't stack them, they're just a deterrent, not a threat.

>>1896635
For the price of 3 atgm teams, it's better to just place a sniper team there and buy a helo with F&F missiles.

File: 1724957835641691.jpg (206 KB, 965x1000)

206 KB JPG

>>1896507
Kek
>Can't even take on the poorest shithole I. Europe
>Logistics train breaks down less than 50km over their own border
Russia is an African tin pot shithole, these vidya are pathetic cope for gay rape prison Nigeria (with snow)

>>1896637
of course there are more efficient ways to kill tanks, but stacking them is the one way i've gotten use out of ATGM teams specifically

the weapons team with dual javelins also kinda pop off hard

>>1896638
hohols are still losing to that Africa tin pot shithole

File: 1720780094679859.png (433 KB, 720x481)

433 KB PNG

>>1896641
>The bumfuck Slavs poorer than anyone else are losing to...
>The other retarded snowniggers who have them beat by every metric
>Very slowly
>In a 3 day special military operation
That isn't a win, that's snow monkeys being absolutely laughable

>>1896625
Some atgm squads, like the Dragon CAAT team or the VDV Kornet have two ATGM launchers and they alternate-fire so one will eat the APS and the second will get through each firing cycle. You can also take cheaper teams like the 50pt Konkurs or the Airborne TOW team and pair them to achieve the same effect. Generally speaking you need ATGMs in pairs at least so they can volley through APS. Just don't put them all in 1 spot or else a single tank shell will suppress both squads.

However you shouldn't rely on ATGMs entirely to be your main source of anti-tank firepower. Maps are so dense with line of sight blockers that it's rare for there to be a position where your ATGM teams can actually utilize their range and properly cover approaches without tanks just cutting through a city block or forest to jump on top of them. Combine ATGMs with your own vehicles and infantry with short range disposable launchers for best effect. Think of ATGMs as a screen against oncoming vehicles, not a hard counter.

>>1896645
suppression doesn't seem like it does a whole lot to weapon teams imo

sure, they fire a little slower, but they're still 100% accurate

>>1896662
It just slows their RoF to a crawl, yeah. A suppressed ATGM team won't win a shooutout vs a tank most of the time because they just take too long to get their shots off. It usually takes 3 solid hits to actually kill a tank frontally, and most tanks come with 2x smoke they can use to fuck over an ATGM volley in addition to their APS.

Actually smoke is so good right now that with good micro you don't even need APS.

>>1896665
Smoke is amazing, though you kinda need two. One to reverse, another to cover your run on maps like Kladeia or however you spell it with its abundance of open ground. Playing peekaboo through smoke to smack something between reloads is strong as fuck

>>1896641
So, another 2 weeks until Kiev falls?

>>1896694
How's the 48h ATO operation going?

>>1896696
>b-b-but what about
So two more weeks it is.

I get too nervous to join multiplayer, what if I do poorly and get shit on. Or get overwhelmed because I cant keep up with micro

>>1896713
The game is not all that micro intensive and most players are shit because it's a beta. Just go in and smash toy soldiers together

>>1896735
Lying is bad, you know?

Is there a way to spot enemy infantry in woods without getting ambushed first? I could send in infantry to comb through, but that's too slow to do for every single clump of woods.

>>1896830
Drones and helicopters
You could also just send tanks/IFVs with APS, they'll shit on them

am I wrong in believing single player will be absolutely shit and will rely entirely on multiplayer cancer like Eugen?

>>1896835
They are doing a scripted single player campaign like the first wargame (which was kino) instead of the dogshit "army general" shit of the newer games (which is just the multiplayer maps with different decks and the AI just fast moves to your spawn). So it might be good. They will also have a scenario editor so people can make their own shit and share it.

>>1896840
can't wait for some cheeky banter when the 'Bomb Donbass Children' scenario drops

>>1896842
SOVL

Are people leaving matches more often than before, or am I imagining stuff?

Should I do Marines/Armor or Marines/Airborne?
I want marines just for the prowler.

>>1896551
>about how the Houthis "fucked around and are now going to find out"
>gets bombed with impunity
>all you can do is seethe and attack random trade ships passing by
might as well be budget serbia

>>1896861
>start attacking random trade ships
>USA seethes and says they will put a stop to it
>houthis still attacking random trade ships to this day

>>1896863
>claim TKD in support of paliniggers getting genocided
>do this by attacking unrelated and even friendly random trade ships
>kikes shrug, bomb your port, and continue their genocide
truly the best support an ally could provide kek

>>1896830
Recon helis can see a little better because they're elevated, and drones will paint whole forests for you. But for ground troops forests are a knife fight because vision inside them is fucked. You've really just gotta send troops with good CQC loadouts to comb through and root out the bad guys if you can't safely bring in aerial recon.

>>1896859
>marines + armour
best tanks + best recce + best infantry + best artillery, but your good infantry are too big to ride bradleys and your heli/air tabs are point-starved
>marines + airborne
best infantry + best recce + best air/heli tabs
But your tanks/IFVs are second rate and your artillery options are limited.

Man, those are games are so one-sided. It's either a total victory or a total loss, rarely something in between.

This game really needs a notification when a unit is under attack. Could be a ping on your minimap and a quick little voice line, or maybe some text saying "X is taking fire" right above the minimap

Just did my first game, it was pretty fun. I need to get a larger transport to ferry troops from spawn to the front, the travel times are long and I cant afford to keep buying transports constantly.
My planes kept getting raped on bombing runs. How do I properly micro planes to drop their entire load instead of just doing one or two bombs then trying to make another pass?

File: VEE DEE VEE.webm (2.61 MB, 960x540)

2.61 MB WEBM

Post some webms. I am not installing this shit again so i only have webms from the last beta

File: 1711596754457357.webm (3.94 MB, 2048x1280)

3.94 MB WEBM

>>1897161
New but not mine

>>1897196
nice rampage, love me some helos

>>1897004
Bombers drop specific bombs at specific missions and altitudes.

Rockets and guns? Fired at low altitude with a Strafing Runs
High drag bombs (Snakeyes, rockeyes) drop on Bombing Runs at low altitude
GPBs (Not JDAMS) drop at high altitude with Bombing Run
JDAMS (laser guided bombs) drop at high altitude with precision strike
HARMS auto-launch onto radar-enabled AA vehicles from any altitude (they get better angle of attack from high altitude, and may get more range, needs testing)
Cruise missiles launch at high altitude with Precision Strike

Do not mix weapon types, or you'll only drop some of your munitions during a pass, and you're very vulnerable to being shot down

>>1897196
>37 fps
what pc do you have? im tempted to install it cause pc requirements are deceptively low but i just dont trust them

>>1897255
it runs alright on potato settings
your gpu will actually detonate if you enable shadows

Should I use plane launched cruise missiles or land based cruise missiles for the purpose of taking out enemy artillery?

>>1897332
If you picked Russian naval deck then get only Iskander for cruise missiles. For anything else there's really no choice, as far as I'm aware. US decks can only launch cruise missiles from planes and their land-based ballistic missiles are a waste of points, you're better off picking regular MLRS or artillery.

File: 1724161346587009.jpg (45 KB, 600x599)

45 KB JPG

The game is just way too rush focused, there's no reason to buy infantry to hold something, you're much better off just buying more tanks that you can use to meet the opponent's pushes with those points. The only reason anyone even bothers with infantry is because the deck point system and the tank availability. 300 points of infantry in a building will almost always lose to 300 points of tank.
>infantry, even when garrisoned in buildings, needs 2 ATGM teams to reliably kill a tank with APS
>even the biggest ATGMs need several hits to kill a tank
>almost every tank has smoke to waste missiles
>moving behind any obstacle will break LOS and make the ATGM miss
>even Javelins lose lock and miss if LOS is broken
>tanks can move and reposition much faster than infantry (and also go back to resupply)
>tank cannons hit almost instantly compared to ATGMs
>tank cannons cannot be countered by APS
>a tank usually has a cannon and a heavy MG while ATGM squads lack the latter
>a tank comes with its own transport and doesn't need to pay extra for it
In fact I think I'd prefer to just buy the IFVs without the infantry if I could, they generally do the same job but better and share a lot of the advantages of the tank. The one advantage infantry has is that it can be airlifted.

When the meta settles, infantry will only be there as that bonus you get when buying an IFV, and ground warfare will consist of MBTs and IFVs.

>>1897400
>without the infantry
you can
>VEH tab
>buy your AFV
>done

File: 20241029_063514.jpg (397 KB, 2048x1462)

397 KB JPG

I know the devs have said they're interested in allowing modding, but have reservations about just how far to allow. I'm hoping that they'll allow us to customize the specializations to use in custom games or SP stuff.

I'd like to make some more reasonably accurate formations for both sides that are still fun to play.

File: Russian Armored-Marines.png (3.51 MB, 1896x918)

3.51 MB PNG

Should I change anything with this deck? I struggle with jets and armor in general, helicopters especially even with the ZSUs (I think I should just take them in pairs) I kinda want to remove the Berets here for more upgraded Kurgs tbqh, I don't ever use them. Magnolia is my cluster arty if it means anything.
>>1897398
I think the VDV get a plane that can launch Cruise missiles as well.

F18 with 4 JDAMs or F35 with 2 cruise missiles

>>1897453
You need tor, pantsir or sosna to deal with helicopters realistically with tor being the best at fighting them since its missile has a larger explosion radius while still having decent damage, but its not bad to keep the 80 point shilkas to soak and shoot down sead missiles or cruise missiles. I would just drop everything in the air tab and put in 2 tu22s with cruise missiles and remove the iskander since they will fire 3 much faster missiles and give you a slot for the tor, otherwise you should probably remove the magnolia and one nona for it. Probably best to drop the gornos completely since they are kinda useless and spend the points on naval infantry with jammer bmp3s or get a t15 or two for one of your squads.

>>1897474
nevermind I just stuck 2 JDAMS on a harrier and got the F18 with 2 cruise missiles as well

Why is it so hard to get a RU vs US game? It is either mirror matches or just mixed nations. I want RU vs US

File: 1675921687762856.png (1.39 MB, 997x697)

1.39 MB PNG

>>1897487
>play RU
>RU mirror match
>"everyone must be playing RU, therefore I will play US instead"
>play US
>US mirror match

>>1897487
>>1897489
Play custom matches

>>1897453
The only RU infantry worth getting are Engineers and Konkurs M. Spend all your points in the tab pimping them out in max-upgrades T15s.
Drop T90A and Kriz. Gun tube artillery is useless and is just a waste of time, get another Iskander and get some quick supply vehicles.

Lose anyway because you're not airborne and don't get drones, the TOR or the Dervitsaya.

The devs need to allow a separate non-tank vehicle tab. Absolutely retarded that transport vehicles are tied to infantry squads in the builder when you can deploy units with whatever they're compatible with during the actual game.

How the fuck do I deal with T15

>>1897636
You're not supposed to. It's the most powerful wunderwaffe ever built, capable of withstanding a direct nuclear blast.

File: 20241011_225141.jpg (1.81 MB, 3122x3122)

1.81 MB JPG

>>1897636
AGLs. They slide right through APS and seem to inflict crits just like infantry AT plus I think they tend to hit the top armor because of their trajectory. Armored combat seems to basically be who can degrade the others APS and inflict more statuses quicker.

Spotting definitely needs a touch up. Forests should be 200% infantry territory and a death trap for vehicles. Only heavy armor and APS should buy a vehicle a fighting chance.

I've also noticed that when fighting in forests, infantry tend to accidentally move inside of their minimum range for stuff like UBGLs and AT weapons which leads to them.getting melted against defenders.

>>1897636
It has tank armour but not a tank gun, so just kill it with a tank. It's ATGM actually sucks because it has exactly 2 shots and fires both of them back to back, so you can just smoke immediately when they fire and now it can't hurt you anymore.
Just don't show it your side armour because tank side armour is paper thin in this game.

>>1897632
That was the case in the last beta, there was a separate transport tab.

I haven't even played a match yet. Just testing game mechanics.
-RTB at full health gives back 90%
-RTB refund doesn't take into account ammo spent
-Reloading from supplies is incredibly cheap compared to the reload point costs in airstrikes, and also compared to adding extra payloads in the unit designer (ie much cheaper to give longbow 8x hellfire and have it reload, instead of giving it 16x hellfires).
-The above 2 points mean that it's much cheaper to heli or artillery strike compared to calling in an air strike for the equivalent ordnance.
-Probably always much cheaper to repair first before RTB, instead of just RTB a damaged unit (took about 450kg supplies (4.5 pts) to repair ~45% damage on a 150pt apache)
-RTB while carrying supplies will also refund the supplies
-LASER range is 2.4km at least on the units that I tested
-You seem to be able to LASER the ground beyond the unit's optics range
-Helicopter flying low is 50% speed, but they stop moving horizontally every time they gain altitude to fly over obstacles like trees
-All helicopter rocket pods fire at the same time, so 4 rocket pods = 4 rockets fired at the same time

Does anyone know whether a TOW infantry with 1200m optics range can fire at something 1500m away spotted by another unit?

>>1894452
Do you have any idea how dogshit the Sidearm is IRL? It's just an A2A IR-guided shitty little light weight missile that's turned into A2G. Not my fault American SEAD and SAMs are dogshit. Play to your strengths instead of complaining about your weaknesses. This game is asymmetrical in design because real life is too. Time to grow up lil bro.
>>1894405
Not my fault your ATGMs are limited to firing one at a time. Maybe you shouldn't bring Abrams at all of you're gonna lose them all the time. I think Humvees are more your style. Don't forget the fucking SLAAMRAM so you can fire fucking AMRAAMs and Aim-9's from the ground as your SAM LMAO
Wakey wakey USA's time is running out
"Why is everything so dogshit"
IT'S CAUSE IT IS HAHAHAAHAHHA
>>1894774
It's so good it gets fooled by a lamp stuck on a pole from behind a T-72. Just wait until we get Chinese ATGMs but you'll probably rage quit the same update.

File: Duly noted.gif (1.84 MB, 480x360)

1.84 MB GIF

>>1897793

How long will this open beta last?

File: 1636177169054.jpg (112 KB, 642x960)

112 KB JPG

>Wakey wakey USA's time is running out

>>1897254
I use two seed missiles on my 1000fab bomber so I can counter fire at any AA switched on to stop my bombing run

Is that big brain or dumb? My plane seems to do better

>>1897806
NTA but whenever someone quotes your whole post and adds le cringe image to it, you can be sure that you're right and they're wrong

>>1897876
The F18D? Use the SLAM-ERs instead, they're almost as good as bombs, and you get to fire off all your shit at standoff ranges

if you want to actually kill enemy AA, bring out 3+ Prowlers with all-HARMs at a time, hold fire, clump them up and then let them go hog

>>1897926
Don't HARMs fire automatically?

>>1897931
not if you hold fire

>>1897926
RU gets the SU-34 which can carry 2 anti radar missiles and a large choice of bombs for around 300 points

Even if my plane kills 1 tank and fires off its two missiles at some AA its usually a good trade

>solo queue quick match
>1 teammate afk, another disconnects, enemy team has the same ratio of afks
>queue with 2 friends through the lobby system, the 2 randos that get assigned to our team disconnect at match start and so do 2 enemies
>join a regular 5v5 lobby
>6 chinks with unreadable names disconnect
Every single game is like this
What the fuck

>>1897969
Was the same last beta. This is exactly why i am not playing this one.

Is it better to leave a vehicle on the field to ferry troops forward, or just RTB it every time? Like a blackhawk or Mi8

>>1898137
Loading infantry into a transport at spawn is probably too much micro to be worthwhile. You get a refund rtbing a heli so just send it home.

Should I even bother with any of the mech infantry variants? Or just take 8 airborne as my infantry

>>1898484
Airborne don't come with MMG's, Stingers or Bradleys.

Do they plan to expand the faction or add new countries? It is weird that they went with "coastal" specialization for Russia. I know Black Death marines are a thing but still.

I hope US Army gets KF41 because Bradley in this game is so shit. That 25 mm cannon are TOW missile are a joke.

>>1898504
No idea about factions, but they're adding China as the 3rd country.

>>1898538
>That 25 mm cannon
ngl makes sense, both vatniks and hohols think the cannon sucks in real life

>>1898504
Coastal makes sense because the game's scenario revolves around Suwalki. Obviously if the US is intervening from the Baltic coast then coastal defense matters.

>>1898590
It would make sense either way. After all, it's a branch of their armed forces.

>>1898538
Slow cannon = bad

>>1898538
The Bradley is fine. A pair of them with their TOW2s will savage a russian tank cost effectively. They just can't fire the missile while moving, so you need to actually position your Bradleys where they can get a clean shot without needing to chase their target. Their autocannon was nerfed vs infantry compared to last open beta to make them less of a spammable anti-everything unit but it's still effective
The only downside to the Bradley is that it can only carry 6 inf, and the US has very few worthwhile 6-man squads to transport with it.

>>1898639
>tank one-taps one bradley, sending its missile crashing into the ground
>the second bradley's missile gets APS'd, then it gets onetapped
Bradleys are garbage in this beta

What was the point of adding ELO to random matches?

>>1898504
US is getting SOCOM specialization and Stryker specialization
Russia getting Motostrelki and something else

>>1898684
With BUSK2 it takes 3 shots for a tank to kill a Bradley. But with top attack missiles, Bradleys only need 2 to connect to kill an abrams/Armata. A pair of up-armoured Bradleys is 105pts each so less than a tank combined. They're really cost effective, especially compared to infantry atgm teams that cost almost as much but die much faster

>>1898692
Blame competitive niggers who cried for MUH RANKED MATCHMAKING

>>1898770
Couldn't they just add a separate ranked mode?

Can't believe the devs listened to the idiots who wanted a Downed Pilot Rescue mini game, as if there wasn't enough shit to keep track of already.

>>1898959
I also want wounded soldiers that can be picked up and returned to base.

>no way to make airborne troops ride helicopters
How fucking hard would it have been? Am I supposed to believe nuclear subs with ICBMs is within the scope of the game but putting the paratroopers that already exist into the transport helicopters they just added was a bridge too far? Total shit.

>>1897727
You can actually laser a target at up to about 4km IIRC provided you have line of sight.


What I want to know is if it's even worth it to carry the KH-35U's on the Ka-52K or if the SEAD missiles are a better choice. Coastal/Armored is a bit strapped for HARM otherwise.

File: 1726200190278764.jpg (89 KB, 767x1024)

89 KB JPG

>>1899023
>He can't figure out how to put troops in helicopters
I think Wargame might be more your speed, champ.

>>1899023
Go to the helicopter tab, click the helicopter you want to use, then click the squad(s) you want to load into it

>>1896592

Isn't the Reconnaissance-Strike Complex the same concept but for Russia?

>>1899023
There's no way you're that dumb.

>>1899035
Is lasering working better than last beta?
Finally got the opportunity to play today

Is it just me or are US engineers pretty weak in urban combat? I just had a double stack of them firing their SMAWs into garrisoned marine raiders and each hit killed 1 soldier. Are they better in forests?

>>1899317
>killed one soldier
That sounds about right. All soldiers have exactly 5hp and most anti-infantry launchers deal somewhere between 5 and 10 damage depending on how good it is.
What makes Mech. Engineers good is the combination of their anti-infantry launchers, shotguns and high armour. They deal most of their damage in close quarters where the shotguns excel, but Marine Raiders are a difficult fight for any infantry.

Against CQC raiders just fight them with a vehicle, since they have no AT launchers. Against AT Raiders you want to just close in with a pair of Mech. Engineers and force the fight in close quarters, ideally using linse of sight blockers to get close before being shot.

>>1899317
Is correct, >>1899334 Marines and Marine Raiders are very dangerous, as well as CQC Force Recon and WILL trade up when fighting infantry at close ranges. To fight them, obviously use a vehicle, hit them with a cruise missile to degrade them, or fight at standoff ranges with machine gun teams.

If they chase you/push into you, fall back and repeat the above points, smoking behind you as you run.

>>1898959
I like it.
>>1899011
Would be cool, when a squad gets killed there is a chance it could spawn wounded troops like the pilot that you could limp away back to base

holy shit I totally forgot how to play anything but AA launchers

File: wow.png (498 KB, 1036x494)

498 KB PNG

This helicopter was a great investment, holy lol
>it shot down an Su-35 at some point and I never saw it happen

Broken arrow? More like Broken Dick.

>>1899393
>when a squad gets killed there is a chance it could spawn wounded troops like the pilot that you could limp away back to base
A wargamey way to design it would be to add a mobile MEP unit that once deployed gives you a modest refund for your infantry killed within a radius.