What do people think about this. I'm not claiming to have "figured out the game" but would like to see some reflections on this thought of mine:

I found that Each side, NATO and PACT, have their own roles. Before stating my main point, as an example, I would like to point out unit prices for a comparable unit:
Chaparell(?) AA missile launcher vehicle w/ 4200m range:
$35 on the NATO side
$65 on the PACT side (Don't know the name off hand)
Same stats.

This difference epitomizes the subtlety of the game. I look at the Chaparell as a very def unit; very weak armor, very slow speed, OK accuracy, and very long range.

There are other examples of units that have these characteristics and it leads me to concluded that NATO is SUPPOSED to defend while PACT is SUPPOSED to attack. Based on the COST of the units alone, skill aside, Nato should defend and Pact should attack. This also plays inline with the soloplay. As Nato you defend against the PACT invasion... as PACT you try to invade.

I conclude that you are supposed to defend as NATO, but not as PACT and that doing so is advantageous for NATO only(for the most part, obvious troll specific situations aside).

Bring skill into this and of course that changes things and one could say that truly skilled players will know the cost of their units and responsibly deploy them accordingly; this way even playing def can win on the Pact side... it just costs more; but if you lose those units, you've ceded many more points than had you attacked and lost the same number of offensive units.

I'ld be interested to see if anyone else found something similar.

Chapperels have pretty bad accuracy...

Unit stats say its a '4'. Which is average, until you take in the range(not saying that accuracy gets better, an accuracy of '4' at 4200m is pretty freakin sweet)... not only that but 3-4 chapparells will take out Mi spam easy. And although its a '4' they dont miss that often. And they 1-hit pretty much everything. I know since I use them all the time.

And finally, your post is completely off topic. Nice Job.

OP needs to learn game.

/thread.

_________________

I'm a noob, but I do think I'd rather have two Chapparals than a single Buk (probably similar chance of a single hit, but a chance of two hits, twice as hard to remove), or a single max vet Chapparal (same base accuracy if the maths on this forum are right, but better firing rate), but I dont think those differences are enough to draw a conclusion like this.

?

Isnt that point of this post? Thanks for the obvious.

How does commenting on something in the OP qualify as "off topic"



Buks have power 9/10 (depending which version you take), so they generally one shot NATO air power.

The topic is not unit stats... its cost and how that relates to the game play.

I was pointing out that you're flat out wrong. Chaperrels do not have "very good accuracy". Regarding the rest of your post, both sides can be offensive, or defensive. [/thread]

Yeah. Buks 1 shot apache after apache while my fucking 3 chaps run out of ammo not making a single hit. Pact aa is way powerful.