Qwai armour imbalance

[[R-DEV]AFsoccer]

I played Qwai last night on TG and we (the Chinese) lost by about 300 points. The U.S. used HATs against our APCs and the Strykers finished us off.

Just something to think about.

[Portable.Cougar]

I know I have won just as many games on China as I have on USA

[tankninja1]

Unless the Chinese are slower than snails getting out of their main, and the US forces can cap and set up defences on both sides of the river, the US will always lose.

[40mmrain]

the chinese can win yes.

The map itself's results arent too imbalanced, its difficult to operate with armour on that map, its just that playing as american armour is brutal as youre up against so much.

Its like black gold J10 vs mig29. The j10 beats mig29 every time, but the russians can still win with superior inf or armour, its just that its no fun to fly as the russians.

[sharpie]

Originally Posted by [R-DEV]AFsoccer

I played Qwai last night on TG and we (the Chinese) lost by about 300 points. The U.S. used HATs against our APCs and the Strykers finished us off.

Just something to think about.

But your mortars were still sexy.

I think all we needed were moar crates, and we could have won the day buy overrunning them with supplies.


OT, an armour balance would be nice, but you just have to play the US armour correctly for the US to win.
And I don't believe the tank is really needed anymore.

[Murphy]

Or you can just not go head to head with the tank? I've caught many tank crews with the Bradley waiting in ambush. Sorry gents but I think trying to use the Bradley as an offensive unit is what is causing you to thin this map is unbalanced. Get your Bradley to sit back a bit and let the inf get intel on enemy armor then respond accordingly.

Strykers should also avoid head to head confrontations with the enemy 30mm, you would figure it's quite common sense. Let your uber guided HAT take out the biggest threats then rip those VN3s apart (if your stryker dies to vn3 go inf please).

Think of US armor as mobile defensive emplacements with the option to advance if/when things are safe enough to cross the river. The PLA have the option to have their armor act offensively which should be easy prey for the bradley/AT inf, and if the PLA camps their side the US has time to maneuver an AT team into place as there are very very few places to hide on this map.

As Portable mentioned you're playing it wrong, the US Army needs to keep their armor more defensive then the PLA otherwise they will lose everything within the opening minutes (Like the bradley mentioned in Dtacs post, we had an APC and a HAT deployed and waiting before he could get across).

[40mmrain]

Originally Posted by Murphy

Or you can just not go head to head with the tank? I've caught many tank crews with the Bradley waiting in ambush. Sorry gents but I think trying to use the Bradley as an offensive unit is what is causing you to thin this map is unbalanced. Get your Bradley to sit back a bit and let the inf get intel on enemy armor then respond accordingly.

Strykers should also avoid head to head confrontations with the enemy 30mm, you would figure it's quite common sense. Let your uber guided HAT take out the biggest threats then rip those VN3s apart (if your stryker dies to vn3 go inf please).

Think of US armor as mobile defensive emplacements with the option to advance if/when things are safe enough to cross the river. The PLA have the option to have their armor act offensively which should be easy prey for the bradley/AT inf, and if the PLA camps their side the US has time to maneuver an AT team into place as there are very very few places to hide on this map.

As Portable mentioned you're playing it wrong, the US Army needs to keep their armor more defensive then the PLA otherwise they will lose everything within the opening minutes (Like the bradley mentioned in Dtacs post, we had an APC and a HAT deployed and waiting before he could get across).

So the americans get .50 cal, 25mm and ATGM for defense. The chinese get 30mm, 14.5mm, 120mm and ATGM for defense.

Seems fair and balanced. The chinese get mobile defensive emplacements as well, just better ones.

[Murphy]

The US Army also has those nifty guided HATs that can trump a big loud bulky tank any day of the week, while the PLA hat kit is very predictable it's still nowhere in the same league as the American equipment. The US has more then enough opportunity to deal with PLA armor with their infantry, the same could be said of the PLA as well.

The US team just needs to handle the Tank and then enjoy the advantages of having an active Bradley (still very susceptible to AT fire).