Full fuel tech cost mean little without MP cost also and starting resources.
It mean even less when some faction do full tech and others do not.
Way to try and deflect the point with waffle.
Posts: 591 | Subs: 1
Full fuel tech cost mean little without MP cost also and starting resources.
It mean even less when some faction do full tech and others do not.
Posts: 56
Would you look at that!
It seems like Ost does -NOT- pay a single drop of fuel for any upgrade they get and OKW is rewarded with super heavy for full tech.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Way to try and deflect the point with waffle.
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Posts: 3260
Universal Carrier durability upgrade? That would be super awkward and weird considering it's size and design. I don't see how this could be done.
Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6
BIG IQ move: now analyse what each faction pays at different timings for getting similar results.
Start with support weapons/healing > weapon upgrades > light tank > medium tanks.
Then you have the complete picture.
Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1
Smoke canisters (locked behind the Platoon Command Post) would go a long way. It'd allow it to flame out MGs without getting snared.
Posts: 833
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Posts: 4474
Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1
and sice some people here haven't passed elementary school i will do the math for u by removing starting fuel
okw 255
ukf 250
usf 250
ost 225
su 220
Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1
Posts: 4474
Ok I will help you as you would just post made-up fantasy numbers again. Here are the actual numbers:can i ask u why u removed 5 fuel from okw ? medic should still cost 15 fu righ ?
UKF full tech: 270 Fuel - 20 starting fuel = 250 Fuel
Ost full tech: 225 Fuel - 20 starting fuel = 205 Fuel
OKW full tech: 260 Fuel - 10 starting fuel = 250 Fuel
Soviet full tech: 220 Fuel - 20 starting fuel = 200 fuel
USF full tech: 270 fuel - 20 starting fuel = 250 Fuel
Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1
can i ask u why u removed 5 fuel from okw ? medic should still cost 15 fu righ ?
and still this proves my point, okw is balanced with dlc factions, ost is balanced with su
unless okw get's even more free stuff and same for osther but last time i check all seem normal to me
Posts: 4474
no i literally said axis does not get free upgrade, i did mention okw pays pays more for less is some aspect (stg are 1 bar , 1 sherck etc) , i did not say ost (that's why i added okw in the ()) pays more, ost pays same as su
Yes it costs 15, I corrected that.
I really don't know what your point is anymore though. First you said UKF pays less for more. Now all of a sudden your point is that Ostheer and Soviets are balanced towards each other and the DLC factions are to be looked at separately. But then why did you claim Ost pays more for tech than UKF but gets less? I am confused.
Posts: 1289
no i literally said axis does not get free upgrade, i did mention okw pays pays more for less is some aspect (stg are 1 bar , 1 sherck etc) , i did not say ost (that's why i added okw in the ()) pays more, ost pays same as su
Posts: 1002 | Subs: 2
Snip
Posts: 5279
but it basically just meant nothing because the OKW player could frontally charge squads into British infantry and walk all over them winning every engagement with brainless micro.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
...
Posts: 203
I've been told this is actually intended. Despite their costs and limitations Tommies are NOT supposed to win even when dug in and being charged frontally. They are not supposed to hold the ground they are supposed to knock out a model or 2 and then retreat, ceding ground and resources. I was told that if other units can't mindlessless charge head on into dug in infantry and win then the assault infantry is UP. The ONLY metric that matters is resources not role. Volks + stgs > investment than Tommies so the volks need to win no matter what. Same with sturms. Of course they will win even harder if used properly or employ any of their buildings but their cost alone means the NEED to win. Even closing across no cover. Head long into defensive infantry in the best cover they can muster. I have this from a credible source