Posts: 1096
Orangepest uses it in a niche situation. Ask him about it.
Posts: 570 | Subs: 1
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
Posts: 148
USF:
Recon Support: Remove paratroopers from combat group, just drop the pack howie for 100mp 60 muni.
Posts: 148
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Noobs l2p, leave my advanced warfare strafe alone.
Posts: 1954
Can we just have the B4 back in it?
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
It never had a B4 in it. It had an over-the-top bombing run and salvage when originally released. It does need to be reworked, but any commander without Mark Target and some type of tank that can chase something down is always going to be a worse "tank hunter" than Mechanised Support or Guard Motor.
I would like to see a "command" T34/85 added to it, which has a 20% reload aura and Mark Target as an ability.
PTRS penals would need to be reworked. They're okay in small games, but bad in large games.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
Posts: 1614 | Subs: 3
It's the same with USF strafe run. The damage can be obscene but it doesn't track so it's more like a bullet based bombing run.
Posts: 1890 | Subs: 1
Posts: 1954
It did had B4 briefly tho.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Posts: 833
Posts: 173
B4 was never available to the Tank Hunter Tactics commander.
Imo a "tank hunter" commander should not even have access to any sort of AI howitzer in the first place.
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
Imo a "tank hunter" commander should not even have access to any sort of AI howitzer in the first place.
IMO, it is more of a bait for enemy to dive for.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Hi guys, propose 1 ability swap to make commanders usable. I don't mean to slap a Tiger to every commander and I don't mean to change commanders that are already good, but the trash ones. These are easy changes that could give the game more variety. Let me start.
SOV Commander - Advanced Warfare, remove useless 90MU IL2 strafe and replace with literally anything else, be it Incendiary barrage, AT gun camo, Recon Plane, Mark vehicle, just avoid overlap or another useless ability.
As you can see none of what I suggested is over the top or useless, please, follow the same logic.
Thanks.
Your turn.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Posts: 1954
this
B4 isn't a bait, B4 is a game breaking piece of crap if RNGeesus frowns upon you and can be absolutely devastating in a truly competent player's hands. Putting it in a doctrine with PTRS Cons which can lay cheap mines to ambush with grenade assault is a horrible idea.
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
Some people make "RNGeesus" frown on them. I have Counterattack in my loadout about 1/2 the time. When I see certain behaviors AND lack of a counter, I use it and often get 30-50 kills with it. When it vets quickly, it will fire fast enough that it doesn't seem so random.
Storm doctrine punishes the same type of behavior. I like it better than Counterattack, partially because it is a great vaccine for the Counterattack virus, and partly because it punishes blobs even better. I played on Port of Hamburg against 2 Soviets yesterday who liked to stack mg's, mortars, etc, and then push in with infantry. The LEFH killed 19 models on the first barrage. The stuka dive bomb in the middle of their retreat path kept most of their team weapons from getting back to base. The game was pretty much over after that.
Against better players, B4 probably is just a RNG generator, but good players usually have a counter for it, which makes using it a bad idea anyway.
 |
|
|
27 | ||
 |
|
|
15 | ||
|
|
|
|
4 | ||
 |
|
|
298 | ||
 |
|
|
196 | ||
 |
|
|
4 | ||
|
|
|
|
3 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
 |
|
|
2 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
