Great idea, let me force myself into an off meta commander and spend 400 munitions in order to do something as basic as attack a side and cap it.
400 muni for killing 200/120 and setting me back almost 5 minutes in tech is a good trade
Posts: 2272 | Subs: 1
Great idea, let me force myself into an off meta commander and spend 400 munitions in order to do something as basic as attack a side and cap it.
Posts: 600
400 muni for killing 200/120 and setting me back almost 5 minutes in tech is a good trade
Posts: 260
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
400 muni for killing 200/120 and setting me back almost 5 minutes in tech is a good trade
Removing it would be rather a waste of faction flavor, but I wouldn't mind it losing the ability to attack ground units on auto-attack.
How does everyone feel about changing it to function like bofors, where it has a cooldown skill that can suppress a general area if targetted correctly.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Removing it would be rather a waste of faction flavor, but I wouldn't mind it losing the ability to attack ground units on auto-attack.
Posts: 260
What faction flavor?
OKW is already 95% ost, just with trucks instead of "bunkers".
Posts: 1351
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
If there is a problem in 1vs1 game that has to do with map and not the truck.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Either most 1v1 maps are radically redesigned, or the Schwerer gun is nerfed. This is a no brainer.
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
Schwerer is a dual side issue.
Its badly design and force extra taxative micro to counter it while it doesn't require any input to use it, as you explained it.
Because of that it forbid OKW to receive the necesary buff it should have on some of their units and generate frustration playing the faction.
Shwerer and Tiger2 aren't helping the faction as a whole to be balanced.
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
Tiger 2 is an expensive unit, so it's not something cheesy in the sense that you have ways to counter it.
Posts: 808
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
can be hard to deal with in 1v1's but piss easy to destroy in team games. Adding pop cap could be an option and if its destroyed you dont have to re purchase it to get tanks thus, removing some of the risk factor to compensate but idk im thinking out loud.
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
So, you lost to a static building..
indirect fire wasn't an option..
Posts: 5279
and if they have 10 units costing a minimum of 2500mp what's the rest of your army doing? Why armt you capping territory when they are swinging over to defend their schwere? The nice thing about blobs is they are only in one place. Also it was good of you to mention the soviets in this match up because those AT guns do pretty good against infantry too. 2 zis' and a t70 can absolutely push off a blob.
He has 10 working synapses, meaning he’ll just rotate his army over. He’ll also know your army’s position and have a big infantry superiority because you’ve spent 720mp and 260mp 70f if soviets for recon T70 to deal damage to it.
Basically it forces you into a super risky early game siege that’s gonna be even more difficult next patch if the doctrinal tank buff for okw comes into play and you have to deal with an ostwind/Hetzer 30fuel earlier.
Posts: 3260
In contrast if OKW goes fast BGHQ and then rushes the Schwerer to their proximate cutoff and fuel, you literally have no means of countering it, save maybe royal arty UKF that can buy an AT gun and pay 100 muni for a proper barrage.
Posts: 3053
While i don't agree with OP, these comments just shows how little some people know about 1v1 maps and the mode.
For those who play team games only, you wouldn't realise that there are maps on which the base MG bunkers cover strat points near your base. Putting a Flak HQ just outside your base and covering your cut off is plenty safe.
It's as risky as constructing your tiers with Soviets and OH towards the exit of your base so you can reinforce from farther away.
PD: no risk at all.
1 | |||||
1 | |||||
1 |