People have been suggesting stuff like tank traps, sandbags, trenches, caches and others for the Sappers since AER came out so you're not the first and only one do so.
No I am not and did not claim I was.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
People have been suggesting stuff like tank traps, sandbags, trenches, caches and others for the Sappers since AER came out so you're not the first and only one do so.
Posts: 203
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Sapper will not be op with 3 vickers, they have still very low survivability
Posts: 203
That is simply false. Ro.E. have armor and lower target size.
At vet 3 they are one of the most durably squads while being cheap to build and reinforce.
There is very little reason to be able to have 3 weapon , more than mainlines, to begin with.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Try heavy sappers with 2 brens then and you get wrecked by obers or lmg gren and snipers with your ~150 mun squad
Posts: 203
1) So a 210 engineer unit loses to ober an long range elite unit, why wouldn't they?
2) Vet 3 Heavy sapper with 3 lmg beat LMG grenadier in cover cover fights (in live) adding a snipers mean absolutely nothing since the majority of infatry loses to snipers.
3) Vicker K has been changed to "assault rife"
4) There is not reason for a cheap engineer unit to be able to equip 3 weapons.
5) None of that change the fact that claim your claim Ro.E. "very low survivability" is simply false. Do you agree that Ro.E do not have "very low survivability"?
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
no i don't agree
Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1
Posts: 1220 | Subs: 1
No I am not and did not claim I was.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
you said "my suggestion" lound and clear, so it indeed will creat some misundertanding.
Posts: 1954
Posts: 919
Also, M10's are really pointless in 4v4's. I haven't played 1v1's recently but suspect they're not very good there either.
Posts: 1954
I do think they are most effective at 2vs2 if your mate goes strong for AI. It is a very cost effective tank to kick other tanks once you have a pair of them. But I wouldn't play that at 1vs1 and screwing my AI power totally, your first M4A3 is so much more worth its fuel.
In 4vs4 they are not worth picking over M36 in 90% of combat situations. Maybe you can use them on a map like steppes.
Posts: 195
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Back when I played 1v1, they seemed like the UKF version of the panic puma. I've tried them a few times in the live game and they seem to have too little range for something that dies in 3 hits and is allegedly a TD. There's no reason it should have less range than a Stug and cost more. Pathing is a little better but that's the only thing that's better.
72 | |||||
39 | |||||
39 | |||||
27 | |||||
21 | |||||
11 | |||||
611 | |||||
15 | |||||
13 | |||||
3 |