The problem with ptrs
Posts: 1660
Edit: if you are new to the game consider that to avoid and minimize ptrs damage you should reverse and use a range advantage to shoot without letting them fire. Obviously you may get chip damage, the trick is to avoid being flanked and cornered or let infantry get too close, so that you can repair your light vehicle and use it again. Also use infantry to screen it while you reverse
Posts: 356
So the issue with ptrs is that they work?
Edit: if you are new to the game consider that to avoid and minimize ptrs damage you should reverse and use a range advantage to shoot without letting them fire. Obviously you may get chip damage, the trick is to avoid being flanked and cornered or let infantry get too close, so that you can repair your light vehicle and use it again. Also use infantry to screen it while you reverse
PTRS is 40 range. Puma is the only axis light vehicle that comes to mind that can outrange PTRS.
Posts: 1660
PTRS is 40 range. Puma is the only axis light vehicle that comes to mind that can outrange PTRS.
40 range is NOT an effective range to consider since cooldown and aim time force ptrs to move while a light vehicle can fire on the move
Posts: 356
40 range is NOT an effective range to consider since cooldown and aim time force ptrs to move while a light vehicle can fire on the move
If the LV is firing at them they can fire back without any sort of movement, but if you want to try and kite ptrs with 40 range vehicles you're more than welcome to.
Most infantry AT weapons have 35 range vs the common 40 range vehicle cannon which is why kiting can be somewhat effective.
Posts: 1794
If the LV is firing at them they can fire back without any sort of movement, but if you want to try and kite ptrs with 40 range vehicles you're more than welcome to.
Most infantry AT weapons have 35 range vs the common 40 range vehicle cannon which is why kiting can be somewhat effective.
also shreks cant fire unless standing still? while ptrs can fire on the move.
imo making the already buff ptrs to 35 range seems fair
Posts: 919
also shreks cant fire unless standing still? while ptrs can fire on the move.
imo making the already buff ptrs to 35 range seems fair
No AT handheld can fire on the move. They have to stop, then the aim time starts. The biggest change of the last patch wasn't the third PTRS but the reduction of aim time to Shrek/Bazooka level. Before it was impossible to shoot at a kiting vehicle with PTRS.
Posts: 178
protip: driving vehicles alone at AT infantry is a good way to kill your vehicles
protip: PTRS penals still suck at killing infantry
protip: try learning why you are losing before calling for nerfs to anything that beats you
Posts: 117
You can't, you just say it and proceed to act like 5 year old.
Nice one boss you showed him.
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
also shreks cant fire unless standing still? while ptrs can fire on the move.
Lol what game are you playing?
Until they make a soviet version of Wolfenstein, ain't nobody who can fire ptrs on move
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Lol what game are you playing?
Until they make a soviet version of Wolfenstein, ain't nobody who can fire ptrs on move
Close enough
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
also shreks cant fire unless standing still? while ptrs can fire on the move.
imo making the already buff ptrs to 35 range seems fair
You are on drugs again, aren't you?
PTRS can't and couldn't at any stage of the game, held by any infantry of any faction ever fire on the move.
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
Close enough
Damn, I would fall over just trying to hold it like that
Livestreams
36 | |||||
249 | |||||
99 | |||||
14 | |||||
3 | |||||
3 | |||||
2 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.589215.733+4
- 4.1099614.642-1
- 5.280162.633+8
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.271108.715+22
- 9.721440.621+3
- 10.1041674.607-2
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Mclatc16
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM