Bunkers
Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4
I still don't understand why these are 0 popcap and apparently immune to light gammon bombs. Is there a reason axis bunkers need significantly more armor than the USF counterpart?
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
Is there a reason axis bunkers need significantly more armor than the USF counterpart?
Uhh yeah they cost 25 more mp
I also do not understand why both don't cost pop. Anything that fights on the map should cost pop, for everyone. Mines don't count obviously
Posts: 518
I still don't understand why these are 0 popcap and apparently immune to light gammon bombs. Is there a reason axis bunkers need significantly more armor than the USF counterpart?
I guess it makes up for the lack of riflegrenade also I think that the immunity to gammon bombs is a bug
Posts: 1794
i do not see a need for pop cap.
the above is probably a bug.
Posts: 1563
I still don't understand why these are 0 popcap and apparently immune to light gammon bombs. Is there a reason axis bunkers need significantly more armor than the USF counterpart?
Yeah why is it that a 17 lbr can't be de-crewed have to be destroyed and has brace that just about negates all damage and can be repaired while brace has the same damage, pen, range as pak43 is non-doc and has +40% more hp???? oh right pak 43 shoot through walls I guess since that justify's it you can accept not being able to throw nades justifies it's higher armor.
I didn't expect such a petty and thoughtless complaint from a MOD, shame on you.
Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4
Yeah why is it that a 17 lbr can't be de-crewed have to be destroyed and has brace that just about negates all damage and can be repaired while brace has the same damage, pen, range as pak43 is non-doc and has +40% more hp???? oh right pak 43 shoot through walls I guess since that justify's it you can accept not being able to throw nades justifies it's higher armor.
I didn't expect such a petty and thoughtless complaint from a MOD, shame on you.
??? I can't complain about things becasue I have a badge?
Neither of those things justifies why they cost zero pop, not to mention the video showing a LGB which should AT THE VERY LEAST deal a pixel of HP to an enclosed bunker with 1 man. Grenades are intended to clear garrisons such as this IRL. Why not just give bren guns 90% moving DPS on sections since pfusi's get that on G43s. Alls fair right?
Posts: 1563
??? I can't complain about things becasue I have a badge?
Not if this the complaint is this petty.
Neither of those things justifies why they cost zero pop,
it's not a justification, it's an example of weird balancing logic.
not to mention the video showing a LGB which should AT THE VERY LEAST deal a pixel of HP to an enclosed bunker with 1 man. Grenades are intended to clear garrisons such as this IRL.
And bundle-nade IRL used blow off threads of tanks or derail trains they don't do that in game, I wonder if the 0 pop fighting position or the new 0 pop soviet bunker actually takes any decent damage from bundle-nade.
Why not just give bren guns 90% moving DPS on sections since pfusi's get that on G43s. Alls fair right?
Hey, so long as you give Grens the ability to upgrade 2 lmg 42's and a 5th since section get to do that then sure all fair as you said.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4
Not if this the complaint is this petty.
If small changes are considered petty so things like the above don't happen, then full on petty is what we need. The exact same concept was given to the jackson and now the calliope in the armor department so p4s would not bounce on them. I suppose those changes were also petty when they were talked about.
it's not a justification, it's an example of weird balancing logic.
And bundle-nade IRL used blow off threads of tanks or derail trains they don't do that in game, I wonder if the 0 pop fighting position or the new 0 pop soviet bunker actually takes any decent damage from bundle-nade.
Hey, so long as you give Grens the ability to upgrade 2 lmg 42's and a 5th since section get to do that then sure all fair as you said.
Glad we're on the same page that things should be balanced axis to allies instead of 1 side having 50 armor bunkers and the other dying to StGs.
Posts: 1096
I didn't expect such a petty and thoughtless complaint from a MOD, shame on you.
What the hell are you going on about? He's a moderator of a comparatively small forum , not a member of a jury ffs.
Posts: 307
Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2
Yeah why is it that a 17 lbr can't be de-crewed have to be destroyed and has brace that just about negates all damage and can be repaired while brace has the same damage, pen, range as pak43 is non-doc and has +40% more hp???? oh right pak 43 shoot through walls I guess since that justify's it you can accept not being able to throw nades justifies it's higher armor.
I didn't expect such a petty and thoughtless complaint from a MOD, shame on you.
And none of these points matter if it comes to the question if grenades are supposed to work like this against structures.
Posts: 518
common, that bunker MUST die from nade/ flame nade or even snare with that pixel of HP. bug or rng is unaceptable.
+1. Always thought they were like satchels but this is just ... weird
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
+1. Always thought they were like satchels but this is just ... weird
Those are heavy gammon bombs not light
Posts: 956
Posts: 2779
Posts: 307
You want grenades killing bunkers, Mr. Supreme Mod?
with this pixel of HP, yes they should.
Posts: 2779
with this pixel of HP, yes they should.
I don't recall small arms killing tanks in COH.
If that weapon type doesn't work on a certain unit/structure, you shoot it for a year it still doesn't work.
Show me how a grenade can tear down a wooden structure.
Posts: 1563
I agree with OP, there should be something like deflection damage but only vs buildings or functionally similar to that.
He is only complain about bunkers and why wasn't destroyed by a 1s fuse ability. He's not complaining about all structures axis and allies. So I can't support his one-sided farce.
And none of these points matter if it comes to the question if grenades are supposed to work like this against structures.
I think bundle nades do some damage vs fighting positions and soviet bunkers. but Remember Brit emplacements can't be 1 clicked like the axis ones. So there is no way to judge if that is fair or not.
Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2
He is only complain about bunkers and why wasn't destroyed by a 1s fuse ability. He's not complaining about all structures axis and allies. So I can't support his one-sided farce.
Because apparently only bunkers have this issue (correct me there if I am wrong, but I think that is the case). Fighting positions get reliably damaged by nades as intended as you said yourself below.
I think bundle nades do some damage vs fighting positions and soviet bunkers. but Remember Brit emplacements can't be 1 clicked like the axis ones. So there is no way to judge if that is fair or not.
Bunkers and fighting positions have nothing to do with British emplacements and their ability to brace, nor with the 17pd or the PaK43.
Livestreams
18 | |||||
12 | |||||
2 | |||||
2 | |||||
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.589215.733+4
- 4.1101614.642+2
- 5.305114.728+1
- 6.916405.693-2
- 7.271108.715+22
- 8.721440.621+3
- 9.1041674.607-2
- 10.17146.788+1
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
8 posts in the last week
40 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Durddcdy23
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM