new content coming?
Posts: 2819
Posts: 177
Permanently Banned
Didn't you tell the exaxt same shit when people predicted the western front? You did.
He did, but this time he has actual reasons to believe that there wont be a pershing:
Noun recently said that the Pershing isnt something that they are considering for the near future.
Couple that with the fact that Relic has never added a new unit via DLC so far (and probably wont in the future) and the Pershing becomes something that we might see in another expansion pack...IF that expansion pack was focused on the US Forces (highly unlikely)
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Didn't you tell the exaxt same shit when people predicted the western front? You did.
And that was a crushing letdown for me and quite a few others as unique eastern front feel went down to shitter.
Last thing I want to see is unique feel of armies go the same route.
Also, there is a quote on the blog stating specifically there will be no pershing or chaffee, but they have use their engine sounds for OKW vehicles.
Posts: 177
Permanently BannedPosts: 13
Permanently BannedPosts: 177
Permanently BannedWhat about the Sherman M4A3E2 (Jumbo) as a new heavy tank?
Wouldnt that also require a new model?
Posts: 13
Permanently BannedPosts: 3293
Posts: 177
Permanently BannedPosts: 65
Posts: 65
I really haven't heard any good reasons why they wouldn't add it with all the user demand. At the right price, CP level, and pop cap (if they solve this issue for US) any unit can become balanced.
The tank was actually used late in the war and saw some combat. It's not like it was strictly a prototype tank.
Posts: 177
Permanently BannedThe problem with the Pershing, and as far as I can remember I'm paraphrasing Noun here from one of the latest streams, is that it's just unrealistic to include it.
Lol, the old "realism-card" in a game where soviets fight alongside the US army. Yeah...Relics excuses
I really haven't heard any good reasons why they wouldn't add it with all the user demand.
Because adding new units via DLC doesent seem to be an option for Relic. Probably because of financial reasons.
Posts: 65
I see a lot of top community members being very firm that there will be no Pershing as if they have some insider information. If that is the case, can you explain why the US was given a heavy skin if not to have some kind of heavy tank fill that role sometime in the future?
I really haven't heard any good reasons why they wouldn't add it with all the user demand. At the right price, CP level, and pop cap (if they solve this issue for US) any unit can become balanced.
The tank was actually used late in the war and saw some combat. It's not like it was strictly a prototype tank.
I don't believe this is a balance issue, but more of a faction identity and realism issue.
But as far as seen combat goes, a few saw combat in like, 1945, but it was somewhere around a dozen and maybe twice. It's just too unrealistic.
Posts: 1702
And that was a crushing letdown for me and quite a few others as unique eastern front feel went down to shitter.
Last thing I want to see is unique feel of armies go the same route.
Also, there is a quote on the blog stating specifically there will be no pershing or chaffee, but they have use their engine sounds for OKW vehicles.
I too was a little dissapointed when WFA was announced.
I would of much preffered simply another soviet faction and another german faction.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
I see a lot of top community members being very firm that there will be no Pershing as if they have some insider information. If that is the case, can you explain why the US was given a heavy skin if not to have some kind of heavy tank fill that role sometime in the future?
That is exceptionally easy to explain.
Because the code is already there and what good would it do to remove it just for a single faction?
I really haven't heard any good reasons why they wouldn't add it with all the user demand. At the right price, CP level, and pop cap (if they solve this issue for US) any unit can become balanced.
One of the reasons would be: there was a total of 0 pershings during battle of bulge, which USF are based on.
First pershing have seen the combat only after the battle of bulge(and let me say this again, USF are based on US forces during Battle of bulge, not earlier, not later, exactly that, same for OKW).
The tank was actually used late in the war and saw some combat. It's not like it was strictly a prototype tank.
Whooping 20 of them have seen any action.
Makes as much sense as including IS-3 tank, because one regiment have seen action on far east.
Posts: 3293
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Posts: 110
Posts: 247
Asking for pershing is like asking for soviets to have wehrmacht tiering system.
It just will not happen. Deal with it.
lol, just like the US faction, right?
Posts: 65
That is exceptionally easy to explain.
Because the code is already there and what good would it do to remove it just for a single faction?
Correct, no one would expect them to change the code to remove the slot just for one army. However I wouldn't expect them to issue a rare skin for USF heavy tanks if they had no plans to ever use it.
One of the reasons would be: there was a total of 0 pershings during battle of bulge, which USF are based on.
First pershing have seen the combat only after the battle of bulge(and let me say this again, USF are based on US forces during Battle of bulge, not earlier, not later, exactly that, same for OKW).
Yeah, the base design is from that time period but that isn't something they absolutely couldn't deviate from. The new commander with the Pershing would be called "late war tactics" or something along those lines. Wow! that was an easy problem to solve, wasn't it?
Whooping 20 of them have seen any action.
Makes as much sense as including IS-3 tank, because one regiment have seen action on far east.
Well, that's 20 more than zero. It was a popular unit in COH1 and the war footage of it destroying a Panther in Cologne has made it a WWII icon. There would be no problem including it if balanced correctly.
Livestreams
20 | |||||
10 | |||||
147 | |||||
37 | |||||
21 | |||||
4 | |||||
4 | |||||
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.655231.739+15
- 2.842223.791+5
- 3.940410.696+6
- 4.35459.857-1
- 5.599234.719+7
- 6.278108.720+29
- 7.307114.729+3
- 8.645.928+5
- 9.10629.785+7
- 10.527.881+18
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger