Login

russian armor

Best ideas you've heard today

24 Feb 2015, 19:42 PM
#21
avatar of FaustCostBulletin

Posts: 521



You obviously dont play enough OST. OST bleeds MP more than any other faction

And BTW im still right


Considering the majority of my games are as OST, your assumption couldn't be more wrong. You can't close your eyes and ears and scream "I am right" when you are blatantly wrong. Since you seemingly intend to keep doing that, I will stop wasting more posts on you.

Then I'm not fuel starved as OKW in 4v4 ^^ if we follow the logic :D


No, you aren't, because caches. And less dependance on early game vehicles.
24 Feb 2015, 19:42 PM
#22
avatar of WiFiDi
Honorary Member Badge

Posts: 3293

you could give the t34 the 57mm upgrade like the sherman upgrading to a 76 in coh1. :D

yep thats right going to a lower mm was actually an upgrade :D
24 Feb 2015, 19:43 PM
#23
avatar of QueenRatchet123

Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2

Permanently Banned
Then I'm not fuel starved as OKW in 4v4 ^^ if we follow the logic :D


I dont understand :guyokay:
24 Feb 2015, 19:45 PM
#24
avatar of QueenRatchet123

Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2

Permanently Banned


Considering the majority of my games are as OST, your assumption couldn't be more wrong. You can't close your eyes and ears and scream "I am right" when you are blatantly wrong. Since you seemingly intend to keep doing that, I will stop wasting more posts on you.


Ost gets raped by jacksons, in fact they are hard counterd by them

By ur logic,

Panther should be in t3
24 Feb 2015, 19:45 PM
#25
avatar of FaustCostBulletin

Posts: 521

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Feb 2015, 19:42 PMWiFiDi
you could give the t34 the 57mm upgrade like the sherman upgrading to a 76 in coh1. :D

yep thats right going to a lower mm was actually an upgrade :D


Better penetration but poorer after armor effect. It could indeed work as a low damage higher fire rate and high penetration upgrade, but it is a far less simple solution and it requires more work. Moving T-34/85 to the main tree does not.
24 Feb 2015, 19:47 PM
#26
avatar of Thunderhun

Posts: 1617



I dont understand :guyokay:


OP says he isn't MP starved as Ost...I just followed his logic when I made my statement about OKW in 4v4:P
24 Feb 2015, 19:52 PM
#27
avatar of GuyFromTheSky

Posts: 229

I don't agree at all with #1. I find both the T70 and the T34/76 viable in their current state. Introducing the panther-like /85 to Soviet T3 would be a terrible idea balance wise imo.
24 Feb 2015, 19:57 PM
#28
avatar of some one

Posts: 935

"Dear" Relic if you goona replace those Sov tanks Plz

Make Elephant non doctrinal unit
Put it in tier 3 instead of StuG
To compensate
decrease the range a bit, consideraby decrease the cost , increase the speed and rotation of it.

thank you
24 Feb 2015, 20:02 PM
#29
avatar of GiaA

Posts: 713 | Subs: 2

None of the factions should gain additional income from their allies caches. It's impossible to balance a cache in all game modes when it is 4 times as strong in 4v4 as it is in 1v1.
24 Feb 2015, 20:04 PM
#30
avatar of FaustCostBulletin

Posts: 521

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Feb 2015, 20:02 PMGiaA
None of the factions should gain additional income from their allies caches. It's impossible to balance a cache in all game modes when it is 4 times as strong in 4v4 as it is in 1v1.


That's silly and please don't derail the thread, among with others.

This thread is about nothing but the two suggestions I pointed out.

Everyone interested in the thread itself, please refer to page one, where some of the longer and more relevant posts are.
24 Feb 2015, 20:05 PM
#31
avatar of FaustCostBulletin

Posts: 521

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Feb 2015, 20:02 PMGiaA
None of the factions should gain additional income from their allies caches. It's impossible to balance a cache in all game modes when it is 4 times as strong in 4v4 as it is in 1v1.


That's silly and please don't derail the thread, among with others.

This thread is about nothing but the two suggestions I pointed out.

Everyone interested in the thread itself, please refer to page one, where some of the longer and more relevant posts are.
24 Feb 2015, 20:06 PM
#32
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053

T34/85 in terms of penetration, not in terms of health and armor.

The doctrinal t34/85 should remain tough as it is and the stock version should be visually different, so you can tell that it wont be as tough.


You cant simply move the doctrinal t34/85 into the soviet tech tree. You can only wish for a penetration upgrade of sorts.
24 Feb 2015, 20:08 PM
#33
avatar of some one

Posts: 935

I agree Soviets should not receive additional income from USF fuel caches due to excessive USF MPs.
24 Feb 2015, 20:09 PM
#34
avatar of FaustCostBulletin

Posts: 521



You cant simply move the doctrinal t34/85 into the soviet tech tree. You can only wish for a penetration upgrade of sorts.


Why not?
24 Feb 2015, 20:10 PM
#35
avatar of some one

Posts: 935


You can only wish for a penetration upgrade of sorts.


May I wish for penetration and vision upgrade for the StuG?
24 Feb 2015, 20:13 PM
#36
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053



May I wish for penetration and vision upgrade for the StuG?


I would like the stug to be buffed and repriced into a proper TD, the role in which it was given in war. No upgrade needed.

Why not?


Because Relic, and because you cant simply move units that are already in a doctrine.

24 Feb 2015, 20:15 PM
#37
avatar of GiaA

Posts: 713 | Subs: 2



That's silly and please don't derail the thread, among with others.

This thread is about nothing but the two suggestions I pointed out.

Everyone interested in the thread itself, please refer to page one, where some of the longer and more relevant posts are.


I refered to your 2nd point :)
24 Feb 2015, 20:23 PM
#38
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

Revert the bugfix on the RoF on the T3476.
Add an upgrade/teching (yep, it's not gonna happen) on T3 that allows to upgrade your T3476 cannon to the 85s. You don't have the HP pool of the doctrinal 85s, but you have the pen of them.

The only thing you could improve on the M5, is it's AA capabilities to match those of the USF/OKW HT.
24 Feb 2015, 20:41 PM
#39
avatar of some one

Posts: 935


The only thing you could improve on the M5, is it's AA capabilities to match those of the USF/OKW HT.


Can I have the same AA capabilities for Werhmacht Ostwind?
24 Feb 2015, 20:52 PM
#40
avatar of FaustCostBulletin

Posts: 521



Can I have the same AA capabilities for Werhmacht Ostwind?


That would be quite the nerf. And stop derailing my thread.

So far page 2 has been mostly a disaster, drowning away the relevant posts. Once again, people who are actually interested in the discussion put forward at the OP, refer to the first page.
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 guests

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

351 users are online: 1 member and 350 guests
serg_codmod
1 post in the last 24h
9 posts in the last week
27 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48812
Welcome our newest member, Danne264
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM