Mortar Carriage

No, no, no, no, ALL THE SQUADS.

I'm tired of something that blows up one-shotting by my stuff on legs the moment I look away no matter what faction I play. Obviously, it's far less as Soviets, but it's still dumb.

Yes. Its just more of a problem for the 4 man squads. This includes CEs pathfinders ass engies and other 4 man allied units.

just a noob asking, wich units need more micro than a Scott?? (I can think on snipers i.e)

no joke, just asking.

all light vehicles require extra micro, even the scott

anyone who says otherwise is just buttmad

I wouldn't mind seeing a reduction in the effectiveness of it's direct fire mode. As a trade of potentially a buff to its barrage, increase it's indirect fire range, or some improved AT pen for direct fire shots.

Scott is made of glass. And your problem with squad wipes isn't the Scott it's clumping from the turd tier cover system

2 Flame posts invised, as well as 2 posts citing said flaming

If you see a flame post, it is better to report it, rather than include it in your own post.

Wow, really? You're gonna quote Burts to disprove what I was saying? Find me a less biased and more skilled player and quote them. And they have to disagree with what I said. Not with something similar to what I said.


Seriously, Burts... And his posts was full of "fuck" and "shit". Quote Katitof too next time, show me how wrong I am.

My points:

With current squad-bunching it is spoiling the game. Perhaps if just this was changed it would become a balanced unit. I do not believe the Scott makes the US OP. it's just an un-fun unit to face.

The Scott is not micro-intensive.

It auto-fires from long range and is armoured.

It can outrun flanking infantry.

It can outrun and out-shoot AT guns.

Flanking with a tank is extremely risky vs a faction with non-doc tank-disabling mines.


See if you can find several good players who disagree with these points. If you can find someone who can express his ideas without expletives, that'd be great.

Alright, i will give you my reasons.


1) Same range as an at gun such as the pak 40

2) Dies it 2 anti tank gun shots or 3 panzershreck shots

3) same AOE as the sherman


And the reason you "dont see good players" explaining here anything, is because when they say something, they instantly get trolled by people who have no clue.




Flanking is extremelly risky vs a faction with non doctrinally disabling mines? which faction are we talking about here? Cause it seems like every single faction has non doctrinal mines that cripple.


And i honestly have zero clue what do you mean by "un-fun to play againts", the few things that actually work are deemed "un-fun to play againts"? Cause that what most of your post seems to be about. Bitching about the allied units that are good.

Alright, i will give you my reasons.


1) Same range as an at gun such as the pak 40

2) Dies it 2 anti tank gun shots or 3 panzershreck shots

3) same AOE as the sherman


And the reason you "dont see good players" explaining here anything, is because when they say something, they instantly get trolled by people who have no clue.




Flanking is extremelly risky vs a faction with non doctrinally disabling mines? which faction are we talking about here? Cause it seems like every single faction has non doctrinal mines that cripple.


And i honestly have zero clue what do you mean by "un-fun to play againts", the few things that actually work are deemed "un-fun to play againts"? Cause that what most of your post seems to be about. Bitching about the allied units that are good.

No, just suggesting there are some allied units that too strong and spoil gameplay just as there are axis units that are too strong and spoil gameplay and allied/axis units that are too weak too.


You write with such anger, I wonder what it is in your life that hurts you so much that you have to splurge out your rage here. it's a discussion about a game, not a political fight for life or death. You can disagree with people, explain why. There's no need to let out all that teenage angst against other forum users.

Is it your goal to start fights with people so you can feel some accomplishment? There was no personal insult to you at all but you blurted out a steady stream of insults in reply. Is it because you're too scared to express your anger in real life? Is it because you're too small to fight so you keep quiet then come here to vent?



In reply to your points:

1) same range perhaps but can fire indirectly from behind shot-blockers, thereby nullifying the pak's range.
2) dies to two hits but can be kept behind the front and far away from AT with a meatshield of infantry blobcking the path. Approaching with AT guns is very dangerous.
3) Same AoE as Sherman perhaps but the Sherman is a direct fire weapon with shorter range, therefore has a big AoE to compensate. The Scott has no such disadvantage.



Still, as I've already said I think the issue with the Scott might go away if squad-clumping were fixed.

No, just suggesting there are som allied units that too strong and spoil gameplay just as there are axis units that are too strong and spoil gameplay and allied units that are too weak too.


You write with such anger, I wonder what it is in your life that hurts you so much that you have to splurge out your rage here. it's a discussion about a game, not a political fight for life or death. You can disagree with people, explain why. There's no need to let out all that teenage angst against other forum users.



In reply to your points:

1) same range perhaps but can fire indirectly from behind shot-blockers, thereby nullifying the pak's range.
2) dies to two hits but can be kept behind the front and far away from AT with a meatshield of infantry blobcking the path. Approaching with AT guns is very dangerous.
3) Same AoE as Sherman perhaps but the Sherman is a direct fire weapon with shorter range, therefore has a big AoE to compensate. The Scott has no such disadvantage.



Still, as I've already said I think the issue with the Scott might go away if squad-clumping were fixed.

dies to two hits but can be kept behind the front and far away from AT with a meatshield of infantry blobcking the path. Approaching with AT guns is very dangerous.

same range perhaps but can fire indirectly from behind shot-blockers, thereby nullifying the pak's range.


These statements completely contradict each other. So now the firing behind shot blockers is the problem? Like seriously, if theres infantry blocking its path, then you can use a tank and now there isint any infantry blocking it's path? The same arguement can be said for the sherman, or any tank in the game.


I fail to see the problem here. You claim oneshots are the problem yet it doesn't oneshot nearly as often as people claim it to.


And like i said, sherman is almost always the better choice over the m8 scott. The m8 scott only purpose is when the OKW player is spamming out like a ridiciluos amounts of volksgrenadiers, and theres so many panzershrecks around that approaching with shermans is not an option anymore. And with the jagdpanzer IV meta the scott is extremelly difficult to use properly.

Vs ostheer it's pretty much always better to go shermans.


Why am i angry? I'm not angry at all

...
...
...

In reply to your points:

1) same range perhaps but can fire indirectly from behind shot-blockers, thereby nullifying the pak's range.
2) dies to two hits but can be kept behind the front and far away from AT with a meatshield of infantry blobcking the path. Approaching with AT guns is very dangerous.
3) Same AoE as Sherman perhaps but the Sherman is a direct fire weapon with shorter range, therefore has a big AoE to compensate. The Scott has no such disadvantage.



Still, as I've already said I think the issue with the Scott might go away if squad-clumping were fixed.

There are two possible solutions:

1) Ask Relic to make a patch to stop models bunching up.
2) Make sure you spread out the models when you position the squad. I find that Holding the mouse button and dragging it back from the position you chose helps. You can see the dots appear where the guys will go.


As for the range issue, there is a downside to the Scott long range - you can't use it in close quarters...because it will wiped by shreks and ATGuns.

just an opinion. I´m pretty sure you know what I did here.

Further flame post invised.

There are ways of making an argument, which do not have to include insults.

Why do the discussions of allied units always end with so many insults?


Oh well, I think those sqadwipes from this unit and most other units/grenades/explosives and so on are related to the squadbunching. Thats annoying with all factions, but amplified by 4mansqads

Scott wipes, like a lot. You could argue poor survivability, but you can't it has smoke.
Was worse last pacth, but after its nerf/buff this patch it instead inflicts more damage at the cost of slightly less 1 shot kill zone. As in less than a 0.5 AOE area, but whatever. Lol if only the brummbar was as good as the scott, but the shells it fires are floating through the air like helium ballons and coincidentally half the time kill like 1 model or nothing at all.

There are two possible solutions:

1) Ask Relic to make a patch to stop models bunching up.
2) Make sure you spread out the models when you position the squad. I find that Holding the mouse button and dragging it back from the position you chose helps. You can see the dots appear where the guys will go.


As for the range issue, there is a downside to the Scott long range - you can't use it in close quarters...because it will wiped by shreks and ATGuns.

just an opinion. I´m pretty sure you know what I did here.

I agree) And you're right about dragging the mouse. The problem is, when units are moving they sometimes clump up too and the scott will sometimes hit moving squads. Again it's a Relic-begging issue for changing squad clumping.



Daspoulos
"Scott wipes, like a lot. You could argue poor survivability, but you can't it has smoke.
Was worse last pacth, but after its nerf/buff this patch it instead inflicts more damage at the cost of slightly less 1 shot kill zone. As in less than a 0.5 AOE area, but whatever. Lol if only the brummbar was as good as the scott, but the shells it fires are floating through the air like helium ballons and coincidentally half the time kill like 1 model or nothing at all."

+1

I agree) And you're right about dragging the mouse. The problem is, when units are moving they sometimes clump up too and the scott will sometimes hit moving squads. Again it's a Relic-begging issue for changing squad clumping.

and that is why HMC is perfectly fine....

Why do the discussions of allied units always end with so many insults?

It's because so many of the allied units are garbage, with many having been nerfed into oblivion after "discussions." It's made US and Soviet pretty boring most of the time. Now you start a "discussion" because you think one of the three semi-decent USF units is OP because someone used it well against you.

In the meantime, Axis players get vehicles that (in most cases) start out better, and then are given complete fantasy abilities (Pak43's shooting though forests, buildings, IR halftracks that can see through forests, buildings, etc) because somehow just being better units isn't enough.

and that is why HMC is perfectly fine....

Maybe... We'll have to see how the game plays after clumping is fixed.