First Review British Forces
Posts: 985 | Subs: 2
Posts: 2238 | Subs: 15
Posts: 2053
Posts: 764
as I wait for their glacial paced advance like I'm playing The Settlers (attacking with buildings...).
... As adversaries they make me feel like I'm taking up the slack of an AI in a tower defence game, slamming waves of units into the wall of their buildings...
The comments are pure gold
Thanks for sharing Capiqua.
Posts: 34
Posts: 657
Posts: 2238 | Subs: 15
Posts: 640
When you set up your 17-pounder emplacement in a contested zone, and watch advancing enemy tanks pop like overripe melons. - See more at: http://www.gamewatcher.com/reviews/company-of-heroes-2-the-british-forces-review/12298#sthash.Q9eFWVxa.dpuf
not op at all lol
Posts: 334
Yeah no shit...
Posts: 559
"The Churchill Crocodile flamethrower tank spews liquid fire at surprising range"
Yeah no shit...
So does the OP bren with that upgrade. I predict the 1st whine post on August 31st about OP brits will be this.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
So does the OP bren with that upgrade. I predict the 1st whine post on August 31st about OP brits will be this.
Lets ignore the fact that croc is 12cp, pure AI tank(it have a pea shooter to scare off that assaulting 222s!) and wasp requires tech, which means it will have short window of opportunity because of lights.
Posts: 1217
I hope that´s just my (limited) impression.
Posts: 1144 | Subs: 7
Am I the only one annoyed that 17 pounders seemingly make 2/3rd of your anti tank force?
I hope that´s just my (limited) impression.
AT guns, piats, fireflies, cromwell
Posts: 1217
Talking about the gun including the vehicles armed with it.The firefly is armed with a 17pounder. So is the Comet. Late game you are probably facing 17ps only. At least it looked like that to me.
AT guns, piats, fireflies, cromwell
Posts: 618
Am I the only one annoyed that 17 pounders seemingly make 2/3rd of your anti tank force?
I hope that´s just my (limited) impression.
The 17 Pounder is certainly not essential for the British.
EDIT: Ohh, you mean in that sense. Then yeah, I guess.
Posts: 2053
Am I the only one annoyed that 17 pounders seemingly make 2/3rd of your anti tank force?
I hope that´s just my (limited) impression.
Late game could consist of any of the three churchills as well. Im not sure what there is to be annoyed about, Brits have 3 stock 17 pounder wielding units while USF sobs in shame with its single Jackson.
Posts: 424 | Subs: 2
not op at all lol
Compared to the Pak 43, 17pdr costs fuel 75(!) for a immobile emplacement and 400 MP. Another thing is that is has pay through Sabot Rounds to shot through shot blockers unlike the Pak 43. Pak 43 also has super turbo stun everything round. At least it does have flares to reveal the area. I remember so many OST and OKW players raging that my 17 pdr emplacement was penetrating and destroying their Tigers and Panthers. I guess only Axis can have the best anti-tank weapons
I think USF players will be crying over Firefly more than the 17pdr emplacement considering it does 240 damage, more armor (for what its worth with Allies), as mobile, increased damage at Vet 3, and HP compared to the Jackson. Same range too for only 30 more fuel. Has a 9 second reload it seems however. So it looks like Jackson will be better against medium tanks than heavy tanks but can still use HVAP rounds for increased damage and penetration.
Posts: 2053
Compared to the Pak 43, 17pdr costs fuel 75(!) for a immobile emplacement and 400 MP. Another thing is that is has pay through Sabot Rounds to shot through shot blockers unlike the Pak 43. Pak 43 also has super turbo stun everything round. At least it does have flares to reveal the area. I remember so many OST and OKW players raging that my 17 pdr emplacement was penetrating and destroying their Tigers and Panthers. I guess only Axis can have the best anti-tank weapons
I think USF players will be crying over Firefly more than the 17pdr emplacement considering it does 240 damage, more armor (for what its worth with Allies), as mobile, increased damage at Vet 3, and HP compared to the Jackson. Same range too for only 30 more fuel. Has a 9 second reload it seems however. So it looks like Jackson will be better against medium tanks than heavy tanks but can still use HVAP rounds for increased damage and penetration.
And dont forget tulip rockets. Its 50 muni to equip and 100 muni to use, but it is pretty darn potent...
Posts: 978
I think USF players will be crying over Firefly more than the 17pdr emplacement considering it does 240 damage, more armor (for what its worth with Allies), as mobile, increased damage at Vet 3, and HP compared to the Jackson. Same range too for only 30 more fuel. Has a 9 second reload it seems however. So it looks like Jackson will be better against medium tanks than heavy tanks but can still use HVAP rounds for increased damage and penetration.I predicted the special snowflake. Not even surprised. 60 range and 240 damage on a turreted tank destroyer. Now even with more durability. Why would I even remotely consider building a Panther? The outrageous thing is that while also being an anti tank unit, the Panther is still stuck at 50 range with the excuse of having a turret. - While also having a shit rof.
Bonuses only for the 17 pounder, because reasons.
Give the Panther a normal reload or more HP.
Livestreams
50 | |||||
19 | |||||
5 | |||||
141 | |||||
30 | |||||
19 | |||||
4 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.655231.739+15
- 2.842223.791+5
- 3.942410.697+8
- 4.35459.857-1
- 5.599234.719+7
- 6.278108.720+29
- 7.307114.729+3
- 8.645.928+5
- 9.269143.653+2
- 10.10629.785+7
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
10 posts in the last week
29 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Selvestr
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM