Molotovs and AT nades into single upgrade
25 Aug 2015, 14:29 PM
#21
Posts: 2487 | Subs: 21
For people saying molotovs are useless and easy to dodge. It depends, I find they still have their uses. For example, on certain maps like semois summer, stalingrad, la glazie, and kholdney ferma winter molotovs are quite effective early game to upgrade. And if you're on other maps deciding to upgrade molotovs towards the late game can be a nice bonus as the enemy doesn't expect after playing you early-mid game to throw a molotov so he might keep his squads closer to yours during engagements, thus allowing you to get a sneaky molotov throw in and potentially wipe a unit.
25 Aug 2015, 14:37 PM
#22
5 
Posts: 104
How about a yes to merge and do vehicle damage. Not really a huge balance point but I find it weird they don't damage tanks as that was basically the whole point of them. In beta if a tank ran over a fire pit it would get a damaged engine, I still remember the disappointment of seeing that, then thinking I could do the same with Molotov's on a vehicle, only to waste my muni.
The fire pit engine crit thing was awful though. You'd build a fire to survive a blizzard only for your tank to seemingly go out of its way to run it over and damage itself in the process
The fire pit engine crit thing was awful though. You'd build a fire to survive a blizzard only for your tank to seemingly go out of its way to run it over and damage itself in the process
25 Aug 2015, 14:42 PM
#23
Posts: 830
Just a single upgrade should be nice. Be realists, where did you see something once nerfed were get buff back?
Mortars. Epic at launch, nerfed, buffed back to what they are now.
25 Aug 2015, 14:44 PM
#24
Posts: 830
How about a yes to merge and do vehicle damage. Not really a huge balance point but I find it weird they don't damage tanks as that was basically the whole point of them. In beta if a tank ran over a fire pit it would get a damaged engine, I still remember the disappointment of seeing that, then thinking I could do the same with Molotov's on a vehicle, only to waste my muni.
The fire pit engine crit thing was awful though. You'd build a fire to survive a blizzard only for your tank to seemingly go out of its way to run it over and damage itself in the process
Alpha and beta had many different crits for vehicles. Many of them got removed during the game's life cyle.
25 Aug 2015, 14:44 PM
#25
Posts: 1802 | Subs: 1
Just a single upgrade should be nice. Be realists, where did you see something once nerfed were get buff back?
HMG42
25 Aug 2015, 14:45 PM
#26
Posts: 830
If they get a grenade, don't give them the Guards grenade xd
25 Aug 2015, 15:07 PM
#27
Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1
For people saying molotovs are useless and easy to dodge. It depends, I find they still have their uses. For example, on certain maps like semois summer, stalingrad, la glazie, and kholdney ferma winter molotovs are quite effective early game to upgrade. And if you're on other maps deciding to upgrade molotovs towards the late game can be a nice bonus as the enemy doesn't expect after playing you early-mid game to throw a molotov so he might keep his squads closer to yours during engagements, thus allowing you to get a sneaky molotov throw in and potentially wipe a unit.
"get a sneaky molotov throw in and potentially wipe a unit" you say?
Let me see if I understand...
25 Aug 2015, 16:27 PM
#28
Posts: 354
Yes for single upgrade, and molotov definitely need fix/rework.
25 Aug 2015, 19:15 PM
#29
Posts: 110
What. Making them both available promotes variety and customization. Most high level matches no one techs AT nades until needed and no one techs molotovs.
As for your USF example, that has nothing to do with the way upgrades are unlocked.
Do you ever see people equip zooks and not bars/1919s?
Because I haven't seen it once since the change. i'm not sure how you can argue this increases variety over seperate, well priced upgrades.
25 Aug 2015, 20:45 PM
#30
1 Posts: 412
Do you ever see people equip zooks and not bars/1919s?
Because I haven't seen it once since the change. i'm not sure how you can argue this increases variety over seperate, well priced upgrades.
That still makes no sense. The zooks are there if you need them and give you extra AT options, aka increases variety.
Zooks are already rare, making them a separate upgrade again would put them back to the graveyard.
25 Aug 2015, 20:49 PM
#31
Posts: 110
Ok, so in my mind, the most variety is achieved when you sometimes have players getting just bars, sometimes just zooks, sometimes both, sometimes none, and this is what you don't see with the current bundled upgrade. Does that really make no sense to you?
25 Aug 2015, 21:19 PM
#32
Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1
That would likely be more because Zookas are pretty bad, though. They were always unpopular because of that - now one might decided to get a Zooka or two to fend off a light while they truly seek BAR spam, small improvement over "Zookas suck so I'll just get BARs".
25 Aug 2015, 21:25 PM
#33
Posts: 135
I would keep them separate, make ppsh and ptrs nondoctrinal and add them to the mix whilst increasing the price a little bit. Of course this would mean more changes but just throwing some ideas here.
You could either call them "assault" and anti tank packages or they could be made mutually exclusive a la brits so that option A gives molotovs and ptrs upgrade for conscripts and option B was at nade + ppsh.
You could either call them "assault" and anti tank packages or they could be made mutually exclusive a la brits so that option A gives molotovs and ptrs upgrade for conscripts and option B was at nade + ppsh.
25 Aug 2015, 22:01 PM
#34
1 Posts: 551
How about a yes to merge and do vehicle damage. Not really a huge balance point but I find it weird they don't damage tanks as that was basically the whole point of them. In beta if a tank ran over a fire pit it would get a damaged engine, I still remember the disappointment of seeing that, then thinking I could do the same with Molotov's on a vehicle, only to waste my muni.
The fire pit engine crit thing was awful though. You'd build a fire to survive a blizzard only for your tank to seemingly go out of its way to run it over and damage itself in the process
+1
Molotovs were used to damage tanks engines by throwing em in the tanks rear during WW2. Relic totally fucked up everything by making molotov an AI weapon.
As an antigarrison weapon molotovs dont burn down a building altho they have a high chance to set a buidling on fire, but not always. Some buildings seem to be fire proof and some burn like a box of matches. Very inconsistent.
25 Aug 2015, 22:04 PM
#35
Posts: 110
That would likely be more because Zookas are pretty bad, though. They were always unpopular because of that - now one might decided to get a Zooka or two to fend off a light while they truly seek BAR spam, small improvement over "Zookas suck so I'll just get BARs".
Zooks definitely needed a buff or to be made cheaper.
But my point is I feel it's best for upgrades to be seperate, and then you balance each upgrade, rather than "hmmm x is popular, but y isn't, so let's put them both together to get y used more", just buff y.
25 Aug 2015, 22:07 PM
#36
1 Posts: 551
You all are missing my important point: people who do cons strats buy both anyway. people who dont do cons strats dont buy either of the upgrades.
25 Aug 2015, 22:21 PM
#37
Posts: 622
You all are missing my important point: people who do cons strats buy both anyway. people who dont do cons strats dont buy either of the upgrades.
well I do cons but i only buy AT nades = =.... i rather get a engieer with flame than upgrade molotov
25 Aug 2015, 22:21 PM
#38
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
It will probably get fixed eventually.
Eventually™
My controls weren't working
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
26 Aug 2015, 01:17 AM
#39
Posts: 110
You all are missing my important point: people who do cons strats buy both anyway. people who dont do cons strats dont buy either of the upgrades.
Except this isn't true at all.
26 Aug 2015, 08:56 AM
#40
40 
Posts: 88
Molotovs should just be a Vet 1 ability for cons. Have it to were they pay to unlock a normal Nade. Nothing to good, mine you.
this i think they should either come standard or at vet 1 otherwise you either have to chose and delay t-3 and end up on the back foot in the fuel fight if you buy all the upgrades
2 users are browsing this thread:
2 guests
Livestreams
 |
|
|
21 | ||
|
|
|
|
19 | ||
 |
|
|
2 | ||
|
|
|
|
5704 | ||
 |
|
|
233 | ||
 |
|
|
123 | ||
 |
|
|
34 | ||
|
|
|
|
19 | ||
|
|
|
|
16 | ||
|
|
|
|
5 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.830222.789+36
- 2.561204.733+3
- 3.34957.860+14
- 4.916404.694-1
- 5.280162.633+8
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.721440.621+3
- 8.14758.717+1
- 9.17046.787-1
- 10.1019662.606+4
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1222
Board Info
299 users are online:
299 guests
1 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
36 posts in the last month
8 posts in the last week
36 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48939
Welcome our newest member, Ellmjnhiem
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Ellmjnhiem
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM