USF: 5 Man Vehicle Crews
Posts: 1283 | Subs: 4
What do you think?
Posts: 2561
And I think there are plenty of better options to fixing advanced vehicle crews. Vehicle crews shouldn't be fighting in the first place. An extra man wont change that.
Posts: 1216
If you get raped disembarking vehicles for repair, then that's honestly a L2P issue, isn't it? Vehicle Crews aren't even fast at repairing, I barely bother disembarking due to risk of getting attacked.
A bit of OT, but a thought popped into my head about using Vehicle Crews to replenish depleted squads, just like Conscripts. Would be a nice alternative role for them that's not a big deal, and gives vehicle crews that lost their vehicle a cheap meat shield role without just suiciding them. They can be used to supplement your other units' losses and keep those AT guns and howitzers rolling.
Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1
Permanently BannedPosts: 4928
I don't see how this would be more realistic, OR give Thompson upgrade more utility. On top of that, asking for a window of forgiveness for using the worse unit to fight with is asking for a noncombat unit to be great at combat.
It depends, it would be more realistic for Sherman crews because Sherman Tanks were manned by 5 men (driver, hull mg, gunner, loader, commander), but less realistic for basically everything else. Especially the light vehicles that clearly show 2 men, but have suddenly 4 when they get out.
A bit of OT, but a thought popped into my head about using Vehicle Crews to replenish depleted squads, just like Conscripts. Would be a nice alternative role for them that's not a big deal, and gives vehicle crews that lost their vehicle a cheap meat shield role without just suiciding them. They can be used to supplement your other units' losses and keep those AT guns and howitzers rolling.
I feel like this would better fit Rear Echelons due to them being rushed to the front lines to support the exhausted troops during the offensive.
Posts: 738
Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2
it is a great upgrade but as with the fact that vehicle crews are 4 men and that they have smgs, it is hard to use them.
Posts: 1283 | Subs: 4
Vehicle crews are vulnerable for a reason. I don't see much reason for this, other then to subvert that.
And I think there are plenty of better options to fixing advanced vehicle crews. Vehicle crews shouldn't be fighting in the first place. An extra man wont change that.
OR give Thompson upgrade more utility. On top of that, asking for a window of forgiveness for using the worse unit to fight with is asking for a noncombat unit to be great at combat.
If you get raped disembarking vehicles for repair, then that's honestly a L2P issue, isn't it? Vehicle Crews aren't even fast at repairing, I barely bother disembarking due to risk of getting attacked.
In my mind I don't see a difference between a vehicle crew and say, Pios, CE's or RE's, which we equip with weapons all the time, in fact the M20 bazooka/Thompson seems to suggest their original intended role included some degree of combat equity which they really don't actualize in their current state. An extra man would give them a little bit more survivability, and hopefully a window to actually have some staying power in a firefight. I agree, the disembark + repair is a risk reward proposition, but it's also supposed to be a unique feature which gives the USF an edge, not counting super glue... so, it would be nice to see such a design choice have a little more flexibility and use.
Posts: 3052 | Subs: 15
Posts: 4928
sherman crews should be 5 mang, aaht 3 mans ,M20 2 meinz,Stuart 4 man, E T C.
I'd like this because it's more realistic, although I'd keep AAHT and M20 at 3 so they can lose a man and still recrew like other crews can.
Posts: 622
Posts: 1283 | Subs: 4
Posts: 1116 | Subs: 1
Permanently BannedPosts: 622
The thing is drop it down to like 2 thompsons and 5 men. Doesn't make sense that all weapon crew members get expensive weapons like thompsons. Like 2 by default and 5 men for tank crews would be my answer IMO. But thats just me.
problem is the crew is stronger than RE, which shouldn't be the case, because if Crew is stronger than RE, most time they will swap RE with crew where crew take the infantry combat roll instead of being the crew.
Posts: 503
I don't see how this would be more realistic, OR give Thompson upgrade more utility. On top of that, asking for a window of forgiveness for using the worse unit to fight with is asking for a noncombat unit to be great at combat.
If you get raped disembarking vehicles for repair, then that's honestly a L2P issue, isn't it? Vehicle Crews aren't even fast at repairing, I barely bother disembarking due to risk of getting attacked.
A bit of OT, but a thought popped into my head about using Vehicle Crews to replenish depleted squads, just like Conscripts. Would be a nice alternative role for them that's not a big deal, and gives vehicle crews that lost their vehicle a cheap meat shield role without just suiciding them. They can be used to supplement your other units' losses and keep those AT guns and howitzers rolling.
If you watch DEVM play he will get an engine critical and pop out and do critical repair so fast you would literally have to fire a rifle grenade on his crew the moment they pop out to even have a chance of hitting them before they pop right back in and drive off for full repairs.
Posts: 473
Permanently BannedPosts: 1484
Posts: 4928
What is the reinforcement cost for the vehicle crew, is it cheaper than RE?
No it's 30.
Livestreams
15 | |||||
2 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.829222.789+35
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.483190.718-1
- 4.587233.716+3
- 5.1095612.641+19
- 6.891399.691+1
- 7.280162.633+8
- 8.1004649.607+5
- 9.304113.729+4
- 10.379114.769+1
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
7 posts in the last week
25 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, typhu88at
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM