Login

russian armor

Flak Emplacements...

14 Jan 2016, 21:42 PM
#41
avatar of Hans G. Schultz

Posts: 875 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Jan 2016, 10:03 AMKatitof

Overall army balance is irrelevant when singular units underperform.

All units should be viable choices, not always optimal, not always go-to option, but not useless to the point you wish you could travel back in time just to stop yourself from getting one.

Flak, M-42, greyhound, penals, vickers UC all suffer this fate.

In this particular case, scrap fuel cost or take away AoE, leave suppression and make it rely on accuracy instead of AoE and scatter to hit, this is the only way for such unit that does have gun on the ground level to hit anything when the ground isn't flat.

Agreed.

The other units that you mentioned should be fixed next.
14 Feb 2016, 07:36 AM
#42
avatar of Hans G. Schultz

Posts: 875 | Subs: 2

I almost forgot about this old thread of mine, but It contains something that I consider not worth abandoning.

Bump.
14 Feb 2016, 08:06 AM
#43
avatar of IA3 - HH

Posts: 289

un-decrew-able, more health and increase a bit damage
14 Feb 2016, 08:47 AM
#44
avatar of Thamor

Posts: 290

Need shielding technology steal from UKF, so okw can super brace.
14 Feb 2016, 10:07 AM
#45
avatar of Aerohank

Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1

I faced a flak emplacement for the first time in months yesterday. To my surprise, it was actually fairly effective. It was placed on flat ground so it no problem hitting and suppressing infantry. I tried to quickly take it out with double AT guns, but my AT guns had a very hard time hitting it. I'm not sure if I just had some extremely bad RNG, or if the gun has a small target size.

I'm going to do some experiments with it myself. I'm not sure how long it holds up against things like mortar fire. Nor do I know how good it is on non-flat surfaces.
14 Feb 2016, 10:13 AM
#46
avatar of Nuclear Arbitor
Patrion 28

Posts: 2470

I faced a flak emplacement for the first time in months yesterday. To my surprise, it was actually fairly effective. It was placed on flat ground so it no problem hitting and suppressing infantry. I tried to quickly take it out with double AT guns, but my AT guns had a very hard time hitting it. I'm not sure if I just had some extremely bad RNG, or if the gun has a small target size.

I'm going to do some experiments with it myself. I'm not sure how long it holds up against things like mortar fire. Nor do I know how good it is on non-flat surfaces.


it works even better if it's on an elevated point firing down. still get's decrewed pretty easily.
14 Feb 2016, 17:35 PM
#47
avatar of edibleshrapnel

Posts: 552

Unable to decrew, fixed.


14 Feb 2016, 17:40 PM
#48
avatar of edibleshrapnel

Posts: 552

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Jan 2016, 06:40 AMSerrith
I have no issues with the flak being buffed.... But the OP is kind of obnoxious...


14 Feb 2016, 17:40 PM
#49
avatar of Domine

Posts: 500

Even if it would be unable to be decrewed, nobody ever would pay fuel for a poor mans emplacement that gets rekt by really any vehicle or an AT squad or a single mortar, or an offmap or onmap arty, or or or...
14 Feb 2016, 20:29 PM
#50
avatar of Grim

Posts: 1096

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2016, 17:40 PMDomine
Even if it would be unable to be decrewed, nobody ever would pay fuel for a poor mans emplacement that gets rekt by really any vehicle or an AT squad or a single mortar, or an offmap or onmap arty, or or or...


with the exception of AT squads it SHOULD be countered by everything you just listed......just sayin'

But yeah this is the one unit of the OKW that could do with a buff and I fully support it.
14 Feb 2016, 20:43 PM
#51
avatar of Thamor

Posts: 290

Should be like bunker.
15 Feb 2016, 00:12 AM
#52
avatar of GenObi

Posts: 556

Can it be decree and add suppression
15 Feb 2016, 00:35 AM
#53
avatar of Virtual Boar

Posts: 196

Unable to decrew and at least something of a similar damage model has of the Whermacht MG nest. So that it isn't affected by small arms that much apart from rocket launchers.
15 Feb 2016, 00:40 AM
#54
avatar of Domine

Posts: 500

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Feb 2016, 20:29 PMGrim
with the exception of AT squads it SHOULD be countered by everything you just listed......just sayin'


It costs fuel. It should be weak OR expensive imo. Not this. Look at the bofors or the mortar pit.
25 Feb 2016, 03:13 AM
#55
avatar of Mistah_S

Posts: 851 | Subs: 1

Make it undecrewable (like Brit emplacment), and have the same weapon as the 251/17 flackht. Cost increased to 30 fuel.

This way, it would be like a bunker +, with better damage, light at, but at the cost of fuel and similar durability. It could then cover flanks, but be destroyed quickly if it is unsupported.


+2
25 Feb 2016, 03:25 AM
#56
avatar of SturmTigerVorgo

Posts: 307

The upkeep of this unit is huge, it's not worth building it at this point.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

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

943 users are online: 1 member and 942 guests
Brick Top
1 post in the last 24h
9 posts in the last week
27 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50007
Welcome our newest member, Helzer96
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM