M10 Achilles. Yes or No?
12 Jan 2016, 17:59 PM
#1
Posts: 657
Title says it all. If the M10 Achilles could be introduced into the game, would you give it the green light, or would you not want to see it? Explanations on why or why not would be good.
12 Jan 2016, 18:06 PM
#2
Posts: 2723 | Subs: 1
Comet, Cromwell, Firefly, 17 pounder, 6 pounder, Piat blob.
Nej.
Nej.
The internal battery has run dry, the game can now be played. However, clock based events will no longer occur.
12 Jan 2016, 18:15 PM
#3
1 Posts: 3052 | Subs: 15
Lol imagine a 200+ damage unit crushing infantry like an m10.
The mass uninstall would kill the community.
The mass uninstall would kill the community.
12 Jan 2016, 18:22 PM
#4
5 
Posts: 615
I'd support the Archer as a commander unit - would be a pretty unique little TD platform...not really the Achilles, too similar to other things.
12 Jan 2016, 18:22 PM
#5
![avatar of [Warfarers]Primarch](/images/no_av.png)
Posts: 82
I forgot the M10 was on speed in this game when I voted 
British usage of it should change it's role anyway. They used more as a mobile AT gun than a frontline tank killer.
British usage of it should change it's role anyway. They used more as a mobile AT gun than a frontline tank killer.
 | Playercard of TigerKonigs | |||||||||||||||||||
|
12 Jan 2016, 18:50 PM
#6
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Without "unit replacement" system like in ToV I don't see the point with 17 pounder emplacement and firefly already in game.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
12 Jan 2016, 18:54 PM
#7
2 
Posts: 538
voted NO as I do not see a reason. Or why would you like it in?
Because it is cool? Because it will improve the gameplay? positive emotion?.....
Because it is cool? Because it will improve the gameplay? positive emotion?.....
Greetings from Nürnberg - always happy to increase our local COH pool for local events - more glory: Rankade ladder
12 Jan 2016, 19:29 PM
#8
Posts: 552
What's the need, so Relic can make more money off nothing really, as there's already the firefly, 17 pounder, and 6 pounder AT gun? Why more? Should we be upsetting the balancing with more units?
ahwoah kenny
12 Jan 2016, 19:32 PM
#9
Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2
Ostheer has Pak43, Stug, Panther, Elephnat, Tiger, Tiger Ace, pak40, schrecks
OKW has Pak43, JP IV, Panther, Jadgtiger, King Tiger, Puma, schrecks
Just sayin...
OKW has Pak43, JP IV, Panther, Jadgtiger, King Tiger, Puma, schrecks
Just sayin...
12 Jan 2016, 19:41 PM
#10
Posts: 2723 | Subs: 1
Ostheer has Pak43, Stug, Panther, Elephnat, Tiger, Tiger Ace, pak40, schrecks
OKW has Pak43, JP IV, Panther, Jadgtiger, King Tiger, Puma, schrecks
Just sayin...
But half of them are doctrinal, all of the British anti-tank mentioned is non-doctrinal.
The internal battery has run dry, the game can now be played. However, clock based events will no longer occur.
12 Jan 2016, 19:45 PM
#11
Posts: 738
Yes, it would be nice for brits to have an AT option that's not hindered by a 10 second reload (firefly) or a 20 pop cap emplacement (17 pounder).
12 Jan 2016, 19:48 PM
#12
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
But half of them are doctrinal, all of the British anti-tank mentioned is non-doctrinal.
That doesn't really mean they should get more doctrinally. UKF was designed specifically to counter heavy armor, more TDs like this seem pointless, because why?
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
12 Jan 2016, 20:00 PM
#13
Posts: 2723 | Subs: 1
That doesn't really mean they should get more doctrinally. UKF was designed specifically to counter heavy armor, more TDs like this seem pointless, because why?
I'm confused, your wording suggests you are siding with me but the gist of your argument says otherwise.
I R Confuzzle.
The internal battery has run dry, the game can now be played. However, clock based events will no longer occur.
12 Jan 2016, 20:23 PM
#14
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
I'm confused, your wording suggests you are siding with me but the gist of your argument says otherwise.
I R Confuzzle.
I'll try again OpieOP.
Achilles would be another mobile TD with 17 pounder and crappy survivability.
I don't believe its needed, I don't see what kind of purpose or unique role it would present, moreover UKF being already heavy AT oriented doesn't seem like it even needs more variety here, I could understand something like this for soviets which AT definitely doesn't excel, but not for brits, even 2 USF TDs fill completely different niche with different playstyle behind them.
In this case, how it wouldn't be inferior firefly?
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
12 Jan 2016, 21:34 PM
#15
Posts: 1304 | Subs: 13
Give us the Archer Tank destroyer. Sure it might always need to drive in reverse, but I rather have that somewhere and be more unique than a Firefly without Tulips with slight stat adjustments.
Would make an ideal ambush tank destroyer once you played around with stats and abilities. Shoot and immediately run away, of course it'd have the weirdest/worst pathfinding like the M15 AA HT
Would make an ideal ambush tank destroyer once you played around with stats and abilities. Shoot and immediately run away, of course it'd have the weirdest/worst pathfinding like the M15 AA HT
12 Jan 2016, 21:46 PM
#16
1 Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4
I would rather see something more unique than just an up-gun.
Bring on the Staghound.
Bring on the Staghound.
Tobis "Complete Throw"
Someone asked what my avatar was from... I really don't know.
Defeated Paula and knocked him out of 2v2 Anniversary Cup
Someone asked what my avatar was from... I really don't know.
Defeated Paula and knocked him out of 2v2 Anniversary Cup
12 Jan 2016, 21:56 PM
#17
Posts: 1216
Lack of a reason means no.
12 Jan 2016, 22:06 PM
#18
Posts: 62
Give us the Archer Tank destroyer. Sure it might always need to drive in reverse, but I rather have that somewhere and be more unique than a Firefly without Tulips with slight stat adjustments.
Would make an ideal ambush tank destroyer once you played around with stats and abilities. Shoot and immediately run away, of course it'd have the weirdest/worst pathfinding like the M15 AA HT
That's actually a really cool idea. A fragile tank destroyer that's meant to camo and ambush before pulling off. Yeah it is similar to Jackson but still a cool thing to have.
13 Jan 2016, 08:13 AM
#19
Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1
Give us the Archer Tank destroyer. Sure it might always need to drive in reverse, but I rather have that somewhere and be more unique than a Firefly without Tulips with slight stat adjustments.
Would make an ideal ambush tank destroyer once you played around with stats and abilities. Shoot and immediately run away, of course it'd have the weirdest/worst pathfinding like the M15 AA HT
Looks too much like SU-76 to me.
13 Jan 2016, 08:18 AM
#20
Posts: 2561
I think the Archer would be better. Achilles is too much like the firefly.
0 user is browsing this thread:
Livestreams
 |
|
|
43 | ||
|
|
|
|
31 | ||
 |
|
|
30 | ||
 |
|
|
111 | ||
|
|
|
|
30 | ||
|
|
|
|
19 | ||
|
|
|
|
14 | ||
|
|
|
|
3 | ||
 |
|
|
3 | ||
 |
|
|
2 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.600215.736+15
- 3.34957.860+14
- 4.1107614.643+8
- 5.305114.728+1
- 6.916405.693-2
- 7.273108.717+24
- 8.722440.621+4
- 9.1041674.607-2
- 10.17146.788+1
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1235