1 
Posts: 2885
That is one doctrine (other one isn´t free). So if I have chosen another doctrine earlier or don´t have the Elefant in my outload I´m supposed to lose by your logic. For example if I´ve chosen a Tiger.
Posts: 1217
You are arguing that people should lose the game for not choosing Elefant. People not wanting to go for that doctrine in 90% of all games have every right to complain about a boring and shit game experience.
Then you made a mistake. And btw the fact that it is in a stock & free doctrine makes it so accessible that nobody has right to complain. Its like saying "USF has no LMGs" (they have, in 2 doctrines, one is stock and free) while everybody is spamming lmg blobs.
Posts: 747 | Subs: 2
You are arguing that people should lose the game for not choosing Elefant. People not wanting to go for that doctrine in 90% of all games have every right to complain about a boring and shit game experience.
 | Playercard of RedT3rror | |||||||||||||||
|
Posts: 1283 | Subs: 4
That is one doctrine (other one isn´t free). So if I have chosen another doctrine earlier or don´t have the Elefant in my outload I´m supposed to lose by your logic. For example if I´ve chosen a Tiger.
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
Posts: 1217
US player should lose the game if a Tiger Ace is fielded and they didn´t choose the Pershing doctrine. Flawless.
No, but it is an often overlooked solution to a tactical problem. cc. ferwiner, RedT3rror
There are players that want to have fun. Don´t you agree it´s bad design you are forced into a heavy TD each and every game and Tigers aren´t as viable? Thus the meta is stuck with the same doctrines over and over again. Nobody is asking to make the Tiger unbeatable but a small buff is needed, seeing how much its counters are going to perform better versus it (T-34/76, Su-85, Firefly if you will) and seeing that it also gets some nerfs (deflection stun removed, less rear armor).
To be honest, going into a match 2v2+ with not atleast 1 JT or Ele in your teams loadout seems just stupid to me.
Posts: 366
Posts: 1072
SOOOO TROOOOLLLL.
Posts: 14
alternatively, ostheer repair speed can be buffed so that tiger can stay on frontline more. just my 2 cents
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
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.
Posts: 1072
Posts: 1283 | Subs: 4
US player should lose the game if a Tiger Ace is fielded and they didn´t choose the Pershing doctrine. Flawless.
Posts: 1217
My do you come up with some rather insiduous and asinine conclusions.I´m not the one saying players should lose the game if they didn´t chose that one doctrine. I simply put the shit you said into a different perspective to show how ridiculous it is.
Posts: 181
alternatively, ostheer repair speed can be buffed so that tiger can stay on frontline more. just my 2 cents
I´m not the one saying players should lose the game if they didn´t chose that one doctrine. I simply put the shit you said into a different perspective to show how ridiculous it is.
Posts: 160
That is one doctrine (other one isn´t free). So if I have chosen another doctrine earlier or don´t have the Elefant in my outload I´m supposed to lose by your logic. For example if I´ve chosen a Tiger.
Posts: 1283 | Subs: 4
I´m not the one saying players should lose the game if they didn´t chose that one doctrine. I simply put the shit you said into a different perspective to show how ridiculous it is.
Posts: 174
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
real world question:
Did IS-2s have better protection than the Tiger? I noticed it does not have sloped armor, unlike the IS-2.
seems odd.
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.
Posts: 276
1. MAKE TIGER GREAT AGAIN!
2. ???
3. PROFIT!
4. WEHRMACHT IS GREAT AGAIN!
Posts: 556
 |
|
|
30 | ||
|
|
|
|
27 | ||
|
|
|
|
15 | ||
 |
|
|
944 | ||
 |
|
|
1 | ||
 |
|
|
1 |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
