Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1
it would just affect the four offending units, instead of affecting nearly every tank.
and if the sherman, t34/85, and panzer 4 have such extreme path finding problem, it would be better to find a separate solution instead of overpowering it with insane turn rate.
Posts: 154
Posts: 366
Posts: 420
Why ppl need crushing anyway? I mean its quite BS mechanic which clearly favorites RNG and shitty play. I mean, you still can push enemy AT inf, and deny ability to shoot their AT weapon, to have time to bring reinforcents and so on.
In this case all tanks should have same chances to crush or their cost should represent their ability to crush, or they all shoulndn't be able to crush.
I would rather see crushing remove, because this mechanic was never part of gameplay, rather then abusive mechanic, which was clearly in favor of Brits and USF.
I will simply lol at anyone expecting such a change to a 2 year old general use infantry.
Equally possible are pershing for USF, IS-3 for soviets or ober nerf for OKW.
Posts: 295 | Subs: 1
I totally disagree. Crush is a reward for proper tank micro. it is also risky since all core inf except for brits will have non doc snares. So actually crush shouldn't be much of a problem at all. And it isn't even historical inaccurate.
Posts: 1063
Oh please, lets say see it in this way. How harder and how much micro PIV takes to crush, now compare how much micro cromwell takes to crush. You will see that cromwell is 900000% easier.
Look at panther, look at comet. And so on.
Its not like british dont blob, or soviet dont blob or USF dont blob. All factions blob and there are blobers across all factions. Why then crushing should be only usefull and easy to make by allies? Not to mention that crushing usually force player to lose his vet troops in a seconds.
Posts: 1585 | Subs: 1
Oh please, lets say see it in this way. How harder and how much micro PIV takes to crush, now compare how much micro cromwell takes to crush. You will see that cromwell is 900000% easier.
Look at panther, look at comet. And so on.
Its not like british dont blob, or soviet dont blob or USF dont blob. All factions blob and there are blobers across all factions. Why then crushing should be only usefull and easy to make by allies? Not to mention that crushing usually force player to lose his vet troops in a seconds.
Posts: 455
This argument seems to imply because one faction has a tank that is probably overperforming in the crushing role therefore no one should have crush. That is a false statement. Also P4 has blitz, try that when you crush you will be presently surprised.
Crushing isn't just very useful to Allies, I find myself using it regularly with German factions.
Also most Allied tanks are extremely vulnerable when they crush because of the amount of AT on the German side, and the number of snares they have now in the patch.
Posts: 278
Oh please, lets say see it in this way. How harder and how much micro PIV takes to crush, now compare how much micro cromwell takes to crush. You will see that cromwell is 900000% easier.
Look at panther, look at comet. And so on.
Its not like british dont blob, or soviet dont blob or USF dont blob. All factions blob and there are blobers across all factions. Why then crushing should be only usefull and easy to make by allies? Not to mention that crushing usually force player to lose his vet troops in a seconds.
Posts: 4928
all you filthy hotchkiss lovers need to l2p #TeamPanzerIII
19 
Posts: 1295 | Subs: 1
Posts: 295 | Subs: 1
That's an argument for nerfing the Cromwell's crush, not removing crush altogether. Removing crush seems likely to have a bundle of dumb knock on effects, especially at high level play. If I pop hit the dirt behind a PIV, is that PIV now stuck? What if there's a suppressed or pinned squad behind it? Are you cool with losing it in those situations?
Besides crush was actually one of the best balanced things in the game. There was a neat risk/reward curve-you can get a squad, but because your positioning is predictable you can easily be baited into mines/at guns, never mind the snares.
Posts: 278
You cant nerf crush without nerfing cromwell\M10\T34 mobility. Crush happens because of really fast turning speed. Sure if you want to nerf crushing for thouse allied tanks, you have to nerf their rotating speed, which is nerf in general, because all thouse tanks based on mobility.
I'm not fine with that, but I dont rely fully on crushing, its not main tanks AI, and I wont miss it so much, because crushing for axis is already situational. Crushing as allies is regular thing, no matter what.
But ok, if ppl want to trade mobility of T34\Cromwell\M10 but keep crushing in the game (and it would be same situational feature, which would appear in 1 out of 10 games) then ok, let it be.
Posts: 1930
You cant nerf crush without nerfing cromwell\M10\T34 mobility. Crush happens because of really fast turning speed. Sure if you want to nerf crushing for thouse allied tanks, you have to nerf their rotating speed, which is nerf in general, because all thouse tanks based on mobility.
I'm not fine with that, but I dont rely fully on crushing, its not main tanks AI, and I wont miss it so much, because crushing for axis is already situational. Crushing as allies is regular thing, no matter what.
But ok, if ppl want to trade mobility of T34\Cromwell\M10 but keep crushing in the game (and it would be same situational feature, which would appear in 1 out of 10 games) then ok, let it be.
Posts: 283
This is the clear and simple solution to the problem. Infantry should fear tanks, not the other way around.
 |
|
|
47 | ||
|
|
|
|
31 | ||
|
|
|
|
31 | ||
 |
|
|
28 | ||
 |
|
|
18 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 | ||
|
|
|
|
17 | ||
 |
|
|
14 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
