Where's the hotfix?

Jump back to quoted post27 Jun 2016, 14:55 PMMr.Smith

I say breaking, because if we up received accuracy across the board:
- Vehicle-mounted MGs will no longer be able to do their job
- If we up Vehicle MG DPS, we will break them against AT guns
- If we remove received accuracy penalties from AT guns, infantry will have a hard time decrewing them for tanks to go through
- The vicious cycle perpetuates

Jump back to quoted post27 Jun 2016, 11:42 AMSmaug

grens could use a survivablity buff. Look at all the core allied inf on max vet. IS target size goes down to around 0.52, Rifles also goes down to around 0.55, even lol conscripts get target size of 0.6 on vet3 whilst grenadiers start good with 0.91 but get a horrible vet3 surviavablity bonus. Instead of -23 recc acc on vet3 they should atleast get -29 recc acc on vet3.

Jump back to quoted post27 Jun 2016, 21:44 PMChet

My post is about survivability. Those survivability stats are still accurate for other units, therefore point is still valid that grenadiers are the worst infantry in the game, and do not scale late game where they will get wiped out constantly.

Their damage output is not in any way significant when compared to the DPS output of allied infantry with upgraded weapons. Not to mention the fact many players will be constantly wasting 60 munis to get squadwiped incessantly.

Jump back to quoted post28 Jun 2016, 07:12 AMGenObi

Not until we get enough salty axis tears, pay back's a fitch aint it

Jump back to quoted post28 Jun 2016, 07:12 AMGenObi

Not until we get enough salty axis tears, pay back's a fitch aint it

                                    "$REF": "action\\change_target_action.lua",
                                    "actions": [ (CURRENT ABILITY BUFFS HERE)],
				    "change_target_type": "entities"

Jump back to quoted post27 Jun 2016, 21:44 PMChet

My post is about survivability. Those survivability stats are still accurate for other units, therefore point is still valid that grenadiers are the worst infantry in the game, and do not scale late game where they will get wiped out constantly.

Their damage output is not in any way significant when compared to the DPS output of allied infantry with upgraded weapons. Not to mention the fact many players will be constantly wasting 60 munis to get squadwiped incessantly.

Jump back to quoted post27 Jun 2016, 09:26 AMBurts

No they don't.

You seem to be ignoring the fact that grenadiers have a higher DPS than their allied counterparts to make up for their smaller squad size.

Jump back to quoted post28 Jun 2016, 12:46 PMIncendiaryRounds

You're a USF fanboy. Every post you do is in favor of the Allies. Even defending the completely broken USF mortar. I bet whiny allied crybabies like u are the reason Relic even had the stupid idea of giving USF a mortar in the first place. Cuz of listening to crybabies like u. Lets see - USF players whining about having no heavy tanks - Relic caves in and gives a pershing in a doc with other great almost op abilities (combined arms is op since its bugged) Heavy Cav is hands down the most popular now. Then USF players complain about mg spam and it seems that Relic forgot about grenades, pack howi, and mortar halftrack from infantry doctrine. And gave the USF yet another broken unit/ability - the mortar. And all USF fanboys are defending it like "we deserve a mortar cuz how are we going to deal with mg spam." If u can't clear them out with smoke, nades, pack howi, its a l2p issue, not "relic please give me a tier 0 mortar". How would u like it if Ostheer get a puma in tier 2? Would you cry and say "we need Ostheer to have no light tanks so we can bully them with our own." Same with dealing with brit emplacement spam. Is there a non-doc unit that kills emplacements swiftly with little micro? NO. So why should the USF get a mortar to deal with their achilles heel?