Pls make the Flak emplacements usefull

Jump back to quoted post2 Jan 2017, 19:54 PMStark

We have 2 axis faction, lets don't make them the same, i know it's simple solution but we need diversity, Just buff flak emp, that's IT

Jump back to quoted post2 Jan 2017, 16:52 PMImagelessbean

Unit is bad, real bad.

OKW should lose base flaks and gain bunkers as Elchino said. Flak emplacement could then get some love of some sort.

Jump back to quoted post2 Jan 2017, 20:32 PMMr. Someguy

The game considers the Base Flaks and Luftwaffe Flaks to be different units, so they can be changed independently of each other. For simplicity and logic's sake, they should probably just gain the MG Bunker.

Jump back to quoted post2 Jan 2017, 19:54 PMStark

We have 2 axis faction, lets don't make them the same, i know it's simple solution but we need diversity, Just buff flak emp, that's IT

Jump back to quoted post4 Jan 2017, 16:22 PMAradan

We dont need more cancer from any faction. Lets replace Flak emplacements for trenches.

Jump back to quoted post2 Jan 2017, 20:01 PMHans G. Schultz

I don't understand how buffing the flak emplacement would make the two factions the same. Maybe you could give me your wisdom?

Jump back to quoted post4 Jan 2017, 17:20 PMDangerous-Cloth

Trenches are cancer lol

Jump back to quoted post4 Jan 2017, 19:24 PMAradan

You need just flame grenade, another grenade, or target it with AT gut. No problem with trenches.

Jump back to quoted post4 Jan 2017, 15:25 PMDangerous-Cloth

L3P

If placed properly it can be a game changer. I once placed it on an opponents cut-off in the first 25 minutes of the game. He could't believe his eyes and rage quitted!

Jump back to quoted post6 Jan 2017, 07:37 AMPlaguer

The only thing that Flak Emplacements offer is light AT But as soon as infantry comes along they die

Jump back to quoted post6 Jan 2017, 11:08 AMMirdarion

That thing has less penetration than the 222, how exactly can you consider it to be light AT at that point?