USF weapons should be on field upgrades
29 Aug 2017, 18:36 PM
#41
Posts: 87
How many people still equip the M1919 anyway? All the hearsay I've heard is that it's not worth buying over double BARs, since you can only get one.
Something, something something, something.
There, done.
There, done.
30 Aug 2017, 00:31 AM
#42
Posts: 3053
How many people still equip the M1919 anyway? All the hearsay I've heard is that it's not worth buying over double BARs, since you can only get one.
Lol no one except 1000+ teamgame noobs. Double bars, hell, 1 bar, is superior to 1919s for a variety of reasons.
 | Playercard of LoopDloop | |||||||||||||||||||
|
30 Aug 2017, 06:53 AM
#43
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
I never said that something that isnt used should be removed, i dont think you could even argue that i so much as implied it. He said skilled players use forward ambulances, i proved otherwise with more evidence (anecdotal evidence is more evidence than he provided).
Also, i never said that balance should be based around what top players SAY, i more or less said thay it should be balanced around how top players PLAY. Arguing that balance shouldnt be based around the highest level of play because top players did not predict penals or the luchs being too strong would be balancing around what top players say, which isnt even what im suggesting. Balancing around the fact that top players heavily use penals and the luchs would be balancing around how they play, which IS what im suggesting.
Top players played the WBP before the patch goes live, we even had tournaments and one was called "King of the Hill" if I remember well.
TOP players are following what the best of the top use to play. As you say, everybody use the Armor doctrine because DevM used it with success. If tomorrow DevM comes with a new strat around Tier3 and Paratroopers, everyone will follow him.
30 Aug 2017, 08:06 AM
#44
Posts: 1002 | Subs: 2
Top players played the WBP before the patch goes live, we even had tournaments and one was called "King of the Hill" if I remember well.
TOP players are following what the best of the top use to play. As you say, everybody use the Armor doctrine because DevM used it with success. If tomorrow DevM comes with a new strat around Tier3 and Paratroopers, everyone will follow him.
Im aware of king of the hill, seeing as how i played in it.
Dave already made frequent use of paras, and he held rank 1 with usf pretty consistently but not too many people adopted his strategy. His build was a little too prone to being punished and required a more specific style in order to pull off. While i generally agree top players usually look towards the absolute best players for their builds, i think that some strategies are too specific to be adopted by other players. Then again, that isnt even the main point youre trying to make, so just consider this just some of my ramblings.
30 Aug 2017, 08:17 AM
#45
Posts: 1002 | Subs: 2
Lol no one except 1000+ teamgame noobs. Double bars, hell, 1 bar, is superior to 1919s for a variety of reasons.
If it means anything, i always use 1919s. The long/max range dps of a squad of rifles with a single 1919 is essentially equal to that of a double bar rifle squad. On top of this, the main advantage in combat is that you dont lose dps as quickly since nearly all of the dps in a 1919 squad is on the last man, which means in a hypothetical fight to the death at max range, a rifle squad with a single 1919 would probably win against a double bar rifle squad.
Some other notable advantages are that:
1919s dont even have a chance of dropping unless the squad gets wiped (since the weapon is on the last man) while double bars drop starting on the second to last man (in most situations this results in FAR more bars to be given over than the number of 1919s that would be given over).
1919s dont require weapon racks, so you save a fair amount of fuel and manpower.
30 Aug 2017, 09:04 AM
#46
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
Im aware of king of the hill, seeing as how i played in it.
Dave already made frequent use of paras, and he held rank 1 with usf pretty consistently but not too many people adopted his strategy. His build was a little too prone to being punished and required a more specific style in order to pull off. While i generally agree top players usually look towards the absolute best players for their builds, i think that some strategies are too specific to be adopted by other players. Then again, that isnt even the main point youre trying to make, so just consider this just some of my ramblings.
The ultimate point is there is no reason for you to be against USF weapons to be field upgrades. Your argument of being a TOP 1vs1 USF players is not valid since it would be exactly the same for you while improving USF gameplay on teamgame.
I suspect that your answer and little speech on TOP1vs1 vs TOP teamplayer had more to do with the poster than the topic itself looking at past discussions between the two of you.
30 Aug 2017, 18:06 PM
#47
Posts: 1002 | Subs: 2
The ultimate point is there is no reason for you to be against USF weapons to be field upgrades. Your argument of being a TOP 1vs1 USF players is not valid since it would be exactly the same for you while improving USF gameplay on teamgame.
I suspect that your answer and little speech on TOP1vs1 vs TOP teamplayer had more to do with the poster than the topic itself looking at past discussions between the two of you.
I never posted that I was against USF weapons being field upgrades in this thread. At all. Feel free to provide a quote by me that shows otherwise.
30 Aug 2017, 22:55 PM
#48
Posts: 3053
If it means anything, i always use 1919s. The long/max range dps of a squad of rifles with a single 1919 is essentially equal to that of a double bar rifle squad. On top of this, the main advantage in combat is that you dont lose dps as quickly since nearly all of the dps in a 1919 squad is on the last man, which means in a hypothetical fight to the death at max range, a rifle squad with a single 1919 would probably win against a double bar rifle squad.
Some other notable advantages are that:
1919s dont even have a chance of dropping unless the squad gets wiped (since the weapon is on the last man) while double bars drop starting on the second to last man (in most situations this results in FAR more bars to be given over than the number of 1919s that would be given over).
1919s dont require weapon racks, so you save a fair amount of fuel and manpower.
Well I think it means something because somebody who knows how to play will use 1919s. You bring up interesting points for sure.
IMO (and I'm not trying to argue, just saying what I think of it), putting 1919s is weird because it gives up the negligible advantage of garands being semiauto (negligible because upgrade weapons do most of a squads dps anyway) and the role of riflemen being an aggressive flanker squad with its utilities and general stats. I also rarely put 1919s on paras (even though it's really really good) for pretty much the same reasons. I also always buy racks anyway because I don't like making at guns (or I go lt) and at my level it's usually not necessary anyway as zooks and maybe a AAHT or Stuart will do the same thing but for less mp. You also have a higher dps ceiling with double bars as the enemy closes (if they're inclined to do so, basically all of okw).
| Playercard of LoopDloop | |||||||||||||||||||
|
30 Aug 2017, 23:11 PM
#49
Posts: 1002 | Subs: 2
Well I think it means something because somebody who knows how to play will use 1919s. You bring up interesting points for sure.
IMO (and I'm not trying to argue, just saying what I think of it), putting 1919s is weird because it gives up the negligible advantage of garands being semiauto (negligible because upgrade weapons do most of a squads dps anyway) and the role of riflemen being an aggressive flanker squad with its utilities and general stats. I also rarely put 1919s on paras (even though it's really really good) for pretty much the same reasons. I also always buy racks anyway because I don't like making at guns (or I go lt) and at my level it's usually not necessary anyway as zooks and maybe a AAHT or Stuart will do the same thing but for less mp. You also have a higher dps ceiling with double bars as the enemy closes (if they're inclined to do so, basically all of okw).
Right, m1919s really change the role of riflemen, which makes it awkward for sure. I like 1919s because they give riflemen the ability to win at any range. In a lot of cases with 1919s, the enemy squad will lose at both max and min range, while with a bar, you still want to get to point blank. In a sense, 1919s make up for a weakness while bars capitalize on a strength. That said, ive been considering trying double bars again for many of the reasons you mentioned, especially since the non-1919 commanders (namely armor and heavy cav) arent getting nerfed anymore.
31 Aug 2017, 00:03 AM
#50
Posts: 87
Fun fact! The Riflemen actually have dialogue lines for an upgrade that gives them the .30cal. Was there ever such an upgrade, or is that just a unused audio file that was never needed?
Anyway, I still think it would be a good idea. Since the M1919s don't show up until 3CP, it wouldn't be some kind of OP opening if they were field upgrades.
Anyway, I still think it would be a good idea. Since the M1919s don't show up until 3CP, it wouldn't be some kind of OP opening if they were field upgrades.
Something, something something, something.
There, done.
There, done.
31 Aug 2017, 00:31 AM
#51
Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4
Fun fact! The Riflemen actually have dialogue lines for an upgrade that gives them the .30cal. Was there ever such an upgrade, or is that just a unused audio file that was never needed?
Anyway, I still think it would be a good idea. Since the M1919s don't show up until 3CP, it wouldn't be some kind of OP opening if they were field upgrades.
BARs = .30cal
31 Aug 2017, 00:35 AM
#52
Posts: 87
BARs = .30cal
These lines specifically refer to an LMG, while the BAR is usually addressed as the Browning or B.A.R in it's own related lines.
Something, something something, something.
There, done.
There, done.
31 Aug 2017, 00:47 AM
#53
Posts: 911
These lines specifically refer to an LMG
How do you know, did you write the lines?
And FWIW the Bar was a LMG (albeit a poor one)
Imagine my playercard is here
31 Aug 2017, 00:51 AM
#54
Posts: 87
How do you know, did you write the lines?
And FWIW the Bar was a LMG (albeit a poor one)
Nah, I just heard them while playing. Really surprised me to. And I've never heard the BAR get the same voice lines, so I assumed they were specific to the m1919. I could be wrong, but I'm fairly positive I've never heard those before.
Something, something something, something.
There, done.
There, done.
31 Aug 2017, 05:08 AM
#55
Posts: 59
Oh pudding karolllus banned. Though it's not a big surprise, I thought it might happen as recently he has been quite hostile in some of the threads.
31 Aug 2017, 22:54 PM
#56
Posts: 3053
Right, m1919s really change the role of riflemen, which makes it awkward for sure. I like 1919s because they give riflemen the ability to win at any range. In a lot of cases with 1919s, the enemy squad will lose at both max and min range, while with a bar, you still want to get to point blank. In a sense, 1919s make up for a weakness while bars capitalize on a strength. That said, ive been considering trying double bars again for many of the reasons you mentioned, especially since the non-1919 commanders (namely armor and heavy cav) arent getting nerfed anymore.
Lol guess our points both stuck on each other. 1919s are also crap ton cheaper too (don't remember if that was already mentioned).
| Playercard of LoopDloop | |||||||||||||||||||
|
3 Sep 2017, 04:55 AM
#57
Posts: 1216
Personally I think USF's weapon rack idea should have been designed similarly to UKF's: there would be some field options for your troops to upgrade there instead of running back to base.
On the other hand, the design for squads and upgrades for USF also meant that any such advantages makes them far more powerful as a mobility faction; UKF racks make sense because you want your Tommies to stay where they are, and faction design reflects this. Riflemen being able to do the same, and wreak havoc as they advance the front, means they're overpowered.
The logic of having to run back to base for more firepower then makes sense.
The racks idea is moot once you have specialist units like Rangers because they have better and unique upgrades, anyways.
On the other hand, the design for squads and upgrades for USF also meant that any such advantages makes them far more powerful as a mobility faction; UKF racks make sense because you want your Tommies to stay where they are, and faction design reflects this. Riflemen being able to do the same, and wreak havoc as they advance the front, means they're overpowered.
The logic of having to run back to base for more firepower then makes sense.
The racks idea is moot once you have specialist units like Rangers because they have better and unique upgrades, anyways.
3 Sep 2017, 17:03 PM
#58
Posts: 1617
Nah, I just heard them while playing. Really surprised me to. And I've never heard the BAR get the same voice lines, so I assumed they were specific to the m1919. I could be wrong, but I'm fairly positive I've never heard those before.
I heard them saying 30 cals when they upgrade to M1 carbines (also use 30 cal ammo) in Ardenness Assault
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
4 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.586215.732+1
- 4.1098613.642+2
- 5.280162.633+8
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.271108.715+22
- 9.721440.621+3
- 10.1041674.607-2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1231