Also, can I ask to clarify this
Tulips no longer cancels move commands upon stun when hit
Does this mean that Tulips cause no stun now? If so - please buff reload speed. It is the worst among TDs, even axis heavies.
Posts: 493
Tulips no longer cancels move commands upon stun when hit
Posts: 879
Posts: 328
Demos were fine. Please don't change. Why take away one of the only early allied ways of destroying bad blobbers?
Posts: 328
Reducing slots for conscripts is stupid, conscripts don't have access to weapons racks, no access to DP / Shreck or other powerful weapons. Only the British can help the Soviets with weapons and only one Commander. In the doctrine of hunting tanks, they now have one PTRS? Stupid change
Posts: 36
Posts: 1304 | Subs: 13
+1
In the mid and late game cons rely on obtaining better weapons (especially shreks) to help them become useful against increasingly powerful enemy units. Or as a deterrent to Axis players for being too reckless with shrek squads (a con squad with two shreks is the nearest the SU get to having a hard inf counter to late game armour).
The previous changes helped them scale and improved them a lot, only to then take a big step backwards by making them much weaker in the late game.
I really hope this change doesn't make it into the final patch. The other changes for cons are great, but this one is too excessive.
Posts: 328
PPsHes Conscripts take up slot items, PTRS we can look at for the upcoming tank hunter revamp. And gaining slot weapons is something rare, let alone two. One of any axis weapon is generally strong in their hands. It's only in team games where the ability to double up weapons can affect cons.
Realistically, in the late game in DBP, Conscripts will hold their due to the boost in accuracy and if you're smart, fighting behind cover. Not because they've stolen double MG42s or have been decked out with British lend lease.
Posts: 911
Demos were fine. Please don't change. Why take away one of the only early allied ways of destroying bad blobbers?
Posts: 73
Posts: 353
Posts: 328
Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4
Posts: 960
Surprised no cromwell and comet buffs to scatter. Those units can't hit infantry for their lives since their nerf.
Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2
PPsHes Conscripts take up no slot items, PTRS we can look at for the upcoming tank hunter revamp. And gaining slot weapons is something rare, let alone two. One of any axis weapon is generally strong in their hands. It's only in team games where the ability to double up weapons can affect cons.
Realistically, in the late game in DBP, Conscripts will hold their due to the boost in accuracy and if you're smart, fighting behind cover. Not because they've stolen double MG42s or have been decked out with British lend lease.
Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7
The thing is that the commander is not 5 individual abilities; it's a collection of them. Live-version commander has 0 synergy between the units.
If you can't see a synergy forming around the 4 new non-stand-fast abilities, I don't think I can help you
Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2
The thing is that the commander is not 5 individual abilities; it's a collection of them. Live-version commander has 0 synergy between the units.
If you can't see a synergy forming around the 4 new non-stand-fast abilities, I don't think I can help you
Posts: 587
Why nerfing AVRE so much? It was already really tricky to use.
Posts: 911
The same can be said about the Panthers Fusiliers, they have three G43 and two slots for weapons, and these guys are very powerful, but no one runs nerf their.
Posts: 2635 | Subs: 4
Permanently Banned
PPsHes Conscripts take up no slot items, PTRS we can look at for the upcoming tank hunter revamp. And gaining slot weapons is something rare, let alone two. One of any axis weapon is generally strong in their hands. It's only in team games where the ability to double up weapons can affect cons.
Realistically, in the late game in DBP, Conscripts will hold their due to the boost in accuracy and if you're smart, fighting behind cover. Not because they've stolen double MG42s or have been decked out with British lend lease.
Posts: 2272 | Subs: 1
73 | |||||
47 | |||||
14 | |||||
0 | |||||
395 | |||||
7 | |||||
4 | |||||
1 |