Login

russian armor

So why exactly can't UKF/USF base buildings be destroyed ?

5 Jun 2018, 20:19 PM
#61
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8


He wasn't including The Starting SP.

And any particular reason for that?

Starting SP doesn't have any abilities locked for being free and its about cost of having 2 squads on field, what's the point of having 3 SPs?
5 Jun 2018, 20:55 PM
#62
avatar of mr.matrix300

Posts: 518


And any particular reason for that?

Starting SP doesn't have any abilities locked for being free and its about cost of having 2 squads on field, what's the point of having 3 SPs?

The point of having 3 SPs? One for AT purpose,one for clearing mines and one for building bases( one guy adviced that OKW also should need SP for building bases)
5 Jun 2018, 20:59 PM
#63
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8


The point of having 3 SPs? One for AT purpose,one for clearing mines and one for building bases( one guy adviced that OKW also should need SP for building bases)

I honestly can't tell if you're joking or not.
I'll assume you do.
6 Jun 2018, 11:52 AM
#64
avatar of Brotgrenadier

Posts: 33

What a laughable Thread. If you are rushing your opponents base and destroying his buildings without him having any sort of AT, then you already won the game anyway. This "Issue" of base buildings being destructable is absolutely irrelevant.

Funny enough, UKF is probably the most vulnerable when it comes to base rushes, simply due to them not having AT snares on their main infantry, so really OP is crying about axis getting rushed while UKF is the faction having the hardest time dealing with it.

The point of having 3 SPs? One for AT purpose,one for clearing mines and one for building bases( one guy adviced that OKW also should need SP for building bases)

Go ahead and do that, you will soon enough realize that while having 3 SP's is "nice", you will fall behind and start losing more games. Also you'll have to explain what you mean with "building bases", if you want to play Sim city then you should just switch over to UKF tbh.
6 Jun 2018, 16:54 PM
#65
avatar of mr.matrix300

Posts: 518


I honestly can't tell if you're joking or not.
I'll assume you do.

So you never use Sweeper or Schreck ?
6 Jun 2018, 16:59 PM
#66
avatar of mr.matrix300

Posts: 518

What a laughable Thread. If you are rushing your opponents base and destroying his buildings without him having any sort of AT, then you already won the game anyway. This "Issue" of base buildings being destructable is absolutely irrelevant.

Funny enough, UKF is probably the most vulnerable when it comes to base rushes, simply due to them not having AT snares on their main infantry, so really OP is crying about axis getting rushed while UKF is the faction having the hardest time dealing with it.


Go ahead and do that, you will soon enough realize that while having 3 SP's is "nice", you will fall behind and start losing more games. Also you'll have to explain what you mean with "building bases", if you want to play Sim city then you should just switch over to UKF tbh.

I am not sure if you just didn't care or really did not read any other post of this thread.
I am NOT talking about bases which are 100% destroyed but about destroying one Base building (or 2) and then falling back again.
And to the 3 SP.I already said what I mean with "Base building" : One player was talking about giving the task of building bases to OKWs SP instead of letting them set up truck ... please at least read a bit of the thread before you complain and 2 Pioneers are necessary if you want to Have at least some AT weapons for Infantry AND want to clear mines too(most times I only get sweepers but then I lack AT weapons)
6 Jun 2018, 19:34 PM
#67
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

Sure is a good thing that volks have snares and ranks are pretty cheap I guess... Oh and mines... The idea that without hand AT the faction is pooches is laughable at best.
6 Jun 2018, 23:35 PM
#68
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260


I am not sure if you just didn't care or really did not read any other post of this thread.
I am NOT talking about bases which are 100% destroyed but about destroying one Base building (or 2) and then falling back again.


The point he was making is that doesn't happen. If you're in a position to destroy the enemy base buildings without losing your tanks then you destroy them all. If you're not, throwing away tanks by attacking the enemy base will probably lose you the game.
7 Jun 2018, 08:05 AM
#69
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8


So you never use Sweeper or Schreck ?

I literally not used okw shreck once since its on spios.
Puppchens are cheesy enough.
You can even check out replay section for a proof of that, I've uploaded one recently.
7 Jun 2018, 13:05 PM
#70
avatar of Brotgrenadier

Posts: 33


I am NOT talking about bases which are 100% destroyed but about destroying one Base building (or 2) and then falling back again.

If you are in a position to attack base buildings instead of the recovering infantry, or actually manage to destroy a building and retreat without losing your tank, then you were already winning so hard its basically over.

And to the 3 SP.I already said what I mean with "Base building" : One player was talking about giving the task of building bases to OKWs SP instead of letting them set up truck

Didnt realize it derailed so much that we're dealing with highly improbable hypothetical scenarios here.


If you are going for his base buildings instead of his actual units, then you are just doing him a favor and make a comeback more likely to happen.
7 Jun 2018, 17:02 PM
#71
avatar of mr.matrix300

Posts: 518

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Jun 2018, 23:35 PMLago


The point he was making is that doesn't happen. If you're in a position to destroy the enemy base buildings without losing your tanks then you destroy them all. If you're not, throwing away tanks by attacking the enemy base will probably lose you the game.

I did this a few times in 2 vs 2.While the enemy was attacking our VPs I was rushing with 2-3 Pz 4s to his base,destroyed his T4 and then fell back again as soon as the T 34s came to defend it(talking about rank 900-1200(maybe won't work against better players) and btw. If giving the UKF/USF destroyable bases would change no thing then why just don't give OST and SU nondestroyable ones too (for OKW there might be a solution too)?
7 Jun 2018, 17:04 PM
#72
avatar of mr.matrix300

Posts: 518




Didnt realize it derailed so much that we're dealing with highly improbable hypothetical scenarios here.


I wasn't the one who brought this up so...


If you are going for his base buildings instead of his actual units, then you are just doing him a favor and make a comeback more likely to happen.

Except if you play against OKW,OST and SU
7 Jun 2018, 20:18 PM
#73
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260


I did this a few times in 2 vs 2.While the enemy was attacking our VPs I was rushing with 2-3 Pz 4s to his base,destroyed his T4 and then fell back again as soon as the T 34s came to defend it(talking about rank 900-1200(maybe won't work against better players) and btw. If giving the UKF/USF destroyable bases would change no thing then why just don't give OST and SU nondestroyable ones too (for OKW there might be a solution too)?


In theory I'd have no issue with that. The UKF base is the best designed one in the game in my opinion. Having to have an engineer build OST and SOV's base structures adds nothing which is probably why they ditched it for the newer factions. That's the answer to your initial question by the way.

This is entirely academic, however. I'm fairly sure the assets don't exist for rebuildable OST and SOV bases (except the HQ which already works like a USF/UKF one) and even if they did it's not enough of an issue for Relic to put in all the work to change it.

OKW's a bit different because its structures are functional emplacements that have a field presence.
7 Jun 2018, 20:59 PM
#74
avatar of mr.matrix300

Posts: 518

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Jun 2018, 20:18 PMLago


In theory I'd have no issue with that. The UKF base is the best designed one in the game in my opinion. Having to have an engineer build OST and SOV's base structures adds nothing which is probably why they ditched it for the newer factions. That's the answer to your initial question by the way.

This is entirely academic, however. I'm fairly sure the assets don't exist for rebuildable OST and SOV bases (except the HQ which already works like a USF/UKF one) and even if they did it's not enough of an issue for Relic to put in all the work to change it.

OKW's a bit different because its structures are functional emplacements that have a field presence.


Hm ... and what about reducing the price down to 100 MP to rebuild a base ? Would be fair to me.
(same could work for OKW since OKW also has to invest some fuel too)
7 Jun 2018, 21:03 PM
#75
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

I doubt it would make much difference. Relic's pretty unlikely to do it.
7 Jun 2018, 21:04 PM
#76
avatar of Rocket

Posts: 728

Pointless thread other than to prove the point of my quote you then made your sig. I kinda like it.
7 Jun 2018, 21:12 PM
#77
avatar of mr.matrix300

Posts: 518

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Jun 2018, 21:04 PMRocket
Pointless thread other than to prove the point of my quote you then made your sig. I kinda like it.

Well thers nothing to prove ... it is obvious that Europeans just think that they a superior to every other nation and thus wan't to nerf USF so hard that all their units had the same worth as a Osttruppen squad with one member left.Everone who does not see this must either be blind or influenced by the european propaganda.And it is also clear that OKW is the strongest fraction in game I mean ... just look at the Flamenade ... gardening Timer with a 1 while russian satchel has a timer with 3 this clearly needs to get fixed.Oh and btw: America is the greatest nation in the world and every invention ever made comes form there (and 75 mm Sherman was best tank of the war(it should at least be able to 2 hit kill a tiger ace in this game ... gardening european bias))



7 Jun 2018, 22:54 PM
#78
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

Well thers nothing to prove ... it is obvious that Europeans just think that they a superior to every other nation and thus wan't to nerf USF so hard that all their units had the same worth as a Osttruppen squad with one member left.Everone who does not see this must either be blind or influenced by the european propaganda.


wat
8 Jun 2018, 13:51 PM
#79
avatar of mr.matrix300

Posts: 518

jump backJump back to quoted post7 Jun 2018, 22:54 PMLago


wat


Don't take this post of mine serious.I was just joking about Rocket (he claimed that Europeans want to nerf the USF and buff axis because they think that European nations are better than USA etc.)
8 Jun 2018, 17:26 PM
#80
avatar of Rocket

Posts: 728



Don't take this post of mine serious.I was just joking about Rocket (he claimed that Europeans want to nerf the USF and buff axis because they think that European nations are better than USA etc.)


Not what I said. I said some people here seem to believe that okw should never recieve any nerfs like obvious ones putting lava nade behind tech and will make any bullshit argument to save their beloved okw from getting a reasonable and most times obvious due nerf.

For instance you probably do not think that there is anything wrong that okws p4 comes out the same time as USF sherman even before it if USF messes up just a bit at all do you? even though okw p4 is best stock medium in the game.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

426 users are online: 426 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49063
Welcome our newest member, jennifermary
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM