Feelings after the Decemberpatch

Jump back to quoted post1 Jan 2019, 00:53 AMblancat

Rifleman's DPS is higher at the mid-close and is way more likely to come out on top than a volks or gren when facing opposing cqc units

-> so true, rifleman is strong when they are fighting CQC

if u can ^^

volk always 1 more squad than rifleman because they are so cheap

useless rear echelon cant help combat when "free CQC super pio" slaying rifleman in CQC

use cover and flank?

volk flame nade always neutralize rifleman in close - mid cover

ok, ur good skill makes rifleman win volks, and how can deal with "Free CQC expert super pio" to low hp rifleman?

use well again? spam more shitty rifleman?

AE is one of the best answer in this situation

Problem is not AE, the "FREE CQC super pio" is real unbalance unit

Jump back to quoted post1 Jan 2019, 01:07 AMdistrofio

Man, its a joke. Dont take it personally. Also its already there. Dont get too mad or mods will begin a new year banning our a**es!

Jump back to quoted post30 Dec 2018, 20:15 PMpigsoup

cannot wait for new commanders.

Jump back to quoted post31 Dec 2018, 20:46 PMSander93

They have practically the same RA (SP 0,87; AE 0,9), but 5 models and higher near range DPS (SP 64, AE 67) as well as longer range for near DPS (SP 3; AE 10). They have higher on-the-move accuracy/DPS (SP ~50%, AE ~66%). They cost 280MP as opposed to 300MP. They get the flamethrower as a stock upgrade. They have better combat veterancy and lower requirements. They face Kar 98K mainline infantry as opposed to M1 Garands.

How exactly are they worse than Sturmpioneers?

Jump back to quoted post1 Jan 2019, 06:14 AMNaOCl

No need to nerfed JLI into the ground.

Jump back to quoted post1 Jan 2019, 04:58 AMLeOverlord

So apparently it's not their flamethrower that bothers players, it's the CQB as i expected. I haven't seen anyone saying "Stumpioneers are very strong, they need to be changed". Since i started this game it blows my mind that Engineers are able to beat well trained soldiers. Again, my suggestion is this : Change AE's default loadout. Change one of their Grease guns.

Jump back to quoted post1 Jan 2019, 07:38 AMNaOCl

You imply combat engineers were not/should not be combat effective units.

Combat engineers were elite troops for all factions.

Combat engineers were/are often expected to lead the assault before the infantry in combat situations.

Jump back to quoted post1 Jan 2019, 07:38 AMNaOCl

You imply combat engineers were not/should not be combat effective units.

Combat engineers were elite troops for all factions.

Combat engineers were/are often expected to lead the assault before the infantry in combat situations.

Jump back to quoted post1 Jan 2019, 07:48 AMLeOverlord

In this case, let Assault Engineers are they are, if you also imply that they are elite troops. And to get into history a little bit, German engineer units also led the attacks against Greece but they were neutralized. Anyways, back on the topic, do we really need to discuss how submachine guns are superior to Assault Rifles in CQB situations and how ARs are superior to submachine guns in medium-far range? Again, if your issue is the CQB, let's change their damage output. Let's reduce it.

Jump back to quoted post1 Jan 2019, 07:48 AMblancat

Combat engineer is support unit, not elite troop


lead assault? for what? with mine detecter?

That is not LEAD, just supporting


only "german special superior strumpio" and assault engineer can be elite troop

Jump back to quoted post1 Jan 2019, 08:08 AMNaOCl

>Elite troops never die.

Jump back to quoted post1 Jan 2019, 07:48 AMLeOverlord

Again, if your issue is the CQB, let's change their damage output. Let's reduce it.

Jump back to quoted post1 Jan 2019, 09:26 AMSander93

The issue is not their strength in general, the issue is specifically their strength in the first 5 minutes of the game. Anyway I have no idea where you want to go with this discussion because you seem to take it in a completely different direction with every single post.

Jump back to quoted post1 Jan 2019, 09:38 AMLeOverlord

Stumpioneers are also strong in the first 5 minutes of the game, but nobody says a thing about them. It's just that we all got used to seeing the early game USF getting steamrolled and now we can't accept that they have alternatives and a stronger start because of that.

Jump back to quoted post1 Jan 2019, 09:38 AMLeOverlord

I just think that it's not a solution to lock their flamethrower behind tech. If we really want to adjust them, let's increase their cost or put them on cooldown. Or even better, change their stats, decrease their damage output. These are some ideas.

Jump back to quoted post1 Jan 2019, 09:54 AMSander93

Sturmpioneers early game combat power has been a discussion for ages. Secondly the Assault Engineers are stronger than them as shown by the stats I posted earlier.

Thirdly, Assault Engineers go up against enemies that aren't as well equiped to deal with them as the Allies can deal with Sturmpioneers. USF have Riflemen with good near and mid range DPS, Soviets have 6 men squads and the Brits have T0 HMGs and the UC. Sturmpioneers are simply less problematic than 2-3 Assault Engineer openings because they have less impact.




Again, these changes would negatively affect their entire game performance when only the first 5 minutes are the problem. The solution should therefore be searched for in delaying the timing of their power creep. Giving them 1.0 target size (0.9 at vet1) and putting the flamethrower behind tech would do exactly that.