Ok, I just lost a game in 2v2 in what its called(the community map) as USF. The real kicker here is that there are THREE FULL HEALTH buildings right next to VP AND FUEL POINT. FULL HEALTH BESIDES POINTS.
What. The. Hell.
I was playing USF so you can guess how that battle went. Everyone is just blindly rushing for buildings instead of capping. Flame nades and flamethrowers were mandatory just to have a chance to fight back.
Why are mappers still hell bent on making so many buildings near important points even when they don't make for fun battles, it's just tedious. Same for 1v1 maps all team game maps shouldn't have important full health buildings smack dab near the point. Ever.
Garrison Heavy Maps
4 Jan 2019, 23:23 PM
#1
Posts: 223
Fail of War 3 
4 Jan 2019, 23:35 PM
#2
Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4
I know what map you're talking about, but I forget the name. Anyways, so long as all factions do not get nondoc flamers full HP buildings should just not exist. Make them lower HP, and not stone.
4 Jan 2019, 23:40 PM
#3
Posts: 955
Nope
Thats a design choice, not a mistake and in certain situations, maneuvering around buildings and in/out jumping can be a lot of fun
A mistake would be if over 40% of maps were like that (BTW afaik, majority of maps have buildings around fuels, which is a shame, we need more diversity)
Of course there is the problem that certain factions lack easily accesible tools for such kind of combat, but faction design/balance is meant to be adapted to maps, not vice-versa
Thats a design choice, not a mistake and in certain situations, maneuvering around buildings and in/out jumping can be a lot of fun
A mistake would be if over 40% of maps were like that (BTW afaik, majority of maps have buildings around fuels, which is a shame, we need more diversity)
Of course there is the problem that certain factions lack easily accesible tools for such kind of combat, but faction design/balance is meant to be adapted to maps, not vice-versa
"Nice. Very impressive. Now let´s see Paul Allen´s playercard."
5 Jan 2019, 00:29 AM
#4
Posts: 223
Nope
Thats a design choice, not a mistake and in certain situations, maneuvering around buildings and in/out jumping can be a lot of fun
A mistake would be if over 40% of maps were like that (BTW afaik, majority of maps have buildings around fuels, which is a shame, we need more diversity)
Of course there is the problem that certain factions lack easily accesible tools for such kind of combat, but faction design/balance is meant to be adapted to maps, not vice-versa
Yeah good idea, let's put all buildings near points because its very DIVERSE and sucks to be USF, UKF, OKW players, go off themselves. Screw balance, historical diversity fuck yeah. Do you also want to put stone buildings next to cutoff because its fun yeah?
Fail of War 3
5 Jan 2019, 03:39 AM
#5
Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4
Yeah good idea, let's put all buildings near points because its very DIVERSE and sucks to be USF, UKF, OKW players, go off themselves. Screw balance, historical diversity fuck yeah. Do you also want to put stone buildings next to cutoff because its fun yeah?
Alliance of defiance
5 Jan 2019, 11:09 AM
#6
Posts: 955
Yeah good idea, let's put all buildings near points because its very DIVERSE and sucks to be USF, UKF, OKW players, go off themselves. Screw balance, historical diversity fuck yeah. Do you also want to put stone buildings next to cutoff because its fun yeah?
If its just a few maps like that, then yes, it wouldnt be boring. The US and Brits having trouble with it is a problem that the faction designers should have forseen and solved
Of course the thing that nearly every map in the game has overdominant buildings is a shame, but a couple of them... no problem
"Nice. Very impressive. Now let´s see Paul Allen´s playercard."
5 Jan 2019, 12:18 PM
#7
Posts: 823 | Subs: 3
If its just a few maps like that, then yes, it wouldnt be boring. The US and Brits having trouble with it is a problem that the faction designers should have forseen and solved
Of course the thing that nearly every map in the game has overdominant buildings is a shame, but a couple of them... no problem
why should the designer forsee, that people don't get flamers in their loadout as commander choice?
Then there is other tools, USF has mortar, pak howi, nades, and you can also swarm these buildings on mentioned map, because of how the walls aroaund it are made.
Me: I am scared, that i will need to shake ma head the same as when i read ur posts, so i rather not
Katitof: Its not even close to me even at my worst in the past, imagine ullu, incendiary, aaa, vetlolcake and disto merge into one mega axis zord with forcefield protecting it from accepting any factual data. Add to that a victim card(his rumblings at my PM).
Katitof: Its not even close to me even at my worst in the past, imagine ullu, incendiary, aaa, vetlolcake and disto merge into one mega axis zord with forcefield protecting it from accepting any factual data. Add to that a victim card(his rumblings at my PM).
6 Jan 2019, 11:00 AM
#8
Posts: 571
How does US have problem with garrison when they get:
- T0 Mortar
- RE/ Officers that can smoke
- Pack Howitzer
and
- 2CP Mortar Halftrack with WP (Doctrinal)
- RE with flamers + smoke (Doctrinal)
- Assault Engineers with flamers (Doctrinal)
I am slightly confused here.
UKF on the other hand is stuck with some pretty shitty options for dealing with garrisons...
- T0 Mortar
- RE/ Officers that can smoke
- Pack Howitzer
and
- 2CP Mortar Halftrack with WP (Doctrinal)
- RE with flamers + smoke (Doctrinal)
- Assault Engineers with flamers (Doctrinal)
I am slightly confused here.
UKF on the other hand is stuck with some pretty shitty options for dealing with garrisons...
6 Jan 2019, 14:58 PM
#9
Posts: 2115 | Subs: 1
How does US have problem with garrison when they get:
- T0 Mortar
- RE/ Officers that can smoke
- Pack Howitzer
and
- 2CP Mortar Halftrack with WP (Doctrinal)
- RE with flamers + smoke (Doctrinal)
- Assault Engineers with flamers (Doctrinal)
I am slightly confused here.
UKF on the other hand is stuck with some pretty shitty options for dealing with garrisons...
RE's upgraded with flamers cannot use smoke btw.
servant to the vet 5 königskübel
b4 and soviet FHQ enthusiast
fan of the illustrious black prince
b4 and soviet FHQ enthusiast
fan of the illustrious black prince
6 Jan 2019, 23:26 PM
#10
Posts: 571
RE's upgraded with flamers cannot use smoke btw.
Oh okay, cheers. Thought they could since I havent used rifle company in so long.
9 Jan 2019, 06:09 AM
#11
Posts: 1979
How does US have problem with garrison when they get:
- T0 Mortar
- RE/ Officers that can smoke
- Pack Howitzer
and
- 2CP Mortar Halftrack with WP (Doctrinal)
- RE with flamers + smoke (Doctrinal)
- Assault Engineers with flamers (Doctrinal)
I am slightly confused here.
UKF on the other hand is stuck with some pretty shitty options for dealing with garrisons...
1. Mortars can be doged by poppin in and out relatively easily..
2. Smoke cant clear garrisons and nades are a waste... plus smoking and getting close means eating german stg/bundlenade spam...
3. Pack howi needs vet to get wp
4. Rest are doctrinal
Ukf does have 3 consistent anti garrison tools...
1. The wasp
2. Base arty
3. Sniper
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
28 | ||
 |
|
|
268 | ||
 |
|
|
92 | ||
|
|
|
|
18 | ||
 |
|
|
3 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
 |
|
|
2 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.589215.733+4
- 4.1099614.642-1
- 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
Board Info
793 users are online:
793 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49062
Welcome our newest member, Mclatc16
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Mclatc16
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM