HOW ABOUT GIVE ALL UKF EMPLACEMENTS SCUTTLE
Posts: 732
VET 0 only refunded 10% menpower
VET 1 refunded 20% menpower and 10% fuel
VET 2 refunded 30%M and 20%F
VET 3 refunded 40%M and 30%F
PAK43 refunded 150/15(42%M and 1/3F)
My English not well,but I think you know what I say.....
Posts: 528 | Subs: 1
Posts: 3260
Posts: 16
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
Emplacements are a low tier way to play as it is. They are by default strong. Why should they buff something that you build and leave on the map not having to pay attention to controll it? Vs players actually outplaying you with micro.
I agree with this take 100% but the problem is that they are in the game. Either we should remove them and replace them with something else, or re-work them cause right now they are VERY limited.
Removing brace but adding an ability to pack them up would seem like a nice path to try. Then tweak its health accordingly. At least that puts them in a better position to reward good micro
Posts: 1614 | Subs: 3
Posts: 5279
Also fixes sim city for the better
Posts: 563
Posts: 2358
Imagine a bofors (it has wheels right?) being able to be displaced and it needs to be set up again in order to be fully functional, like a really big slow ATG. Same goes for all emplacements.
Posts: 783
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Would be great if OKW last base could get that too right?
It used to.
It was removed, because no one ever used it except for by mistake.
Posts: 1096
Using emplacements is enough of a handicap as it is without having to friendly fire one to death everytime you needed to reposition.
Posts: 5279
I'd be happy just to have the option to scuttle an emplacement without any resource refund.
Using emplacements is enough of a handicap as it is without having to friendly fire one to death everytime you needed to reposition.
thats kind of the point though. invest resources to hold a point. you cant just decide to mobilize after reaping all the benefits of massive health pools and damage reductions then turn that all into tanks.
can you imagine how disgusting team games would be if even a single player could have the pop open to just creep emplacements forward?
Posts: 31
Would be great if OKW last base could get that too right?
How about giving OKW last base brace?
Posts: 1096
thats kind of the point though. invest resources to hold a point. you cant just decide to mobilize after reaping all the benefits of massive health pools and damage reductions then turn that all into tanks.
can you imagine how disgusting team games would be if even a single player could have the pop open to just creep emplacements forward?
Not really. They would have to pay full price for the emplacement each time they wanted to rebuild. Meaning your opponent has wasted those resources.
Not to mention that emplacements are utterly gimped these days anyway.
Posts: 94
Permanently BannedIf emplacements are useless, which they are right now, buff them instead of giving players refund for intentionally cripling themselves
Posts: 5279
Not really. They would have to pay full price for the emplacement each time they wanted to rebuild. Meaning your opponent has wasted those resources.
Not to mention that emplacements are utterly gimped these days anyway.
And if placed halfway competently they will be generating value while they are there.
And emplacements aren't even that horrible players are just used to them being assault structures instead of defensive ones.
Poping a bofors near an important point after the infantry phase will usually force the enemy to alter their build to engage it or cede the area
Posts: 1096
Poping a bofors near an important point after the infantry phase will usually force the enemy to alter their build to engage it or cede the area
Unless mortars and AT guns are only for the early game then the build order should be unaffected unless the player had no idea they were facing the UKF and made no effort to build mortars?
Posts: 2358
If emplacements are meant to be defensive, then buff them in exange double build time cost. It will be harder to destroy (a defensive buff) at the cost of removing such cheesy plays
Posts: 2358
Unless mortars and AT guns are only for the early game then the build order should be unaffected unless the player had no idea they were facing the UKF and made no effort to build mortars?
I get what you mean, but i think the point is how drastic the change in build order becomes. Normally anyone would get an ATG at some time in early-midgame point, but if the game was particularly hard for axis or mistakes were made, it tightens the build order into really awkward positions, maybe unflexible enough to force a loose.
I think thats fair, but a little bit overseen. Good play for UKF should promote continuous advantage rather than a 1-2 punch to kill axis mobility. Same is said to OKM that they push way too hard into the enemy build orders and strategies and ask for nerfs.
Livestreams
11 | |||||
2 | |||||
19 | |||||
15 | |||||
7 | |||||
3 | |||||
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.655231.739+15
- 2.842223.791+5
- 3.943410.697+9
- 4.35459.857-1
- 5.599234.719+7
- 6.278108.720+29
- 7.307114.729+3
- 8.645.928+5
- 9.269143.653+2
- 10.10629.785+7
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
10 posts in the last week
29 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, hekom17
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM