About some OKW commander ability
Posts: 731
And about ostwind and Hetzer,they are callin long time ago.....and now they are in AA HQ,but AA HQ also produce P4.J...I think maybe we can move both of them in Command HQ,and when OKW deploy any two HQ unlock produce.
Posts: 563
As for ostwind and hetzer, the likely issue with that could be the timing of the 2. If i understood correctly that if you built ANY, og the trucks (like battlegroup and mechanized) it could lead into particurally annoying rush that opponent might not have enough counters for. I think battlegroup hq was 30 fuel and mechanized hq was 45 fuel (plus 15 per truck) which leads to 105 fuel for both hqs and 100 more fuel for ost or hetzer. compared to battlegrop to panzer hq and pnz 4 = 320 fuel (i am not sure, you can correct me on any of these numbers). I think it could lead to issues being able to rush out effective anti infatry tanks that early, but i am not very informed of okw timings, so correct me if required.
Posts: 731
imo incendiary rounds are not certainly bad. I personally am quite fond of them, as they actually force mgs and such to reposition more and leave them more open. It could be stronger, but then it would require either cost increase or increased scatter to be fair.
As for ostwind and hetzer, the likely issue with that could be the timing of the 2. If i understood correctly that if you built ANY, og the trucks (like battlegroup and mechanized) it could lead into particurally annoying rush that opponent might not have enough counters for. I think battlegroup hq was 30 fuel and mechanized hq was 45 fuel (plus 15 per truck) which leads to 105 fuel for both hqs and 100 more fuel for ost or hetzer. compared to battlegrop to panzer hq and pnz 4 = 320 fuel (i am not sure, you can correct me on any of these numbers). I think it could lead to issues being able to rush out effective anti infatry tanks that early, but i am not very informed of okw timings, so correct me if required.
In fact,I'm not sure what’s the timing should hetzer show in the battlefield.....but ostwind really need more early timing,or use “brummbar” replace ostwind and produce in T4 more better
Posts: 563
In fact,I'm not sure what’s the timing should hetzer show in the battlefield.....but ostwind really need more early timing,or use “brummbar” replace ostwind and produce in T4 more better
ostwind most certainly requires buffs, but its also stuck in a doctrine it does not make any sense being in
Posts: 94
Permanently Banned
ostwind most certainly requires buffs, but its also stuck in a doctrine it does not make any sense being in
Oswind needs to have passive supression from a get go, no as a part of bulletin.
Also it should be given vet 1 ability comparable to Centaur and fuel price should go down to 70, be are its performance is closer to Luchs or T70 than Centaur or KV8
Posts: 591 | Subs: 1
In the OKW roster?
So... no change?
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Posts: 731
Useable... by all Mortars?
In the OKW roster?
So... no change?
EMMMMM.......I mean it can be used by all capture mortars.....
Posts: 731
Regardless of timing both hezter and Ostwind should not be built from T4 but from base building. They should remain available even if t4 is destroyed.
Nice idea
Posts: 261
EMMMMM.......I mean it can be used by all capture mortars.....
This makes no sense, do yo think Sov should be able to use camo on captured Pak 40?
I suggest you to change this option to "reduced cost" or something else.
Posts: 731
This makes no sense, do yo think Sov should be able to use camo on captured Pak 40?
I suggest you to change this option to "reduced cost" or something else.
直接换苏联那个燃烧弹炮击或者换成迫击炮车就完事了(滑稽)
Posts: 5279
Regardless of timing both hezter and Ostwind should not be built from T4 but from base building. They should remain available even if t4 is destroyed.
we already have precedent of units unlocking in t0, would be nice if obers and callins tied to t4 would simply unlock in t0 instead.
Posts: 5279
This makes no sense, do yo think Sov should be able to use camo on captured Pak 40?
I suggest you to change this option to "reduced cost" or something else.
...yes.
as long as the unit type is in your army i dont see why an ability that targets it shouldnt be usable
should a captured sherman be unable to secure territory when using encirclement doctrine?
Livestreams
33 | |||||
24 | |||||
22 | |||||
17 | |||||
6 | |||||
2 | |||||
2 | |||||
1 | |||||
1 | |||||
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.600215.736+15
- 3.34957.860+14
- 4.1107614.643+8
- 5.305114.728+1
- 6.916405.693-2
- 7.273108.717+24
- 8.722440.621+4
- 9.1041674.607-2
- 10.17146.788+1
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
8 posts in the last week
37 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Rusel334
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM