Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2
And there is the proof that you haven't even played the new Lend Lease.
Posts: 3260
I played Lend Lease just yesterday and it’s absolutely not worth the price. Maybe for a fictional fight against spam, we will add fuel to the cost of Paratroopers and Fallschirmjager, because flying on an airplane will require a huge amount of fuel.
Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2
Then play those docs. Leave my Lend Lease alone. I don't want my Assault Guards nerfed.
Posts: 3260
They are already useless. Take the Shock Troops - they are in many commanders, and they are better. Are you talking about some nerfs? On the contrary, I want a buff for them. and stupid design with HT prevents this. Justifying its fictional spam when comparable units do not have such restrictions.
Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2
You know what Shocks also are? Expensive.
You're not going to get a buff for a 270 MP 0 MU unit that's stronger than Cav Rifles. If you detach them for the halftrack, Lend Lease will be the meta doctrine for a patch and then they'll get nerfed.
The M5 Assault Group is really, really good if you time it right. I see no reason to ruin it just because you personally don't like unit bundles.
Posts: 72
You know that Assault Guard the are even more expensive and are delaying the construction of T3 and T4. and Again the ridiculous excuses of poor design. Why do you compare the Assault Guard with the Cavalry. The Assault Guard is comparable to the Shock Troops and Rangers / Paratroopers. And they do not cost 270m. they cost 510 + 30 their price can not be considered separately. When the HT is removed, you can talk about their price. Let's everyone call-in infantry arrive with the HT and fuel for the paratrooper squads - this is was is really, really good if you time it right, will reduce spam and delay the construction of all tiers for all fractions.
Posts: 711
You know that Assault Guard the are even more expensive and are delaying the construction of T3 and T4. and Again the ridiculous excuses of poor design. Why do you compare the Assault Guard with the Cavalry. The Assault Guard is comparable to the Shock Troops and Rangers / Paratroopers. And they do not cost 270m. they cost 510 + 30 their price can not be considered separately. When the HT is removed, you can talk about their price. Let's everyone call-in infantry arrive with the HT and fuel for the paratrooper squads - this is was is really, really good if you time it right, will reduce spam and delay the construction of all tiers for all fractions.
Posts: 3260
You know that Assault Guard the are even more expensive and are delaying the construction of T3 and T4. and Again the ridiculous excuses of poor design. Why do you compare the Assault Guard with the Cavalry. The Assault Guard is comparable to the Shock Troops and Rangers / Paratroopers. And they do not cost 270m. they cost 510 + 30 their price can not be considered separately. When the HT is removed, you can talk about their price. Let's everyone call-in infantry arrive with the HT and fuel for the paratrooper squads - this is was is really, really good if you time it right, will reduce spam and delay the construction of all tiers for all fractions.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
The halftrack costs 240 30. The Assault Guards cost 270. Together, they cost 510 30.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
Posts: 3260
And since you can't get them separate, that means you need to pay MORE then you would need to pay for shocks.....
Posts: 810
Posts: 3260
buff assault guard(reduce cost or add some skill)
done
Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2
I'm big fun of Lend-Lease commander. Assault group, in fact not delay your T3 and T4. Why? Fuel drop. HT costs 30 fuel, the same amount you will get from 1 drop. You can call-in assault group BEFORE you even build T3. When you have quad you don't need t-70, quad counter any OST LV and could fight against flak-ht from OKW. Only luchs and puma could kill it very easy.
In fact, i would prefer fully remove assault guards from doctrine and move call-in HT to 2 CP like in UKF lend-lease commander. Because main power of this commander, not HT, not guards, but M4c and fuel drops.
Also self-repair for shermans (to reflect, that you can't repair M4c by crew as USF) and repair station instead repair for cons will be better for overall theme of commander.
Posts: 833
Son of a bitch, those ungrateful Soviet bastards, I swear.
It was better than their AT rifle that couldn't penetrate anything above a light tank's armor for sure, or suicide charging against an enemy tank with AT grenades. But then again these are the Soviets we're talking about so I'm sure that a rocket projected weapon would be less preferred than running to your death in the name of the motherland.
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
 | Playercard of T.R. Stormjäger | |||||||||||||||
|
Posts: 3260
OR OR OR OR OR
HEAR ME OUT
OR
We KEEP the assault group call in as an ability, but make Assault Guards buildable from T4 at a higher price than the call in (320mp).
Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2
I mean, you could do that, and it probably would't hurt.
Is it really necessary, though?
Posts: 186 | Subs: 1
OR OR OR OR OR
HEAR ME OUT
OR
We KEEP the assault group call in as an ability, but make Assault Guards buildable from T4 at a higher price than the call in (320mp).
Posts: 3260
Dude, this is no longer funny how much you can justify shit design.
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
I like the M5 Assault Group, post buffs. I liked the Recon Company AT Gun + Support Paratrooper airdrop too.
Unit bundles, if priced correctly, can be both viable and strategically interesting.
Sure, you could ditch the halftrack and just have Assault Guards, but then you'd just end up with another generic CQC unit. The price would go up because unbundled Assault Guards are overpowered at a 270 MP 0 MU price point.
You'd just end up with another generic CQC squad. We've got loads of those.
If you dislike unit bundles on principle, fair enough, but the M5 bundle is well worth its price in its current state.
| Playercard of T.R. Stormjäger | |||||||||||||||
|
 |
|
|
54 | ||
|
|
|
|
14 | ||
 |
|
|
2 | ||
 |
|
|
2 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 | ||
 |
|
|
1 |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
