Scott in LT or CP as the OKW Walking stuka.

Jump back to quoted post2 Sep 2019, 04:12 AMzerocoh

lol no, people are already pissed at the thing.

I would like to see the scott get a little more armor though, things like 222 and ostwinds can actually kill them very easily. Maybe a little more health so I can't get fausted at full health?

Jump back to quoted post2 Sep 2019, 06:51 AMRiley

What does it mean "people are already pissed at the thing"? Axis funs dont love Scott?

But at the tournament in the Masters Cup, not Scott wiped the squads in every battle, but a walking stuka did it. So why not transfer it to the Schwerer Panzer HQ, or transfer Scott to the CP or LT?

Jump back to quoted post2 Sep 2019, 10:19 AMadamírcz

Stuka has fucked up design in the first place

This aint a fair comparison though

Scott is more of an LV version of Leig

Jump back to quoted post1 Sep 2019, 23:52 PMRiley

Why does OKW get powerful artillery like a walking stuka so early, and does a less powerful Scott come out with a major?

I think this is not fair, considering how powerful the walking stuka is, and how in an instant it can wipe entire squad.

Jump back to quoted post2 Sep 2019, 11:39 AMVipper

Try building a stuka as your first t2 unit and see what happens.

Jump back to quoted post2 Sep 2019, 11:39 AMVipper

Try building a stuka as your first t2 unit and see what happens. Just because a unit is available early does not mean that you get an advantage from building it.

Jump back to quoted post2 Sep 2019, 11:59 AMRiley

The results of the tournament suggest otherwise. Watch the Masters Cup tournament. There the early walking stuka was a wipe machine.

Jump back to quoted post2 Sep 2019, 12:45 PMVipper

Stuka is available early but making scott available earlier does not solve the problem. It actually creates another. This is typical "the grass is greener on the other side" mentality.

The availability of stuka is problematic mostly in 4vs4 games and I guess one could try locking it behind the engineers upgrade.

I don't think that Cup has a allot to do with with how early Scott become available.

My actually suggestion by stuka has been to replace the HE round with incendiary making the unit perform more like an anti garrison unit than squad wiper and offering the HE at higher vet level.

Jump back to quoted post2 Sep 2019, 12:45 PMVipper

My actually suggestion by stuka has been to replace the HE round with incendiary making the unit perform more like an anti garrison unit than squad wiper and offering the HE at higher vet level.

Jump back to quoted post2 Sep 2019, 15:16 PMelchino7

No need to hide it behind vet. Make it require T3 be built and make the HE barrage an upgrade which cost mp + fuel. Now you can make the T2 Stuka only Flame barrage while reducing the cost of it as well.


Now regarding USF:

You could try swapping the Scott with the Pack Howie.

-Scott: reduce AA range to 50.
-Stuart: now you can make the unit more AT worth oriented once medium tanks appears as the Scott takes on the job of the light tank with AI capabilities.
-Pack Howie: reworked to be the "Land mattress" of USF.

Jump back to quoted post2 Sep 2019, 14:49 PMRiley

Its solve the problem! USF also just like OKW will can use early artillery. Why should only OKW have such an opportunity? Although Scott is definitely not such a sudden threat, like a walking stuka.

Jump back to quoted post2 Sep 2019, 15:30 PMRiley

..

P.s. Sorry, I didn’t notice what solution you propose.

Jump back to quoted post2 Sep 2019, 11:59 AMRiley

The results of the tournament suggest otherwise. Watch the Masters Cup tournament. There the early walking stuka was a wipe machine.

Jump back to quoted post2 Sep 2019, 20:50 PMKiwiBirb

The scott’s Current auto attack range is 80 (more than an Elephant by 10) so reducing the attack range to 50 (Stug G’s range) will make it a less powerful bleed tool while allowing it to do area denial at 80 range

Jump back to quoted post2 Sep 2019, 21:02 PMSander93

Having to tech SPHQ to get tanks will make going for early (double) Stuka(s) extremely risky.

"Faction A needs the thing because faction B has the thing" is also not a universal or even valid argument.