Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
Cap. Crew vehicles. Stick some bazookas on them for an extra AT squad. Crew a team weapon to ditch the squad entirely if you don't actually want it.
You could also use the Captain specifically to supervise production without tying up a hefty chunk of pop sitting in your base doing nothing.
Or spend 83 MP on making them 5 man. I see no reason you couldn't offer that upgrade to the Major too.
Posts: 3260
So being a burden more than anything else in definitive.
Posts: 48
You guys complaining about Riflemen know they're way, WAY more expensive than Volks or Grens right?
Posts: 3260
You guys complaining about Riflemen know they're way, WAY more expensive than Volks or Grens right?
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Riflemen are roughly 8% more expensive than Volksgrenadiers.
Your hyperbole is doing no favours to your credibility.
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: 3602 | Subs: 1
If you don't personally see the use for the 3 man officers, upgrade them to 5 man.
You've got that choice.
Posts: 3260
Your Idea doesn't make sense, just admit it and move on.
Volks were 10mp more then cons for ages and they have roflstomped them without contest.
20mp difference for mainline is pretty significant.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
...
I'd argue that's got more to do with poor balance between Volks and Cons than anything else.
Posts: 2
Posts: 888
Riflemen are roughly 8% more expensive than Volksgrenadiers.
Your hyperbole is doing no favours to your credibility.
Imagine ur standing with a gren squad in green cover upgraded with lmg and a rifle squad is coming from far far far away and just running to you and wins the 1v1. Is this balanced ? Lmao
yh but the faction as a whole is op atm something needs to be done
Posts: 3260
They aren't just 280 MP vs 260 and 240. They cost 28 MP to reinforce, cost 150MP/15 fuel to unlock grenades and another 150MP/15 fuel to unlock BARs plus 120 munitions to equip them. This all factors in when I say they are expensive.
Posts: 888
You can't compare Vet 0 unupgraded Riflemen to Vet 0 unupgraded Volks and then cite upgrade costs.
Riflemen with one BAR outgunned StG Volks at all ranges before the buff.
Riflemen have never had a scaling problem. 280 MP, 120 MU, vetted up Riflemen have always been worth their cost.
The problem was their unupgraded, unvetted performance, which the Garand change seeks to address.
Posts: 4474
ah i wish this logic was used for pfusi, still lose to cons while costing 30 more mp
Volks were 10mp more then cons for ages and they have roflstomped them without contest.
20mp difference for mainline is pretty significant.
Katitof-2018
Posts: 4474
At Vet 0 cons would still dominate gren behind sandbags at long range despite costing the same and already beating them at close.
What's wrong with the comparison? At Vet 0 Volks would still dominate Riflemen behind sandbags despite the more expensive cost of Riflemen. This is totally ignoring Strums too. Riflemen had no discernable advantage over Volks but for some reason were significantly more expensive. It was the dumbest situation. Then Volks would instantly get their 60 munitions StGs and flamenades after teching while USF side techs put upgrades so out of reach that you'd very often see Volks wipe the floor with Riflemen for several minutes into the game. It was a sad sad state and I'm really glad they addresssed it.
Katitof-2018
Posts: 3260
What's wrong with the comparison? At Vet 0 Volks would still dominate Riflemen behind sandbags despite the more expensive cost of Riflemen. This is totally ignoring Strums too. Riflemen had no discernable advantage over Volks but for some reason were significantly more expensive. It was the dumbest situation. Then Volks would instantly get their 60 munitions StGs and flamenades after teching while USF side techs put upgrades so out of reach that you'd very often see Volks wipe the floor with Riflemen for several minutes into the game. It was a sad sad state and I'm really glad they addresssed it.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
ah i wish this logic was used for pfusi, still lose to cons while costing 30 more mp
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: 4474
do at tommy pay for at nade ?, or do guards or shock pay for nades?
Given the fact they don't need to pay any additional side grade costs for faust and nades, I'd say they are fairly priced for what they do.
Bear in mind that rifles and tommies don't exactly start with everything unlocked for free.
If cons being shitty because of utility out of the gate was a good argument, then so it is for PFs.
Katitof-2018
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
do at tommy pay for at nade ?
or do guards or shock pay for nades?
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: 2358
It means that regardless of rifle or gren state, grens are supposed to lose at all distances and they do, rifle buff didn't changed anything here.
Volks were 10mp more then cons for ages and they have roflstomped them without contest.
20mp difference for mainline is pretty significant.
.jpg){kind=icon}
Posts: 2358
Given the fact they don't need to pay any additional side grade costs for faust and nades, I'd say they are fairly priced for what they do.
Bear in mind that rifles and tommies don't exactly start with everything unlocked for free.
If cons being shitty because of utility out of the gate was a good argument, then so it is for PFs.
 |
|
|
82 | ||
 |
|
|
44 | ||
|
|
|
|
35 | ||
|
|
|
|
34 | ||
|
|
|
|
24 | ||
 |
|
|
13 | ||
|
|
|
|
562 | ||
 |
|
|
78 | ||
 |
|
|
31 | ||
|
|
|
|
18 |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
