Yes. You may not know this, but this is a tactical RTS. If you make the enemy AT move you know what? It's not in position anymore! Congrats. You made an opening! If you want the game to play itself, perhaps balloons TD is more your speed. A game where there is no counterplay and your enemy mindlessly plays right into your defense everytime without fail!
In THIS game there is give and take. Counterplay. You do a thing that makes them HAVE to do a thing. Buying a unit that you just set behind sight blockers and bleed the enemy is a badly designed unit. Especially one as slippery as the Scott.
Do you get upset when you have to flank as well? Have to use smoke or off maps? Camo? Any other core elements of the game you feel are too much for you that we can discuss? I personally dislike the way I have to build units and tell them to take cover and cap points, perhaps between that and your issues we can get together and develop a patch that's actually just watching band of brothers. We get the epic visuals without actually having to do the tedious part of playing the game with a whole other player.
Your post is completely out of logic, you could always move your pak if the scott auto-fire it. |
Adjust Scott for a LV timing and swap it with the Pack Howitzer.
Rework Pack Howitzer into a good barrage only weapon.
too complex for them, see how the butcher the pak and scott on the same patch to become redundant units. |
|
So who play regularly with the Pershing like selecting the commander for it? |
The last couple of patches have addressed this by decreasing Medium tank target size and increasing Racc of AT Guns. Not much else can be done without breaking balance. IE you can't lower AT gun accuracy without making LVs super oppressive. I don't know what to say beyond "build better counters" and "don't attack straight into support weapon walls".
I know it can be a struggle on some maps or factions (looking at you USF LT build with no Calli) but the AT guns themselves aren't the problem IMO.
I had more in mind to increase their popcap by +2 so building 2 atgum become a decision unlike today. |
If you are suggesting that medium tank should arrive earlier that is suggestion in the wrong direction.
If ones opponent invest to much in ATG gun one can simply invest in infatry and gain the advantage.
If there an issue here that would would be case with Zis that not provide AT but also AI and thus it is easier for a player to invest into two zis guns.
I don't know how you understand that, but nan everything wrong.
Have you tried using infantry instead of tanks against them yet?
Sarcasm isn't a valid argument.
Hmmm, the enemy is using double AT guns. OP!!!!
I thought AT guns use population. Wasn't aware that they are completely free. So if you go one AT gun, you spend 7 pop, but if you go 2, it's 0 pop?
you're missing the point, the cost efficiency of 2 atgun is too great vs medium tanks because their impact on the player economy is simply too low. If you have the manpower, there is no decision making about building a second one.
2 AT guns are acceptable even in 1v1. They cost 7 pop-cap which is pretty much 1 mainline squad. Even if you go for staring engi (5), 4 mainlines (28 pop), 2 elites (18 pop), 1 MG (6 pop) and 2 AT guns (14) you are using in total 71 pop-cap. And you still have pop-cap for 2-3 armored units.
Tecnically if game is 50\50 there is no reason not to do AT gun walls, since they litterty can 2 shot any 640HP tank.
pretty much this.
If all medium tanks had 720hp, that wouldn't be much of a problem imo but with the current values, 2 atgun are simply too cost effective vs medium tanks because the manpower flow around min 10 allow players to bank 300-500 manpower easily.
|
|
What's your opinion on it?
-----
In my opinion, more generically the dual support weapon strategy on 1vs1 and 2vs2 (HMG and Atgun) are too well established in the meta, consequences of too few downsides until late game and rocket arty availability to counter them.
I think the problem with it rely more on the opportunity side, players tend to always have 300-500 manpower available on the early-mid game after having unlocking their T2 (or equivalent) and units associated.
So with all that manpower available and usually still 3-5 minutes to wait until T3/first tank, building a second atgun, even if there are no medium tank on the field is never a bad decision because it doesn't impact the player economy.
To me being able to dual your proper hard counter to medium tank before they even hit the field without impact on your own economy/play is a balance issue. Building a second ATgun should be a investment that cut the player from getting something else, a process going through tactical decision made by the player and not just a part of his build order.
I think atgun are currently correctly priced for what they bring individually, but the windows of opportunity to get two of them should be reduce to become part of a strategy decided by the player and not a simple usual build order because resources are here to allow it anyway.
|
Letting pathfinder grab BARS is a dumb idea, just that.
I won you last week with that strat.  |
It became more reliable.
For example I played vs OKW 2v2, owned dude whole game, but ST stalled it a lot. If you can't listen to its engine noise every second of the game, it becomes very problematic, especially vs HMG. It just kills it faster then you are able to retreat it.
Elpern with Kpen are now spamming the doctrine and Elpern came to a conclusion that it is definitely overperforming with current timing, price and performance. Jibber also wasn't happy with new ST, when he played vs it.
I had a game where the ST OS every single of my squads at each shot, then OS a Sherman and then almost OS a Jackson.
I still have the replay I guess. |
...
You want to make the Ez8 special and related to its historical strength, just put the engine critical trigger to >50% so you have a tank that can brawl without fearing getting faust and lost in a matter of seconds.
At the same time you make it unique for the game. |
Its not really fine if every guy you meet had a b4 commander on his loadout. Before the patch it is not as picked right now means its even better than the rng one shot med tank version.
I knew the Tiger and pfusillers were not fine!! |
Relic Entertainment
