And you get squad that actually can fight before T3.
Also, are you even aware that ost got bonus menpower over soviets at start?
Yep, I just stopped playing conscripts a while ago. Maybe one squad max. But yeah ost got some discounts. |
80MP-10 fuel T1 that build very fast against 100MP 10 fuel AT-nade and 100MP 10 fuel molotovs. With OST T1 you got nade and faust. While for cons you nedd spend 200MP-20 fuel to take what you get for 80MP-10 fuel. ANd i don't consider time to make molotovs and AT_nades, this time much highe neither time to build T1.
Sorry my bad.
Still you get merge, 6 men, and hoorah from t0.
But it should be cheaper imo I guess. 50 manpower or sth like that. |
You can use "grens are T1" argument, when cons will start with at least AT nades unlocked.
Nope, t1 needs to be build by an engineer and it is more expensive. the engineer will start capping later and an mg without an engineer is a stolen mg. Meanwhile you will have 2-3 cons running around and capping. I understand that gren should get merge and oorah, too (if such argument can't ber used in your opinion). |
Well that is the point. You need more firepower to melt that HP down. It is simply unfair if it will take me 2 panthers to take down a tank. (Which also can be easily countered by brit at guns).
So in a realistic scenario you have a croc + 2 at guns and plenty of tommies and i got 2 panthers 1 pak 2 pgrens and some grens. You run onto me with your croc, rape my infantry or atg. Then i try to hunt you with panthers. Now i have to dive a 1000+ HP tank with 2 panthers which will be slammed by atgs.
I am not asking for an overnerf for a unit. Just make it less no brainer and punishing when you give your rear to enemy (Spoiler alert : Just like any other heavy tank)
Not much to add here - true. |
Counter argument base on your... Feeling ?
I gave you lots of valid arguments. What are you talking about?
And nobody here, including me are asking for sections buff,
But you just wrote (a post or two above)... that you want to discuss how to improve IS
And "very strong" is not so fit with the UKf as a description, since the faction has the lowest player base and win rate in aall mode. It have "strong units", which all has been neft/standarized, while still left with a bunch of gaps/missing pieces in the line up.
Mate - you don't refer to most of the things I wrote, you don't want to show your playercard, and keep accusing me of things I don't do. We'll have to agree to disagree. In my opinion it is just another l2p issue and accusing people with differnt opinion that give you a lot of valid arguments of what you yourself are doing - that is precisely thinking that "grass is greener on the other side ...." |
It is only what you think, if you want to prove it then make your own thread about ost. This thread is about infantry sections and i believe that anyone here already done with arguing about unit's performance and move on to discuss about how to improve the unit and maybe the whole faction. You are derailing the thread.
Well, I could say the same about You. You want to boost the faction which is very strong. Infantry sections just got buffed and you keep suggesting there is something wrong with them. Somebody just needs to give counterarguments as there is a real risk that buffing infantry sections will derail the whole game. |
If the USSR had really prepared for an attack, it would not have had such a tragic beginning to the war. There were no preparations for an attack, only in conspiracy theories:
- almost all divisions had "peacetime staff" which means most divisions had from 4 thousand to 8 thousand people out of 14 thousand standard divisions
- fuel for tank units that were on the western border was stored in the Caucasus.
- if the USSR was preparing for an attack, then the troops were in full combat readiness, but this did not happen. The order of a possible attack was received only a few days before the war, and with a big caveat - not to succumb to provocations.
They were far from combat readiness. They were grouped like ducks for slaughter - clusteres planes on airstrips, tanks parked one next to another, etc.
But it would have been - some of the most devastaiting losses happen when you are grouped in attack formations and are fired at with concentrated arty barrage. |
No, you're not.
If you were, your win ratio would be higher, proving your point.
No, because I don't smurf and my win ratio (for all factions) includes all my games since the game beginning including internet failures, players cheating against me, phone calls, my kids needing a nappy change, etc.
You have higher rank exclusively because of population distribution across factions, ost and soviets have most since they are here since day 1, while ukf is youngest and dlc locked faction, meaning least players play them. You simply have less players to compete with, therefore higher rank, remember that ranks are for the faction, not across the board. It was always the easiest to climb brit ladder due to lack of players in it.
Well, I'm not so sure her - UKF has been here for a while now.
And inb4 you go there, yes, its confirmed, no guessing.
I'm not sure I understand - cna you explain? |
Anyway, again, this is just "grass is greener on the other side" issue.
It is not. I lose mainly to OKW not to ost. Play ostheer!
|
And yet, your win ratio with them is exactly the same as with any other faction you play.
In fact, your playercard proves that game is perfectly balanced for average player.
No - I'm much better with brits  And it is so much more forgiving playing them. But I'll have to put some more effort into ost after patches - I'll report in a month or two |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
