Profile of whitesky00

Comparing the doctrinal Puma to the non-doctrinal AEC is an argument that will get the AEC-lovers nowhere, the Puma is outclassed by the AEC because the AEC has MUCH better Anti-Infantry.

OH please. Is this your smurf account? you don't even have that many games listed. You play purely Axis and specifically OST.

People are also mentioning the OKW puma and you lump everyone as an AEC lover. Yes, AEC has strong AI abilities which will probably result in a smaller AOE nerf but all the pro Axis comments say that the puma has 0 AI abilities which is also untrue.

Please present information instead of just opinions and starting more hate instead of useful debate to resolve the problem. At the moment I only see Axis posting OP and coming up with counter unit examples to have other players post ACTUAL data to counter it.

Dunno, I don't own it. What about? But the M3 from mechanized is nice but too squishy and damn too expensive, I tried several time to hard push with it but requires too much babysitting.

Uhh, doesn't this just defeat the point you stated that giving blobby factions a mobile halftrack will make them more OP?
Denied...
if you push with a blob and a halftrack and get suppressed... you have to retreat to base.
if you push with a blob and a FRP get suppressed... you retreat for 10 seconds and come back from multiple angles, or flank.

Again FRPs affects team games a lot more.

Whoever said spam MGs and screen troops... you have even MP. How are you supposed to get screen troops and SPAM MGs without them having the same amount of squads outflanking your mgs and overpowering from a different direction, just to retreat, reinforce and heal in front of your face, and then come at it again.

Generally, OKW only has to work against infantry at early stages of the game but against an HQ, one has to get AT zooks, satchels, AT guns, mortars, and it requires a lot of time to take down.

Can someone explain to me how much risk and reward is involved here? I have to risk handing over MGs, mortars, and AT guns to OKW and I'm more likely to fail especially if a 2nd or 3rd force flanks just for a moment, enough to make me retreat or lose a squad. The only risk on the OKW side is during building construction which is an extremely narrow time frame.

Again, i've stated my opinion on this before. FRPs are not a problem in 1v1 but are a huge factor in big maps because OKW is the only faction to have access to early FRP with extremely high durability.
Ambu can be killed by small arms, Major can be killed by small arms. UKF tent goes down in 5 shreks? bunker in 1 satchel. OKW buildings... like 15-20 AT shots.

I would say the AEC needs to arrive at least twenty fuel later than it does right now. That's still much earlier than a Luchs and just slightly more fuel than is required build a US AA halftrack.

Again, this is the amount of fuel required to build your first light vehicle right now:

AEC: 30+15+50-20=75
Stuart: 60+70-15=115
Luchs: 15+55+65-10=125
T-70: 10+85+70-20=145 (this assuming that the Soviet player goes T1. If they go T2, then it's 155 fuel).
US AA Halftrack: 50+50-15=85

So I'm thinking that the AEC should probably arrive at around the 100-110 fuel mark if rushed. That's still faster than its closest counterpart, the OKW Puma, which arrives at 130 fuel.

My suggestion: AEC cost increased to 60 from 50. Teching cost increased to 25 from 15. And all British Infantry Sections get access to the anti-tank grenade, which is only available to Tank Hunter Sections right now.

I would rather not put more fuel cost into a side upgrade. Bofors and AEC upgrade cost is the same. changing one would require the other to change as well. timing is a better change.

If you get IS AT grenade, you'll never here the end of the Axis complaints. OP 5 man squad with AT and dual equip = OP. And while you're at it, please fix the AT grenade. I believe all other AT snares do 100 damage but the UKF AT grenade only does 50.

What about the idea of giving every faction a starting AT weapon?

I feel this would make USF OP. They would spam riflemen, ambu, and AT and dominate map presence?

They have the same "far" accuracy of 0.03 and depending on which file (mp or not) the Bazooka is either slightly more accurate at "near" or slightly less accurate than the Panzerschrek.

(Bazooka has 0.03F 0.06N)
(Panzerschrek 0.03F 0.05N)
(Panzerschrek_mp 0.03F 0.07N)

Either way, the accuracy at max range is the same.

I stand corrected. Thanks for the info Rappy.