On the rak, Okw players dont find it cheesy or gimmicky, would prefer to keep as it is without the gun shield or the range, no?
Yet non-okw players consider it unreliable and lousy.
There is a disconnect imo. Those who use it like it, those who dont thinks it is not good and needs to be a standard at gun.
im non-okw player, and i prefer its unique remain, with reduce performance/cost, and not think is cheese.
Gunshield does nothing. It's all a placebo and doesn't actually provide any cover.
There's no disconnect. People always used to complain about its shorter range, its unreliability, and its tendency to get wiped in 1 shot from explosives, partly due to the former two traits. Either people wanted it changed to be more in line with other AT guns, or they were content to abuse it as a tank killing commando squad instead of a real AT gun. Many many people found it both frustrating to play with and to play against, if you wanna sift through the literal years of complaints from both sides have at it. |
So I actually like the falls. I know I'm a hlod out of liking units that are supposed to make use of cover instead of attacking across open ground head on but I think that's what makes falls unique. They can engage from any range and camo so they can pick when/what range to fight from. I like to use them kind of like commandos, but without the restrictions of HAVING to be at close range meaning they can help out in a big fire fight. A very strong and versatile unit that imo has a lot to offer if used outside the conventional "walk at the enemy shooting and hope to come out on top" approach of most WFA elite infantry
+1 |
I disagree. Coh is all about uniqueness asymmetry. Fuck making factions similar for 'balance' sake.
Perhaps slow its camo movement more, make it more expensive.
But keep the camo and retreat.
Live raken is fun suprise but not powerful enough to hit heavy tanks anyway.
You lose attention to micro a cameo unit instead of park and leave it, it is all fair in the original intention.
Wow A-moving a camouflaged 50 range tank sniper really takes a lot of micro. That and movement while in camo is absolute cheese, but at the same time it's worse than all the other AT guns at being an actual AAT gun. Asymmetry is good, but this is just a bad mechanic. It'll still be the only AT gun to have nondoc camo and the ability to garrison buildings.
Hey patchers, i suddenly got an idea!
Now i didnt do the maths but here goes.
What if the cp requirements remains same/more as live games, but every teching and base deployment, gains you more cp. Thus either method, you will reach heavies at the same time as sbp intended.
This allows more flexibility. Those who prefer to fight using low tier units as usual, can do so. Those who are more passive or behind in cp, can use teching to reach heavies.
Instead of forcing all to do the tech, i dont know run back, click tech, build base. Seems a bit superflous.
What do you say?
I dont see sbp encouraging player to build med units for a change, they are just doing extra teching.
Why not give both options like good ol' coh.
That's how it is for every faction except Brits due to design oversight. So that would only affect Brits but for the sake of fairness/consistency that should be done too I guess. |
You can't confirm kills and hits from ww2 gun camera footage. That's ridiculous. You can see that their firing AT stuff, but getting actual kills from the cockpit was very difficult, and there's no way in hell you could confirm it from ww2 plane cameras
Long story short loiters should go, strafes should replace them. Mostly because of gameplay reasons
+1000
Strafes are more interesting gameplay-wise for both sides and can be less frustrating for users since it'll (mostly) actually do what you tell it to and for opponents because there's not a bunch of planes flying around that you either have AA for or don't and have to go afk for a minute.
Here is a IS2 taken below 50% by 2 passes, the schwer does a very minor contribution, it looks around 30% health after these two passes, I highly doubt the schwer contributed 20%..
https://clips.twitch.tv/RefinedStupidAsteriskTriHard
This ability almost always deals maximum damage within the first 10 seconds and rarely does limited damage. It probably is OP.
The math does not add up. Something is funky with this ability.
It was... uh it was clearly the luchs that did the other 20% or so. Definitely, yeah it was definitely that luchs. |
As a fellow team gamer. Fuck the live raketen. Jaeger camo hunter AT is cancer and worse is its unreliable without it.
+1 |
Yeah I don't think any starting infantry unit is worse than Riflemen.
Stop playing USF then lol. |
|
Both nades are very good. Sidetechs for them are fine considering you get the officers with tech too, that's the only reason they're justified. |
Falls are fine. They have incredible dps at all ranges, basically being Panzergrenadiers that also have good long range dps. There are however a few weaknesses you have to keep into consideration with them:
- Their DPS falls of quickly with each model that drops.
- They drop models fast because of their high RA and bad squad formation in the open.
- The damage they do is spread across the enemy squad, instead of focused on a few models.
These weaknesses means you have to always try to get them in an advantageous or supporting position, so you don't lose models, instead of using them like brawler or mainline units. This means sticking them behind cover, using camouflage, flanking with them, shielding them behind your other infantry or overwhelming the enemy with bigger numbers.
I would've personally preferred if they lowered their RA a bit and gave them 2-3 FG42's instead, but with a much better dps profile to compensate. This would've made Falls a lot easier to use. Instead, their DPS got increased, keeping the risk of using them the same, but increasing the reward.
I find it ridiculous that jaegers are tougher than falls. IMO it should be the other way around, since jaegers are supposed to be a support squad anyway. I would have personally also liked a lower falls RA too. |
All over brits got some good changes, but still. They are sometimes way to powerful.
Emplacements are simply cancer. Bofors still killes Inf way to fast (give it stats of Ostwind).
Also the grenade bug isn't fix (they can still trew grenades when red suppressed, if order was before the suppression).
Not trolling, but the fraction was a joke and stays a joke.
There are so many things have to be changed.
Emplacements are a joke in 1v1 but I agree that they can be pretty cancerous in teamgames. I find them much harder to kill if they go the advanced emplacement commander, and that's the only time I ever find them to be really serious problems. I think that whole commander needs to be totally reworked from the ground up as something more useful and less cheesy without the focus on emplacements.
I wish there was something that could be done about emplacements in general that would make the game better for both sides, because they're super cancerous to play with or against and just kind of encourage arty spam on both sides, but they're also not super competitive unless you use advanced emplacement commander and brits still lack proper indirect options because hurr durr mortar pit. |
If you actually read my response, you see I refer to free being no teching involved as you stated yourself, thus shock troops have free nades too. Don't come here and ramble on to me about trolling when I replied fully to your comment.
Wow, nice way to treat someone new asking for help. Hurr durr allies get free grenades too reee.
It's not even the same faction he was asking for help with. Shocks have nothing to do with USF lol.
I find AAHT to be a good choice against builds with lots of assault grenadiers, since they'll oftentimes back it up with schreck pgrens since they know they have no fausts, but schrecks don't do very well against the AAHT if you micro it well since they'll get suppressed before they can fire. Like Sidaroth said M20 can be a good choice too, but I prefer AAHT since it'll fend off the schrecks too and you also get access to AT guns, so it's the much safer option. That being said if I go LT I'll usually go airborne company so I have access to AT guns, and that's great for this scenario too since you'll get paras and either kind (1919s or thompsons) tears up assault grenadiers with good micro. Also, I like mixing a pathfinder into my early game build too since they seem to be a bit of a force multiplier for your rifles. In case you didn't know they have 2 scoped rifles that don't have a ton of DPS but are very accurate and will "snipe" infantry models under a certain health threshold (IIRC it's 40%) and kill them instantly. They also have 2 carbines that are 1-1 superior to riflemen garands and have a really long sight range that's useful for finding mg42s or even just infantry and stuff, but are squishier and more expensive to reinforce than rifles and get no abilities beyond beacon planting. |
Bleb Feesh
LoopDloop
LoopDloop
Relic Entertainment
