Profile of A table

Jump back to quoted post9 Mar 2018, 21:51 PMinsaneHoshi

I just want to point out while its fire rate may be good, its aim time is still painfully long.

Also while cammo is nice, its only there to balance out the negatives of its short range and lack of survivability. Camo may be good, but firing from 60 range and from the FOW is better.

Jump back to quoted post1 Mar 2018, 12:10 PMullumulu

Jump back to quoted post1 Mar 2018, 12:04 PMA table

Sorry, but no. Volkschrecks were and are cancerous. I understand the frustration of the lack of reliable AT, but I(and alot of other people) don't like it.

/quote]

1. Volkschrecks "are" cancerous? what do you talk about?
2. Didnt you read my suggestion? i said 2 schrecks! TWO! wtf could this be cancerous? In which case this could be op or something? It is one(!!) Panzergrens squad. Not more.
Are Panzergrens op or cancerous?
Schrecks misses a lot in higher range..

3. Why should Okw with 2 schrecks OP, Cancerous, anyoing and so ...while allie faction run with 5-8 zooks/PRTS/piats around the field?

4. What is your fear? To lose your Tank to a Volks sqaud with one or maybe 2 Schrecks? Comon. It will be took than that.

5. What does bring you to tell that many other ppl wont like this idea? Are you the Manager/ student representatives of the anti volks party?

Please stop messing with quotes, i can barely read it.

Anyway, for your points:

1; Volksshrecks are cancerous because they encourage blobbing. Simple as that.

2; 2 Shrecks are still too much. This would lead to 2 volks with shrecks and 3 or more volks covering them, which once again leads to blobbing without effort. Not to mention the fact that volks still have snares which you haven't adressed in the comment or the OP.

3; Allied factions having AT on their mainline infantry is (more or less, still debatable) acceptable because those AT weapons like PTRS, PIAT and bazookas are not nearly as powerfull as a Panzershreck. Aside from costs, it outperforms all of the afformentioned in penetration and damage from what i have seen in my games. why would they cost more compared to the allied AT otherwise? The fact that you are trying to make it look like the Panzershreck is inferior to allied AT just because it is not available on your mainline is just ridiculous.

Hence why i argue that you get double Pzershreck upgrade on sturmpioneers; they are available early, and punish light vehicles or mediums that try to outflank your other units/stuff. they are also rather expensive to reinforce making any attempt at blobbing them with volks very manpower hungry and thus very punishing.

It's also why i am against Obersoldaten getting 2 panzershrecks because they come too late to make a difference.

4; My fear is that these disgusting volksshreckblobs will return in COH2. There is no reason to give mainline infantry the nondoctrinal capability to frontally penetrate all mediums at any range, regardless of low accuracy.

5; See point 4. I am no representative of the anti- volks party, but who are you? Did you ever fight against the ridiculous volkshordes? Please let me know what you thought of them in the past, if you found the balanced or not compared to what the allies fielded at the time.

Also a reminder: i agree that OKW needs better early- game AT, most notably the raketenwerfer but that's another topic.

Jump back to quoted post27 Feb 2018, 12:27 PMullumulu

i dont want a bofors which deal with whole armys. .

Jump back to quoted post26 Feb 2018, 23:09 PMinsaneHoshi

Isn't 500 the combined cost of their actual cost value plus their deploy anywhere mechanic?

And if cost justifies OP ness, why are expensive obers perform only slightly better than Bren IS?

Jump back to quoted post26 Feb 2018, 07:24 AMullumulu

they are not amazing..they are OP