The "comeback" only occurs because Hans played way too passively with his massive advantage..
Same probably applies to me. This was pretty much just a rant thread. I think I am simply not used to comebacks of this kind, since I usually am a 2 vs 2 player where its always GG once a team faces a similar situation like Kimbo in the first round.
You can hold more points, destroy the enemys first tank, kill lots of his units early on and still get pushed back by something as trivial as a Pak wall.
Now you might say "this is a l2p issue" . But we also saw stuff like this in the ML2 matches of today. Players were literally driven to their base and had a 1:20 KD just to get a massive comeback.
It just feels so unrewarding to me. If my enemy loses half his army early on , his first Tank and maybe even his flakbase (as OKW ) and has like 1% mapcontroll I don't feel that he should be able to survive and even win against me just because he spams antitankguns
Now some people say "yea you always have to watch out in 1 vs 1, one small mistake and you can lose" Well... why do I lose when I do one mistake, but someone having a 1:100 KD still allows him to have a comeback ? Just feels like a big scam to me
We were pushing them hard early on. They lost 2 Sections, one AEC and one UC. The problem was that they manged to take control of both ammo points ( Moscow ) . From that point on it went downhill. Our infantry could not do much against them, as they were equipped with MGs and were upgraded to 5 men squads. Furthermore they built forward bases on the ammmo points which made it basically impossible to do anything with our infantry against them. Fighting them with Vehicles was also no option as they had AT guns and one guy had double Pioneers with Piats. So I tried to build a stuka to kill their infantry / destroy their forward bases, but they doged stuka and simply repaired the forward bases quickly with their sections. Then they harassed our cutoff and took the fuel. From that on it was a lost fight.
So ... yea. I guess my question is. What to do as OKW ( and maybe OST ) against 5 men sections with MGs, which camp your cutoff because they have a forward base. I guess the answer would be ISG, but that thing is locked behind T1 and I already went Mech HQ. at that point ... so yea.
and with a bit (rank 1-1000 skill) of skill, it kills.
This way of arguing is not a one way street. If your enemy is rank 1-1000 he probably won't get his sniper killed by a kubel either. Even if you retreat your sniper after the kubel starts shoting at it you still have more than a decent change to surive it even when you have no mines / literally no Infantry with snares nearby ( at least on 2 vs 2 / 1 vs 1 maps ) .
I can't even remember getting my sniper killed by a kubel even once ( same applies the other way around )
Let's be honest, MG34 and 42 are not the weak points of axis. Maxim is pretty pretty weak compared to them. [...] Maxim is the worst MG in the game. Period.
And yet MG 34 is the one of the three which is basically never seen ... unlike maxim.
I don't really get why so many claim that maxim is weak or bad. Imo it is a decent MG ( apparently it even has a better supression on longer ranges than Mg 34 too ( Maxim suppression per burst increases from range 10 on, while Mg 34 drops by range 12 )( also mind the 6 men crew ) )
Valid, but having to pay 120mu for a decent chance is inefficient.
Obers costs 80 ammo + a lot of MP, are late game and have no snare. Having more than a decent chance with Rifles against them would be more than unfair
Cost? It comes out as worse unit then UC as it isn't even armed
Once upgraded it will be a better unit than a upgraded UC , while costing less than than a Upgraded UC. And it arguably also has a better price/ performance ratio when not upgraded than a non upgraded UC.