|
Then buff the shermans survivability and nerf it's ai abit so it can act as a meat shield, buffing the Jackson would make it op. |
|
The scout car is fine, if anything it needs a buff |
|
Seeing some of the other suggestions made by others like Millar cow are not bad ideas, but ops idea of 235mp volks with mp44 and mg34 to turn them in to Obers lite is an awful idea. |
|
This thread is pure madness, mark target is op. I want to know what crack you people are smoking |
|
lol no |
I can agree with what you are saying, but the problem here is that the underlying issue of why these abilities are being abused won't be addressed, because relic. What will happen here as per relic logic is that they will nerf it to the ground as they always do. Instead of looking at the underlying logic of why this unit/ability is being abused, snipers? because sov stock infantry suck, P47? because usf at suck, mark target? sov at suck. Instead of nerfing then to reasonable levels and adjusting the game to compensate the nerf I.E. adjusting stock units to be more effective, they just give it a massive nerf bat and maybe compensate for it 1 or 2 patch cycles later. Yes I've seen the issue tracker and its quite impressive, I wish something like this exist for coh1/dow2.
|
I think ideally this would be a valid argument but it's not really true. The synergy with B4 and P-47 mean that your opponent could lose a heavy tank through no fault of their own at all. I'd like to see Mark Target continue to be a great way to punish an over extended axis tank but not a way to wipe it out using only indirect fire. What's wrong with changing the ability to give increased penetration instead of damage, for example?
I think the allies definitely need those things. And this isn't even close to the only thing in the game that I think needs changing. Haven't you seen the issue tracker that I maintain?
I can agree with what you are saying, but the problem here is that the underlying issue of why these abilities are being abused won't be addressed, because relic. What will happen here as per relic logic is that they will nerf it to the ground as they always do. Instead of looking at the underlying logic of what this unit/ability is being abused, snipers? because sov stock infantry suck, P47 because usf at suck, mark target? sov at suck. Instead of nerfing then to reasonable levels and adjusting the game to compensate the nerf I.E. adjusting stock units to be more effective, they just give it a massive nerf bat and maybe compensate for it 1 or 2 patch cycles later. Yes I've seen the issue tracker and its quite impressive, I wish something like this exist for coh1/dow2. |
so change mark target to increase pen vs targeted vehicles. they way i always expected the ability to work... how the fuck is a plane spotting a fucking vehicle going to increase a shells dmg? i know its not much better with penetration being increased, but at least one could argue that a spotted vehicle is easier to aim at, hence increasing the likeliness of hitting a weakpoint thus penetrating. imo thats a buff to the ability considering that many allied weapons dont penetrate axis heavies very well and reliable (lower) damage through higher pen, is (again this is my opinion) better than higher but unreliable dmg. you wont be able to burst heavies, as you could now, but it will make a lot of low pen AT wpns a lot better
I completely agree, In fact I proposed this change a few patches ago when relic nerfed mark target, but everyone cried that was op so...... |
|
Relic didn't do this I refuse to admit they're this dense, this has to be segas doing. |
This is exactly the kind of flawed thinking that leads to the stale meta we have currently. Nothing should ever be "needed". The solution to the problem you just stated is to nerf axis heavies, not leave mark target in an overpowered state.
Yes, it is definitely overpowered. Those things might be overpowered too, but that doesn't change the fact that mark target is also overpowered.
This sarcasm isn't particularly constructive. Neither are expletives. I'm certainly open to reasonable counter-argument. Why do you think mark target should stay as it is?
I completely agree.
Why is should stay? Because I said it before it you lose a tank to mark target 9 time out of 10 it is YOUR FAULT, in order for it to be effective you have to be able to flank his/her tank and at that point its your fault for over extending and supporting your armor. Unless ofcourse there is an reliable at weapon in this game the allies have that is non doctrinal that can reliability fight axis armor and has decent armor and health, than in that case yes mark target should be nerfed. Not only that of all the things in the game you chose marktarget? Like thats the most game breaking thing in the game, because the allies have such great at capabilities oh wait....... |
0
United States
Major-General Sir Percy Hobart
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
