Profile of zarok47

5 man upgrade is a waste of fuel before your first tank in my opinion. I'd never make more than 3 infantry sections and usually when I've made 3 rather than two I wish I just made more snipers. Maybe against double Ost multiple infantry sections would be fine but they don't stand up to vetted OKW elites.

vet 2 5 man IS can stand up to most axis inf, but when you give them LMG's (either bren or vickers) they slaughter everything.
I generally opt for them when i find myself unable/unwilling to micro my snipers effectivly, since IS's are rather a-move orientated once upgraded en vetted (really scary when you have that m3 ht reinforcing behind them).

Good guide btw.

You just said that rushing a puma for OKW to counter brit sniper is not an efficent strategy. So now it is an efficent strategy? I don't see why this strategy wouldn't work and the british sniper is the least of OKWs problems vs the british faction.

And regarding the 222. I seriously don't understand what people expect from a 15 fuel and 210mp unit. Ever tried to get 2 222s to counter a sniper?


Like seriously, the brits and USF or the soviets dont have good counters to the ost sniper either. The M3 and M20 are very fragile and valnuarable to fausts. UC even more so. But nobody complains about ost sniper because theres a thing called flanking. OKW players even get to spawn troops behind buildings to make flanking a sniper easier.


Anyways, somebody suggested removing the snare from the sniper and adding snaers to the IS.

Yes, do that. That would increase the power of the brit sniper by a huge amount againts infantry because snares would now be everywhere and overall sniper would be alot harder to counter.

I respond to this, piece by piece, starting with the 222.

A dedicated sniper hunter (according to patchnotes) requires 2 of them to even deal with a single sniper.
Diving in with said 222's will mostly result in the demise of atleast 1 of them, if not both, due to the presence of the 280 at gun, whislt the sniper has a good chance of escaping due to reteat, sight range and ofc, the crit.

222 is a joke as a sniper counter vs brits.

USF lacks a good sniper counter, i won't argue there, but UKF can get their own sniper out, thus negating the need for another sniper counter (tho i agree, the UC is a joke aswell).

As for flanking and using buildings to spawn troops behind the sniper: A. its map depandent and B. more often then not the sniper see's you coming (45 sight range yee) and retreats, leaving all your effort in the dust (seen this on both ends far too many times).

But really, 70 fuel and 320 mp for OkW, in a 1vs1, spend solely to try and counter the brit sniper (you need vet 1 first, good luck getting that killing inf) whilst all the brit player has to do is spend 280 mp on his at gun and laugh at your efforts?
Not gonna work in any half-competitve 1vs1 match.

I don't see OkW having anything near a good sniper counter (nor USF for that matter).

Personally, i see snipers in this game as unneeded and quite frankly bad, since a well-supported sniper is far, far too hard to counter for any faction, with the sole exception of countersniping but that's more for another topic.

My bad sry

i would like to see it keeping it's ability to fire without LOS but an massive increase to the scatter will balance this

Firing with 3-4 second delay without LoS, and you want to add RNG to it?
Currently its already frustrating to be on the receiving end, but with this, not even the user will find the ability "fun".

Make it require LoS and delay the shells abit, basicly bringing it line with Railway.
Adjust cost if needed.

Currently it's a skilless oneclick counter to OkW on the field.

*also remember the brit 6pndr cost 320mp vs us 270

6pndr costs 280 mp.

ofcourse, pridepost

jove had 5 seconds delay, impossible for him to play, it was almost 2v1.

I see, since i have faced the 2 of you before and things never lasted past the 10 minute mark.

I hope one day we can stand up to you guys without anyone having delay's etc.