|
It's very good and useful in almost any situation.
I use this commander when I feel the need to "carry" week teammates. My favorite strategy is to combine T2 with T4 and do my best to hold territory. The downside is you lack a main battle tank until the KV1. Couple cons, 2-3 maxims, at gun, maybe mortar, 1-2 shocks, su85, kat, kv1, its a strong combination that can very effectively support your teammates.
The B4 is risky is there is a player with stuka dive bomb. Generally you can put it far enough back to avoid walking stuka barrages, so dive bomb is the biggest issue. If there is a dive bomb, and the player has half a brain, its pretty much wasted manpower. |
|
Blitz is the single most OP ability if you compare it side by side with the capture mode of soviet tanks. |
|
"We're working on it" does not quell my concerns. The work that has been done created bugs and threw balance around the blender. What reason do we have to believe things will get better when recent history shows Relic actions have made things worse?
|
|
They're working fine as far as I can tell. Do you have mortar bulletins?
and, so you know, the barrage ability is less accurate than auto-fire. It does fire faster though. |
|
Not that I know of. Turn down the UI opacity in the menu and watch it because you don't have a choice.
|
|
It seems that the maps that were previously removed or modified on the map list have been reverted. Hill 331 is back in game, and Ettlebruck is once again a 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4 map.
These changes were for the better, I don't understand why they reverted. Ettlebruck as 4v4 is a joke. |
Because trying to balance 4v4 mess would ruin 1v1 completely, that's why.
Still not an argument, it's an assumption you have already deemed to be true. |
|
4v4 is a joke, agreed. I like 4v4, just wish it was balanced.
Some of your "timings" are off (exaggerated).
I don't understand why people insist that making the game different for different game modes is a good idea. It would be very jarring for things to be different prices/effectiveness, as the game is already loaded with a variety of units/prices. Secondly, I have yet to see an argument as to WHY it would be needed. We go from:
There is a problem -> there is no other way -> make each game mode different.
It should be:
There is a problem -> whats the issue? -> test some changes -> a million other ideas -> final resort, different numbers for diff game modes. |
|
I have high hopes for the "E-Sports Partnership" which was announced at Gamescom. High hopes generally set me up for disappointment, and I find myself quite pessimistic about its potential.
There are too many bugs and too much fundamentally broken faction design. They keep spinning knobs, adjusting accuracy, scatter bonus, moving burst modifier, and on and on. It doesn't address underlying problems.
Keep spinning the knobs, and if it doesn't work, spin them again. |
Personally the reason I'm most hesitant to play right now is if my opponent gets a KT or JT, there's no simple counter, and depending on Soviet doctrine choice, no counter at all. Any tanks I have are worthless, any infantry I have are worthless (obersoldaten), any Vet 3 infantry I have are barely clinging on (obers again). OKW just blobs Panzerschrecks and Obers and stalls to KT, and it isn't fun to fight against.
This is also a huge reason why I play less now. I MUCH prefer Axis because they're just more fun to play. Allies has its moments, but restrictive teching and boring units make dealing with late-game infantry and armor a real problem. (And not a fun "Hey I like solving problems" kind of problem, but a "My god why did they do this too me" kind of problem). |
United States
2
![[NS] TüMe flag](/images/replay/okw_flag.jpg)
Relic Entertainment
