G43 are fine on Grens. They needs a different role on PGs.
I'm in favour of giving PG's a single Jäger G43 instead. Grenadier version is indeed fine as-is. |
Who will win, probably DevM. Who I want to win, KoreanArmy. |
They could also allow you to build more Commandos from it, or raise the price and make it come with 2 Commandos or Commandos + Airlanding Officer. As it is though it's pretty expensive, and I still don't like how bloody huge Relic decided to make it. Not only is landing hard but it also spews out a hundred gibs when it dies. So many gibs that it breaks the physics engine and every prop on the map starts sliding around. |
This is a map design issue, not a Bunker issue. Except that USF Base, that's just USF's unnecessarily complex base design. I don't know if the mapper can actually do anything about that... |
i can't follow this. in coh, reinforcement costs are calculated from the entity prices. inf section costs 280MP because one entity costs 70MP. reinforcement costs for infantry usually is 50% of entity cost, which is 35MP for an IS entity. if you reduce that by 10%, to 40%, you get 28MP. not 31.5MP. 31.5 would be a 5% reduction.
Oh that's what that means, okay I understand it now? By -10% I thought they meant setting it to 10% off the model cost (70 - 10% = 63 ÷ 50% = 31.5) rather than adding 10% to the divided-by number (70 ÷ 60% = 28). |
Well, I have seen armor or hp nerf, but not both.
Especially the armor nerf is extremely heavy.
Medium tanks have now more armor then the tank that was known for having thicker frontal armor then Tiger I.
The Churchill still has more health than any unit in the game, and they get Heavy Engineers. It's clear Relic is going for a tank that is very durable at the cost of high maintenance. It's also only 150 Fuel, maybe they should have increased the cost for lesser nerfs, but I dunno. Low armor value tells me they want a well-used T3 to have a fighting chance since the Panzer IV has relatively poor penetration.
cost is 70 per model, so 7 MP actually is 10%.
70 - 10% = 31.5 |
Instead of writing an essay on inconsistencies, let's just take a look at one stupid example: We have PPSh-41s that are quite effective on Partisans and Conscripts, yet are piddly useless pea-shooters on Shock Troops and Guards Assault Infantry.
It depends how you look at it. The way I see it, Conscript PPSh is inconsistent because it's one of the few upgrades that reduce DPS at a certain range, whereas most upgrades increase it at all ranges. And as Miragefla said, Shock PPSh's are stronger than Cons version up close. |
Hmmmmm... While the Churchill needs a nerf, I feel the regular Churchill should still have better armour than the specialist variants on account of it's cosmetic look and lack of powerful weapons.
Not sure about Penetration differences, but the standard Churchill does 160 damage with the main gun while the Crocodile variant does just 80.
Cough cough, stg obers, cough cough, shocks. So maybe they needed a nerf fine, but 500 mp, for commandos with half dps and a crap glider is not worth it and never will be worth it. In a few weeks when commandos are extinct from the battlefield, I will point back to this post and say I told you so.
Commandos do 120 DPS currently, Shocks do 80, StG Obers do 60. Commandos STEN do more damage than Ober's IR StG. In my opinion, no fresh squad should have base damage higher than a Shock Squad, yet Commandos do 50% more. |
I cant get why they nerf commandos. 1 commandos squad couldn't wipe inf in seconds, 2 of them could.
I missed this bit earlier, it's wrong. Commandos do around 120 DPS, models have 80 health. Commandos ambush can wipe even Obersoldaten in 4 unless they are Vetted. |
But the glider is crap. -big rant-
Then complain to Relic about the Glider, not the Commandos, who were massively overperforming. I believe no unit should be able to kill a full infantry squad in 3 seconds with just their guns. Especially when said infantry had Predator cloaking and can literally appear out of thin air mere feet from you. |