Bazookas were encouraged to be used at close range as defensive weapons during armour rushes, so I'd dramatically increase the close range penetration and increase damage to 100. |
And USF doesn't have snipers or mortars to dispatch units from behind cover safely from the get go.
Different armies, different units, different utility kits.
Exactly, and Ost gets MG 42 on Grens for 60 Munitions while USF gets M1919 on anybody for 70. There's no problem here, not everyone can be the same. |
By the time a centaur hits the field, you should have some kind of AT ready. It's not much different than like a ostwind or anything.
Good thing the Centaur easily counters those pesky AT Guns that were foolish enough to think they could kill it. Unlike the Ostwind, which is right fucked if it parks infront of a ZiS. |
If you're loading two of them on a single squad and its not like rifles cost as much as grens either.
Ostheer doesn't have this option, they don't even have sandbags! |
Thread: Centaur17 Sep 2015, 08:52 AM
The Ostwind should be cheaper, and therefore able to to be inferior. A suggestion you seem to ignore. Rebalancing doesn't just mean nerfing/buffing. That's lazy rebalance and one of the first things you learn in game design both classic and computer.
That's just nonsense, balance is about altering cost and performance so that every faction may be on equal footing. There's no other way to do it, I'm not sure what you're suggesting by saying balance is lazy.
Last time I checked the Faust also has a longer range.
I don't know when you checked, but you were wrong then and you are wrong now. The AT Grenade and Panzerfaust have always had the same range.
4) Ostwinds are ridiculously good at de-crewing AT guns in my experience.
Only if they flank, but the Centaur has no need for flanking. |
I think we should keep armies' diversity so no, I won't agree with FRP to everyone. Diversity is good and one of the things that make this game different. So my vote will be no.
There's a difference between diversity and large advantages though. The original factions lack the long-term staying power of all the new factions. |
I'm eh on these ideas, I don't think I'd use either one, the negative impacts outweigh the benefits and I'd be better off using Panzergrenadiers. It'd also be really unfair for such things to only apply to Grenadiers.
As for LMG's, it'd be neat if they could make it so that behavior changed based on the situation. So an LMG 42 Grenadier would have 2 fire modes, one active at a time depending on the situation:
Prone: Active when still and distant from the enemy and is effective at mid to max range. There is a very short set-up time (1-2 seconds) and a decent arc. If the soldier has to preposition, he can simply turn in place although this takes a couple seconds as well.
Standing: Active when moving or in close proximity to the enemy. Sturmfeuer is inaccurate and wasteful, so many shots are fired but few hit. On the plus side there is no set-up, the soldier can track or switch targets more easily.
Although I used LMG Grenadiers as an example, this would also apply to the Bren Gun, DP-28, MG 34 M1919, Vickers K. The BAR is not included because it is more closely related to the FG 42 and StG. |
OKW are the only faction with out a Halftrack. Both the USF and UKF have halftrack in commanders, and the usf also have ambos
Technically OKW has the most Half-Tracks, just none they can reinforce from |
How come there is always such fear about bazooka blobs actually becoming a thing. It's never been close to happening.
Because anything that's effective and accessible in large numbers will be spammed. |
What's going to happen with the infantry company LMG now that defensive stance is removed? It's pretty junky alone and costs 70mu. Previously when you pop def stance you get this massive suppression boost. With defensive stance gone, this lmg is going to perform worse than lower priced axis versions and still cost more, plus doctrinal.
MG 42: "Might need nerfed."
M1919: "It's pretty crap."
Actual: *nearly identical*
|