Profile of Gbpirate

That's a mighty fine K/D ratio, Beemer!

I really feel like Relic fucked up with the way factions and call ins work in this game.

I think, ideally, every faction should have a heavy, non-doctrinal tank available from T0, after all other techs have been researched/built, just like OKW. Next, there could be various call-in medium tanks available from various doctrines that are weaker than the standard tech vehicles, yet cost less fuel. Of course, the opposite could be true, where there could be one or several weaker medium tanks in tech, and stronger medium tanks as call-ins.

My vision would be, for example, the current Panzer IV Ausf. whateverthefuckitis would stay in T3, but have a few commanders with a call-in Panzer III Ausf. J that would be cheaper than teching up and getting the P4 and come out sooner, but would be disadvantaged towards other larger medium tanks and heavy tanks. For the soviet equivalent, that would be like having the T34/85 being doctrinal and the T34/76 as a call-in.

As for the WFA armies, they are a much more difficult challenge. USF teching needs to be re-worked, period. M10 should get penetration with vet to make it viable. OKW's reliance on infantry AT as their main AT seems silly. But that's a whole different subject.

I don't know how either of those systems would work in terms of being tied to tech cost, however, if the current call-in state were to be preserved, tanks should be tied to tech cost.

But seriousely Relic, just give me a PIII. That's all I want.

Here's a nice game a few Bears played last night on a custom map (Monlithic Bacon's?). It was a good, well played game on all parts, however, the only issue was the American player (Choccy, I believe) couldn't access his BARs because they were phsycially outside of the map.

On my part, I did a good job keeping combined arms to repel units; two vetted MGs, two vetted Paks, and an assortment of tanks.

Enjoy

I'll be there! Rawr!

Hey Turbo, I appreciate your thought out response.
About the MG: I knew I was going to put an MG in that house from the loading screen; I think of that Church the same way I think about the house in the middle of Faymonville Approach; it protects a VP and allows me to protect (or in the opposite case, threaten) my cutoff on the east side.
In hindsight, it is much more limited; there is heavy cover in the road and in a destroyed truck towards the west, near the sight-blocking hedge. I also wanted my opponent to tech to nades to slow down a fast LT tech (thus giving me more time to build a Pak gun or an extra infantry squad).

I was very timid that game, although I'm not sure why. I never saw an M20 on the field, yet, the P4 came to late for that to have any effect (although the M6 mine did, eventually). I remember a few times realizing that, at the mid, I only had a Pak gun and a mortar defending it and I felt very awkward not knowing where the enemy would come from, and my rather clustered position reflects that.

I agree, wholeheartedly, with everything you have said. On certain maps, I find, I don't really know what to do. On Kholodny, do I push and hold the north, or the south? It's like that on a few maps.

NB: It is my understanding that G43s are good for improving mid-close range firepower. They are good for a flanking squad because of their high moving accuracy (.8 I believe) and their RoF. It would make sense for them to be good at long range, like the LMG42, considering the scope on the model, however, they were overhauled many months ago. That overhaul included making G43s and LMG42s mutually exclusive which is rather unfortunate, considering the poor performance of the Ostheer in the current meta.