Okay. How about moving your truck? Seriously, I think 13 hits is ok
What...?
You're not serious? |
Yeah, this whole katyusha justification based on utilizing the supply trucks as intended needs to stop. Everyone who has brought this off as presented their argument as though they were viciously bias. Not that that's a surprise.
No one here is saying that having your base shelled to death, destroyed by AT guns, or even grenaded is unbalanced. No one is arguing that there shouldn't be certain risks for setting up based on proximity.
They're saying the katyusha is not only absurdly overpowered against infantry, but much more so in regards to OKW forward positions.
Sorry not sorry, none of those routes of base destruction is even close to the way a fresh baked katyusha removes trucks in 2 ridiculously short cooldowns. |
The shoe is on the other foot and jerry doesn't like it.
"just don't blob"
You came to this thread about five pages too late.
Your edgy quip was addressed quite some time ago... over, and over again. Bring new perspective to the table or try and engage the points that countered this long ago.
I'd prefer the latter. |
I think a price increase is justified but making the cooldown equivalent is absurd consider the difference in damage output.
This sums up everything in one sentence.
Your entire argument is just ridiculous at this point. Of course you're okay with a price increase! Who cares about some extra nickles when you can instantly wipe out bases, armies, artillery, and light armor. |
Yes call me a fanboi despite the fact that I play all factions pretty regularly.
Your argument makes about as much sense.
The stukas reload time means its balanced?
You are conveniently ignoring the post that has about 12,000 views which clearly indicates it is not balanced. So yea fanboism works both ways.
The stuka still maintains 100% accuracy and does far more damage in a much shorter time despite the fact that it has a longer fucking reload. Right now the only problem with the Kat is it can be spammed while the werfer cannot. Hence the goddamn cost increase.
You are high.
The stuka does not have 100% accuracy, it is not a carpet bomb of death, there are PLENTY of instances where not only directly targeted squads go unwiped, but untouched due to the random placement of each 280. Don't even attempt to argue there are similar examples regarding the katyusha.
It has been said to death in this thread, and the only reason it's being rehashed over and over is because half the people in this thread are not giving it a proper read through. |
Nope. It is called being agressive. For some reason people love playing defensively .
However I am talking about 1 v1 . Team games have always been a hugee clusterfuck.
... What?
This isn't a debate on the merits of aggressive versus defensive strategy. Your justification for sending in a lone puma to "hardcounter" the katyusha is the product of either a bias stance or inexperience.
No decent player is going to let a puma waltz across the field to take out a katyusha. That's not "being agressive," that's being careless stupid. |
Ostheer can just rush it with a 222 or piv. Okw can get a 6 min puma or a stuka.
What the Katyusha really does is prevent the old ostheer meta to stall for tigers and encourages teching.
No it doesn't.
And to be honest, everyone attempting to rehash the rationale that "you can just rush it with a puma or a ____" is being incredibly unrealistic or exploiting this situation in an effort to feed Ostheer/OKW players terrible advice.
I'm assuming the former. |
Stuka wipes squads very easily too.
Please, stop complaining about Katyusha. You OKW players didn't complain at all about your Stuka and now are crying because soviets have a similar unit that comes much later in the game.
If one of them should be nerfed, then both of them should. In my opinion both of them are OP as hell, but it angers me how biased people try to defend one unit while condemn the other.
That's just blatant ignorance. You're figuratively utilizing the "nuh-uh, you are" retort. Without sufficient evidence or even perspective, your posts just come across as desperation.
As many people have pointed out, including myself, the katyusha is brutally punishing to OKW specifically. In basic specifics -- The walking stuka is a counter to mass set up squads and blobbing. The katyusha rips apart the core of the OKW army essence. And though yes, while the vulnerability of forward bases is a huge issue, the actual problem is the point for point punishment for losing an OKW squad vs any other faction, but MOST especially in comparison to RU.
This silly argument of "don't nerf this without that" is baseless. |
Is not true that only blobs are punished by the Stuka.
Support weapons can't survive when Stukas are in the battlefield. FHQ neither.
Each cooldown means an ATgun less and anything that is close.
How is that punishing? Firstly, if you're repositioning like you should, it won't really affect you that much.
And then again, even if you lack the perseverance to relocate, you're only losing the squad. Unless you've completely neglected to repair the support equipment -- which again is player error. This is all also on the assumption the squad is completely wiped, which, lets be honest, does not happen nearly as much as the katyusha's current iteration.
|
That's not true at all.
And by the way, going soviet T4 is risky against OKW. Pumas can destroy SU85s and Katyushas very easily, and soviets doesn't have AT infantry to defend their katyushas like OKW have.
A Stuka has much more survivability, Katyushas instead can be destroyed even by a 222.
How is it untrue? All you said was "that's not true at all."
Justify. |