Long story short: no.
lol. yeah...short story even shorter : yes. For all the reasons already mentioned. |
Most of you who play Allies probably won't need to hear this, but based on my recent team game match-ups, a lot do:
When playing Allies, realize this- CAMPING RARELY/ NEVER WORKS !
Please don't just mass a huge blob of assorted units and camp them somewhere, thinking that you'll be safe and there's no way that the Axis will ever get that point from you. You're wrong. Every second that passes with the Axis holding at least one fuel point, is a step closer to the armored column that WILL run you over and take that point, destroying all your units in the process. So here's my tip :
When playing Allies- MOVE ! Be fluid, flank, use buildings, obstacles, etc....to get into position. Don't get complacent, and DON'T stay in one spot. The advantage Allies have is this fluidity. You need to constantly be de-capping, capturing, etc...
The Axis can afford to stall until late game. Allies can't. If allowed to get to late game with even a bit of the map, Axis will win. (in large team games).
So : be aggressive ! Again, maybe some of you know this, but clearly, some don't. There is nothing in the Allied make-up or philosophy that encourages camping. |
Honestly, if I'm not having a fun game, I'm not sure why I should be forced to watch my units get destroyed over and over again because some guy who doesn't know the writing on the wall doesn't want to surrender.
I play games for fun, if they're not fun then I'll leave, simple. Life is too short.
I hate leaver penalties in all games because they force you to play in games which simply aren't fun or games where you are just out matched. It's stupid, childish and goes against the whole idea of games being a past time rather than some kind of second job which some people seem to think they are...
If such a thing were to be implemented, the whole player base would be hurt even more. There would be more abusive players, who know they can't leave so take out their anger on their team, there would be more team killing, particularly of bases, because people realise they can't win. It'd be a microcosm of Dota2 or Hon's or LoL's communities, and those communities have to be some of the most revolting I've ever seen.
+ 100000000
I also hate getting locked into a team game where my allies keep refusing to surrender, and where you know you're going to lose within the first 10 mins. You know what, it's a team game. That means that as fun as they can be, there's also a chance you'll get stuck with people who: suck, are abusive, or will drop if they dont like something about that game. It goes both ways though; you can't honestly tell me that you LIKE being forced to play through a sh itty game. |
I just want to share a story with you guys about blobs. Players that blob typically become overconfident in their blob. You can exploit that. Recently, playing as Soviets, I got fed up with this OKW blob. I set up an engie demo charge, and lured his blob onto it. The blob was no longer a problem. True story . |
Thread: Rangers27 Nov 2014, 01:46 AM
yeah...I'm not griping too bad, since the USF finally seem to have gotten some love, but it still would be awesome to see Rangers again. Yes, I get that a lot of Axis elites are call-in, but USF's ONLY elite is call-in. Definitely not complaining about Sov elites...those shocks are straight-up murderers BTW, have shocks been nerfed in some way ? They're still awesome, but don't seem to be the "hot knife through butter" they used to be ... |
Thread: Rangers26 Nov 2014, 23:43 PM
<rolling my eyes> ugh. fine. I guess it's ok that only Axis gets a million types of elite troops. |
Thread: Rangers26 Nov 2014, 22:57 PM
So...if I buy AA, can I use Rangers in multiplayer team games ? |
All right, fine...I'll be the first to say it : "oh look, this thread again"
Yes, one would hope that after AA, or as a result of AA, things might change a bit in multiplayer. At least, USF gaining a commander that has Rangers...I'm talking old school CoH1 Rangers that come with bazookas, and become straight-up murderers once they vet. |
Hm...using Sov units. Well,
Guards aren't that great
Shocks are great, provided you smoke to get in close
Snipers...meh. Unless you're good with your micro/ babysitting
Scout car...fairly easily countered at this point
Cons...decent I guess. Good for using molotovs and AT grenades
Maxim...pretty good
Mortar ..pretty good
Deploy those two together, and advance slowly
ZiS...I really like it. Yes, it's not very agile, but decent against armor, and the barrage is pretty good for breaking up fortified positions, or even to hit blobs
T-34...you need about 3 to really be a threat. Even then, they're kind of fragile.
Katyusha ...not bad, but comes fairly late I guess, and will explode if even looked at by any Axis unit
T-70..not that great, unless you want to harrass some isolated points, or provide some back up to lone squads capping somewhere away from battle
IS2/ISU152...it is what it is. Actually pretty vulnerable if unsupported.
KV1...not really worth it, but soaks up damage
KV8...good against infantry, but at that point , schreks will take it out fairly handily. Use with support.
I guess none of this is new; support your units, and don't get over-ambitious. The current meta supports choosing a commander that has shocks, and some kind of heavy tank. Can't go wrong. |
US, I hate to walk back to base to pick up guns or manual heal from ambulance everytime.
That's true...it would be so awesome if there were some kind of mechanic to allwo USF to pick up infantry weapons from vehicles; simulating that they were ferried to the front lines from HQ. Let's say, if you're close to a vehicle, you can arm from there or something. |