Profile of drChengele

Actually even without the mobile mortar, just separating the mortar and the Bofors into mutually exclusive unlocks is an awesome idea.

Which brings me to the following point: why would the AEC be behind an unlock anyway? I would say that the role and the effectiveness of the AEC do not require it being an exclusive in order to be balanced. In the beta its extra tech unlock may have been justified but the game has moved on a lot since then. Increase AEC cost by 50/10 if you must for timing purposes but make it always unlocked. It would have literally zero effect on gameplay, except a player could now have both the Bofors and the AEC at the same time, which I just don't see as some game breaking synergy. Yes a player could lock down a part of the map with a Bofors while harassing the other part with an AEC but the combined fuel cost of both means by the time this would be possible Axis should already have a lot of viable options to chase the AEC away

Bofors or Mortar pit should be the 2 mutually exclusive upgrades. This will solve a lot of problems, as already outlined above - without the synergy of both, they will be more manageable. You want the awesomeness that is Bofors, you pay by giving up indirect fire, and vice versa.

But I wouldn't mind any of the solutions outlined in this thread.

Proving that running over troops actually has a right to exist.

Why do you feel the need to prove that a 30 ton vehicle moving at 50 km/h can run over a man?

Actually my great grandpa was in WW2 and he said it was mostly fought between dozens of allied light tank destroyers trying to run over hordes of rocket wielding volksgrenadiers.

That was the main problem with the Normandy landings - they had to go uphill and Germans were in the bunkers which made running them over much more difficult.

Why should players who sacrifice alot of MP to contribute to the "war effort" be punished because their lazy teammate built a cache first? I'd rather reduce the amount of safe points to a minimum.
Most maps could need a reduction by 2-4 points. In fact, you can see that most of the 3v3+ maps have completely overthrown and ignored the the competetive map design of 1v1 and 2v2 maps. Cut offs are almost non-existant, fuel points are either 100% safe (Lienne) or are both strongly contested (Steppes).

Your proposel is just unfair and would cause toxic behaviour. It doesn't sounds like it's been thought through

Indeed, why should a player playing a team game mode be punished if his teammate refuses to play with teamwork and does things without regards for the team?

Players who play with decent build orders and good micro can be punished by a lazy teammate who YOLOs their infantry into MG arcs and has to spend 2/3 of the game retreating. Or a player who stalls for Kingtigers without building AT and getting rekt by a medium rush. There are many ways having a bad teammate will bite you in the ass.

200 manpower for 100 fuel over the course of the game is a good trade that people can make in 1v1s as well. In large team games the same sacrifice yields four times more resources across the entire team, and all for a "substantial" investment. Either the cache should cost 50 manpower in 1v1s, and 200 in 4v4s, or 200 in 1v1, and 800 in 4v4s. Which is it?

I've heard this exact argument before. For some reason people treat potential teammates as wild beasts that you can communicate with exclusively through grunts or something. I find that even random teammates can be reasoned with.

I could use the same logic to argue against demo charges - if I play random I can get a team killer that will demo charge my retreat point. Why should I be punished because this guy is an asshole that refuses to play as part of a team? Remove demo charges, immunize me from idiot teammates.

There are enough points for everyone to put down a cache or two. Players who play with decent build orders and good micro can be punished by a lazy teammate who YOLOs their infantry into MG arcs and has to spend half the game retreating. Or stalls for kingtigers without building AT and getting rekt. There are many ways having a bad teammate will bite you in the ass.

What is worse, a teammate stealing your cache slot once every 10 games, or 4v4s being a tech tree spamfest and clusterfuck?

Sorry if you feel this wasn't thought through.

Perhaps you are just used to the way it is, and think team games are balanced as they are. You seem like you like to benefit from caches and prefer the team game fuel flow, medium armour spam and 18 minute KT. Please accept that some of us do not.

If your teammates are behaving toxic, if you cannot even coordinate such a small thing a building of a few caches between your teammates, you deserve to lose.

If you cannot coordinate such a simple task, how can you hope to take down a Jagdtiger on steppes 30 minutes in?

edit: format fixes

I remember talking about this like a year ago when blitz was a larger issue (than everything else) but they ran into a snag. Something like they couldn't assign different max speeds for reverse or couldn't have multiple acceleration stats.

It's like saying they can't limit a Tiger to one in the field because the engine doesn't support it. It may very well be true but personally if it was my engine I would be ashamed to admit that, and I am a one man guy. If only Relic had access to a crack team of programmers whose job it is to be able to code such things in.

Is that possible?

I have a feeling we'd see "step 2" already implemented in mods if it was possible to access the "am I reversing" variable. Either it is not possible or Relic feels it would cause some pathing issues.