Not really interested at this pile of shit again.
However,
Someone said rolling 521.5 kg around is easy (assume in grassland / snow / muddy place) and he got a Physics Master degree? God, how much did you pay for that piece of paper?
LOL
Well it has big ass wheels on it, as long as they dont try going up steep hills it should be fine. Its just like why you can roll your broke down car with relative ease off to a parking lot from the middle of a road. It weighs a lot, but Wheels make life easy |
Agreed.Let usf auto unlock BAR and bazooka(give BAR to one officer tier and Bazooka to other,that way will make choice more strategic).Free lieutenant gotta go.
Because wehr free unlock means nothing as it doesn't have resources to use them,nor numbers to make an advantageous situation out of it.Just loses huge MP.
Well you see, giving bazookas to the captain tier would be a terrible idea. The two people who get bazookas out of need only do so because there is no other alternative in liutenant teir for AT. Now you want to give it for "free" to the captain tier except they have to pay 80 Fuel to get it?  |
|
I agree with Aero, +1 |
i could care less for his balance opinions, but the best thing hes ever said was that the ostheer could tank 2 sniper shots due to the hp buff EleGiggle
I wish I would have seen that. A new signature I would have had  |
Why do you think Priests are the most problematic things as Iv highlighted before? Because they are a safe investment, you won't lose them and you don't have to pay the population cap for them.
So what you are saying, is that the US player is going through the game, in an even one loosing stuff, and slowly converting his army to Priests 15 minutes into the game? that would still take him a while to over cap himself, and with all that army supply in indirect there is a distinct armor advantage you should have.
There is also the point and click counter of Cas, a single sweep kills them.
I sincerely believe you must be getting wrecked just as much as you believe what you are saying  |
You and your arranged teams must get wrecked all the time to see pop cap abuse as much as you complain about it. In close games pop cap is rather hard to exceed seeing as both sides are loosing things |
The worst Ostheer doctrines are shit because they force you to tech, which is extremely expensive for Ostheer. The reason why Ostheer teching isn't rewarding is because your stuck paying insane prices for things, not because the units themselves are shit.
And by OKW scaling I mean in team games, in 1's it would be broken for OKW to have caches because OKW isn't supposed to be able to supplement it's income, but in higher game modes were your enemies can spam caches and get almost twice your income you need caches in order to not get overwhelmed, which means you need to get your Ostheer player to play logistics officer.
EDIT: The same could be said of USF's doctrine choices, vis a vis OKW's doctrine choices
lol
OH NO!! forced to tech? what ever will you do?? I never tech up to tanks ever in my games either 
So what you are saying in the logistics part is that OKW play as intended until Ostheer break the designed draw back of OKW
I dont understand how you dont get what a pro and con list is |
If you pick shitty Axis commanders in a competitive game regardless of game mode you are going to get brutally owned. The commander selection for Axis and Allies is more balanced than it has ever been in the past, mostly due to the fact Soviets have 2 choices instead of one for elite infantry.
Axis "synergies" in the sense you are required to have an Ostheer team mate and or team mates because OKW cannot last on the field without indirect fire support as well as caches, because you bet your ass the Allies players (if they are not retarded) will be making caches.
There are plenty of unrewarding Axis trade offs, Ost teching being unrewarding, lack of OKW scaling in team games unless Ost player enjoys logistics work, OKW having significant weakness to buildings unless a stuka is rushed, ect.
To wit; Axis is just as much forced into a set "meta" amount of strategies and doctrines as Allies are, to pretend this is not the case is ignoring Ost's teching problems and OKW's gaping holes in it's unit list.
Please, I'll take any of the shitty axis commanders over the shitty Allies one. There isnt even a bad commander for OKW, the worst one is Elite armored and well its sure great you have solid OKW units that themselves are not bad.
Ost teching is pretty rewarding. You get these great stock units with no terrible choices in the structures unlike Allies. In addition hey, you get these glorious nukes called Rifle Grenades. Something that to get an equivalent of as allies you have to spend extra fuel.
Lack of OKW scaling? I thought you played this game. You do realize Vet 5 is un obtainable by any of the other factions? They dont scale poorly, not any poorer than other factions anyhow.
The only point you listed that is true is the OKW building weakness |
Do you have a credible source to back up your statement? Dont tell me the specifics if you are in alpha and under NDA, just tell me that if the call in meta is going to get fixed soon.
Because i remember very well PQ stating like 6 months ago is that they do not want to attach call ins to tech because they understand how heavily soviets depend on their call ins.
Anyways, attaching call ins to tech is not the way to go. All it would mean is that you now get a T3 building before your call in. Late game would still be dominated by call in tanks for sov/ost and esp for soviets because their non doc vehicles are pretty bad in the long run.
They dont have to attach call ins to tech (which they probably wont). there are other smaller changes they can do to decrease the call in meta effectiveness such as further delay, stat changes, and cost modifications (for stock and call in units, these are not exclusive changes) |
While informative on the nature of abilities and things Axis can abuse in 4's, it makes extremely little points about what tools Allies have in their arsenal in order to even the odds.
Things like USF pop cap abuse, call in meta fuckery, and whatnot all can swing the tide in the favor of Allies late game in order to make up for the perceived weakness in stock units. If you assume Axis players make smart choices in doctrine, and Allies make dumb choices in doctrine then of course Axis players will win, but if both sides pick the correct doctrines then the odds will be much much more even.
Picking horrible doctrines in 3's and 4's as Axis will mess you up very hard if your facing opponents using meta doctrines like IS2's, 85's or ISU with mark target, P-47's, Priests, ect.
If you want to write an actually informative post on 3's and 4's you need to come at it from a neutral perspective rather than an assumption of weakness on the Allies part and assumption of strength on the Axis part.
His post addressed how Allies are cornholed into taking the few competitive commanders which do not synergies as well as Axis due to unrewarding trade offs Allies have to take which are non existent in Axis. He did look at the neutral ground you just dont want to see it. He started by comparing base units from each side and their cause/effects. He could if you want, elaborate on why Allies suffer more because in the commander section he only addressed Axis ones |
~TAB~ I'll Get You Some Day
Crypticz
Vermillion_Hawk
I'll Get You Some Day
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
