yeah. i had a 4v4 yesterday that featured 7 or 8 tigers, 4 of them at one time. wasn't a very good game for a lot of reasons, the rank 10 team mate against an arranged team being a huge part of it.
Conscripts on Vet 3 with triple molotov range bulletin on top of Hill 331 could theoretically throw a molo right to the Axis base acting as a mortar halftrack
lol have you tried this? if so you must post it. if this affects RGs it would be even better.
If you did #3, I would build a sniper, an extra CE, 2 SU85's, and six ML20's, and spam mines. With roughly 24 large shells landing per minute, no place would be safe. Wouldn't be a fun game, for anyone.
and you would get rolled because you have no field presence and nothing to defend your artillery with.
"Make 4v4 more like 1v1" kind of ignores the reasons people play 4v4 in the first place
i personally play team games so that i have other people on my team, not so that the battles are bigger. i really don't have a huge preference between 2v2/3v3/4v4, i just like to play with other people
I don't really see how it would be possible to redesign the teching in such a way without making captain a natural progression between LT and Major
i don't see how that's a problem, instead i see it as desirable because it gives USF more options and slows the timing of the late game more to OKH's level. of course doing that without tweaking everyone else would be a problem.
The point I'm saying is, were Soviets' late-game intended to be built around their call-ins, there would not be commanders for them without late-game call-ins. If it were such a simplistic design rule, the large amount of commanders contrary to that would definitely have not happened.
i know, i'm just saying i don't trust relic not to design soviets for callins and then make commanders that don't have them.