My point was that you constantly complain about thompsons any time they’re brought up and yet now you want to give assgrens the most similar axis equivalent of the thompson for some reason. IMO it’d just be a straight nerf to the assgrens too because they’d lose lategame survivability for marginally better midrange DPS, while wasting 60% of their weapons if they do decide to sit midrange since mp40s aren’t that good at midrange and they should be closing anyway. Doesn’t make much sense to me and I honestly like the 6th man in the lategame.
And my point is that if Thompson is the way to go for CQB I see little reason for a different solution on Ass. Gren. Actually my suggestion for CQB units are abilities like "diversion". |
Then you would know that in practice pgrens are still very good on the move. Not ~90% DPS retention good but nothing besides the G43s are like that so that shouldn’t be your base of comparison.
Compared with DPS on the move of SMG troops like shock and you will see that Pgs DPS on the move drop more. And that is the point I am trying to make Pgs are not designed as smg are unit.
Finally the DPS on the move of PF with G43 is comparable with one Penal have.
Exactly. And that’s why airlanding officer wouldn’t be crazy oppressively strong or anything. I think they should lose the ability to pick brens up from racks though, because with them they might be too good in the lategame.
I suggest you test the unit because there are at 2 high rank player finding too strong.
Also, I’ve said it before but 35 mp is a pretty high reinforce cost for an assault unit that isn’t super standout great in any regard right out the gate.
Actually I agree on this one and imo CQB troops should be cheaper to reinforce than other troops they should get a reinforcement reduction with veterancy like Ro.e. |
Yes let’s give the unit with commando camo vehicle satchels and or 2 out of the 3 most OP and cheesy mines in the game. Nothing could possibly go wrong there.
You mean elite AT weapons, mines, camo first strike bonus like that support Paras get or powerful snares, camo, first strike like AT conscripts get or snares, camo, mines, vet penetration first strike bonus, extra sight, spawning with AT weapons like AT partisan get? |
Meanwhile giving thompsons to anything is wildly OP...
Since that seem to be trend, now days one could apply the same logic to Ass.Gren also instead of the weird 6 man upgrade.
|
Have you ever used pgrens sir?
Yes I have
Another thing to note about airlanding officer is that commando stens are useless beyond 10 range.
The majority of SMG where designed like that and for good reason. "Elite" Thompson where the exception because USF elite infantry already come with great weapons. |
Don't cancel your zis barrages mid barrage. That seems to cause one of the many bugs with the gun.
Maybe it would be better if one did not have the option to cancel it? |
|
Since the majority of users would probably agree that IRHT is more suited as doctrinal unit instead of stock one how about replacing with Opel supply truck. Now this truck instead of working like the ostheer one would have the "siphon" timed ability.
The siphon ability would allow it to "steal" resources from enemy sectors.
In additing how about adding a 2 rocket incendiary barrage for Fuersturm doctrine at separate cd, making or a g43 mortar with access to incendiary barrage and making the MP-40 VG a separate CP 0 unit. |
And not being limited to 1, deal :v
That is simply homogenization. I would rather have an earlier Hammer/anvil choice bren become closer to BAR available to 5 man squad and Vicker-k available only to 4 men squads. |
They don't need a buff, they have sprint to make up for most of their weaknesses.
I'd like to see the 6 men upgrade being an earlier option though, they can get blindsided by Thompson Assault Sections and Flamethrower Assault Engineers early on before 6 men. T2 might be too soon, but Lago's tech suggestion could work.
I do not like the 6 men upgrade...I would rather try 2 ST44 upgrade... |
You do realize stug e is doctrinal in non meta doctrine?
That is simply false. Mechanized Assault Doctrine doctrine was the second most picked Ostheer commander in the latest torment. Out of the 20 times the doctrine was picked only 1 Stug -E was built.
And scott is stock unit that's supposed to be USF equivalent of rocket arty?
Obviously yes, you'll see one more then the other, but as vipper loves to say - just because unit isn't used doesn't mean its bad, in fact, it can be hidden OP.
Nice to see that actually agree with me but let me correct you on what I am saying.
"just because unit isn't used doesn't mean necessarily its UP".
But that does not seem to apply in this case since top player had the opportunity to produce the unit and choose not to do.
Also, are you going to stick to that "quote" for long?
I sadly can't do the same, because I don't want to write a fucking 1000 page BOOK with yours.
If you want to discredit someone, you'd have to drag yourself out of skill and logic gutter first.
I will not even both to go into this and will simply suggest you ask the same question to yourself.
|
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
Heartless Jäger 
