|
Maybe just make the snare faster after like vet 2-3? Idk, the first idea that has come to my mind. |
|
The Truck has a crew inside, consisting out of 3 medics, right?
And no one really uses them, right?
What about the USA player just pays...I dunno, maybe around 150 MP and 5 fuel for the squad of these medics, maybe even with 4 men, that can place themselves in some sort of cover for AURA healing or be moving for healing by coming up close, and THEN, after a player has got a Luit/Captain, he can get the truck itself for like 100-150 MP and 10 Fuel?
Problem solved on both 1v1-2v2 and 3v3-4v4. |
FYI, The Wehrmacht faction ingame represents the early-to-mid war Eastern front German army: https://steamcdn-a.akamaihd.net/steam/apps/231430/extras/UKF_Blog_Infographic_FactionProfile_Revised.png?t=1574777616
I meant the Multiplayer version.
There could be no STGs, no Americans, no ISU-152 and stuff, if it was "early-to-mid war". |
Ostheer's got no light tank. That's part of its design, and means it needs to field infantry counters to light vehicles.
The best one it has against lights is Panzershreck PGrens, but these are 100 munitions. If you're on the back foot, that can be a problem.
If I recall correctly, Relic's previous solution to this was to make the Panzerschreck upgrade two parts: you'd buy one Panzershreck for half the cost, then you'd buy the next. This created an inevitable problem of one-Panzershreck PGren blobs, so they got bundled together.
But that ability to buy lesser AT for less munitions and fully upgrade later was a neat feature that could be worth bringing back.
- What if PGrens could get two Panzerbusche AT rifles (they're in the campaign) for 50 munitions? They're much less effective than shrecks, but they do the job on the cheap.
The PGrens could then upgrade those AT rifles to Panzerschrecks for another 50 munitions.
As my friend SneakEye, I think the idea is good but has to be carefully tested for the sake of effectiveness, yes.
But! A big BUT! What about the fact that Germans didn't use Panzerbuche at '44-'45? Or there is historical proof they did? Just this aesthetic part of the upgrade makes it a bit...weird.
And yes, if it's an AT RIFLE, how hard will be for them to hit infantry with them? Because if those are going to be as inaccurate as the Shreck that's not going to be any better, except for being more early. Just the thing is that PZGs have to be an effective Anti-Infantry unit until the Upgrade to become clearly Anti-Tank, yes, BUT, if it's earlier game, as why you've suggested this idea, the infantry still plays a HUGE role in that part of it, and they just have to be still effective against infantry at that specific match period. |
|
Нет.
Нет.
И нет.
И пошёл нахуй бля, нечего позорить Русь Матушку этими РОА, говоря, что они-Русские! |
I'd keep it at say 280-300 and make the 2nd one fire as long as it's garrisoned. Adjust performance and PopCap accordingly. Garrison bonuses are such an underrated element to balancing emplacements. Either they are trashy like now or fully autonomous and cancer like before. There has to be a middle ground and I think the extra resources of having to garrison is that middle ground.
I actually like this one the most, but what about wasting the ManPower into units that have to be inside of it? The fact that it can be built pretty close to the frontline isn't going to change anything, as it has to be in the back like any normal artillery not to be easily destroyed. The player would still have to waste a squad to sit inside of the emplacement for it to have full firing capability, so rather than wasting 350 the player would, considering we use same Royals, for example, from 280 to 490 MP and from 300 to 510 ManPower lost, and if the player just places a squad he already had to get inside, he would lose fighting/repairing/building/etc. capabilities. So still pretty bad... |
Wasn't single mortar pit categorically prohibited by relic?
Because it didn't work once or just because? |
Swap UC with royal engineer, put sapper in T1, UC in T2 and add fuel cost to it. With new timing, we can bring UC up to M20 lv, like an armor upgrade bring it back to pre neft, also allow troop to fight from inside. A smoke discharger upgrade will fill the gap of not having mobile smoke source for UKF.
The swapping idea of yours again? The discussion is about upgrades for the UC we have right now, maybe let's talk about it, not a complete rework? |
|
If you want AI Firepower-T-34-76.
If you want Anti-Blob Firepower-Katya (also against defensive enemies)
If you want Anti-Tank Firepower-SU-85.
Remember that 1 has to be in numbers and attack first, and other 2 to be behind, but one of the behinds also has to be at least of 2 if you see heavy tanks.
Guess yourself.
(I am not taking doctrines into account as it's understandable what each in docs do) |
Don't derail guys. This has nothing to do with the topic in the slightest. But he means the UKF emplacement abiliity (green shield icon, weapons disabled for damage reduction)
To the subject:
I don't get why the Brummbär should have decent penetration. It's worth its price in AI capability, so why should it also have the chance to deal decent damage against mediums while it already has (according to someone posting earlier) deflection damage? This does not make a lot of sense.
Against lights, sure, but a medium should not be threatened to be damaged by normal shots.
However, I'd argue for high penetration for the bunker busting barrage because the Brummbär here behaves more like the AVRE/Sturmtiger.
Off topic: thanks for a reminder.
On topic:
Maybe because it's just too slow and same 2 T-34-76s can easily run around it, penetrating it with an ease, also considering there are Penals with AT satchels or Cons with their AT Snares or ZiSes and...more.
If it's a Brum you really don't want to use just one force against it, because, chances are, it's supported with AT units and infantry or with everything the enemy has, so yeah. |
Russian Federation
Relic Entertainment
Oziligath 
T.R. Sidewinder 
