|
The game was alot more fun pre-WFA, atleast for me. |
Thanks for agreeing. Yes, T34 used to have good AI efficacy.
Thanks for apologizing, ypu where one of the guys that caused this.
But guys likenypu whining about AT and Ram changed that to its current state as basically a cheap PIV mirror with obviously less AT effect, equal AI (unless PIV upgraded at justified cost), an obsolete Ram, and all that now justified by anlower price.
T34 was alright beforel but Sov whiners insisted on more AT, which at cost, obviously resulted in equal AI, and lessAT than PIV, with the Ram as a free element.
Did you really expect a T34 that is better AI, functional Ram, and equal or better AT than PIV, for less cost?
Cmon, thats just insane and unreasonable. You didnt actually expect that... or?
Be careful what you whine for, cos you just might get it.
The t-34 doesn't have equal AI than the PIV, PIV anti infantry is heaps better, even without the pintle mounted machine gun.
And you seem to be misunderstanding the whole situation. It went like this T-34 85 fuel good AI, horrible anti tank, ram to compensate --> t-34 superior anti infantry performance to PIV, worse anti tank (pre wfa and post elbe day) --> t-34 nerfed anti infantry but reload was decreased PIV is now slightly better in every single way --> t-34 reload increased, PIV is now heaps better than the t-34 in every way.
And the PIV has way better scaling than the t-34 due to much, much greater vet bonuses.
Sherman with AP rounds is already more effective againts infantry than the t-34/76, HE rounds and 0.50 cal are just icing on the cake.
Sherman for some reason can keep its superior anti infantry performance and also have better anti tank capability, and come with a tank destroyer in the same tier, yet the t-34/76 cannot?
|
All of which supports, as I said, the consequence of whining about the wrong things.
T34s used to carry value as a cost efficient disabler via Ram, but Sov whiners wanted a PIV equivalent, at less cost, for whatever reason. Result being a Ram nerf, an AI equaliztion (wheress before T34 was superior), and a small increase in AT as proportional to cost, which ofc ended up as less than PIV, due to cost.
GJ in pissing on your own head on this one, and making call-in armor dependancy even more prevalent on Sov.
Instead or a reliable and effective Ram, which was free and cost efficient as an asymmetric equalizer and advantage, instead you have T34 which ofc logically and at cost is inferior to the PIV anyways with roughly the same AI (whereas before it was greater), minus PIVs native arsymmetric MG upgrade for Muni, and with a slightly improved AT.
T34 was better off before, but Sov whiners insisted on a change that actually ended up compromising two of the units core and cost effective advantages, in favor of better AT stats which where obviously going to be inferior to PIV anyways, due to cost discrepancy.
You did this to yourself, and is typical of "only Sov" player perspectives, who seem to completely discount and ignore the original design featured in asymmetric design which gave Sov inherent advantages.
T34 Ram amd AI was great back in the day, with appreciable AT, for cost.
Thanks to the whine, instead there is now an obsolete Ram, equal AI (until Axis MG upgrades), for a small increase at AT stats and survival, that is measured against cost, and hence obvipusly inferior to PIV anyways.
Your whine did that. Gj on changing T34 into the cheap PIV mirror you wanted, but losing the AI advantage which was so useful vs smaller Axis units, AS WELL as the Ram reliability, whivh came for free as an asymmetric compromise and free micro/situational advantage.
I'm sorry , but the t-34/76 as a PIV mirror was completely fine when it had the same kill AOE as sherman HE shells (pre-WFA) and it was also fine when it had a 5.5 reload time. However, now with it's 6.5 reload time, it is rather underperforming.
Even shermans with AP shells is more effective than the t-34/76 againts infantry. Not to mention that sherman also has the 0.50 cal and crazy good HE shells. |
|
This really does need to be hotfixed soon. USF simply can't do anything againts this on alot of maps. |
|
I dont understand why they were nerfed so hard when LMGs were nerfed only by like 10%.
Seriously, nobody even asked them to be nerfed, very few people actually bought them in competitive 1v1. |
|
gg wp coh 2 |
Undoubtedly the T34 was the catalyst that started the development of the Panther (& tigers). However, Burts post implied that the Panther was a copy of the T34 with tweaks. My post was a reply stating that from an engineering point of view, this isn't the case.
I never said that the panther was a copy of the t-34. All i said was that the panther was based or maybe the better word here would be inspired by the t-34 |
|
Esports really does not care about balance. All that esports care is the game being fun to watch. And bugs do not make the game fun to watch. Of course good balance means long, good games and bad balance means games tend to end very quickly. So question is, can relic iron out the bugs so the game is fun to watch? |
|
Keep trying MVGame |
Seriously lol?
They are the most expensive infantry in the game (440mp) and also cost an eye and an arm to reinforce, also they are very squishy due to 4 man squad.
They only spawn 1 time fron the building, then they are like just regular german infantry.
Also if german dude has more than 3 falls... it will be manpower starved for a long time due to reinforce costs.
They aren't the most expensive infantry in the game. Their real cost is around ~384mp and their real performance is scaled to that. The extra 56 MP cost is due to their ability to deploy from anywhere.
This is the same for paratroopers, who cost 380 MP to deploy, but their real cost is around ~336 mp.
If they were worth 440 mp, their reinforce cost would be 55. |
0
Cheese
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
