Blitzkrieg Mod Forum

Since the Thompson buff I was kinda wondering if they were worth it for the combat engineers. I dont have corsix and I can't download it for some reason so I was wondering if someone could post the stats of the two weapons in the comments.

I would also love to see two Brownings instead of one for Ranger. But I am also an US guy soooo.. (totally not biased). This is not very balanced at all. Ranger is the long range infantry we have and they are good at it. Browning is almost comparable to mg42. Mg42 is Good 2 almost mg42 makes it ver...

Question, I haven’t done any test yet but I will do some in near future. My question is, Is panther going to have any chance vs Pershing? If not what should I use? StugIV? Panzer IV?, PIII or 37mm AT from HQ? Or Panthers are meant to do PIV and StugIV job fighting Sherman’s? Just treat it like US d...

Was just thinking about giving the mk3/4 churchills a -25% recieved dmg modifier. And setting their hp to like 700-600. Reasons be, need less time to repair, and it would help with their late game utility making them die less to Nashorn and other big guns, I'm thinking more by combining it with TC v...

Why some of you guys are obsessed with the idea of destry a panter with a 76mm sherman hitting in it's front armor? if you know you can destry it hitting on the sides and rear armor? Because the 76 is the biggest AT gun 2 US doctrine have I dont count the m36 since it is optional and I have found i...

He is also a recon unit that gives passive boots to all your infantry, He is a super tough recon unit that is hard to kill. Yes he is definitely worth it. He is an officer that usually doesn't die to a random airstrike since he can camo. And he has enough HP and Heroic unit trait that sniper have a ...

the commando 55 .cal doesn't uncloack when shooting. which alone makes it pretty good compared to tommy 55.cal

If Def doc gets mortar bunker it should get the price reduction and manable bunker treatment like the other bunkers. But reliance on mortars seems like a pretty weak unlock for cp. So many abilities kill these mortars without any problems and that are undodgeable. Maybe we could swap it out for 88mm...

I dont think a replay is necessary. This has been complained about quite often about the pz4 and stug spam. I think the current way we're heading it's reducing the effective armor of these two units. The fuel transfer cost has been put behinde a big cp unlock so I dont think that is too big a proble...

Defence doctrine feels kinda weak. Dont know if this is the thing it needs.
I cant remember how bunkers work now. Can they be captured by allied units like current bunker? or will
It always be in axis control?

Doesnt really sound like a fun thing to come against in def doc if it gets to be more tanky. And what woulld you fill in the empty slot left in SE? Do you intend for both docs to keep mortar bunker? There is a reason most emplacements with heavy range keep getting nerfed. (107 mortar emplacement US ...

Just FYI the regular CW mine (Hawkins) is also a AT mine. just to let you know.

2 - against heavy German infantry

I usually just off map heavy infantry. The 50cal strafing run would probably make little work of any infantry.

My first 3v3 with airborne with serious opponents.

Was testing stuff out in this match but I think it went quite well.

Wold love what your thoughts are on handheld AT and stickies and Airstrieks this game.

EDIT: over 1 and a half hour long. Extreme lack of anti air from axis side.

They are pretty expensive and dont scale very well late game due to their cost inefficiency. And they should get outgunned pretty handily if you have Riflemen + Engineers/Jeep as support or just have a HMG. Any unit will get fucked up if they attack someone at a corner. If the pios go against riflem...

I think you can rush Tiger ace a little bit too early for only 5 cp's. And since there is no fuel cost and the requirements are the same, compared with regular tiger (Late). Then it can be rushed before there are any feasible counter to it. This is of course for 3v3 where you can have 2 players to p...

Just reduce sniper HP. They shouldn't be able to tank so much fire anyway.

Stug and m10 have same amount of DMG and health. But one costs 30-80 more manpower has a MG and can shoot HE and bounce alot of shots. I think the stug shouldn't one shot m10 when the stug isn't even shooting from ambush. But there is some weird hardcoded shit that wont let revealed stugs/m10 lose t...

Just ignore this post. Was just angry.

A stug drives into a m10 ambush. The m10 dies. The end.

Why does m10 and shermans die to one hit from stugs and shermans. Isn't that kinda op? I could understand if they were concealed. But it's jsut standing in the middle of the open and kills everything in one shot.

If cromwell did same splash as German tanks while costing less and not having to spend as many munitions while beeing twice as fast wouldn't be very fair. German HE tanks are super slow and no defence excepting the F1 of course. But I think the cromwell is fine as it is atm, better anti tank would p...

If infantry doctrine got volksturm it would completely destroy all balance. Rushing two squads in spending 70 munitions to kill a tiger is kinda good wouldn't you say? Volksturm get the best handheld anti tank there is. And it costs the same amount of cp as cheap rilfe squads. I agree though that vo...

Just played a match where pz4 f2 deflected 4 76mm shells in a row. Please fix. Armor is way too good on this tank, it shouldn't even be bouncing 75mm shells. EDIT: And Hellcats bouncing from camo. I really think 76mm should pen a f2 from camo. I mean. It's the best anti tank gun Airborne doctrine ha...

You could use m10's instead of m4 they should die just as easily as shermans vs stugs. They are pretty identical.

I was going to say Nashorn is better becaue it's more expensive, but I guess that isn't the case. But armor doctrine can get Allied war machine and veteran combat engineers and cheap shermans for 4 cp's. Then the 4 shermans you lose vs 2 stugs can get returned right away. I dont think armor doctrine...