210mm Nebelwerfers

Do you have a balancing problem or do you want to make a suggestion for the game? You are at the right place.
User avatar
sgtToni95
Posts: 421
Joined: 04 May 2016, 09:50
Location: Italy

210mm Nebelwerfers

Postby sgtToni95 » 13 Apr 2017, 20:01

Hi all,
[premises]
1) i recently got frustrated after playing many games where SE player had vet 3 210 Nebels (one once scored more than 100 inf kills, tens of tanks, even heavy ones, vehicles and emplacements).

2) i really hate arty in general from both sides, cause i see indirect fire can destroying so easily and quickly well manouvered and planned actions even before they start, often leading to "arty partys" games and i recently started to rage quit them for being way more boring than uni lessons and studying, which I play bk to have a break from.
[\premises]


I wanna first give a quick description of this unit and of how it performs in game, so to see if the idea of it i have is mistaken, so feel free to disagree and bring arguments against what i say.

Availability: SE doctrine, maximum 2
Cost: 450 MP
Salvo cost: 80 Ammo

Downsides:
-counterable by arty and other indirect fire, outranged by howizers, destroyable or, when decrewed, might be stolen by the enemy
-slow movement speed and has delay before actually starting to move
-not the best accuracy, with very bad luck might rarelly hit nothing
-shooting "whistles" and rockets teacers will warn the enemy about the incoming fire

Upsides:
-smoke around it might hide it while shooting, and if wise-used can be moved after each salvo to prevent counter arty
-after being decrewed can still be recrewed without significant MP losses
-can stop enemy's pushes with both tanks and infantry, reliably damaging/destroying even the heaviest tanks in 2-3 hits
-2 of theese might stop reliably even flanking/double waves attacks with literally a click or two
-usually 1 accurate salvo is enough to destroy the emplacement or defending unit it's aimed at, making it a great unit to clear the way for allied attacks
-even if this warns the enemy when shooting, rockets are pretty quick in hitting the target, and, expecially heavy tanks, will find it hard to escape the targeted area

Now, considered all theese aspects, the last point i'd like to bring up is a comparison with Terror doctrine rocket launcher halftrack: it can move faster, and has incendiary salvo, which justify its high fuel building cost, but i think the destructive power is pretty similar, if not inferior due to lower accuracy (not rereally sure about this), while the bombing price is way higher.

So, since theese bombings have such a similar great destructive power, why is there so much difference in ammo price?
If my points will be agreed, what do you guys think about 210 mm Nebel salvo cost be raised, maybe equalizing it to the wurframmen's non-incendiary one or maybe to 100-105?
I know this doctrine is mainly focused on artying and ammo is a vital resource for it, but, in my opinion, this weapon destroying potential can, and it does, destroy enemy units causing way worse losses.

Sorry for long post, i just didn't want to make a "complaining-crying" one, but to have a constructive discussion and i won't mind if it will lead to things remaining the same.
And please don't start provoking or insulting each other ;)

User avatar
Redgaarden
Posts: 231
Joined: 16 Jan 2015, 03:58

Re: 210mm Nebelwerfers

Postby Redgaarden » 13 Apr 2017, 23:38

It has quite insane dmg and aoe but it's kinda like glider that it cost 450mp and it will die instantly afterwads since it's so powerfull everyone focus it.
But there are situations where they can just sit and shoot and the enemy can't do anything against it. It's called the onesided artillery game.

And I love your way of fixing it. It is still cost efficent and not a no brainer anymore where you click at the first unit you see. Correct me if I'm wrong but that thing feels like it does 700 dmg per hit in a wide area.

The thing has very apparant strengh and weaknesses. Muni effciency could be disccused to find the most reasonable price.
Rifles are not for fighting. They are for building!

User avatar
Panzer-Lehr-Division
Posts: 380
Joined: 12 Dec 2014, 14:03

Re: 210mm Nebelwerfers

Postby Panzer-Lehr-Division » 14 Apr 2017, 11:52

You mean mine? Mine once reached it, back the no one Used it i started use it now more does since they saw it's Not bad. I think it's fine alot downside's and upside's.

Panzer-Lehr-Division wrote:You mean mine? Mine once reached it, back the no one Used it i started use it now more does since they saw it's Not bad. I think it's fine alot downside's and upside's.

Edit: raising the Cost of this Unit make's it pretty much useless and the no one will use it. So I say no
SunZiom: but true is you`re only one man which i know who really know how play PE

User avatar
Panzerblitz1
Team Member
Posts: 1251
Joined: 24 Nov 2014, 00:12
Location: Paris, right under the Eiffel tower.

Re: 210mm Nebelwerfers

Postby Panzerblitz1 » 14 Apr 2017, 12:38

Panzer edit your first post if you want to add some modifications to it, don't double post.
Image

User avatar
Redgaarden
Posts: 231
Joined: 16 Jan 2015, 03:58

Re: 210mm Nebelwerfers

Postby Redgaarden » 14 Apr 2017, 16:16

Edit: raising the Cost of this Unit make's it pretty much useless and the no one will use it. So I say no


It's already expensive mp wise. So are you reffering the muni price? If so I would say that even if it costed 95-115 muni I would still use it every time I could just to kill. Even lone targets such as shermans and snipers would'nt be spared.
And they are pretty good at holding the line by wiping expensive infnatry squads such as 101'st and commandoes.
And churchills are pretty much dead before they can fire a single shot.

So the question is where does one limit the usage of 210? Currently they are quite hard to dodge and can only be countered by artillery of your own or speedy tanks. Rendering almost all inf and tanks useless since they will just be picked off or stopped dead on their tracks.

Please note that this is from me using it a single time and it may be quite exaggerated and Lehr could be right and that the price is fine as it is since it has such apparnt drawbacks.
Rifles are not for fighting. They are for building!

User avatar
sgtToni95
Posts: 421
Joined: 04 May 2016, 09:50
Location: Italy

Re: 210mm Nebelwerfers

Postby sgtToni95 » 14 Apr 2017, 16:48

Maybe the fact that people can reach such high kill scores might mean that the downsides might be escaped, and that once one realizes how deadly and cost effective it is then he starts overusing it. And the fact something is overused might mean that it needs some tuning.
I'm not suggesting to modify its damage but to increase the ammo cost of the salvos. This thing has the potential (and i've seen this happening many times) to kill many tanks, even the heavy ones, and infantry units with one bombing. One might say that only noobs would keep all theese units all together, but, to be honest, the whole salvo AoE is not that small, usually enough to block an entire advance or at least to block that portion of the map your enemy is attacking which can't be the whole front at the same time.
I don't think increasing the price to 115 would lead to this unit being underused: i already said that this bombing has similar potential to Terror halftrack one, and people are still using it even with the higher price.
An advancing average company might consist in 2 tanks and 2-3 infantry units (100-120 fuel + 1500-2000 MP at least), losing all of this, or the majority of it to an 80 ammo attack is not really fair from my point of view.
theese units are not considered to be leading a blind frontal attack: what i saw happening is, once you know there's no at on a sector, or no anti-inf you try to push there with proper units, feeling quite comfortable of how you created the good conditions for your attack. Then your enemy sees your units, takes his nebel and for 80 ammo destroys everything in 3-4 seconds.
I'm not asking to decrease the range/damage, I'm asking for a price increase which, for the reasons given above, seems to me quite fair.

User avatar
sgtToni95
Posts: 421
Joined: 04 May 2016, 09:50
Location: Italy

Re: 210mm Nebelwerfers

Postby sgtToni95 » 27 Apr 2017, 07:45

I know this should not be done, but i think this topic has been partecipated way too low, soI'd like to bring up the attention on this topic again, adding that this weapon can destroy a CW Truck in one salvo with 4-5 close hits for 80 ammo, not allowing your opponent to move it in time, and I really think this needs an ammo price tuning since it's becoming way overused, behaving greatly in all sorts of defensive and offensive situations.

speeddemon02
Posts: 153
Joined: 20 Jan 2015, 03:11

Re: 210mm Nebelwerfers

Postby speeddemon02 » 27 Apr 2017, 16:14

I'm against raising the cost as it is high already. PE SE is glass cannon to me. All offensive and very little defensive wise. A couple well placed M4 Shermans can take out SE since they have no real heavy armor. I've seen the 120mm mortar team make or break lines and bases, especially if there are bridges

kwok
Posts: 1019
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: 210mm Nebelwerfers

Postby kwok » 27 Apr 2017, 16:23

Yeah, I'll agree that I think that these particular nebels are an "easy button". I had a game where one of my nebels kills exceeded my teammate's kills.

I think Toni's analysis is spot on.
Last edited by kwok on 27 Apr 2017, 16:36, edited 1 time in total.

Mr. FeministDonut
Posts: 59
Joined: 13 Aug 2015, 21:05

Re: 210mm Nebelwerfers

Postby Mr. FeministDonut » 27 Apr 2017, 16:28

A succesfull hit of 210mm near vehicles or infantry can easily wipe many units. A great example of cheap click-to-kill abilities just for 85 ammo.
85 ammo cost for countering any allied unit on field. double 210mm doubles the messy and creating paranoia for all allied side if there are more than two players. gamebreaking unit, pff-f.

kwok
Posts: 1019
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: 210mm Nebelwerfers

Postby kwok » 27 Apr 2017, 18:23

speeddemon02 wrote:I'm against raising the cost as it is high already. PE SE is glass cannon to me. All offensive and very little defensive wise. A couple well placed M4 Shermans can take out SE since they have no real heavy armor. I've seen the 120mm mortar team make or break lines and bases, especially if there are bridges


I think this is "glass cannon style" is the only thing that makes SE fun (even though I disagree that they are "glass cannons"). Just because they have no heavy armor doesn't mean the m4 sherman counters the whole doctrine. Plenty of other doctrines do not have heavy tanks and many doctrines I believe shouldn't have heavy tanks.
The issue with the 210mm I think is that it is so much of a crutch for SE players despite having so many other options available for the doc, it really makes other units obsolete. Back when Barnes played more, he wouldn't bother with wespes and hummels because they are easily dodged and were just generally less effective than the 210 for an approximately same cost.

A well placed anything can take out anything in BK, that's the beauty of it. Taking that away really just takes away the heart and rewarding feeling of well executed tactics/strategy in the game I think.

As for what are some offensive capabilities for SE? The base units for PE are aggressive as is. The assault grens, the SS grens, they just live forever. One well placed arty strike and you can flood these high cost-high reward units through the enemy line, encase the enemy into an area and do a follow up arty strike to wipe out the rest of the forces. That's how I play SE at least... only way that I find is fun at all. Defensively is fun as well, glass cannon defenses are so rewarding. Blocking roadways to funnel units into your really cheap super powerful Nashorn?
It's almost as if the 210mm overshadows so many units people forget about that are available to just the rawa power of base PE units. PE docs are fun because they are different than WH as they are more like flavors and compliments rather than core units (except luft.... that doc has had so many makeovers recently that it's starting to look more like WH).

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2433
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: 210mm Nebelwerfers

Postby Warhawks97 » 27 Apr 2017, 18:32

speeddemon02 wrote:I'm against raising the cost as it is high already. PE SE is glass cannon to me. All offensive and very little defensive wise. A couple well placed M4 Shermans can take out SE since they have no real heavy armor. I've seen the 120mm mortar team make or break lines and bases, especially if there are bridges


pls what? If necessary that doc can be a nice defensive doc. Depending on the map you can fight alone against two. i did so back then when i held my side against kwok and shadow literally alone.

early: Inf squads (since cost drop that isnt hard to achive to have them at any time), scout car (later replaced with 20 mm vehicle), krad (1-2), 50 mm and mortar HT can be a pain already.

Depending then on situation you can get flame nades (boost inf in general), unlock arty or play "TD style" with Hetzer and later Nashorn.

The key is the sight. Only then you are able to place your units smart enough (20 mm, 50 mm and hetzer are the keys here). Esspecially for the Nashorn sight is essential.


If your enemie goes armor doc you should simply go for Hetzer/Nashorn. 210 mm nebler to keep his tanks busy when they do not attack and score some kills.

If enemie goes raf, 20 mm inf with boosts, flame nades and haupt are essential. And just dont blob. One eye keeps checking the air. SE is in my opinion one for the best counter to RAF. Simply because of the effective basic PE inf and flame nades. Luft might gets cost ineffective on the long term. Depends who has the last vet inf remaining.


So SE gives you many tools. As for me, Hetzer was a PE key unit anyway. early to get (doesnt require any expensive building or upgrade) and efficient counter to any but the heaviest allied armor.


That doc is maybe not like other axis docs simply overwheling your enemie with thick armor, guns and rambos.
Instead the key in offensive is the micro gameplay (how plays inf, hetzer and 20 mm together + sufficient view) and the army composition. Not too much arty (like 3 spgs for 3 enemie units) which is the most widespread mistake many players do. But without at least one arty tool it might get hard later on.

And know the weakness of enemie docs. And when playing vs armor its clearly Krad, Nashorn and 210 nebler (and at least one inf killer).

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3048
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: 210mm Nebelwerfers

Postby Tiger1996 » 27 Apr 2017, 20:06

210mm Nebels are absolutely lethal and powerful indeed, yet I am more against raising the barrage price... Because it's a sitting duck after all.. and takes so much time to set up. There is just noway to escape with it! Can be easily countered with arty.

But speaking of rocket artillery, then I wonder really about the walking Stuka half-track.. this thing now is almost obsolete btw. Too useless... Almost has no use actually.. just who would ever pay 5 Command Points, together with 450 MP + 50 fuel + 115 ammo only to have such an incredibly inaccurate rocket barrage that often deals zero damage on a direct hit??
200 ammo for a Firestorm barrage or 150 ammo for a SturmTiger would be a lot more worth it then. I have always been firmly against delaying the walking Stuka with 5 command points, 3 could have been just more than enough... I rarely see any Stukas now to be honest. It's only useful when finally vet.2 but that's only after already wasting a lot of ammo without hitting any shit!

So, bottom line is; I would be probably fine with increasing the barrage price of 210 Nebels.. but only if the walking Stuka barrage cost is significantly reduced in return.

User avatar
Redgaarden
Posts: 231
Joined: 16 Jan 2015, 03:58

Re: 210mm Nebelwerfers

Postby Redgaarden » 28 Apr 2017, 00:32

210mm Nebels are absolutely lethal and powerful indeed, yet I am more against raising the barrage price... Because it's a sitting duck after all.. and takes so much time to set up. There is just noway to escape with it! Can be easily countered with arty.


We're disuccsing what to do against it when you can't get any counter arty, or it's too early game for you to even have anything considered as arty.
but mostly because when you can't get a counter. Do you think a game should be deicided by one realitvily early game unit? Increasing the barrage price was just a potentional solution and we're open to suggestions I think.

The thing kills way too much and there is no reaction time.

But speaking of rocket artillery, then I wonder really about the walking Stuka half-track.. this thing now is almost obsolete btw. Too useless... Almost has no use actually.. just who would ever pay 5 Command Points, together with 450 MP + 50 fuel + 115 ammo only to have such an incredibly inaccurate rocket barrage that often deals zero damage on a direct hit??
200 ammo for a Firestorm barrage or 150 ammo for a SturmTiger would be a lot more worth it then. I have always been firmly against delaying the walking Stuka with 5 command points, 3 could have been just more than enough... I rarely see any Stukas now to be honest. It's only useful when finally vet.2 but that's only after already wasting a lot of ammo without hitting any shit!


It's quite accurate close range and it's mobile too. High potentinal dmg like a thompson. Could kill pretty much anything but the heaviest tanks.

Jokes aside I think only reason to get stuka is for anti emplacement and low cd (compared to SturmTiger) I think 115 muni for killing entrechments is fine. Yes firestorm does it too but stuka does it cheaper. And that is reason enough for me to get it. and it's still cheaper than sturmtiger. And I'm not in the mood talking about cp efficiency. Though I agree I have never seen it in a long time, but I dont think it's because it's a bad unit, there are just much better things to get. I dont think bringing this thing back to the meta will make anyone happy.
Rifles are not for fighting. They are for building!

Le Grand Conde
Posts: 14
Joined: 01 Apr 2017, 14:39

Re: 210mm Nebelwerfers

Postby Le Grand Conde » 28 Apr 2017, 13:43

Redgaarden wrote:We're disuccsing what to do against it when you can't get any counter arty, or it's too early game for you to even have anything considered as arty.
but mostly because when you can't get a counter. Do you think a game should be deicided by one realitvily early game unit? Increasing the barrage price was just a potentional solution and we're open to suggestions I think.



So...why actually increase the barrage price then? At this point it would sound more reasonable to me to just delay its arriving on the battlefield. I mean, what about rather give 210 mm Nebelwerfer some nice place in CP Doctrine Tree? 210 mm might be really, really powerful weapon, but I think it seems "unbalanced" only on smaller maps. Since SE is quite an artillery Doctrine, amount of space can make some difference. On "small size" and "middle size" maps one does not really have to use Wespe or Hummel at all, as somebody here has already mentioned I believe. And later....picking the right Doctrine against your opponent is still an important part of the game, no? So if Allies lack any sort of contra-arty then, I would call it strategy mistake rather than overpovered unit issue. When contra-arty (or even airstrike) comes, 210 mm Nebelwerfers have only very little chance to escape.

And when we are talking Sturmtiger...(just joking, I would post it anyway): And among other things I judge that the price of Königstiger should be decreased for 2 VP*, 250MP and 25 Fuel (talking "the expensive" version), so it might have a chance to get in the game sooner (and make some more difference) and in exchange the price of Sturmtiger should be increased for 2 VP and 250 MP.

*2VP still seems like the right amount to me, face to face with Super Pershing

User avatar
sgtToni95
Posts: 421
Joined: 04 May 2016, 09:50
Location: Italy

Re: 210mm Nebelwerfers

Postby sgtToni95 » 28 Apr 2017, 16:32

I think the problem is not the dimension of the map affecting nebel range potential, i'd rather say, as i already mentioned, it's the frontline width.

Reasonably talking you can't destroy enemy's defences on the whole frontline at the same time, so your attack will probably come from a restricted frontline segment, small enough to be covered by a nebel salvo, or two in case of a combined flanking manouver.
Same thing can be transposed to attacking situations, when this nebel can clean areas big enough to allow a push.

That's why i think the problems i mentioned are not related to map size.

Delaying it might be a solution, but i still think the power/price ratio would still be a problem.

Le Grand Conde
Posts: 14
Joined: 01 Apr 2017, 14:39

Re: 210mm Nebelwerfers

Postby Le Grand Conde » 28 Apr 2017, 19:03

sgtToni95 wrote:I think the problem is not the dimension of the map affecting nebel range potential, i'd rather say, as i already mentioned, it's the frontline width.

Reasonably talking you can't destroy enemy's defences on the whole frontline at the same time, so your attack will probably come from a restricted frontline segment, small enough to be covered by a nebel salvo, or two in case of a combined flanking manouver.
Same thing can be transposed to attacking situations, when this nebel can clean areas big enough to allow a push.

That's why i think the problems i mentioned are not related to map size.


Well, when I was talking about the map size, I was talking more about maps that are bigger in general, not just "longer". I mean the most common "almost square shape" type, where bigger map means also longer frontline-which means SE player will be able to cover each side with only one Nebelwerfer or focus both on one place-which will result in some uncovered area. When I am attacking where my oponent expects it, without destroying his artillery support, I think I should fail. And when Nebelwerfer destroys my defences (and I personally think Nebelwerfers, including 210 mm version, are relatively ineffective against emplacements), I can still-depending on the Doctrine I had chosen-use my own artillery or my backup units to stop enemy attack. In conclusion, I would say that when fighting SE, you have to first get rid of Nebelwerfers/Wespe/Hummel and then take the charge-I believe that this is just how this game/doctrine works and it feels fine to me. Same as Priest for RA, 210 is important part of SE game-even though not so crucial and significantly more vulnerable. I would really rather see it "delayed", than touching its cost/effectivenes ratio.



And among other things I judge that the price of Königstiger should be decreased for 2 VP*, 250MP and 25 Fuel (talking "the expensive" version), so it might have a chance to get in the game sooner (and make some more difference) and in exchange the price of Sturmtiger should be increased for 2 VP and 250 MP.

JimQwilleran
Posts: 1096
Joined: 07 Jan 2015, 15:05

Re: 210mm Nebelwerfers

Postby JimQwilleran » 28 Apr 2017, 19:34

Le Grand Conde wrote:
And among other things I judge that the price of Königstiger should be decreased for 2 VP*, 250MP and 25 Fuel (talking "the expensive" version), so it might have a chance to get in the game sooner (and make some more difference) and in exchange the price of Sturmtiger should be increased for 2 VP and 250 MP.


Cato the Elder ;D

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3048
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: 210mm Nebelwerfers

Postby Tiger1996 » 30 Apr 2017, 05:40

Le Grand Conde wrote:And among other things I judge that the price of Königstiger should be decreased for 2 VP*, 250MP and 25 Fuel (talking "the expensive" version), so it might have a chance to get in the game sooner (and make some more difference) and in exchange the price of Sturmtiger should be increased for 2 VP and 250 MP.

You keep repeating this statement too many times ^^ When you last pointed this out through the RA doc spotter topic, i actually reacted to each of your points.

But well.. again; regarding your suggestion of swapping 2 command points between the ST and the KT, I honestly like the idea in general, as it also sounds quite reasonable. But I would say that 2 points are too much. KT should never be as early available as the SP... Considering the fact that the SP is available only once. However, 1 command point might be enough!

If I were to do it myself, then I would rather do it like this:-
New Terror doc.jpg


This way the total command points required for the King Tiger would be reduced from currently 11 to 10. While on the other hand, the total command points required for the SturmTiger would be increased from currently 7 to 8 points... But at the end, it's not that much big of a deal to be honest.. such a slight change that wouldn't differ much anyway.

Le Grand Conde
Posts: 14
Joined: 01 Apr 2017, 14:39

Re: 210mm Nebelwerfers

Postby Le Grand Conde » 30 Apr 2017, 18:21

Tiger1996 wrote:You keep repeating this statement too many times ^^ When you last pointed this out through the RA doc spotter topic, i actually reacted to each of your points.


Yeah, I read it :) But since I was not really sure if the discussion is going to keep its original object in any important matter or not, I did not really felt like writing just: "Mhmm.......Gliders solved? Awesome! ......so, there actually is hull MG34 already?" Instead I went for a BK Directory cleanup and found out that I was wrong and the missing weapon was only some graphical glitch. And then I have actually forgotten to reply. Ehm. Still, delayed and green-smoke announced gliders sounds like a great news! Thanks for sharing.

Back to the topic (I mean....KT of course!).
Tiger1996 wrote:
But well.. again; regarding your suggestion of swapping 2 command points between the ST and the KT, I honestly like the idea in general, as it also sounds quite reasonable. But I would say that 2 points are too much. KT should never be as early available as the SP... Considering the fact that the SP is available only once. However, 1 command point might be enough!


And yet, USA player can always choose "regular" Pershing Ace instead (I do realize that not many people really does so and usualy it is considered to be a generally bad idea......). But honestly, I would agree with swapping just 1 command point, if the resource price would be still decreased according to my suggestion (for 250 MP and 25 fuel). One command point itself is, as said, quite a slight change.....while I personaly believe current price of a single Königstiger to be inappropriate its chances on the battlefield as well. As I have already written:

However, this also reminds me that there is one thing I have not pointed out when first writing about this topic. Its about comparing Königstiger with "old" Terror Tiger I, more precisely about the speed of both vehicles. Since artillery is pretty much the best option against these heavy tanks, speed is quite often a crucial survive ability (in my opinion it plays a significant role in any other situation as well, does not matter if you are running from tank destroyers or hunting escaping enemy). Königstiger might have more HPs, but once any tank is seriously hit with artillery in BK, it is lightly going to be destroyed very soon (which is completely realistical and fine and I have nothing against it). I believe that due to "old" Tiger "speed boost" ability is "old" Tiger actually able to survive on the battlefield for much longer than Königstiger (which is, however, quite hard to prove, since KT gets into the fight significantly later, usually close to the end and against more artillery threads as well). Tiger I is still less deadly on the battlefield, but according to what I have said sooner, maybe even current MP/Fuel cost of Königstiger is too high.


Tiger1996 wrote:This way the total command points required for the King Tiger would be reduced from currently 11 to 10. While on the other hand, the total command points required for the SturmTiger would be increased from currently 7 to 8 points... But at the end, it's not that much big of a deal to be honest.. such a slight change that wouldn't differ much anyway.


Exactly, that is why I would also suggest the resources-price decrease for KT.....while resources-price of Sturmtiger could be a little bit higher at the same time. Sturmtiger is basically (literally) still Tiger, so 950-1000 MP would not sound so bad to me. And, if it would sound like too much for the current vehicle, there might be still an option to add top-mounted MG 42...? +higher price could be less encouraging to the kamikaze tactics, to which might so heavy armored vehicle seduce?

kwok
Posts: 1019
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: 210mm Nebelwerfers

Postby kwok » 30 Apr 2017, 21:11

What.

210mm, it's stupidly strong for its price and an easy button to defend or attack with, regardless of map size because it's raw power can be near instantly used likened to an offmap with low cooldown. It acts as anti tank and anti infantry.

This is what makes it relatively better than the wespe (not even comparing it to other doctrines, just within itself). The wespe can't qualify as anti tank and it's blanket ability often leaves some infantry surviving to reinforce. Sure it is not as fragile to counter arty, but the loss in capability and relative higher cost compared to the 210mm plus the fact it needs CP made this unit really obsolete lately. The 210 can counter battery better than the wespe to keep itself safe.

Most people said this already but just reminding why this post was made.


Return to “Balancing & Suggestions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests