Awesome early assault 4v4

[ShadowIchigo]

One of our players got disconnected early game however.. so it slowly turned the tide of war bc of NO BRIT ARTY SUPPORT.. Figures it was our BRIT ARTY player that had to drop. nontheless im sure you will enjoy the early game.. i took out TH with a damlier. lol

[Warhawks97]

Awesome... whats awesome?

i told you to leave the game and to ask for rematch when i saw your teammate producing only Pershings. At that time it was obvious to me that you cant beat luftwaffe or TH without massive arty support and since your team had been no teamplayers (bunch of anti-teamplayers which is usually an axis player feature) and also apparently nobody with CW arty doc the defeat for your team was sure already when you had still lke 70% of the map. In such moments i do leave games as allied as i dont want to waste my usefull time with it anymore without any real chance of comeback playing such frustrating shitty alli games. I think you should do so as well and use your usefull time with more interessting and exciting things in your life. I am not wasting my time anymore with it.

I mean what was it? Sd 2 spam, invicible IV/70 covered by inf that quickly repairs, heavy arty use. Wow...

@Tiger1996: didnt you say axis have problems to repair their tanks? as i could see it the IV/70 got faster repaired as it took damage. In this game (and the one before this) shadow had by far more problems to keep his vehicles and tanks combat-ready. In both games he had to request for repairs.

[Alman]

because of telegram software i lost control of game return to desktop th and it turn back

[Krieger Blitzer]

@Tiger1996: didnt you say axis have problems to repair their tanks? as i could see it the IV/70 got faster repaired as it took damage. In this game (and the one before this) shadow had by far more problems to keep his vehicles and tanks combat-ready. In both games he had to request for repairs.

By mentioning 'Axis' I meant the Wh, not PE...
However that nothing could be done with building or repairing faster than the good standing emplacements of both the US Inf or the CW RE docs! Also no tank is repaired as quick as with 2 99MP Armor doc specialized Engineers.
U will tell me that the PE BergTiger (which is already costing much more) is even faster, right? Not true ^^ It's faster ONLY when compared to a single 99MP squad. As it does actually have in its own the highest repairing rate.. but yet 2 99MP squads are always the fastest indeed!!

The BergTiger repair rate is 15, while the US specialized engineers is 10 but using 2 of them u get 20.

SO I believe that reducing the speed of the BergTiger's repairing ratio was simply just a total mad idea that should never get implemented!!!


Wh Grens in my opinion btw should be costing about 20MP more. BUT then without touching the walking Stukas or Opel Maultiers MP price for sure!

And again; HQ PE Grens or Assault Grens.. any of them both should receive a slightly reduced price, WHILE increasing the logistic upgrade cost of the PE MG scout cars on the other hand...

[Warhawks97]

Wh Grens in my opinion btw should be costing about 20MP more. BUT then without touching the walking Stukas or Opel Maultiers MP price for sure!

Just no. This is exactly how you force use of arty. Make arty cheaper than a normal inf squad and its obvious that all will straight got for arty just to kill a single HMG or reccon.

[Krieger Blitzer]

Well, I guess a better solution perhaps would be to increase the MP price of the walking Stuka by 50 more; and then not to touch the Grens on the other hand! Also Stuka surely remains without CPs.. as it's already requiring the latest HQ upgrade.

OR to just move the walking Stuka to the third building of where Stugs and Panzer4s are deployed! Then only 25 MP price increase and still requiring the last HQ phase to be upped!!

Also the Opel Maultiers are currently just fine for their cost!! Although I believe it's truly useless against any kind of fortifications while leading to become seriously in need later for Stuhs against RE or Inf docs...

[Warhawks97]

Also the Opel Maultiers are currently just fine for their cost!! Although I believe it's truly useless against any kind of fortifications while leading to become seriously in need later for Stuhs against RE or Inf docs...

And its not its job.... jeez. You always want that every axis doc is in every aspect as strong as a specific allied doc in all their aspects. You want improved repairs for WE Terror or BK doc just because two allied docs have it as their special doc featrue, then you want one zook less on Inf doc AT squad because you claim they are stronger than any standard WE double schreck squad (forgetting here that CW has no frontal rush options at all with piats), then you compare Maultier from BK doc with heavy arty units complaining that it is not strong enough to kill an emplacment with a single salvo (and calli sherman or jeep is even worse against fortifications yet you only complain Maultier is too weak), then you want to be able to fight allied armor doc and RE doc with your armor. Jeez be just happy that axis doc have good arty in all their docs.

In short you want that BK doc is better in armor than RE and US armor doc, stronger in arty than CW arty and stronger with inf as US inf doc. And while doing so you completely forget what a beautifull combinations of units and abilties most axis docs provide to you.
And when RE doc makes you having problem with BK doc (what just makes me laugh) what about asking teammates for hummel or grille, huh? allied always have to request support from each other, so start learning doing that with axis as well.

BUT OMG.... calli cheaper.... omg allis OP.

[Krieger Blitzer]

BUT OMG.... calli cheaper.... omg allis OP.

But I already said 'agreed'!!!
950MP (+75) for the Jumbo and swap with cheaper Calliope of 600MP (-200).. specifically when this doc gets Combat Engineers whom are costing 300MP too instead of the Inf doc on the other hand, it's then really gonna be even much better than it is currently; which is good.
I can't find any kind of problems here considering this...

_______________

(forgetting here that CW has no frontal rush options at all with piats)

But the Brits RAF or I mean the CW SAS do actually have 4 upgraded Zookas

[Warhawks97]

But the Brits RAF or I mean the CW SAS do actually have 4 upgraded Zookas

which still hit shit. Shadow and other RAF players like design can tell you some crazy hilarios stories about SAS using zooks.

[ShadowIchigo]

BUT OMG.... calli cheaper.... omg allis OP.

But I already said 'agreed'!!!
950MP (+75) for the Jumbo and swap with cheaper Calliope of 600MP (-200).. specifically when this doc gets Combat Engineers whom are costing 300MP too instead of the Inf doc on the other hand, it's then really gonna be even much better than it is currently; which is good.
I can't find any kind of problems here considering this...

_______________

(forgetting here that CW has no frontal rush options at all with piats)

But the Brits RAF or I mean the CW SAS do actually have 4 upgraded Zookas

Tiger, warhawks has very valid points. I do like alot of your ideas that you proposed, but ive noticed that alot of other ones is making an already powerful doc into a super doc.. thats not how its supposed to be its supposed to be teamwork and a combination of docs. Noylt a doc that can be a counter to every other doctrine. Im not bashing you either, but when you mention things like emplacements being impossoble to kill etc.. i think, in regards to what Warhawks has stated, that you fail to realize the importance of player support from the other doctrines. Ofcourse one doctrine is going to have a weakness to one other doctrine. Thats how bk mod was meant to be set up. It was even stated, iirc, in the mod summary.

@warhawks
I understand, but i wanted to try to atleast fight and make a change even though i didnt see us winning either. But we dod have a cw arty doc player, but he was the one tht got disconnected... if we would have had him still in yhe game im almost 80% sure that the pressure and twrritorial gaim we had in the beginning would have remained for sure.

[Krieger Blitzer]

But Shadow.. I do have absolutely no points, that are requesting any more kind of such better standing Axis docs already than they are currently! I just really hate the fictional way that Hawks keeps in describing the situation with... Claiming that the Allies are Sooo underpowered while definitely this IS NOT true.
The demand of the 3rd Zooka removal of the Inf doc was to solve the frontal rushes as it was also beside reducing the Pzfaust100 range... I wouldn't mind adding other possible ways to the Inf doc in order for them to have better AT capabilities instead of those nasty 3 Zookas. They should be just 2 Zookas per each squad! While for something more appealing against the Axis tanks to be given for it on the other hand!!
And btw I never said that the Allies emplacements are non destructible. However that only I believe they are cost sufficient for what they can do!!! Most of them could be repaired and constructed very quickly...

Isn't it maybe a wonder that the Inf doc is actually the best through 1v1s against probably ALL the Axis docs?? With this logic of Bk mod.. it should be then better than a single one or maximum 2 Axis docs but not successful or highly effective vs all the rest as well o.O


@Hawks, 'NO' to the Wolverines being without unlock for the Inf doc if the 3rd Zooka isn't gonna be removed.

[Warhawks97]

But Shadow.. I do have absolutely no points, that are requesting any more kind of such better standing Axis docs already than they are currently! I just really hate the fictional way that Hawks keeps in describing the situation with... Claiming that the Allies are Sooo underpowered while definitely this IS NOT true.
The demand of the 3rd Zooka removal of the Inf doc was to solve the frontal rushes as it was also beside reducing the Pzfaust100 range... I wouldn't mind adding other possible ways to the Inf doc in order for them to have better AT capabilities instead of those nasty 3 Zookas. They should be just 2 Zookas per each squad! While for something more appealing against the Axis tanks to be given for it on the other hand!!
And btw I never said that the Allies emplacements are non destructible. However that only I believe they are cost sufficient for what they can do!!! Most of them could be repaired and constructed very quickly...

Isn't it maybe a wonder that the Inf doc is actually the best through 1v1s against probably ALL the Axis docs?? With this logic of Bk mod.. it should be then better than a single one or maximum 2 Axis docs but not successful or highly effective vs all the rest as well o.O


@Hawks, 'NO' to the Wolverines being without unlock for the Inf doc if the 3rd Zooka isn't gonna be removed.

if you have genrally such issues with frontal rush i would rather ask for hendheld AT´s aim time, slight range reduction, better coaxial and hull mgs, changed sprint ability when carrying heavy hendheld AT weapons. But you only keep aiming at this third zook thing from inf doc. In the game i wanted to show you last night you could have seen 8 ranger squads and two AT squads trying to frontal rush a panther. Trying that for like 1 hour but never succedding killing the panther. The only nasty thing was that those inf blobb pushed both of my panthers back to base (accross the half map) and damaging both panthers although they were shooting with total of 6 mgs at an inf blobb that has no cover. But thats simply an large issue of coxial and hull MG weakness.


inf doc... well.... top in 1 vs 1, good in 2 vs 2, almost flop in teamfights when tons of mgs and elite inf just shreds all inf into pieces and when dozens of rocket launchers and arty units bombing all your nice emplacments to dust within an blink of an eye.

[ShadowIchigo]

But Shadow.. I do have absolutely no points, that are requesting any more kind of such better standing Axis docs already than they are currently! I just really hate the fictional way that Hawks keeps in describing the situation with... Claiming that the Allies are Sooo underpowered while definitely this IS NOT true.
The demand of the 3rd Zooka removal of the Inf doc was to solve the frontal rushes as it was also beside reducing the Pzfaust100 range... I wouldn't mind adding other possible ways to the Inf doc in order for them to have better AT capabilities instead of those nasty 3 Zookas. They should be just 2 Zookas per each squad! While for something more appealing against the Axis tanks to be given for it on the other hand!!
And btw I never said that the Allies emplacements are non destructible. However that only I believe they are cost sufficient for what they can do!!! Most of them could be repaired and constructed very quickly...

Isn't it maybe a wonder that the Inf doc is actually the best through 1v1s against probably ALL the Axis docs?? With this logic of Bk mod.. it should be then better than a single one or maximum 2 Axis docs but not successful or highly effective vs all the rest as well o.O


@Hawks, 'NO' to the Wolverines being without unlock for the Inf doc if the 3rd Zooka isn't gonna be removed.

if you have genrally such issues with frontal rush i would rather ask for hendheld AT´s aim time, slight range reduction, better coaxial and hull mgs, changed sprint ability when carrying heavy hendheld AT weapons. But you only keep aiming at this third zook thing from inf doc. In the game i wanted to show you last night you could have seen 8 ranger squads and two AT squads trying to frontal rush a panther. Trying that for like 1 hour but never succedding killing the panther. The only nasty thing was that those inf blobb pushed both of my panthers back to base (accross the half map) and damaging both panthers although they were shooting with total of 6 mgs at an inf blobb that has no cover. But thats simply an large issue of coxial and hull MG weakness.


inf doc... well.... top in 1 vs 1, good in 2 vs 2, almost flop in teamfights when tons of mgs and elite inf just shreds all inf into pieces and when dozens of rocket launchers and arty units bombing all your nice emplacments to dust within an blink of an eye.

Maybe fix coaxial mgs for other tanks.. but for panthers, esp the G variant, and the TH pziv is fine.. it shreds inf..

[Warhawks97]

Maybe fix coaxial mgs for other tanks.. but for panthers, esp the G variant, and the TH pziv is fine.. it shreds inf..[/quote]

Depends. The axis Tanks with top mounted shred inf so much better than allied top mount MG´s because the top mounted axis MG42 (or rather MG34) having a a damageoutput three times higher as those of cal 50 (axis have twice better accuracy at distant, shooting twice and a half as fast with decent damage). But still, i can show you a replay where a inf doc blobb of 7 or 8 inf squads is hunting two Panthers accross the half map (no joke) and there was no real cover the inf could have taken.

I will probably create a more accurate topic about coaxials as i already have certain suggestions here.

[ShadowIchigo]

Maybe fix coaxial mgs for other tanks.. but for panthers, esp the G variant, and the TH pziv is fine.. it shreds inf..

Depends. The axis Tanks with top mounted shred inf so much better than allied top mount MG´s because the top mounted axis MG42 (or rather MG34) having a a damageoutput three times higher as those of cal 50 (axis have twice better accuracy at distant, shooting twice and a half as fast with decent damage). But still, i can show you a replay where a inf doc blobb of 7 or 8 inf squads is hunting two Panthers accross the half map (no joke) and there was no real cover the inf could have taken.

I will probably create a more accurate topic about coaxials as i already have certain suggestions here.[/quote]
Ahh yes but i have a propsal for u. Would you say that it is valid that 7-8 inf sqauds should not all be suppressed? Afterall its only two COAXIAL MGS and not a regular one

[Warhawks97]

Ahh yes but i have a propsal for u. Would you say that it is valid that 7-8 inf sqauds should not all be suppressed? Afterall its only two COAXIAL MGS and not a regular one


when they are one huge blobb than i think yes. There is an nearby suppression multiplier on MG´s as well. So if they come from other directions then only those which are under fire will be suppressed. But currently coaxial have almost no suppression and so nobody gets really suppressed by coaxial and Hull MG´s.


That with "only two COAXIAL MGS and not regualr one", is that a joke or sarcasam? how can an MG be "only" an MG? And what is an regular one? I have a softair MG (or had) and thats not a regular one. I doubt that tankers put only softair mgs in their hull and coaxial slots so they are regular mgs, right?

[ShadowIchigo]

Ahh yes but i have a propsal for u. Would you say that it is valid that 7-8 inf sqauds should not all be suppressed? Afterall its only two COAXIAL MGS and not a regular one


when they are one huge blobb than i think yes. There is an nearby suppression multiplier on MG´s as well. So if they come from other directions then only those which are under fire will be suppressed. But currently coaxial have almost no suppression and so nobody gets really suppressed by coaxial and Hull MG´s.


That with "only two COAXIAL MGS and not regualr one", is that a joke or sarcasam? how can an MG be "only" an MG? And what is an regular one? I have a softair MG (or had) and thats not a regular one. I doubt that tankers put only softair mgs in their hull and coaxial slots so they are regular mgs, right?

Bc a coaxail mg is limited in its arc, unlike the standard mobile mg that has like 180 degress

[Warhawks97]

Ahh yes but i have a propsal for u. Would you say that it is valid that 7-8 inf sqauds should not all be suppressed? Afterall its only two COAXIAL MGS and not a regular one


when they are one huge blobb than i think yes. There is an nearby suppression multiplier on MG´s as well. So if they come from other directions then only those which are under fire will be suppressed. But currently coaxial have almost no suppression and so nobody gets really suppressed by coaxial and Hull MG´s.


That with "only two COAXIAL MGS and not regualr one", is that a joke or sarcasam? how can an MG be "only" an MG? And what is an regular one? I have a softair MG (or had) and thats not a regular one. I doubt that tankers put only softair mgs in their hull and coaxial slots so they are regular mgs, right?

Bc a coaxail mg is limited in its arc, unlike the standard mobile mg that has like 180 degress

sure, but its still an MG. And when it fires at you then you should still search for cover. The limited arc for these mgs is already given in game and its not that hard to attack a tank from different sides or at least so that it can shoot just 1-2 squads.

[ShadowIchigo]

Ahh yes but i have a propsal for u. Would you say that it is valid that 7-8 inf sqauds should not all be suppressed? Afterall its only two COAXIAL MGS and not a regular one


when they are one huge blobb than i think yes. There is an nearby suppression multiplier on MG´s as well. So if they come from other directions then only those which are under fire will be suppressed. But currently coaxial have almost no suppression and so nobody gets really suppressed by coaxial and Hull MG´s.


That with "only two COAXIAL MGS and not regualr one", is that a joke or sarcasam? how can an MG be "only" an MG? And what is an regular one? I have a softair MG (or had) and thats not a regular one. I doubt that tankers put only softair mgs in their hull and coaxial slots so they are regular mgs, right?

Bc a coaxail mg is limited in its arc, unlike the standard mobile mg that has like 180 degress

sure, but its still an MG. And when it fires at you then you should still search for cover. The limited arc for these mgs is already given in game and its not that hard to attack a tank from different sides or at least so that it can shoot just 1-2 squads.

But thats what i mean. Rouphly two sqauds, but you mentioned 7 to 8. Even tho its a blob it doesnt mean it will fit that whole arc. But maybe it just wasnt a spaced out blob at all

[Warhawks97]

That was simply one blobb vs two panther (and sometimes an ostwind). The blobb didnt really kill anything (once an ostwind and an HT) and took losses but those 8 inf squads had been in a huge, not really spaced blobb, and forced two panthers driving backwards untill reaching the axis base and thats really stupid. I always kept one Panther staying for a burst to achieve maxium mg efficency while the other then drives backwards and still they hunted my tanks accross the map, shooting a zook sometimes while being on the move.

[ShadowIchigo]

That was simply one blobb vs two panther (and sometimes an ostwind). The blobb didnt really kill anything (once an ostwind and an HT) and took losses but those 8 inf squads had been in a huge, not really spaced blobb, and forced two panthers driving backwards untill reaching the axis base and thats really stupid. I always kept one Panther staying for a burst to achieve maxium mg efficency while the other then drives backwards and still they hunted my tanks accross the map, shooting a zook sometimes while being on the move.

Then yeah i can agree thats a bit absurd that they are able to do that. I wouldnt know though bc the majority of the time im trying to flank and never try to blob.