what a great fuckin match epic firefly

[ShadowIchigo]

warhawk and i vs kwok and babyseal what a fuckin epic firefly lol, warhawks did nicely with smoke support, too bad we didnt sync the smoke attacks correctly.

[Krieger Blitzer]

What is exactly amazing on this game? This is nothing but just an epic BS my friend.. this game is simply a disaster! The Allies tanks pretty much somehow outgunned the more expensive Axis tanks almost in every single aspect... Through all the engagements I couldn't see how the 76 guns were nerfed against the Axis heavies anyhow; the Hellcat one-shots the Tiger Ace frontally even without using HVAP rounds!! Neither I could also feel any kind of usefulness for the flak 88s anymore at any possible side sadly.

Not even Jacksons or SP were in use Yet the Axis tanks got so easily blown up!!!

[Warhawks97]

What is exactly amazing on this game? This is nothing but just an epic BS my friend.. this game is simply a disaster! The Allies tanks pretty much somehow outgunned the more expensive Axis tanks almost in every single aspect... Through all the engagements I couldn't see how the 76 guns were nerfed against the Axis heavies anyhow; the Hellcat one-shots the Tiger Ace frontally even without using HVAP rounds!! Neither I could also feel any kind of usefulness for the flak 88s anymore at any possible side sadly.

Not even Jacksons or SP were in use Yet the Axis tanks got so easily blown up!!!

We simply overstrained them and it was freaking hard game. For a while i was thinking to leave the game and we saw no chance to win it anymore as we had no real arty. Without the arty cromwell from RAF we would have been fucked. But i simply swarmed arround the enemie tanks, we used smoke all the time and we very often got close to them. And the firefly is simply designed to kill tanks. The first firefly got blown up without doing anything. One hit from 50 mm pak and one hit from a stug and the firefly was down. We simply combined our units. My shermans worked as meatshield and sworming the enemie while we used 17 pdrs to kill their tanks. The Tiger ace wasnt an easy kill although i maneuvered arround it. I lost idk how many shermans during that act and i actually thought that i am going to lose the hellcat as well but i got lucky. But axis also got lucky a few times. Just look that sdkfz 251/17. Being never hit and surviving idk how many tank shells all the time. Or the Halftrack in the early stage: 37 mm pak and two greyhounds failed to hit that tank.

It was rather the permanent harrassing with light vehicles accross the map and the combinations of smoke, meatshields, commandos and 17 pdrs that made us winning at the end. And its not that it didnt cost something. I lost 29 vehicles and tanks just to kill 10 or 11 tanks of them and 1 or two vehicles.

Also note pls that i used the marking target ability of my M20´s all the time against all targets whenever possible.

At the end i couldnt even give HVAP rounds to all tanks due to a lack of ammo. All the time HVAP and smoke is not really cheap.


It was simply a harrass and swarming tactic and every axis tank either cost us several tanks or we had to use a 17 pdr tank.


And this "Axis tank cost more" shit.... just bullshit. You have to consider the range of possible targets these tanks can engage. A firefly cant bounce shit and is purely there to kill tanks.


Its same like saying: "Hetzer outgunned pershing although perhsing cost more". Go ask lehr, we talked about that and he told me that he killed Pershing(s) with Hetzers. And? does it mean that its not fair because the Pershing cost more? Bullshit. I killed two Jumbos in a row with a hetzer and its ok. These tanks are designed to kill tanks and nothing else. And the firefly is in this game a tank destroyer.

[Krieger Blitzer]

Ya, u lost so many tanks.. but u won the game at the end... All those tanks almost cost u nothing! And btw if u were ever good enough to manage using Jacksons or SP; I promise u wouldn't probably lose any tanks on the other hand as I am pretty sure that u could have turned this quickly to an epic SP match.

A Firefly, a Comet, a Jackson, an Achilles or a Hellcat can't be compared with a Hetzer or a JPz anyhow.. Hetzers against Pershings aren't as good as Fireflys against even KTs and not just vs Tigers or Panthers! Only JPs could be as good, but u very well know how much they do cost on the other hand... And here we go again.. the last good choice for Axis isn't the lame tanks definitely BUT Schrecks!!! And in my opinion they could even never win a game.


Looking forward to see the Axis tanks finally being capable of outgunning back the Allies tanks at some point... So that we hopefully get to have some more realistic fair balanced chances for both sides!

[MarKr]

Ya, u lost so many tanks.. but u won the game at the end... All those tanks almost cost u nothing! And btw if u were ever good enough to manage using Jacksons or SP; I promise u wouldn't probably lose any tanks on the other hand as I am pretty sure that u could have turned this quickly to an epic SP match.

There's something that makes no sense to me - when you lose to US armor player who uses the SP to win the game, you have problem with that (complaining how OP SP+Command car is), when your opponent uses spam of shermans but no Pershings, SP or Jacks, you have a problem with that too(complaining how "cheap" they are) ... So what would a US Armor doc player have to do so that you don't complain about their win? Because from your posts it sofar seems that when US tanks meet Axis tanks in the field the US forces should every time fail misserably out of sheer principle.

[Krieger Blitzer]

Because from your posts it sofar seems that when US tanks meet Axis tanks in the field the US forces should every time fail misserably out of sheer principle.

Currently, somehow the Axis tanks almost always fail miserably... That's exactly my problem! Or.. is it supposed to be like this then I am afraid?
And I am not only speaking about the US tanks but more specifically all the Allies tanks surely including also the CW ones btw.

Didn't u see how silly it was when the Vet0 Wolverine manged from such a very far distance to somewhat instantly pinned or scared out the Panther using this so called 'hit and run tactics' ability while at the same time the Firefly rapidly attacked finishing it frontally in no time?? This is not a good thing to see to be honest, actually just a bad game like that way!!

[kwok]

I lost because they played better and I made errors. My tiger died to a 5% die roll which I accepted as just my shit luck which I've always had in this game. But, even then unlike most players, I knew that it wasn't the end of the game there. I didn't just drop from losing a tiger "with such bullshit". Most of the time, it wasn't even the cheap tanks that did the major killing. I think it was the firefly protected by the wall of shermans, which is exactly what the firefly was made for. How many kills did that firefly end with?

My error was that I didn't build a foundation for my large tanks. My panthers were only supported by storm troopers, which isn't enough to fight against tanks. What I should've done was build a foudnation of p4's first, and then fielded my bigger guns. Similar to the sherman/firefly combo. You can see I actually somewhat did it near the end and was somewhat successful with it, taking down a good chunk of the enemy tanks, but by the time I caught on the the strategy, it was too late. I had no map control or resources to keep it up. But in the overall game, I fell into the seducing Axis trap of being overconfident in the tanks and forsaking thought/planning/tactics instead. I just let my panthers take on multiple tanks at once rather than playing like an actually tactician/captain with strategy like a strategy game should simulate. This is where I think a lot of Axis players fall short this patch. They're so use to getting the easy way out, they just aren't use to doing that bit extra that allies are use to doing. It takes time to adjust to the nerf, but in the end I think it's balanced. I'm glad I lost, because I feel like Axis finally takes minimal skill to play.

They won because that had better micro, better tactics, and better strategy. If I were Allies this match, I'm confident I still would've lost because they just played better. They deserved that win. If they are superior in skill, they shouldn't be losing because Axis tanks are historically better than Allied tanks. It's a game.

Seriously tiger... fight me. You literally keep dodging me every time. You always complain to me, then I respond "ok, I'll show you how to not get into ___ situation," and you always have some excuse not to play then. Your words have lost all credit not because they are necessarily wrong but because you can be such a hypocrite. You always say "yes I will play you and show you why it's overpowered" but then when it comes down into the lobby/matchmaking there's always a ready excuse. I'm more than ready to be proven wrong, that Allies are over powered. But you never show me. You run every time. It's your hypocrisy, fallacies, and straight up insults that people dislike about you. Not your ideas.

[Krieger Blitzer]

U lost because of their superior arcade unrealistic tank abilities... Clearly not because they played better.

Actually I already faced u more than 3 times recently in team fights when u were Axis.. and u lost it so bad every time, sadly I wasn't impressed anyhow

Me and Shadow as CW vs u and Seal as Axis on the 3v3 map named as Hugel; Remember that one? We surely won and I even had better score than Shadow so far! And I guess that was the last time when we met down there Oh, or probably the last time was in fact that 3v3 one on GoodWood when I played with Mr and Shadow as Allies vs u, Wurf and Seal... Once again the Allies were quickly the winners!!

But what about this game?
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=791
Oh ya, maybe Seal was just afk.

U r glad u lost as Axis only cause u r an American, that's all I think

So I gave u more than a chance to prove it ALREADY.

Yet I am obviously shocked to see that u replied me like this way suddenly while also claiming that I am a hypocrite as well, but alright.. since u like to bring it all up.

[kwok]

On Hugel, it was you vs seal, and he was winning up until shadow came in and saved. Your score was high because left and it was just CPU spam.

The one with hardstyle, it's because seal was afk a good amount of time taking care of real life things.

Each time, you faced seal instead of me, and switched slots to face seal instead of me.

Every time I ask for a 1v1, you run away. Every time we play a game, you switch slots and take on the same people. The only thing I asked for was a 1v1 every time. No team games, nothing interfering between you and me. Every time, that's what I ask for. You never accept. Instead it floats to a team game, some excuse, SOMETHING always.

I bring this up because you insult people frequently, then come on the forums and with fallacies using anecdotes over facts.

[kwok]

You don't go around challenging and shitting on warhawks, trying to bait him into a 1v1, meanwhile avoiding from another. That's hypocritical. Warhawks talks a lot, makes paragraph walls, and pushes for a lot of Allied buffs, sure. But he never insults people until pushed repeatedly. He is probably the most polite person on this forum.

[kwok]

Every time I win as Axis, you shit on your teammate and somehow those games don't count. I don't have banks of replays saved to pull out, most of my replays are just ones that I've lost to review on my own.

But the games I always remember are the ones where people disrespect other people. When people blame others, say vulgar things to others, treat others poorly. It isn't about balance for me. But if balance is what makes people respect others finally, then I'll fight for balance.

[Krieger Blitzer]

I insult people???!!! O_O

Anyways; and what about that game on GoodWood?

What u r giving now.. are exactly what u could call as nothing but some 'excuses' of why u lost these... Only in a try to avoid any kind of an admit of simply saying that the Axis was weak and that the Allies were actually stronger on those games; reasons are probably because u r an American and so u love watching the Axis getting kicked.

And stop pushing me into accepting to 1v1 u, because I will not! For some certain reasons:-
-Firstly that it proves nothing at the end; as it doesn't matter who wins then.
-Secondly that it's obviously not going to be friendly or just for fun; as it could lead to even more haters which are not necessary.
-Thirdly that I do have some clear standing points about specific abilities AS I AM NOT primarily claiming that the Allies are generally much OP!
-Finally that I am more interested in the Afrika add on perhaps even more than the original Bk now anyway...

[kwok]

You've been quoted multiple times for insulting. Should I bring those quotes back up?

What about the games on duclair and cherbourg?

Yeah they're excuses for why I lost because they of circumstances of misfortune where you took isolated cases and twisted them into imbalance issues. And now, you revert to my background which you know nothing about? Except that I prefer playing Axis in this game and win many times?

Wow, the circular/special pleading you have in that last paragraph...
Firstly, you're right, whoever wins doesn't prove anything and yet you parade around saying "you're allies and you win so allies are OP." And your go to argument every time is "I just win more as allies so allies must be OP". Everytime I tell you "no... you're probably just a better allied player than axis." But somehow you twist it into a balance issue. Every time I face you, all I try to prove is this that winning/losing isn't a balance issue. I play you in a 1v1 to show there are ways to get out of situations that you ALWAYS spam me about, which I'm okay putting up with until you start saying crude things to others.
Secondly, yeah you bet it won't be friendly because I am out to shut people who insult up. How many times have I warned you about creating enemies? The amount of times I had to go around telling others to calm down for your sake when truthfully, I think you instigated but I hate seeing the shit flying around in this community. This time, I'm done trying to getting people to give in to your shitty ways and I'm calling you out on yours.
Thirdly, do you really want me to quote things you've said about balance? This contradicts so many things you've been saying.
Finally, all right I won't stop you from doing what you want to do. Leave BK for all I care, just don't come back and talking trash about others masked behind "balance issue".

[kwok]

You're such a great help behind BKNC, you help advertise and you're so friendly to me personally. I really don't understand how you can't just extend those courtesies to others. We talked about this so many times Tiger... It seems like the only way to reach you at all is through forum...

[Krieger Blitzer]

I have been quoted several times insulting?! Really??!! What about those of whom I were in fight with??!! Their posts got deleted because THEY were up with a lot of pure insulting sentences in the first place... Or did I ever manage to make a 'comic' about anyone? Or probably created a topic that is mainly to be against someone???!!! Shake ur head and open ur eyes well dude!

I don't remember any games on Duclair or Cherbourge against u when I played Allies.. at least recently.

I think I don't create enemies, but these enemies do actually manage to create themselves; just look at this thread for example.. I was telling my opinion clearly regarding the armored warfare and the tank engagements generally in Bk and how I am looking forward to improve it from my own perspective in a try to balance things more out, saying that the Axis tanks should have a better long range fighting capabilities... But THEN suddenly u come up telling that I am hypocrite, on and on.. bla bla bla!!! Though I never mentioned u at any of my previous posts btw.

So before u become all the way up of shutting the people who insult, try to first take a look at what u r doing now down here... This is my last response to u here on this thread!

[Warhawks97]

Ya, u lost so many tanks.. but u won the game at the end... All those tanks almost cost u nothing! And btw if u were ever good enough to manage using Jacksons or SP; I promise u wouldn't probably lose any tanks on the other hand as I am pretty sure that u could have turned this quickly to an epic SP match.

I clearly decided not to use pershings. I would have had one pershing against a shitwall of schrecks, TD´s and Panthers. I couldnt wait untill they would finish their massvive defensive wall trying to crack it with one arty cromwell.

So my goals in this game:

1. Roaming before they finish a defense wall with panther bunker, Panther tanks, TD´s etc etc etc: Pershing is a horrible roamer. The best axis roamer vehicle/Tanks are Puma and with 20 mm gun, Panther, Tank IV H/J. The Best alli roaming vehicle is Greyhound and best roamer tanks are 76 shermans and easy eight. I descrive roamer as units that can drive accross the map and able to attack a varrity of enemie units which have the capabilities to fight vehicles and tanks of their class but also other unit types, eg infantry.
2. Reconassaince and supporting stuff: They hadnt really brutal inf and storms didnt use schrecks. So M20 vehicles had been the better choice. They detect sneaky storms, killing enemie "eyes". Also in case of an advance i can take points. So i choosed M20 over scotts
3. Meatshield: Shadow is a "killer" in this game. Ive seen enough games of him and played often enough together to know that he sometimes need a "opening" for a fight. So the best i could do was to harass the enemie and to start battles with the enemie so that he can see everything he has to see to do his job in killing units. I also used the M20 marking target abilities. Also since i started playing with mates and clans the armor doc player never really build stuff to kill heavier armor. Since i can remember i play CW/US combo not with pershings. As long as the CW player gets 17 pdr tanks out there is no need to get jacksons and pershings. The 17pdr has the punch of 90 mm canons (usually better even) just cheaper. The 76 shermans doing better during attacks as a Pershing. They have smoke, top mounted MG and cost less than Pershing. The Pershings are actually more or less "more expensive fireflies".
4. Fighting enemie medium tanks and vehicles: If anything commando and RAF has trouble with then its anti infantry vehicles, medium tanks with top mounted MG´s and AA tanks. So i didnt used that costly Pershings. Pershings cant match with the flexibility of RAF later so lots of shermans that can kill vehicles and AA tanks and which can be everywhere at the same time to support RAF advances is preferable.
5. Full risk and nonstop advance: I hadnt much but i had to throw units into combat as fast as i could. Since i dont have arty in armor doc to crack some bigger defense i had to play "russian style" using all gaps in enemie defense. Still i sometimes thought its over.



So i had many good reasons not to go for Pershings as you can see.


Note pls axis can do so as well. Quite often when i played with a terror mates i didnt use tigers and only few Panthers by my own. When terror mates getting out Panthers i often keep spamming only Tank IV´s and AA tanks.



I think the axis here tried to get a save defense when they figured out we went armor and RAF and to kill us saftey in a attrition fight. They didnt play aggressive which might have been posible for sure. Inf spam by Def doc and medium tank spam of BK player with Panthers later. Beating our flexibility with their own and using the best weapons to counter ours.

[MarKr]

U lost because of their superior arcade unrealistic tank abilities... Clearly not because they played better.

So Allies have arcade abilities while Axis have totaly realistic? What about the speed buff for Tigers? Or the "impossible-to-miss" Longshot you want so badly?

The problem is very similar to the change we made to US Jeep. People were used to laught the Jeep in the face and run their infantry infront of the Jeep without cover and they didn't give a damn. After the patch they couldn't do that anymore and suddenly it was all like "OMG! WTF did you do to the Jeep? It is fuckin OP now!" (I admit we overdid it at first buff but even later when it got to how it is now they still complained about OP Jeep) then they learned to use cover against Jeep and has there been any complains about Jeep lately? No.
And when you say "Axis tanks almost always fail miserably" it is the same issue - everyone was like "I have expensive heavy tank so I must have an advantage no matter if I use it in a smart or extremely dum way." and just as kwok said they lost because Allies brought tanks in numbers while Axis only had one strong tank supported only by infantry. If you have one Tiger/Panther/KT against 4 Shermans, why shouldn't they win? Especially if some of the Shermans get destroyed in the attack?

And now you speak about Vet0 Wolverine using the Hit and Run against Panther...so what? If you go 1Vs1 Wolverine vs Panther, Wolverine has almost no chance with its gun and even if the HaR ability is used, even then Wolverine has no real advantage - it can only get to safety. And just as you said - Wolverine hit the Panther and Firefly destroyed it...so what? It was 2vs1 - if the Panther had been supported by PIVs they could have protected the Panther. Generally talking in 1vs1 Axis big cats have an advantage, with the exception of SP which has advatage over Tigers and Panthers but even against KTs the chances are even. So if you attack with one big cat several tanks you are simply in a disadvantage. Or tell me what number advantage would be sufficient in your eyes so that you would call it a "fair win"? 6 tank destroyers against one Panther?

If you want to start with historical arguments then again I have to remind that many of the Axis big cats had maintanance issues so ingame they should have at least random engine breaks. And historically there were many important aspects that played strongly against nacis so, you cannot use the "it would be historicaly accurate" argument and only take from the historical facts what is usefull to your case.

[Krieger Blitzer]

I already said to remove the flank speed ability from Tigers and then to give it for Panthers instead on the other hand at Vet lvl 2 specifically since Comets have it! But the Accurate Long Shot is an arcade ability... What? Veteran enough crew members.. good 88 gun; tank stops in order to perform the shot, how come u could call this as an arcade ability then??!! Not to mention that it costs ammo too... On such a super expensive tank.

What can be called purely arcade is doubtlessly the 'hit and run tactics' ability for sure... Both the Wolverine and the Achilles aren't just somehow capable of out-ranging Panthers, Tigers or even the KTs as well while out-gunning all of them by using this thing, as they also scare them out magically causing them to become unable to move for some time which is pretty BS!!! Yet, I am clearly still not demanding to remove this ability btw.. maybe just delay it to Vet lvl 1 and not by default anymore... And the most important is to give the Axis tanks their ALRS ability earlier.
I guess u know exactly that this is all what I am asking at the end anyways!!

[MarKr]

I already said to remove the flank speed ability from Tigers and then to give it for Panthers instead on the other hand at Vet lvl 2 specifically since Comets have it!

First, you asked for removing the Flank Speed from Tigers and giving them Static mode instead - this was hardly anything more than simple swapping an ability that is useless for Tiger for an ability that would give your favorite unit more advantage. Second, Comets have Flank Speed so it is logical that Panthers have it too? I fail to see the logic behind this

What? Veteran enough crew members.. good 88 gun; tank stops in order to perform the shot, how come u could call this as an arcade ability then??!! Not to mention that it costs ammo too...

Yeah...so the tank stops to make a shot that somehow magicaly can reach targets further away than any normal shot and this shot has literaly 0% chance to miss even though shots taken at mormal max range can miss in about 25% (not sure about the number) times...Yep, totally normal, not weird at all.

And as always you dodged my question:

Or tell me what number advantage would be sufficient in your eyes so that you would call it a "fair win"?

You often complain that some allied unit destroyed some axis heavy tank but later we discover that there was some other unit that helped - command car gave bonus, Wolverine user HaR ability...so clearly your point of view is that these axis big cats should be able to win in such sitations without problem. So how many allied units and of what type would need to attack one axis heavy tank so that you would consider it a fair win for allies?

[Krieger Blitzer]

The flank speed is useless for Tigers??!! Noway, it's very fking useful if u would ask.. or what is more than to escape from dangers with such a heavy tank by this super kind of speed I wonder... Which is BS of course Except probably on the desert Afrika maps btw! But I honestly never asked to add the static mode for Tigers instead o.O

It's more logic to see Panthers having the flank speed than when to see Tigers having it!!!

The ammo I am paying for the ALRS ability, is obviously for the gunner to aim more accurately at longer ranges at specific single targets.

To ur question;
What kind of bonuses do the Axis tanks get on the other hand?? There are no such Axis command vehicles to normally buff tanks in range or rate of fire... Wouldn't u consider the ALRS as a bonus that is instead of the command vehicle for Allies??!! Or, are the Allies the only side able to achieve this 2v1 according to ur own logic as they could have a SP + the command shit.. but Axis not?
I mean... Where is the KT + command thing too?? The command thing there = the ALRS!!

[Warhawks97]

First, you asked for removing the Flank Speed from Tigers and giving them Static mode instead - this was hardly anything more than simple swapping an ability that is useless for Tiger for an ability that would give your favorite unit more advantage. Second, Comets have Flank Speed so it is logical that Panthers have it too? I fail to see the logic behind this

Well, the flank speed saves tigers ass very very often. I dont know if a static mode would be better or not, but it would fit better for tiger as a kind of "mobile fortress" as a flank speed to be honest. Idk which ability would turn out as more deadly at the end. But flank speed on a tank with such armor and weight is pretty weird.


About Panther and comet he or we discovered that they were pretty equal. The first Panthers had arround 51 kph, later models got reduced to 43-45 (to increase engine life span) but therefore better accleration and more horsepower. The comet was 51 kph fast so this is the logic why panther should have flank speed like comet. Just thing is that Panther(s) are in game just as fast easy eight shermans which speed was about equal. So yeah, we could, using that logic, adding flank speed to all tanks which have historical speed of Panthers. Thing is idk if and which tank had some kind of "critical" reserve that allowed to get over the engines limit for a short time (increased engine rpm etc). The Panthers got stictly limited to 2500 rpm which allowed the speed of these 45-46 kph. So yeah, add flank speed to Panther because of historical stuff and you can give it to easy eights as well. We could remove that ability from comet but idk if the tank could then still fill its role its designed for. Also idk which tank has higher basic speed, Panther or comet.

To ur question;
What kind of bonuses do the Axis tanks get on the other hand?? There are no such Axis command vehicles to normally buff tanks in range or rate of fire... Wouldn't u consider the ALRS as a bonus that is instead of the command vehicle for Allies??!! Or, are the Allies the only side able to achieve this 2v1 according to ur own logic as they could have a SP + the command shit.. but Axis not?
I mean... Where is the KT + command thing too?? The command thing there = the ALRS!!

What bonuses have axis tanks? you kidding? Better armor? Ever seen a firefly bouncing schrecks? They hardly bounce 50 mm paks. Their standard penetration is a lot higher than US once. When comparing tanks of same class (eg sherman vs Tank IV) then shermans penetration chance with HVAP isnt higher as the pen chance the Tank IV has against sherman with basic rounds. I barely need special AP rounds with axis tanks. When i face tanks that would require HVAP rounds (maybe churchills and Pershings) i have as alternative Panzerschrecks.

Or did you see the sticky attack on Jagdpanzer? squad had to get mega close and died while 25 ammo sticky did nothing at all. The Volks and other units get for almost the same cost a Panzerfuast which never fails to pen and which always deals high damage.

What about 50 mm pak rocket shot? I oneshoted pretty much every allied tank with it. SP´s, churhcills etc. Ever seen a 57 mm pak penetrating a Panther or KT? never, doesnt matter how often you use AP rounds. From 2011 till today ive seen just once a 57 mm pak penetrating a Panther from extrem close range.

The axis TD´s with panther gun penetrate pretty much everything even without special AP rounds.

Axis tanks are way less threaten by infantry AT weapons than allied. Those later need tanks to kill tanks, esspecially CW. They dont have quickly a inf squad with schreck that penetrates pretty much everyhting with gurantee.


And the command vehicle isnt anyhow OP. Just when used together with SP. The range boost isnt a huge help when you can penetrate the target. The assault ability boosts slightly the pen chance but tanks are in risk by their own.


Remove the SP and you would have not a single reason to complain anymore about any range/pen disadvantage.



Remove Hit and run ability? idk. Replace it with the same ability as hellcat has or add the tank commander arty strike. I would prefer both abilities, the phosphoreus round and tank commander arty over that hit and run any time.

The Phosphoreus round stuns the tank and can be used in every situation and is cheaper. The off map arty strike could be used also in every situation. Hit and run gives you 80 range but you will bounce anyway most of the time, cost 60 mm (+75 for HVAP) and requires ambush position. So yeah, remove Hit and run and add either phosphoreus shot or TC arty strike.

Edit: @devs: Can you see why i would like to remove autofire of tanks against buildings and emplacments? In games like that they start fireing and wasting rounds against bunkers and stuff and when they reach the target unit they cant fire. Thats pretty annoying if you ask me.

[Krieger Blitzer]

Flank speed for E8s at Vet lvl 1 would make them much more unique than the normal 76 Shermans... So, this is something I agree for! But Comets would still have the flank speed then for sure and yet by default

KT also has armor bonus against the SP, I wonder really?
This is shortly what I meant.. he says SP + command car is 2v1 and I say that the KT plus the ALRS ability = 2v1 also!! Which means that the ALRS is needed earlier for the sake of balance since there are no command vehicles on the Axis side.

[MarKr]

The flank speed is useless for Tigers??!! Noway, it's very fking useful if u would ask.. or what is more than to escape from dangers with such a heavy tank by this super kind of speed I wonder... Which is BS of course Except probably on the desert Afrika maps btw! But I honestly never asked to add the static mode for Tigers instead o.O

Yeah, it was a poor choice of words. I meant that it does not fit the Tiger. You didn't ask for Static mode? I mean not in the recent topics but at the old forum...if not you then somebody did. OK if you didn't then I take it back...

It's more logic to see Panthers having the flank speed than when to see Tigers having it!!!

Which still does not explain why you used Comet as an example why Panthers should have flank speed...

The ammo I am paying for the ALRS ability, is obviously for the gunner to aim more accurately at longer ranges at specific single targets.

So you pay ammo for it...and thanks to that it makes more sense than HaR? You start with saying that HaR is an arcade ability with magical effects and that it makes no sense - I understand that it makes no sense when compared to reality. When I point at ability (ALRS) of Axis tanks that make no sense either, you justify the ability by paying ammo...Man, either compare stuff to reality and then don't argument with game features or compare game features but don't argument with reality but mixing these two aspects makes no sense.

To ur question;
What kind of bonuses do the Axis tanks get on the other hand?? There are no such Axis command vehicles to normally buff tanks in range or rate of fire... Wouldn't u consider the ALRS as a bonus that is instead of the command vehicle for Allies??!! Or, are the Allies the only side able to achieve this 2v1 according to ur own logic as they could have a SP + the command shit.. but Axis not?
I mean... Where is the KT + command thing too?? The command thing there = the ALRS!!

What kind of answer is this? I gave you a simple question and instead of answer you give me 4 questions (at least you ended 4 senteces with question mark(s)).
Let's take it one by one:

What kind of bonuses do the Axis tanks get on the other hand??

If I skipp on the part that, generally speaking, Axis tanks have stronger armor and guns than their allied counterparts, this has nothing to do with my question. Allied tanks have abilities, Axis tanks have abilities. You know what abilities each have so when you consider what they can do, what is in your opinion the ratio of units?

There are no such Axis command vehicles to normally buff tanks in range or rate of fire... Wouldn't u consider the ALRS as a bonus that is instead of the command vehicle for Allies??!!

If you think about it ALRS actually has comparable effects to the bonus of Command car...it increases range, it increases accuracy (once again, ALRS cannot miss), it has limited period of time when it is active and since it is ability tied to the tank, it requires less micro since you don't have to command two units, only one. Sure, it is not the same but diversity is intended.

Or, are the Allies the only side able to achieve this 2v1 according to ur own logic as they could have a SP + the command shit.. but Axis not?

What prevents you from building a Tiger AND PIVs to support it? My point is that you are outnumbered and complain that you lose, even the numbers and then tell what happens. OK, Allies field SP + Command Car? Expensive combo. And you field what? KT + what? Nothing. Field KT + 2 PIVs...KT will still be most probably primary target but while SP fires at KT, your PIVs can close in or flank...Command car can't do anything against PIVs so if you play it right you get close enough and with AP shots you have pretty nice chance to take out SP...so you might lose KT (but can get another), opponent lost SP and won't get another. Yep, you probably say that there are always more units in the field...but if opponent has more units than SP+ Command Car then you should have more than KT + 2 PIVs.

I mean... Where is the KT + command thing too?? The command thing there = the ALRS!!

OK, KT has ALRS instead of some bonuses from another unit which at least means less need for microing two units...so the point here is?

And since I answered these questions, could you finaly give me a straight answer too?

Or tell me what number advantage would be sufficient in your eyes so that you would call it a "fair win"?

[Krieger Blitzer]

I used Comets as an example since they are pretty much similiar to the D version of Panthers...

I pay ammo for both abilities.. but not veterancy for both though! As I do pay it only for the ALRS!! However that I think it's fine to see a Tiger out-ranging an Allie tank anyways, but is it fine to see a Wolverine out-ranging an Axis heavy tank such as the KT as well as scaring it out too?? NO!!!

The answer to ur question is; simply depends

Usually deploying a KT is much more costly than calling in a SP... Several players already told u this before btw as we compared their price, so ya.. often u won't have anything to protect that thing once u get it unlike the SP.

[Warhawks97]

I used Comets as an example since they are pretty much similiar to the D version of Panthers...

?

I pay ammo for both abilities.. but not veterancy for both though! As I do pay it only for the ALRS!! However that I think it's fine to see a Tiger out-ranging an Allie tank anyways, but is it fine to see a Wolverine out-ranging an Axis heavy tank such as the KT as well as scaring it out too?? NO!!!

Add Phosphorus rounds to M10 like M18 has and i am fine. But dont complain when this is even more deadly then.

The answer to ur question is; simply depends

again: ? So when i attack a tiger with 4 tanks, losing three during flanking etc its fine to finally kill the tiger? Not?

Usually deploying a KT is much more costly than calling in a SP... Several players already told u this before btw as we compared their price, so ya.. often u won't have anything to protect that thing once u get it unlike the SP.

I wonder why you still trying to kill it with KT etc? The SP is designed to counter those. Its like complaining that an anti infantry vehicle or tank kills infantry. Also why you cant support the KT? To be honest i would never ever build a KT, JP, JT, SP, Pershing etc unless i know i have some support for them. I prefer a recon over a heavy expensive tank anytime.

Also as i said, feel free to remove it. Nothing speaks against a removal of the SP in my opinion. A 105 sherman for example would be a lot more appropriate over thr SP.