Blitzkrieg Mod 4.9.0 Patch TEST

[Butterkeks]

What did I do? LOL!

This is obviously my post (as it wasn't edited for a single time after his following post as u could all see it guys).. but this is how my post is quoted on the other hand, in his own comment which is different from the real post of mine...

Who is the true asshole now over here??!!

As I said, I don't know how you did it, but you did. I don't need to do stupid kindergarten like this to compete with you. YOu on the other hand...Well we all know how you react when you start thinking that you'll "loose" the discussion.

3rd zook was just a temporary solution that should had an axis counterpart proposal. The problem is always the same and hard to solve: infantry being able to run towards an open field without any cover and fire frontally under the fire of several mg's and heavily damaging/destroying most tanks before retreating with almost no losses.

Until this problem is not solved everything imo are temporary solutions.

Well this applies to WH At squads. Ever tried it out with US AT Squad?^^ Every tank/inf will shred them before they'll take a shot.
The solution would simply be to give the bazooka the same stats as Schreck. They were indeed nearly the same weapon with same accuracy, reload time and range.
So why is the zooka in every three of these worse?

[Yafa]

This should not simply be possible and should be heavily punished. Any infantry unit (including flame squads which are able to immobilize tanks) doing that should instantly be pinned or suppressed at least for such cowardice and lack of tactic

+1

[Kasbah]

This applies to ALL squads. Probably US suffer it more, but to all. My panzers IV get instantly destroyed by US squads running through an open field without problems for example (and for some this is normal) So it's a general issue and I repeat for the last time. Until the possibility exists for a squad, ANY squad, from ANY faction and from ANY doctrine to attack, damage and/or destroy a tank frontally running through an open field, with no cover and retreat, everything else are temporary solutions that don't go to the root of the problem.

I know because of Markr that this is very hard to solve so in no way I am not grateful of his work and Wolf's, but if someday this could be fixed (maybe in COH2, I don't know...) the game would take another dimension by forcing the player to develop a real tactic and attack a tank from the sides and the back, take cover and wait in an ambush, instead of hitting and run without sense.

[Krieger Blitzer]

As I said, I don't know how you did it, but you did. I don't need to do stupid kindergarten like this to compete with you. YOu on the other hand...Well we all know how you react when you start thinking that you'll "loose" the discussion.

Acting innocent.. okay!

[Butterkeks]

As I said, I don't know how you did it, but you did. I don't need to do stupid kindergarten like this to compete with you. YOu on the other hand...Well we all know how you react when you start thinking that you'll "loose" the discussion.

Acting innocent.. okay!

Said by the one who edited it...
Cute. Maybe I should ask Markr or Wolf how you were able to do it.

This applies to ALL squads. Probably US suffer it more, but to all. My panzers IV get instantly destroyed by US squads running through an open field without problems for example (and for some this is normal) So it's a general issue and I repeat for the last time. Until the possibility exists for a squad, ANY squad, from ANY faction and from ANY doctrine to attack, damage and/or destroy a tank frontally running through an open field, with no cover and retreat, everything else are temporary solutions that don't go to the root of the problem.

I know because of Markr that this is very hard to solve so in no way I am not grateful of his work and Wolf's, but if someday this could be fixed (maybe in COH2, I don't know...) the game would take another dimension by forcing the player to develop a real tactic and attack a tank from the sides and the back, take cover and wait in an ambush, instead of hitting and run without sense.

Yeah, should be like that. Problem is:
Atm there is no solution for it. Frontal rushes are way more effective with WH AT squads, therefore it creates unbalance. So you either have to find a solution for every AT squad (like less HP, idk) or for none. You can't simply nerf the one squad, and on the other hand don't touch the other one.

So right now, WH is still capable of these stupid frontal rushes while US is not. Or at least not vs all tanks. Destryoing Pz I´Vs can also be very hard with two at squads.
They should both not be capable of doing it, but if one is and the other one is not... Well it's just toally unfair.

[Krieger Blitzer]

Said by the one who edited it...
Cute. Maybe I should ask Markr or Wolf how you were able to do it.

LOL!
And how u would convince them if they ever managed to ask u saying "Then what exactly proves that it wasn't u who edited his own quote through ur post in order to fit ur wish as Tiger claims?" Logic question, isn't it?!

[Butterkeks]

Said by the one who edited it...
Cute. Maybe I should ask Markr or Wolf how you were able to do it.

LOL!
And how u would convince them if they ever managed to ask u saying "Then what exactly proves that it wasn't u who edited his own quote through ur post in order to fit ur wish as Tiger claims?" Logic question, isn't it?!

Why should I want to convince them? I just want to ask them why it's sometimes not displayed if you edit your post.

As I said, I don't need this Kindergarten to compete with someone like you.

[Krieger Blitzer]

Sometimes the number of times below for editing my posts aren't displayed???!!! Are u mad?
Only Wolf posts don't have these numbers as he is the admin.

[Butterkeks]

As I said, I don't know how you did it, but you did. I don't need to do stupid kindergarten like this to compete with you. YOu on the other hand...Well we all know how you react when you start thinking that you'll "loose" the discussion.

Acting innocent.. okay!

Said by the one who edited it...
Cute. Maybe I should ask Markr or Wolf how you were able to do it.

This applies to ALL squads. Probably US suffer it more, but to all. My panzers IV get instantly destroyed by US squads running through an open field without problems for example (and for some this is normal) So it's a general issue and I repeat for the last time. Until the possibility exists for a squad, ANY squad, from ANY faction and from ANY doctrine to attack, damage and/or destroy a tank frontally running through an open field, with no cover and retreat, everything else are temporary solutions that don't go to the root of the problem.

I know because of Markr that this is very hard to solve so in no way I am not grateful of his work and Wolf's, but if someday this could be fixed (maybe in COH2, I don't know...) the game would take another dimension by forcing the player to develop a real tactic and attack a tank from the sides and the back, take cover and wait in an ambush, instead of hitting and run without sense.

Yeah, should be like that. Problem is:
Atm there is no solution for it. Frontal rushes are way more effective with WH AT squads, therefore it creates unbalance. So you either have to find a solution for every AT squad (like less HP, idk) or for none. You can't simply nerf the one squad, and on the other hand don't touch the other one.

So right now, WH is still capable of these stupid frontal rushes while US is not. Or at least not vs all tanks. Destryoing Pz I´Vs can also be very hard with two at squads.
They should both not be capable of doing it, but if one is and the other one is not... Well it's just toally unfair.

I edited this post too. It's also not shown below.
So what.
Will you now just admit it or will you go on with your childish behaviour?

[Krieger Blitzer]

It shows the number of edited times for a certain post ONLY if there was a following comment added by someone else or even by the first post owner himself BEFORE editing the post...............

[Butterkeks]

And what happens if you start editing your post. THEN I quote you and start writing. Now you submit your edited post. AFTER that I click on submit.

For the system the post was not used for any quotes at the moment when you started editing it.
So what? I guess it would not be shown below.

[Zetsuboon]

Guys please ^^ I think that edited posts arent balancing or technical issues in the new BK-Mod version so would you both pls stop it right now?

[Krieger Blitzer]

@Keks;
But there is nothing now that proves I have edited my post, once u started typing!

Zetsu;

Look who is talking.. a bug spreader... Nice.

[Butterkeks]

@Keks;
But there is nothing now that proves I have edited my post, once u started typing!

Exactly. That's why you took adavantage of it.

Look who is talking.. a bug spreader... Nice.

Tiger, everyone already hates you, do you really want to spread that even more?

And btw he is right. Are you know finished with your Kindergarten, Tiger?
Can we go back to discussing about the changelog?

Let the people believe whom they want to believe. I don't care about it.

[Krieger Blitzer]

Exactly. That's why you took adavantage of it.

That's just how u justify it, imitating innocence.

Tiger, everyone already hates you, do you really want to spread that even more?

And btw he is right. Are you know finished with your Kindergarten, Tiger?
Can we go back to discussing about the changelog?

Hmm? Those who hate me here are very well known.. only u and few more morons ^^
But ya... Anyways!

[Devilfish]

In my opinion, there should be no democracy in these matters. It seems to be, Wolf and Mark are bright enough to make their own decisions based on given arguments and counter-arguments from players. So i try to summarize in few brief points, why all US at squads should have 3 zooks.

1. Zooks have much lower accuracy, resulting in many misses, resulting in lower efficiency compared to schrecks.
2. Zooks are dealing less damage, resulting in lower efficiency compared to schrecks.
3. Zooks have worse rate of fire, resulting in lower efficiency compared to schrecks.
3. Zooks have pathetic penetration compared to schrecks. People claim upgraded have the same pen as schrecks, but it would be doc specific and paid upgrade (remember schrecks are all-doc).
4. Axis armor is much thicker, and even over-performing for early tanks like pzIV H/J.

I would even suggest to replace all zooks in the game with upgraded variants, since they are still, without questions worse then schrecks. But i guess that would be too much to ask, since it would lower the nazi supernatural powers by a fragment.

I don't mind raising the price of at squad at all.

Lastly, it is important to note, that all point above are proved in a post of Warahawk on a previous page, and in addition, surely many experienced players here on the forum can confirm, that everything said about the zooks is truth.

Cheers guys.

[Butterkeks]

In my opinion, there should be no democracy in these matters. It seems to be, Wolf and Mark are bright enough to make their own decisions based on given arguments and counter-arguments from players. So i try to summarize in few brief points, why all US at squads should have 3 zooks.

1. Zooks have much lower accuracy, resulting in many misses, resulting in lower efficiency compared to schrecks.
2. Zooks are dealing less damage, resulting in lower efficiency compared to schrecks.
3. Zooks have worse rate of fire, resulting in lower efficiency compared to schrecks.
3. Zooks have pathetic penetration compared to schrecks. People claim upgraded have the same pen as schrecks, but it would be doc specific and paid upgrade (remember schrecks are all-doc).
4. Axis armor is much thicker, and even over-performing for early tanks like pzIV H/J.

I would even suggest to replace all zooks in the game with upgraded variants, since they are still, without questions worse then schrecks. But i guess that would be too much to ask, since it would lower the nazi supernatural powers by a fragment.

I don't mind raising the price of at squad at all.

Lastly, it is important to note, that all point above are proved in a post of Warahawk on a previous page, and in addition, surely many experienced players here on the forum can confirm, that everything said about the zooks is truth.

Cheers guys.

+1
I suggest even going a step further, by requesting to add the M6A3C still to all inf doc units with bazookas. Not only to At squad and not only to rangers too if therefore 3rd zook get's lost.

[Zetsuboon]

In my opinion, there should be no democracy in these matters. It seems to be, Wolf and Mark are bright enough to make their own decisions based on given arguments and counter-arguments from players. So i try to summarize in few brief points, why all US at squads should have 3 zooks.

1. Zooks have much lower accuracy, resulting in many misses, resulting in lower efficiency compared to schrecks.
2. Zooks are dealing less damage, resulting in lower efficiency compared to schrecks.
3. Zooks have worse rate of fire, resulting in lower efficiency compared to schrecks.
3. Zooks have pathetic penetration compared to schrecks. People claim upgraded have the same pen as schrecks, but it would be doc specific and paid upgrade (remember schrecks are all-doc).
4. Axis armor is much thicker, and even over-performing for early tanks like pzIV H/J.

I would even suggest to replace all zooks in the game with upgraded variants, since they are still, without questions worse then schrecks. But i guess that would be too much to ask, since it would lower the nazi supernatural powers by a fragment.

I don't mind raising the price of at squad at all.

Lastly, it is important to note, that all point above are proved in a post of Warahawk on a previous page, and in addition, surely many experienced players here on the forum can confirm, that everything said about the zooks is truth.

Cheers guys.

+1
But did I understand you right? You want to replacce all zooks (also in the other docs?) with upgraded variants? I dont think this is necessary cause every doc has its own techniques to fight super heavys

[JimQwilleran]

Keks, just ignore whatever Tiger says, please. If you argue with him, you only litter the thread. Let's focus on working on getting back 3rd Bazooka or giving inf doc some other AT solutions. Just dont answer to any "you are stupid, I am pro inf player". Let's just talk among sentient people.

What do you do with annoying 10 yo? You just ignore him until he starts crying and run to his mom.

+1 for Devil.

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

I suggest to add 4 Upgraded bazooka to all alied inf units *kidding*

Btw devs, don't you think that removing second recoiless was kinda..... the most retarded decision ever? I'm actually going no longer touch AB doc, inf is like rifles, silly air strikes, hellcat as only hope for stopping tanks. Speaking honestly you just ripped the doc, and that's after you made it balanced and playable few patches ago. As said, it was the most rare USA doc, now you made it even worse.

[JimQwilleran]

I suggest to add 4 Upgraded bazooka to all alied inf units *kidding*

Btw devs, don't you think that removing second recoiless was kinda..... the most retarded decision ever? I'm actually going no longer touch AB doc, inf is like rifles, silly air strikes, hellcat as only hope for stopping tanks. Speaking honestly you just ripped the doc, and that's after you made it balanced and playable few patches ago. As said, it was the most rare USA doc, now you made it even worse.

Especially after reducing possible Johnsons numbers per squad. I have always liked such things as 6 Johnsons, 6 bazookas in 1 unit. They are some kind of reward for being sneaky. Now AB is not only harder to play, but also less interesting.

[Krieger Blitzer]

- Tuned Recoiless Rifle, removed second one from 101st drop, additional 1 upgrade will be added if needed in next patch, use 82nd as AT support

I suggest to add 4 Upgraded bazooka to all alied inf units *kidding*

Btw devs, don't you think that removing second recoiless was kinda..... the most retarded decision ever? I'm actually going no longer touch AB doc, inf is like rifles, silly air strikes, hellcat as only hope for stopping tanks. Speaking honestly you just ripped the doc, and that's after you made it balanced and playable few patches ago. As said, it was the most rare USA doc, now you made it even worse.

Yes, I also think that the second one has to be back as an optional upgrade that is not costing more or less than 40 ammo...

But the 3rd Zooka.. I believe it simply won't come back! There was a poll; Sorry.

[JimQwilleran]

IRL RL were more accurate and had longer range than bazooka. While Bazooka could penetrate 120mm of armor, RL had 100mm of penetration. That is why RL should be even better than bazooka, and should kill Pz IV without a problem.

[Butterkeks]

But the 3rd Zooka.. I believe it simply won't come back! There was a poll; Sorry.

ABout 13 years ago, we had a poll in germany if the grammar school should take 8 or 9 years to finish (At this time it was 9 years).
In the poll it was decided to reduce grammar school by one year (so it would take 8 in total).

After a few years, people realized that it was a very bad idea to do so. Even many people who once voted for the reduction now want to have the year back. So the german states began to take it back, or let the pupils decide wther they want to have 8 years or 9 years of grammar school.

This is imo a very good example.
After everyone wnted the year back, should the governement say, "No sorry, you once voted for it, now it is like that forever! We can't do anything about it"?
No.

Same situation here.

The removal was simply an overnerf. Armor and AB have other stuff to hold back tanks, but inf doc really relies on its AT-teams.

[Krieger Blitzer]

U can't say that the removal was an over nerf.. the patch didn't even release yet! At least try it for some more time first...

They must have tried the 8 years to then realize it's hard, didn't they??