Possible Luft Rework

Do you have a balancing problem or do you want to make a suggestion for the game? You are at the right place.
kwok
Team Member
Posts: 1745
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Possible Luft Rework

Postby kwok » 06 Nov 2019, 17:56

luft_v2.jpg

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3624
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby Warhawks97 » 06 Nov 2019, 19:39

1. Its nice that you can choose to either unlock strafe or bomb run, depending what you need. But can we get similiar flexibility to US or other docs as well? Strafes have totally different purposes than bombs. Bombs are not a straight "improvment". So having strafes and bombs seperated is nice. Would be nice to see the same for US Airborne and RAF as well.

2. I really hoped to have the SD2 gone. Its just abuse and silly implemented. You can drop them on enemies right away, best when you are attacking and distracting the enemie fire. They can be used as minefields that can stop even tank attacks and vehicles (as anti personal mines). A Single one can sometimes whipe squads. Its an air weapon that doesnt include an actual airplane and just drop out of nowhere. In short: No matter what you do, its kind of broken. Replace it with quad 20 mm unlock. But this time the quad 20 mm will really be 20 mm, not a MG42 with quad 20 mm skin. Luftwaffe which brings me to the next point:

3. Luftwaffe can build single 20 mm guns right away. The quads are unlock instead of the SD2 mines, but the quads will be really devestating.

4. As the quad 20 mm will become really brutal, able to wreck havoc among uncarefull vehicles, the Wirbelwind would require an unlock in one of the top right corner fields. If there are no plans yet what to do with them.


5. As i can see, Henschel Patrole is still there. Cant we replace it with a single Henschel that has a 30 mm MK103 canon? Or kind of strafe that can kill vehicles as well. So the Henschel would fire with MG´s and a single 30 mm canon. The Mk 103 had 440 rounds per minute and able to pen tank top and rear armor. That would also be more realistic as the B2 version was by far the most common one.


6. Make the Henschel quite sturdy. It simply was designed to be sturdy and had even armor on sensitive parts of the plane.

7. The Bomb attack should be performed by a Fw190 A8 that is modified in an F8 "Schlachtflieger". Possible loadout:
A8- F8:
- 4 66 KG Bombs SD 70
- 1x 249 KG Bomb SC 250
- 1x 500 KG Bomb SC 500
- 8x 66 KG Bombs SD 70

F8/G8 upgrade enables:
1x 1090 KG Bomb SC 1000
3x 249 KG Bombs SC 250

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 1745
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby kwok » 07 Nov 2019, 01:02

2, 3. sd2's are planned to be reworked to be mostly anti-inf not vehicle

4. potentially good idea. the top two corners are reserved for some type of armor modelled after the 1st fallsj panzer division (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_Falls ... %C3%B6ring)

5. it won't be a patrol, but a strafe.

6. probably won't do that otherwise it would make a lot of vehicle based AA useless

7. you're saying as two separate abilities? there isn't much UI space. or one upgraded to another?

CGarr
Posts: 102
Joined: 16 Apr 2018, 21:39

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby CGarr » 07 Nov 2019, 01:13

Making the 20mm's perform like actual cannons instead of just mg's would be nice.

User avatar
mofetagalactica
Posts: 510
Joined: 30 Jan 2017, 11:15

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby mofetagalactica » 07 Nov 2019, 03:39

CGarr wrote:Making the 20mm's perform like actual cannons instead of just mg's would be nice.


+1 , His price would also make some scense if this gets implemented finally.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3624
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby Warhawks97 » 07 Nov 2019, 12:53

kwok wrote:
7. you're saying as two separate abilities? there isn't much UI space. or one upgraded to another?


No. I just made a list of possible loadouts. So each listed one could be an option. You can either use many small bombs or one bigger one. I think one 250 kg bomb underbelly and 4x 49 or 66kg bombs were also an option.

Just check the internet for fw190 fighter bomber. It was a very versatile plane

User avatar
Viper
Posts: 432
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 23:18

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby Viper » 07 Nov 2019, 14:35

i dont see any tank or td unlock in this doctrine???

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3624
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby Warhawks97 » 07 Nov 2019, 18:01

Viper wrote:i dont see any tank or td unlock in this doctrine???



I offer a solution for the Tank part at least:
viewtopic.php?f=15&t=3424&p=31968#p31968

As for TD´s you can get a Marder and hopefully the Puma Sdkfz 234/4 with pak 40 will be in Luft doc.

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 1745
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby kwok » 07 Nov 2019, 19:14

Viper wrote:i dont see any tank or td unlock in this doctrine???


Capture.PNG
Capture.PNG (22.54 KiB) Viewed 314 times


This is the insignia for the 1st Fallsj-Panzer Division (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_Falls ... %C3%B6ring). We don't have specifics on what those would be yet.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3624
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby Warhawks97 » 09 Nov 2019, 11:08

I tested Luft doc now and i have to say: It just feels right. Only two things i wonder is that i had Tigers available (Ace skin) but no ammo upgrades and that F2 was an unlock. Guess these two things will change.


But generally this doc is currently just great, although not even fully done. I hope that AB doc will get the same ammount of love some day. Luft doc unlock lines feel great, each unlock gives you something usefull to play with and which has instantly an impact on your gameplay. Tss quite the opposite of AB doc where you unlock lots of stuff but it has no real impact on the situation or the gameplay.

The entire tec lines now make sense, are clearly defined and just look nice. I would argue right now that this doc is currently the best structured doctrine.


The Best job is done to the Command squad. I cant help myself but this is what a command squad is supposed to look like and how its supposed to work. 100% functionality. Boosting troops nearby and provide lots of usefull abilties. And not like the silly AB HQ squad where you dont really know why to get it. For the sniper? the additional bazooka? or to boost nearby troops? Result is that you barely get to field the 101st HQ squad. It doesnt serve the purpose of being functional like the new Luft leader squad.



The weapon upgrades are also fun. No more FG42 right away. If possible However, the second batch of FG42 should be delayed after unlocking heavy equipment. There is now a nice and permanent tecing of your infantry which gets stronger and stronger.

And now you can make your planes costing ammo and fuel. But that raises the question? Why is it now an option but years before it was deemed "impossible" to add fuel cost for planes. I like the concept and it shouldnt be an upgrade, but standard for all air abilties. Air docs keep sitting on a large ammount of fuel for quite some time but can run out of ammo immediatly once they have called two airstrikes.
I would like to re-open the debate of making planes costing fuel and ammo instead of only ammo.

You can also call in an airstrike with the command squad. But it requires vet 3. Thats something that should be present among air docs command units in general. Having the ability to really call in a close air support strike.




One thing to mention is the henschel strafe. It doesnt only attack targets in the targeted area, but along the entire flight path. Even friendly vehicles are being hit by it. Is that Intended?

And i would leave the Stuka plane. I suggested before to make it a FW fighter bomber strike but i do like the new system to aim the stuka bomb precisley.

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2844
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby MarKr » 09 Nov 2019, 16:01

Warhawks97 wrote:Only two things i wonder is that i had Tigers available (Ace skin) but no ammo upgrades and that F2 was an unlock. Guess these two things will change.
The lack of upgrades for Tiger is an oversight, the F2 is there on purpose for now. We wanted to keep the F2 "without unlock" for WM and give some other standard non-unlock unit to PE. It is not final and can be changed further. We'll see.

Warhawks97 wrote:And now you can make your planes costing ammo and fuel. But that raises the question? Why is it now an option but years before it was deemed "impossible" to add fuel cost for planes. I like the concept and it shouldnt be an upgrade, but standard for all air abilties. Air docs keep sitting on a large ammount of fuel for quite some time but can run out of ammo immediatly once they have called two airstrikes.
The core of the doctrine was made this way as a part of a design which we had over a year ago and was only tuned for the current beta changes and needs. The upgrade that changes the costs of planes was part of the original concept, where Luft had no Panther or Tiger or Hetzer so it was pressumed that Luft would sit on even more fuel and so the costs could be distributed between ammo and fuel. It also was made as an upgrade so that players could choose if they wanted to distribute the costs or not based on e.g. map resources and other situational elements. However, gameplay changed quite a lot over the past year and in the beta (basic ammo income, more tanks available than in the first concept) so the point for the upgrade is in a different place now and will need to be revised. It was also meant to be a Luft-specific feature so giving the same to all "air" doctrines would go against this original intention.

Warhawks97 wrote:One thing to mention is the henschel strafe. It doesnt only attack targets in the targeted area, but along the entire flight path. Even friendly vehicles are being hit by it. Is that Intended?
It will attack tanks along its flightpath (if we remove this, it will not "aim" for tanks and so it will be utterly useless as it will rarely hit anything) as before but now it is just one plane instead of the previous 5 (or whatever was the number). I will need to check the friendly-fire but given how the conversion was made, I don't see any reason why it should now kill own units too...
Image

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3624
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby Warhawks97 » 09 Nov 2019, 17:00

I mean years ago there was a debate about airplanes costing fuel and ammo instead of only ammo. Thats bc all air docs were sitting on large ammount of fuel for the most part.

It shouldnt be "luftwaffe only" feature and not an upgrade.

And Luft will really get Tigers oO?

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2844
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby MarKr » 09 Nov 2019, 18:52

Yes, but over the years many things changed. Giving to Luft back then airstrikes for less ammo and some fuel would just make them more OP than they were. As I said the original concept counted on Luft having very limited armor capacity so the upgrade was there to allow for more airstrikes to deal with enemy tanks. But things have changed.

You say it should be like that for all air docs, not just Luft. "should be" why? To save more ammo for infantry upgrades, light arty barrages and other abilities? Or just because it would make "more sense for realism"? The first isn't really a problem because the ammo costs are there to limit usage of abilities. The second is not a reason for gameplay affecting change to begin with.

Yes, Luft might get a Tiger. It is not a final decision but not an unlikely option.
Image

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3624
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby Warhawks97 » 09 Nov 2019, 19:23

MarKr wrote:Yes, but over the years many things changed. Giving to Luft back then airstrikes for less ammo and some fuel would just make them more OP than they were. As I said the original concept counted on Luft having very limited armor capacity so the upgrade was there to allow for more airstrikes to deal with enemy tanks. But things have changed.


well, if they get a tiger i dont think it would be needed anymore.

You say it should be like that for all air docs, not just Luft. "should be" why? To save more ammo for infantry upgrades, light arty barrages and other abilities? Or just because it would make "more sense for realism"? The first isn't really a problem because the ammo costs are there to limit usage of abilities. The second is not a reason for gameplay affecting change to begin with.


Because most luft docs have limited usage of fuel. Furthermore airstrikes cost currently as much ammo as arty strikes althought arty strikes are overall better. Harder to see them coming and no chance to shoot them down.


Yes, Luft might get a Tiger. It is not a final decision but not an unlikely option.



Whats the reason behind that? Capable inf with strong defense along with Tiger Tanks. Thats quite frightening. In HR games the tec requirments are quickly achieved and i did pay like 4 CP for it.

MEFISTO
Posts: 96
Joined: 18 Jun 2016, 21:15

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby MEFISTO » 09 Nov 2019, 21:10

no hetzel or Jpz? any way to figth vs CW early churchil? or the same problem with the 75mm sherman vs PIV F2?

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3624
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby Warhawks97 » 09 Nov 2019, 21:48

The 88 can be unlocked quite quickly. Henschel does exist but as strafe. And if the CP stay as they are, Tiger can be unlocked after 4 CP.


And we have have no information how RE will look like in future. How churchills will perform and how many CP they cost. There is currently no churchill that doesnt require CP. The F2 and sherman comparission is out of place.

MEFISTO
Posts: 96
Joined: 18 Jun 2016, 21:15

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby MEFISTO » 10 Nov 2019, 00:14

Warhawks97 wrote:The 88 can be unlocked quite quickly. Henschel does exist but as strafe. And if the CP stay as they are, Tiger can be unlocked after 4 CP.


And we have have no information how RE will look like in future. How churchills will perform and how many CP they cost. There is currently no churchill that doesnt require CP. The F2 and sherman comparission is out of place.

Don’t tell me 88 to count a Churchill you know that’s no the solution especially in early mid game, And I compare this with PzPIV F2 vs 75 because this doctrine does’t have a vehicle to face this I could tell you allies have 76mm early and for cheap.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3624
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby Warhawks97 » 10 Nov 2019, 14:08

CW is not done yet entirely. And churchill cost CP, unlike F2 which means tecing alone isnt enough.


I would just wait with this untill CW has been reworked and then we see how many CP churchills will get. The sherman/F2 debate is a debate about stock units. Churchills are not stock units but doc units which require CP which means the player has already made strategic decision to which you can counter-react.

And finally we might get a major rework for churchill seperating them into MK VI version with penetrationable armor and MKVII version that becomes available as a normal heavy armor tank and damage sponge.


The Sherman/Tank IV issue is something that will come up in every single game. Churchills are a whole different matter.

MEFISTO
Posts: 96
Joined: 18 Jun 2016, 21:15

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby MEFISTO » 10 Nov 2019, 18:03

Warhawks97 wrote:CW is not done yet entirely. And churchill cost CP, unlike F2 which means tecing alone isnt enough.


I would just wait with this untill CW has been reworked and then we see how many CP churchills will get. The sherman/F2 debate is a debate about stock units. Churchills are not stock units but doc units which require CP which means the player has already made strategic decision to which you can counter-react.

And finally we might get a major rework for churchill seperating them into MK VI version with penetrationable armor and MKVII version that becomes available as a normal heavy armor tank and damage sponge.


The Sherman/Tank IV issue is something that will come up in every single game. Churchills are a whole different matter.

we will wait till the rework gets done but now is not balance even though Churchil cost CP because it cost 1cp now I gess.

Walderschmidt
Posts: 283
Joined: 27 Sep 2017, 12:42

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby Walderschmidt » 10 Nov 2019, 20:21

If people go RS, I will rocket every churchill I see until it gets balanced.

Wald

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 1745
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby kwok » 11 Nov 2019, 19:42

Couple things here:

First, I'm going to call back an old thread that is obsolete but we still went back and took a look to get a sense of what the community wants: viewtopic.php?t=2904

Regarding the Tiger,
This was put in instead of the panther because of the general thought that the panther was too efficient and had too much synnergy with the rest of the luft doc. It's combination of AT power, mobility, and cheap cost allowed Luft to essentially dominate every doctrine without much skill.
The tiger as a unit still holds the capability that panther provided so that there wouldn't be a gap against certain doctrines, but takes away a lot of the synergies that made the panther OP (namely mobility and cost).
I did ask Warhawks to look into possible strong tanks to include into luft from a historical perspective, but historical reasons will NOT be recognized over gameplay. So despite the fallsj-panzer division having panthers, we will likely NOT return the panther unless a stronger reason comes up.

Regarding the Churchill,
We have only gotten to the British reworks, luft doc, and slightly touched the RA doc as of now. The churchill, mostly an RE tank unless it makes sense in the RA doc, was not looked into deeply yet. Please make a separate topic about this as it doesn't really fit into this topic. Luft has always had and will continue to have an answer for churchills so there is not point in arguing how the churchill should be here. If the churchill changes, so will luft and every other doctrine to make sure that churchills as a sole unit are not OP.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 3624
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby Warhawks97 » 11 Nov 2019, 20:48

kwok wrote:
Regarding the Tiger,
This was put in instead of the panther because of the general thought that the panther was too efficient and had too much synnergy with the rest of the luft doc. It's combination of AT power, mobility, and cheap cost allowed Luft to essentially dominate every doctrine without much skill.
The tiger as a unit still holds the capability that panther provided so that there wouldn't be a gap against certain doctrines, but takes away a lot of the synergies that made the panther OP (namely mobility and cost).
I did ask Warhawks to look into possible strong tanks to include into luft from a historical perspective, but historical reasons will NOT be recognized over gameplay. So despite the fallsj-panzer division having panthers, we will likely NOT return the panther unless a stronger reason comes up.



I think the real synergy that made Panther in luft so strong was that it was the cheapest Panther available. It was as good as other Panthers but lacked anti inf. But Luft does not lack anti inf power at all, its probably the most effective inf shredding doctrine out there. So having cheap but well armored Tank with decent gun in combo with some costly inf enabled this doc to get quickly one or two Panthers along with a unit like gebis that took on 3 inf squads at once.
The passive buff was the fact that US had no 90 mm guns in docs aside from armor doc (which was commonly a victim of Henschels).


Things change if we add Panther G that costs more (or, if we make Panther D the more expensive Panther which would also be historical correct). The Tiger might be less well armored up-front but its better protected against flank attacks, has vastly more HP which means surviving 90 mm shots is more likely as it is for Panthers and the 88 adds also increased anti tank capabilities as it oneshots a lot more often than Panther gun. Also, once Tiger got enough vet, you face a real nightmare. While Gebis take out all of your inf from long range, the Tiger will also snipe all your anti inf vehicles and tanks from pretty long distances.

So i fear the Gebis/Tiger combo a lot more than the Gebis+Expensive Panther G combo.


Overall, Situation has changed.

1. No more Henschels swarms that makes any pick of armor doc against Luft a suicide.
2. There is a 90 mm gun in Inf doc now that can counter Panther effectively. The Tiger has greater chances surviving a hit of it.
3. The infantry isnt as powerfull right away. Means anyone who gets Panthers, will face significant drawbacks in its infantry power.
4. If you add Panther G, people will have to pay more for it. Or simply make sure that Lufts Panther costs enough.
5. You can limit the ammount of Panthers for Luftwaffe to avoid spam.
6. As said, long range one-shot Tiger that snipes the way free for the inf is a lot more frightening than a Panther G.


So there are multiple reasons why adding the "weaker" Tiger would make things worse in this case as to allow them to get a single or two Panther G´s and Perhaps Panzer IV´s.

Ultimately, i fear an inflation of Tigers if it gets added to TH as well. We should use it sparsely.

CGarr
Posts: 102
Joined: 16 Apr 2018, 21:39

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby CGarr » 13 Nov 2019, 05:47

Warhawks97 wrote:
kwok wrote:
Regarding the Tiger,
This was put in instead of the panther because of the general thought that the panther was too efficient and had too much synnergy with the rest of the luft doc. It's combination of AT power, mobility, and cheap cost allowed Luft to essentially dominate every doctrine without much skill.
The tiger as a unit still holds the capability that panther provided so that there wouldn't be a gap against certain doctrines, but takes away a lot of the synergies that made the panther OP (namely mobility and cost).
I did ask Warhawks to look into possible strong tanks to include into luft from a historical perspective, but historical reasons will NOT be recognized over gameplay. So despite the fallsj-panzer division having panthers, we will likely NOT return the panther unless a stronger reason comes up.



I think the real synergy that made Panther in luft so strong was that it was the cheapest Panther available. It was as good as other Panthers but lacked anti inf. But Luft does not lack anti inf power at all, its probably the most effective inf shredding doctrine out there. So having cheap but well armored Tank with decent gun in combo with some costly inf enabled this doc to get quickly one or two Panthers along with a unit like gebis that took on 3 inf squads at once.
The passive buff was the fact that US had no 90 mm guns in docs aside from armor doc (which was commonly a victim of Henschels).


Things change if we add Panther G that costs more (or, if we make Panther D the more expensive Panther which would also be historical correct). The Tiger might be less well armored up-front but its better protected against flank attacks, has vastly more HP which means surviving 90 mm shots is more likely as it is for Panthers and the 88 adds also increased anti tank capabilities as it oneshots a lot more often than Panther gun. Also, once Tiger got enough vet, you face a real nightmare. While Gebis take out all of your inf from long range, the Tiger will also snipe all your anti inf vehicles and tanks from pretty long distances.

So i fear the Gebis/Tiger combo a lot more than the Gebis+Expensive Panther G combo.


Overall, Situation has changed.

1. No more Henschels swarms that makes any pick of armor doc against Luft a suicide.
2. There is a 90 mm gun in Inf doc now that can counter Panther effectively. The Tiger has greater chances surviving a hit of it.
3. The infantry isnt as powerfull right away. Means anyone who gets Panthers, will face significant drawbacks in its infantry power.
4. If you add Panther G, people will have to pay more for it. Or simply make sure that Lufts Panther costs enough.
5. You can limit the ammount of Panthers for Luftwaffe to avoid spam.
6. As said, long range one-shot Tiger that snipes the way free for the inf is a lot more frightening than a Panther G.


So there are multiple reasons why adding the "weaker" Tiger would make things worse in this case as to allow them to get a single or two Panther G´s and Perhaps Panzer IV´s.

Ultimately, i fear an inflation of Tigers if it gets added to TH as well. We should use it sparsely.


Depending on how the PE infantry are treated in the future (possibly being made cheaper and therefore able to spread out a bit more), I can see what you mean with the tiger being an issue, as currently I think the main thing that keeps it from being an issue is the fact that unless the game goes for a very long time and the allied players aren't just constantly bombarding the PE player as they usually would (head on combat being a deathwish given how good PE inf are), it is pretty easy to keep PE players confined to a relatively small section of the map after midgame since they generally have so few units due to the high costs. If that limiting factor is taken away, I can see the tiger being problematic, but panthers as they were implemented previously had their own host of issues.

The answer to tigers would usually be heavy tanks, air, AT inf, or AT guns and this doctrine happens specialize in killing all 4 of those quite well with the rest of it's roster. This would leave allied players with TD gambles as their only option, pinning their survival on the chances of TD not missing/bouncing their single cloaked shot and then hoping the PE player backs out since the TD that fired is most likely dead unless it happens to have killed the tiger in one hit (unlikely, especially without 90mm / 17 pounder) / destroyed its main gun (also pretty unlikely).

Best solution would be panthers with a unit limit of 1, for assisting in pushes without fulfilling the entirety of the doctrines AT needs in the way a vetted tiger could (ALRS). This isn't an armor-focused doctrine, and hopefully the TH rework will fill the desire for an axis doctrine that has heavies alongside combat capable inf that can repair (similar to armor).

User avatar
mofetagalactica
Posts: 510
Joined: 30 Jan 2017, 11:15

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby mofetagalactica » 14 Nov 2019, 00:26

I can agree with warhawks, i think the tiger is out of place in luft and he's also correct the sinergy that it had it was because it was the cheapest rushable panther and still strong enough as any other panther.
The new tiger mixed with gerbs are a nightmare, since tigers are way better to deal with jacksons/fireflies than panthers, so i vote for trying with panthers A/G for luft.

Off topic: Please get rid of more rewards options such as panther variants on bk ,chaffe/stuart, add more tiger variants on propaganda/th and stug 3/4, just let the peopple decide in-game whats more suitable for them or not depending on their resources/needs.

kwok
Team Member
Posts: 1745
Joined: 29 Mar 2015, 05:22

Re: Possible Luft Rework

Postby kwok » 14 Nov 2019, 00:49

mofetagalactica wrote:
Off topic: Please get rid of more rewards options such as panther variants on bk ,chaffe/stuart, add more tiger variants on propaganda/th and stug 3/4, just let the peopple decide in-game whats more suitable for them or not depending on their resources/needs.


Sigh... if it’s off topic would if effing kill you to just take two clicks to create a new topic?


Return to “Balancing & Suggestions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 40 guests