COH: Europe In Ruins

Whats the current settings of TR? i thought i read somewhere that it was changed, but in game it still has the regular settings it has been listed?

The launcher never gets updated when I'm away


Tank Reapers changed to + 25% Pen, 20% Acc, 15% Damage on ATGs
                                      + 15% Pen, Acc & Damage on Bazooka
                                      + 25% Penetration on Jumbo
                                      + 25% Penetration and Damage on Stickies

and +25% damage on engineer mines.

As if everyone with Tank Reapers uses engineer mines  ::)

its just an option, like you can use tank reapers and never use the jumbo or ranger and use it just for the at gun and sticky bonuses.

although the jumbo bonuses make 'em rock. zook doesn't seem to do much vs tanks but are awesome vs light vehicles and of course ATGS rock.

haven't tried the mines dont really have a TR coy anymore :(

Meh, TR isn't the same without the bazooka buffs, whoopie it still kills Light vehicles.. that's what it was meant for.. not being able to seriously threaten a tank... even the old ones didn't reliably penetrate the front of tanks.  If the ATG part was the bad part with it stacking on AP rounds, nerf that portion of it, still miss the old bazooka part.  Jumbo penetration is pretty cool, but rather go up the free SMG line and the mobile cover bonuses that provides with a sturdy assault tank any day.

I just can't withhold my anger towards any post in which it is said the old TR zooks were "fine".

No, having double panzershreks for 80 mun on every ranger squad was not "Fine" and to claim that it was is simply preposterous.

Of course they're weaker now. That's the point of a NERF. To make things weaker. Can you please stop crying about the new TR zooks being weaker?

They weren't guarenteed shrek hits on the front of tanks, but it didn't result in silly things like bouncing 9+ shots off the back of a stug with the current bazooka stats (not the current TR stats). It was barely borderline before, and they pretty much got a 50% nerf from their old stats, which means they won't cut it for Tank Fighting, and if not... and if they're just meant for vehicles, may as well pass TR and go another doctrine as bazookas have no problems doing that.  I have no issues fighting PE or blowing up ATGs or pumas and stuff with them as they are without even having TR.

Old TR was OP in that people complained of losing tanks to 2 shots from an AP round ATG with AP rounds. Yeah, that was a bit crazy.. you know taking 50% life off a panther in one shot, pretty damn powerful and I agree it needed to be nerfed there, but the bazookas were fine as is. If anything maybe not the damage as they get good dmg modifers against axis tanks, but the penetration and most definitely the accuracy is what they need.

TR zooks are so weak! I want my TR zooks to go in a curve  around the enemy tank so they always hit the rear. Call it heat seeking trollzooks.

lol lionel, zooks bouncing off rear stug.

I've personally experienced it Leo with the old TR zooks bouncing off a stug, which proceeded to powerslide and suppress the rangers who had it surrounded. So don't you say it doesn't happen.  Just as I've seen plenty of times of Sticky Bombs 'missing' though some people insist it can never ever happen, or seeing an AP round ATG bounce off a King Tiger several times in a row.

Anyone who cries about paying 80mu for AT capabilities on an elite platform with fire up should be ashamed of themselves.

Good players will find a way to flank enemy tanks, rather than rush zooks head on.

Jumbo pen alone is a good reason to get this t4. ATG bonus is still insanely good for your average rifle + atg coy.

More damage on mines is new to me. It's really frustrating that these stats AREN'T in the launcher. If i'd have known, I would have kept my inf company and worked harder on it.

P.S. I've never seen zooks bounce off the back of anything ever, lul

And I've seen the Kraken mate with a unicorn while the Loch Ness monster was leading a Conga line of Martians.
True story.

Spinn do you not even bother to READ?  This isn't a damn always penetrating frontal thing, this is the back of a damn stug and having 3 squads all bounce 2 volleys.. so whats that.. 6 zooks x 2 being 12 shots. So yes, I've seen it and it's semi-reliable with the old TR stats.  Still bounced off the front of a Tiger or something unless you still got lucky.

Not complaining about the ATG, Jumbo pen. is indeed good for a pershing with whatever it comes out to be stat wise (what a 76mm sherman or whatnot?).

And I will assume you've always never seen a sticky miss or AP rounds bounce off KTs? Because I can assure it, it can and does happen, despite your attempt to disbelieve  ;D

Refer to me having seen the Kraken and the Unicorn thing. It didn't happen. You are lieing.

Ah, so the issue here is that you want your bazookas to be able to take out Tigers from the front with no effort at all. Should of said so from the get go so we could of lol'ed and carried on with our lives.

Got the replay still of it happening and PLENTY of witnesses, alas the actual battle file is lost.

And Mys what the heck are you smoking? You're throwing your own stupid argument in when I have never said I wanted them to penetrate from the front.  Old stats they didn't always penetrate from the front, you had to get really lucky or be in a building and a shot fly over the tank and hit it in the ass to even get a hit.  Old TRs suited them just fine in flanking and gave you a tiny chance of dealing with something from the front as opposed to zero chance.  So explain to me how 'It still bounces' can be construed as me wanting to have them go from being borderline to needing to be buffed to always penetrate from the front? Please explain to me your understanding of the english language and what my meaning is in that sentence.  It bounced quite enough before with old TR, now it's bouncing even more now.  Pretty different than a heat-seaking rear shot (which I don't see how it's hitting rear shots from the front with heat seaking tendencies...) or the old RRs with massive penetration that put TRs to shame.

So Mys wake the fuck up - pardon my language - and stop trying to want to make zooks into something they aren't.

zooks have x5 pen multiplier for rear armour stug. penetration vs skirt stug is 0.24.

Point being? The chance is not zero.  It's like rolling a six-sided dice and saying you can never roll say a "one" 10 times in a row.  Unlikely, but it can happen, as the probability of things happen isn't dependent on the previous roll.  I've had a flame HT instant kill a full health Ranger squad on the first split burst, killing all 6 guys, and I've had Flame HTs roast a ranger squad for a full minute and not lose any guy or take any damage.  As well as see the amazing 'miss' sticky that flies into the horizon to join God's word in spreading the joys of the composite TNT sock.. ^^

Convenient, isn't it? That every time I call you out on a ridiculous statement like that there's plenty of witnessses, and you have a replay but never the battlefile :).


0 * any modifier will still always equal zero.
Therefore, there is chance to beat a tank frontally even with regular bazookas.

Rather than stating silly, extremely questionable happenings as the norm as to why the TR bazooka buffs should be reverted how about you provide some actual calculations and number-crunching? You know. Stuff like FACTS?


0.24*5 is = 1.2 chance of penetration. That means you're stating you've rolled a 7 on a 6-sided dice 12 times in a row.

lionel u disappoint me.

I thought you wanted to be in the balance team.

Leo finds your lack of faith disturbing lionel.

(http://laweekly.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/force_choke_2.jpg)

Lawl, so SIX VOLLEYS consecutively failed to penetrate the back of a STuG WITH TR.
You're either the unluckiest player in the history of any computer game ever, or just trolling. Regardless, balance wont occur due to you lying about what may have happened.

I have seen Stickies miss, once or twice, and i've seen them fail to penetrate maybe ten times in 500 games of EIRR. I see no problem with that, it's bound to happen occasionally and should happen, this isn't a definite RPS game. I've used rangers without TR and hell, they don't seem to have any problems dealing damage to tanks as they are. If you want elite inf that can take on tanks reliably, play AB. Rangers already have their advantages and disadvantages, and you should know this more than anyone else.

I've seen stickies miss that's for sure, same with Ap rounds bouncing off the front of a King Tiger and Tiger (same armor) but zooks hitting the rear and bouncing 6 times in a row? Impossible, Stug rear armor is so weak either you were hecka unlucky or the game calculated it as a front short somehow instead of a rear.

You should of gotten over it like when old HEAT and improved barrels were change... .. .... oh thats right TR been the same for 6 + months since the old doctrines got overhauled  :D

An AP Rounds ATG could only bounce off the old German Steel KT at absolute maximum range...

At a 4.8% chance of deflection.

That was very, very long ago.

Tigers were never capable of bouncing an AP-rounds ATG, period (KTs have an inherent 0.8 pen modifier in-built).

A zook can NOT bounce off the rear armour of the StuG, period either. If it does, the game engine mis-interpreted a shot that hit the rear as if it had been a shot that hit the front(AKA : a non-RGD based bug)

Stickies are able to miss because they are technically a grenade with a "sticky" property. But due to their speed and large lock-on radius this is an exceedingly rare possibility (I've seen it happen 4 times in my entire time playing EiR - twice this happened to a P4, twice to a Puma.)

He might infact be getting a 5% bug. maybe all zooks were hitting EXACTLY at the same moment, resulting in a Insta Death but got the 5% bug so it all deflected!!!
I saw a M18 Deflect 6 Panzershrek shots from Stormies, due to the 5% bug. true story

shells still penetrate when 5% bug.

wow, all i asked was stats lol.

should give the jumbo and pen and dam bonus :)

TR zooks are uesless now...

ATGs with AP still rock, but die too easy, old TR gave ATG a health buff too, that could be a good idea since ATGs now will be the main weapon of choice with this t4.

This one time mp44 was penetrating my sherman and picked up zooka not penetrating back of puma because game was interpreting it as KT armor due to 5% bug  1 out of 10 like dice roll  7 times in a row not an RGD thing or bug.  true story i have witnesses and replay but battle file dissapeared from my folder  :'(

Here's the thing guys, in the current doctrine drafts, no doctrine choice is supposed to provide enough buffs to allow a unit to win a fight it would normally lose; only to allow it to preform it's role better. (TR, HEAT rounds, etc.)

Even if it may not pan out the same for every doctrine choice, in the terms of stat buffs, this is the template, hence why TR zooks can no longer take tanks on and live and why we gave the TR player more options in terms of upgunned jumbos and super mines.

Your biggest flaw is that the doctines called, TANK REAPERS not tank ticklers

My infantry company, that i just deleted, i tried both top tier 3 and tier 4s..

and well, they are underwhelming to be honest...  iam having a hardtime finding anything allied fun to play with atm...  trying brit again, see how it goes..

Your biggest flaw is that
1. The doctrine is called INFANTRY
2. were trying to NOT be OP.

What?  Bazookas rape tanks from behind, it's not an inherant weakness of the doctrine choice and your argument is flawed.  Look athe Blitz 'defensive' Elite armor, my grens become super humans, I wiped the floor with 3 british callins with a single LMG gren squad.

The point of the doctrines should be mastering one area while being weak in another.  US infantry you have an AI inf path (via sherman mobile cover and +1 smgs), the Tank Reaper path was anti vehicles yet left you very vulnerable to heavy anti-inf companies, and then well locked and loaded is a meh support, sucks currently.  Same thing with Armor, is armor now flawed under your twisted logic? No offense, but you got the Anti Armor HVAP path, the anti inf path which adds HE rounds... that's what doctrines are and should be about, otherwise what's the point?

@ Dark - And old TR was just fine for bazookas, and so what if its called Infantry? It doesn't mean it only fights infantry, it means its infantry based ><

infantry stands for the fact you are using infantry

No, I dont think you get it. The old TR gave enough stat buffs to bazookas where you could muscle it out with tanks from the front and have a reasonable chance of winning or putting the tank out of commission. Especially the med. tanks, like the P4, and infantry counter tanks like the ostwind. Stat buffs are not supposed to buff your units so they can nuke it's counters even if rear armor is never exposed to you. +33% pen, +25% acc. and +20% dmg zooks did this far too often. They became viable as mainline AT at 80 munitions which is not supposed to happen.

Your comparison of Elite armor blitz troops is not accurate to this discussion as it too falls under the criteria of how stat buffs should correctly effect units. Yes, generic recieved accuracy buffs help in absolutely all situations, but it does not allow you to absolutely overwhelm counters on a regular basis. For example, charge a machine gun with 1 rifle in support and you are still going to lose that battle no matter what type of armor you have. That or a croc, go charge a croc and see what happens.

So, you could've killed 10 british call ins for all that matters. Perhaps the players were shit and you killed sappers. Circumstantial evidence aside, Elite armor troops do not allow you to overwhelm counter cost effectively. It follows the rules, Old TR didnt follow the rules for zooks.


Im going to let you know right now that picking a doctrine spec line to pursue in no way exposes your weaknesses but only seeks to specialize a company in a particular form of combat.

I can tell you right now that me going Tank Reapers does not make my company weak against AI by any stretch because I still have access to BARs, Quads, MGs, snipers, etc which is all you feasibly need. Those of you that think like this and have your company set up like that are just fools.

Again, most of the armor T4s fit into this doctrine buff design. 1 HVAP upgunned sherman will never beat a tiger or a panther in one to one combat, but the buffs help in the matchup and it does nothing to help the sherman against Paks, therefore you cant cost effectively overwhelm counters with these buffs.

Do you see where Im coming from?

Hope he does, because none of SE doctrines buff any AT capabilities.


Im assuming this is what your trying to say simply Ground. Is that the doctrines will buff your playstyle, Meaning your doctrine doesn't necessarily dictate how you set up your company. It only helps in the areas of your playstyle, so if you use alot of Rangers you go TR and they will be buffed abit, helping your playstyle.

In short-er: Your doctrine is based on your needs.

I'm afraid you just don't get it Groundfire, and it leads into the general feeling in the community the dev's don't play the game and know what the heck is going on.  Remember before with ASW and having to be SHOWN that ASW was originally allowing more than 5+ grenades to be thrown?  And us being told 'no it isn't coded like that' until video proof (easy to produce) showed that someone made a mistake in the coding side and apparently never actually used it.  That's just one example of many.

My comparison to Elite armor is accurate and does fall into the discussion as I was fighting Spartan's british Coy and he had Tommys with Brens backed up by a LT and a Captain.  And you know what?  The Elite armor allows me to crush him.  I use Elite Armor grens to bum rush MGs (other than Vickers with instant pin) and I can overwhelm them from the front, I am not worried about suppression with my Gren army because of this.  Now that sounds like it's helping me overcome an inherant flaw that they shouldn't be, but then at the same time it puts me on par as being like rangers and not having to worry about suppression.  My Blitz company has gone more than a 2:1 win/loss because the only 'effective' counters against my grens are tanks.  I can floor any infantry unit being I have super tough 'german rangers'.  I laugh at riflemen trying to fight me, and I will still insist Grens are the mainline german infantry despite what some devs cannot see.

Also your example of the one rifle in support of an MG is flawed, perhaps showing you do not play this game enough, but I have no problems using a pure gren army to overwhelm a supported MG short of a tank like a Churchill or Jumbo or something, which is what my 3 panthers are for to back up my 23+ elite armor grens.

EDIT: And let me add, as we're talking here.. ASW covered a inherrant weakness of Airborne.. assault grenades to counter all infantry, and the half strengths bazookas which let vanilla unarmed squads counter vehicles that are immune to small arms fire...

LIONEL GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEAD. THE BUFFS ARE NOT MEANT FOR YOU TO TAKE ON WHAT YOU COULDNT WITHOUT BUFFS. IT ONLY MAKES IT BETTER ON WHAT IT COULD KILL BEFORE. NOT CREATE MORE OPTIONS TO KILL MORE UNITS.

So explain old Airborne where it has mass damage and penetration, the need for Airborne Rifles, ASW T4 which let it counter things that would rape the hell out of Airborne.  Tank Reapers buffing the Jumbo... does that not cause a problem for Medium armor as well?  Isn't that contradicting yourself Demon in that it's not buffing what the unit could do better (ie the Jumbo is anti-inf) and now you gave it more options to kill things that it couldn't kill before... being Medium armor and panthers (though I wouldn't push it against super heavies).

Maybe you need to get it through your own head Demon and actually play the game and learn how things are actually being played and not theoretical stuff that sounds good on paper but isn't working out in game.

Also, I don't know why you have to be pretty rude going ALL CAPS TO GET MY POINT ACROSS BECAUSE MY ARGUMENT IS DEFEATED, and I don't mean to be rude but dude chill out.

I find hilarious that most of your argument relies on something that was removed ages ago.

Hey hey hey, lets not get too personal here, you haven't contributed to this thread, so I would assume you don't have any right on attacking another forums poster in it. ;P

I was attacking the credibility of the argument, derp.

Ok, first off on the aysemmetric warfare, that's a way bad example considering that its' a past doctrine build ability. These stat buff rules were only just established with this doctrine build. Back then, we had 2 different coders that each wanted to do the doctrines a certain way and no one could agree on a common ground.

Aysemmetric warfare is basically Assault and Assault has this nifty little way of "reseting" itself allowing the ability to go on indeffinately. So it's not the coder's fault at all, he was correct in that ASW only threw 6-8 grenades, its just the way relic coded assault that was bad and we didnt know fully back then what the cause was for this.

Thats the past, things are more standardized this doctrine build.

Now as for your army, im not going to tell you what can and cannot beat elite armor grens, but objectively, with a little micro, proper unit combinations, tactical awareness and cover use anything can be defeated, and lets just leave it at that.

WHY DO YOU KEEP BRINGING UP ASW WHEN IT WAS TAKEN OUT FOR THE EXACT REASON BECAUSE IT CAN TAKE ON EVERYTHING??????

BRING A REPLAY OF NON BUFF JUMBO AGAINST P4. THEN BUFFED JUMBO AGAINST P4 AND COMPARE. IF IT DOES BEAT THE P4 WE TAKE OUT THE JUMBO BUFF. HAPPY?

Again Demon, chill do, you're acting like an irrational child.  You again did not read my whole post, and I'm only covering what I'm familar with being airborne and inf.  What about Tank Reapers buffing an Anti-Inf tank to be anti-tank now?  I don't know why you have selective hearing (or seeing in this case) issues, but learn to actually read the whole post before making irrational and emotional statements demon.

@ Groundfire - i'll concede that point Ground, very thoughtful post and I do agree with you that, with micro, unit combinations, and tactics, yeah any unit can beat any other unit so I'll just leave it at that. Do think it's interesting and thank you for the explanation on that 'resetting' issue that the relic coders fault there, among many other questionable things they did XD

um read my last edit my bad lol

The jumbo is a normal sherman with panther armor. A beefy generalist tank, it is neither AT or AI, but TR gives it a slight boost to it's AT capabilities. Its still absolutely no where near as good as the normal sherman upgun.

TR gives a +25% pen boost, while normal sherman upgun gives something like x2 pen. Way different stuff. Just an option. You still wont beat a panther or a Tiger, just beat a P4 more easily.

Ah so regular will still be P4.

Lionel, we have no problem with Jumbos with the extra penetration.

Because people rarely take Jumbos? Or the fact that it's a tank that could take out PE Halftrack Vehicles

Ah okay, my issue isn't with the Jumbo (I mean I love that sucker, was always against giving it an upgun and thus negating medium armor), so as long as the Jumbo isn't WTFpwning with TR and negating Axis Medium armor, which I honestly miss seeing on the field.

@ Demon - Read your Edit btw, I would love to compare but that would require me grinding out a company to Tank Reapers, so someone who actually is running TR (which I don't know anyone who is currently since the nerf) would have to provide a video how much more effective the Jumbo is with that buff, but again Groundfire's post pretty much explains what it looks like so we can leave it at that.

That T4 just explains your whole Core, infact i would build my company around just having those units, ATGs, Rangers and Jumbos

Seriously we got a tank thats supped up against Medium armor and infantry, then we have a ATG thats even better to take out Axis armor of any calibre
then we have Rangers with SMGS and Zooks to wtf pwn and rushing LV against your ATG and to even destroy armor when flanking

Do you see now why its a balanced T4 now Lionel. Rangers are still expected to perform the same role, but better and killing because damage increase. We then have the best ATG in game became better, to be more feared. and the workhorse of your company, the Jumbo, to keep those pesky flanking from medium tanks. There all perform better but nothing exceeding what expected.

Infact im gonna make a TR account for the EXACT company build i just told you, seriously with micro its gonna be beast and impenetrable.

rangers are for killing LV and assualting hard points

how many rangers do you have in your company? 20?
you get elite armor by default without a T4 on a 6 men high HP squad
you get a suppression neutralize utility to ignore directional suppression by default
you get the best grenades in the game
and you get very good smgs on upgrade and a cheap supporting AT upgrade

everything on one unit without any doctrine buffs needed just a T1 unit unlock

the T4 we are talking about about buffs what 90% of your company (rangers ATguns jumbos) and your begging for more that zooks reliable penetrate most tanks frontal armor?
whats your plan? completely skip AT guns too and build just a big rangerblob around jumbos to tear to everything?

i even would rethink the jumbo upgun on that T4 to give it a major drawback in terms of splash
because now its like a slower supercheap better armored panther with a bit less damage vs tanks that can take on infantry very good

BigDick, what's your game name in EiRR?

wat is this thread

i don't even

Arguing the probability of stats is pointless. We've allseen jeep bounce 88's and Bikes kill pershings. frankly it wouldn;t be CoH without the machine ghosts fucking with stats( for one patch the 95mm cromwell had like a 10,000% chance to penetrate an infantry and shots still bounced off them

omg... let this thread die, and we wonder why we have people sitting in launcher for hours looking at screen for a game... sheesh.

he'll never tell you, he doesn't even use his boardname as his sign in name for eirr so no one can look at the LB's and see who he is.

anyway, i think TR is fine. Jumbos do really well vs medium armor with the +25 buff, and can even hold it's own vs a panther because of the armor (I"ve done it many times, even a tiger for a while)

you add that onto ATGs and rangers, mines, stickies, build our coy around that and you have a very good AT coy. The fact is, the TR tree (other than the crappy t3) is one of the more balanced tree's in EIRR and is one of my favorite. the reason you dont see anyone really use it is cuz it's NOT OP, even b4 the changes tbh, its just not strong enough but can be nasty in the right hands. Heck, i miss my TR coy :( i'd so use the mines now.

and lionel i think u miss teh fact that groundfire DOES play, is very good and is one of the more vocal devs on the forum, if anyone's word is valid about a particular ability, it's his.

I know...






it's Aloha!


haha naw,I'll never spill someones info unless they need an "emergency company restructuring" The brn4meplz special

Hey Brn, where have you been hiding anyway?

Working in Alberta. This laptop can barely run anything and nohope at CoH. It's balls here I hopeto be home mid-late March, I need my EiR fix

i think i know about tow of his names but meh. i still think he's a coward for never revealing himself.

How am I expected to believe what BigDick says on the forums if I don't know what his name on the EiRR launcher is?

You don't.
No one else does.

So, he's just in EiRR forums for the lulz? And I shouldn't believe what he says whatsoever?

pretty much, dont know how u can talk about balance if you're never seen in games ;)

Btw Burn, you couldn't take your PC with you to Alberta? We miss ya man =(

I miss TheLastArmada =(

how ever its important as what i play i can promise you i play eir and i played a couple of games and use many different companies

quick check of all combined profiles says


80 games as PE w/l 4:1
more than 50 games as brit w/l 10:1
currently 25 games as US w/l 25:0 i had an other lvl9 US before (with a leaderboard jumbo) (had 30-35 games on it) that got accidentally deleted somehow where i got refund PP and rank that went into a wehr account
really played wehr games maybe around 40 w/l 4:1

thats combined 200? games since last reset last year (November?)

i how u feel now more comfortable that i play indeed EIR from time to time but on many many many different companies and not just on one

I could only bring myself to page three before I had to bang my head on the table repetitively in an attempt to try to forget the incoherent and horrible logic that is coming from people complaining about TR. I'd say TR is on par with the top t4 for effectiveness.

Zontar, look for starsnake on the leaderboard. You have H0tChiIi, sabretoothed & GrumbleBumbleBee which are all BigDick's aliases afaik.
I think he aliases so people wont bag him for spamming hotch stukas :)

^ this is why people dont like smurfs because a lot of times it's the spammers who smurf.

so now are 2 hotchkiss stukkas (that are even placed in holding area since some days because im trying different company/doctrine builds) spam? interesting

2 same units at once = spam. Didnt u know?

fail than it can't be spam because i never used them both at the same time on the field except when a game was decided by pop

Its delayed spam then. Oh and how can you be spam? 5 euro die stunde fuer englisch nachhilfe. Ich bin jung und brauch die kohle. :-*

He's GrumbleBumbleBee?

Well, that would explain why he said by using HE rounds I'm exploiting, lulz.

:)

+1 to whoever made this change

he is alive !!!!!!!!!!!!!!  :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o

BURN HIM THEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2 weeks guys I will have a update on whats going on

I hope you guys are doing good

This change to TR btw was something that I personally championed and posted a lot about, I worked perhaps overall about a year (not continually but from post #1 about it to the final blow) explaining and debating what T4s that had heavy economical advantage over others and how they needed to be dealt with. This is a shining example of my work.

I've heard a lot of shit has been slung about me when I'm not here to defeat them.. which I of course do not believe in at all because that means my hoodlums and henchmen did not do their job, and i'll be damned if that ever happened

no point replying to my post with the intent of having me reply back I'm retired after all

(http://www.comicbookmovie.com/images/users/uploads/8558/SUPERMAN.LIVES.BIG.nicholas_cage_superman_outfit.jpg)

Smokaz update your avatar  :-*

(http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/6008/421l.png)

lets praise the lord

(http://www.g-g-c.de/forum/images/smilies/anbet2.gif)

But if TR is a T4? Shouldn't it be really good? I enjoy the fact that you give me more options on how to kill Tanks, but Mines and Jumbos aren't something I usually use to kill Tanks.

It is really good. the oldvalues were too good.

Mostcompanies use mines(even if only 1-2) so it helps and the penetration increase for Jumbo's gives it that extra bit in a slugfest.

Its meant to increase your effectiveness of your units counter traditions. not increase your unit capabilities to counter more types of units then it was before. Forget about being Really good. check out Chemical fire, its literally a T4 that doesnt buff anything relevant to make your companies effectiveness better. Which in the future hopefully gets taken out or revamped to reflect a actual T4



Your opinion. but they counter tanks, so effectiveness increases like i said before.

I thought the Tank Reapers T4 was to boost Rangers ability to counter tanks(Something I found they could somewhat do at certain times), considering they can already counter Light Vehicles enough as it is  :P

They still can counter tanks. They just were not meant to counter tanks from the front armour. they still do fantastic against rear armour. and thats something Rangers have always been great at

I'd rather have an Ami equivilent of Teller mines than stronger Rangers. Use rangers to support mines, jumbos and ATG's and you haver a pretty damn solid company against tanks. TR is one of those t4's that is powerful only if it suits your play style. If you don't use heaps of ATG's or zooks, why did you get it?!

Exactly, T4s are meant to go by Your playstyle. Not determine what you have to use.

Name one T4 that does not in any way determine what units you should use.

You cant prove that Myst.

Its like saying. Hey i like using rangers and ATGs. oh look a doctrine that buffs my playstyle. ill do that!

Or a person who looks at the T4 and says, thats the kind of playstyle i want.

Well none of them determine what you should use. That decisionoriginates with the individual. you simply pick a tree that matches what your seeking.

Until eventually you're like us and your simply picking units to break things or see how it pans out

Maybe Tank Reapers was OP because there were barely any Axis tank buff :O

Well we abolished German Steelages ago. that was a nightmare without TankReapers

Of course back then tank reapers had values of +75% to everything

So, I think in-order to bring back up Tank Reapers to a reasonable level, we need to also have some Axis tank buffs.

It's at a reasonable level, you're just doing it wrong! If you're using Rangers to counter a Tiger, p4 or any other AI tank, then.. just delete the game plox.
TANK REAPERS buffs ATG's -- the most reliable form of AT in the American arsenal, by increasing Pen, acc AND damage. WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT? Stack it with AP rounds and veterancy and watch it maul Axis tanks.

TBH, Tank Reapers would suit riflemen + zooks more than it would rangers, 55mu (I think?) for a zook on a rifle squad is awesome.

That doesn't make sense, how is a Zook more effective on a Riflesquad than a Ranger squad?

Cheaper in MP (200 vs 310). MU is different, for better or worse (55 for one zook on rifles, 80 for two on rangers), on a platform that receives -10% received acc on the TR tree, compared to +5hp per man on rangers, better AI capability (due to only having one zook), Can have stickies. 5 pop vs 6. Armour on Rangers is slightly better but meh.

They both have their advantages and disadvantages. For my play style, i'd rather use rifles as I don't need two zooks to support my atg's, I already have mines for flanks too.

What's your play style?

My play style relys heavily on ATGs with AP rounds that somehow always gets 2 members gibbed when a Tank fires at them, leaving the last man to retreat and immediately wasting 40 munitions on an ATG AP rounds that only lasted 5 or so minutes after calling it on the field. My Zooks even with the New TR on still have a hard time damaging a Hetzer/Panther/Panzer 4 on it's "side armor" when before you could see a chunk of the bar go down when the zooks could actually hit the tank while standing still. I don't see why people are getting worked up about Bazookas penetrating the front of Panthers with the old TR, in my experience and considering I've used TR quite a bit, I have rarely seen that happen, and if it has, then most likely due to Rangers blobs firing off a salvo of 5 or 6 zook shots all at once.

And when are you not floating tons of manpower?  For 110 MP, you can upgrade to Rangers to get Elite armor, get a 2nd discount bazooka for 80 (as opposed to two riflemen with bazookas bringing the MU cost to 110 MU... the price of an ATG!), and you also gain the handy fireup.  I also find Triage center pays more in keeping the tough rangers alive as opposed to fragile riflemen.

Better AI as in what... 1 extra garand?  I don't consider it a bug but under the AI focus of US Infantry, you got a SMG with your 2 bazookas.  Losing the ability to sticky and perma disable a tank is something I do miss, but I believe and feel the ranger is just an all around better buy.

That's my playstyle anyway, less reliance on ATGs and more on mobility.  Let the Brits do that stationary crap with their more powerful mortars and MGs and their cloaking ATGs.  I'll just capture axis stuff and use it against them.  Silly to bring too many ATGs due to the pop increase, so let your enemy bring it out for 5 pop (which is now equal to a riflemen), kill it and recrew for a 4 pop gun, giving you a double advantage.  Get a Pak40, even better ^^