Unkn0wn
No longer retired
 Posts: 18379
|
|
« Reply #40 on: August 25, 2009, 03:26:35 am » |
|
A bland manpower increase is only going to give you more unupgraded troops, not affecting the balance of AT vs Vehicles.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| CrazyWR
|
|
« Reply #41 on: August 25, 2009, 03:44:04 am » |
|
Lots of vehicles fielded means less capping power, means less infantry. Its not complicated. Field more AT against armor companies...people expect one build to be able to handle every single other build they come up against, and thats just not possible...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
1. New tactics? it's like JAWS, first one in the water dies
RCA-land where shells fall like raindrops and the Captain is an invincible god
|
|
|
Tymathee
Donator
 Posts: 9741
|
|
« Reply #42 on: August 25, 2009, 03:54:28 am » |
|
I still say put an upgunned puma in your wehr build and watch how well it does.
50mm vs m8 is 90% not moving and 80% while moving
vs m8 is 100% and 80%
t17 is same target table as the m8.
now compare that to schreck (which has a weird 73% still and 80% moving) and a 0.7 dmg nerf, while the 50mm is still at 100.
vs m3 same thing. 100 80 and .8 nerf. and then the pak is 100 vs both still and 80 moving, so your best bet like above said is the pak and then the 50mm is really good at taking out light vehicles and mroe than likely they wouldn't want to waste the t17 ability on a puma, its just not as deadly as a tank and most allied companies are built around either defeating axis support and/or tanks.
and personally, when I play as pe funny enough i have more problems vs armor spam than I do light vehicle spam, i personally kinda welcome it and i dont use many schrecks in my company, maybe one or two squads to take out dedicated AT vehicles. Also the hotchkiss absolutely rapes light vehiclse.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"I want proof!"
"I have proof!"
"Whatever, I'm still right"
Dafuq man, don't ask for proof if you'll refuse it if it's not in your favor, logic fallacy for the bloody win.
|
|
|
Unkn0wn
No longer retired
Posts: 18379
|
|
« Reply #43 on: August 25, 2009, 03:55:18 am » |
|
Lots of vehicles fielded means less capping power Not if you're armour doctrine  . |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| CrazyWR
|
|
« Reply #44 on: August 25, 2009, 04:11:48 am » |
|
isn't vehicle capping slower than if you use infantry though?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Demon767
Warmap Betatester
EIR Veteran Posts: 6190
|
|
« Reply #45 on: August 25, 2009, 04:17:08 am » |
|
Smokaz i went against the same duel armor duo, bloody hard, and annoying. (been posted)
I have 2 Paks and 4 P4's and a stug and fausts on my both KCH, thats all i have AT wise.
My brother had a panther, a stug, a P4 and 1 Pak with 1 duel shrek stormy and 1 shrek stormy.
We did well and it went down to the wire, the fact is if we were attacking, we would of lost, but we were defending so we could lay our mines roughly 6 which were all hit by there tanks.
I just cant think you can argue that armor company cant spam that many vehicles, yet i never want to vs another armor company again, its just boring fighting them.
But i believe in that the new availability system is flawed ATM, i know it shall be fixed, but i second that vehicles need to be fixed, hey i just put in 6 M18's and 4 M8s and im bloody Airborne you know
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 Generalleutnant of The Reichs Wolves  Nevergetsputonlistguy767 |
|
|
| Ununoctium
|
|
« Reply #46 on: August 25, 2009, 05:42:07 am » |
|
In response to armour using many tanks/vehicles.
NOTHING ELSE GETS DOCTRINE BUFFS.
its by choice to get the max out of our resources.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 My tigers get penetrated by everything. Its really really frustrating.
Your tiger is a whore |
|
|
Killer344
The Inquisitor
 Posts: 6904
|
|
« Reply #47 on: August 25, 2009, 07:53:46 am » |
|
But i believe in that the new availability system is flawed ATM, i know it shall be fixed, but i second that vehicles need to be fixed, hey i just put in 6 M18's and 4 M8s and im bloody Airborne you know
Go ahead, do it, and then tell me you don't have an insane PP bleed each time you play a game. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If I get shot and it's a gay medic fixing me up, he's not gonna be fondling my balls while he does it. You can't patch a chest wound and suck a cock at the same time.
|
|
|
| BigDick
|
|
« Reply #48 on: August 25, 2009, 08:00:10 am » |
|
why he should have an insane pp bleed?
my armor account has 6xM10 4xT17 and 5xquads with 1pp cost every game
with more fuel advantages i'll add a 7th M10 (1pp per game more since i have 2 free pp for armor)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Unkn0wn
No longer retired
Posts: 18379
|
|
« Reply #49 on: August 25, 2009, 08:02:38 am » |
|
The airbourne doctrine has lower values in both the vehicle and armour pool.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| BigDick
|
|
« Reply #50 on: August 25, 2009, 08:04:55 am » |
|
vehicles are not the problem but armor i mixed it with ifantry but on airborne he need indeed 8pp pr game by using 6xm10 (except he dont loose them)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| Two
|
|
« Reply #51 on: August 25, 2009, 12:55:27 pm » |
|
old availability was better then the current gimmick spam
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| LuAn
|
|
« Reply #52 on: August 25, 2009, 12:57:58 pm » |
|
then lets hope there will be a hardcap on some "gimmick" units |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
aka UckY  |
|
|
| CrazyWR
|
|
« Reply #53 on: August 25, 2009, 01:24:34 pm » |
|
old availability was better then the current gimmick spam
seriously? The current gimmick spam isn't nearly as bad as it was in old EIR. People calling what we see today gimmick spam makes me laugh. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Mysthalin
Tired King of Stats
 Posts: 9028
|
|
« Reply #54 on: August 25, 2009, 01:30:39 pm » |
|
lol gimmick spam.
Go take on puddin's 6 sniper 8 ranger 10 M10 company, then you'll KNOW what spam is!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| Two
|
|
« Reply #55 on: August 25, 2009, 01:34:39 pm » |
|
old availability was better then the current gimmick spam
seriously? The current gimmick spam isn't nearly as bad as it was in old EIR. People calling what we see today gimmick spam makes me laugh. Yes seriously. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| Mgallun74
|
|
« Reply #56 on: August 25, 2009, 01:34:57 pm » |
|
Hard Cap... no oversupply values...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
wildsolus
Donator
Posts: 807
|
|
« Reply #57 on: August 25, 2009, 01:43:11 pm » |
|
old availability was better then the current gimmick spam
seriously? The current gimmick spam isn't nearly as bad as it was in old EIR. People calling what we see today gimmick spam makes me laugh. Yes seriously. how? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| CrazyWR
|
|
« Reply #58 on: August 25, 2009, 03:28:09 pm » |
|
Hard Cap... no oversupply values...
then you'd just see identical companies from everyone that plays each faction. Give or a take a unit or two here or there. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| LuAn
|
|
« Reply #59 on: August 25, 2009, 03:52:02 pm » |
|
Hard Cap... no oversupply values...
then you'd just see identical companies from everyone that plays each faction. Give or a take a unit or two here or there. If you Hardcap every single unit yes, but afaik the devs only intend to hardcap a few units |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
