0.7.6 Patch Notes

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[lionel23]

What did pop have to do with anything? I'm lost 

[CrazyWR]

I think it was a gren/shrek reference?  I'm not sure how its relevant tbh...

[EliteGren]

Grenadiers with a schreck = 5 pop. 1 zook rifles aren't as pop effective, they only have around half the effectiveness of a panzerschreck.

[CrazyWR]

and yet smokaz keeps insisting they are a counterpart to ab/rangers/infantry stickies...

[gamesguy2]

Grenadiers with a schreck = 5 pop. 1 zook rifles aren't as pop effective, they only have around half the effectiveness of a panzerschreck.

Err ya this.  I was trying to make a forum post while tracking down a bug and having a convo on IM at the same time lol.

No clue why I typed what I did.

What I meant to say was rifles with a single zook is not pop efficient.  It's half the firepower of a shrek with no other upgrades.   It'd be like making grens 10 men squads but can only buy 1 shrek and cost 10 pop, it's ridiculously weak as an AT counter.

Only with infantry doctrine buffs like tank reapers are they effective.

[Smokaz]

They are only pop-inefficient to the degree that you'd actually field something else. One zook is what armor gets, single shrek grenadiers are pop-ineffective compared to stormtroopers with double shreks. Yet this doesn't apply for some reason?

[gamesguy2]

In my opinion, removing canister shot before actually implementing a more anti-vehicle orientated gun was somewhat of a fluke. Unless I am wrong in assuming that the stuart gun will be tweaked?

Look harder.   The stuart gun has been completely overhauled.

NEW BUGS

Officers at vet 2 dont "Suport" any units exept infantry, and he done not follow then, paks, Nebbels, flak88 wont get suport, great...

Not a bug.  Supervise intentionally excluded nebels and 88s.  They still work on paks.

[gamesguy2]

They are only pop-inefficient to the degree that you'd actually field something else. One zook is what armor gets, single shrek grenadiers are pop-ineffective compared to stormtroopers with double shreks. Yet this doesn't apply for some reason?

Single shreked grens are still nearly twice as pop effective as single zook rifles.

Of course it doesn't apply.   

[Smokaz]

Sure, I'lll just trade my zooked rifles for this 10 pop gren with 2 shreks.. oh wait, I am americans. I dont get shreks.

There are definite advantages to rifles having zooks. They can get the sticky too, which basically stops them from being pushed or engaged at the dangerous medium/short range by light vehicles.

[CrazyWR]

...why would anyone come close to zooks?  They fail at range...and also, you would spend 120 munitions for a zook/sticky  combination on vanilla unbuffed rifles?  really?

[3rdCondor]

I'm pleased with the patch. Canister shot was too op, t17 stun removal makes the t17 less overpowered, but without removing it's damage or usefulness against anything but tanks. Staghound mg change is finally here and perfect, but it's still good and worth buying. finally EIR feels more balanced.

[Demon767]

id like to hear how canister shot was to OP

[gamesguy2]

id like to hear how canister shot was to OP

It was more of a vet hunting tool, and doesn't fit with the new anti-vehicle stuart.

[CrazyWR]

I'll reserve judgment on the stuart til I have a chance to use the new one myself, but...at a glance it looks like a silly change.

[puddin]

id like to hear how canister shot was to OP

It was more of a vet hunting tool, and doesn't fit with the new anti-vehicle stuart.

Anti Vehicle referencing Light vehicle killing power?  

Did you use the stuart at all before the proposed the change?  I did, Ran 5 in my most recent company, And against PE as Wind will attest, I ripped his Inf Hts, ACs, Maurders to shreds.  So how much more Anti vehicle do you need?  

Ever use canister shot, I mean really try to use it?   Because if you have not then you don;t understand the ability.  

No it was not used to vet hunt or grief except by certain assholes in the community, Thats like saying AB or Commandos should not be able to drop in the enemy side of the map because they could grief retreating troops....

I used canister when the opposing force grouped 2 or more units together and tried rushing positions, the mere sight of a stuart scares off attackers into a mad dash to cover breaking the infantry immediately, causing the AT to come up closer to cover them and stalling the quick advance.  

The stuart was no where near broken or in need of a change.

Considering the leader board shows around 5-10 stuarts i know there was not a lot of people using them, and no one really tested them to see how they were.  So why the Change?  There was no out cry to change them, There was no basis for saying " This is broke" IT was just changed because it was thought " Hey, This unit just needs to change"  When the problem was the Staghound in most circumstances was a better option...  

I gained a ton of vet on those stuarts... but 2 maurder shots they die, they are fragile and not as fast but have decent range ans can hold their  own at times... With a CCt they get real good.  

I will try the new ones in a 1v1 with someone and post my thoughts, but with no solid reasoning behind a change was just disapointing.

Just Did a 1v1 Vs computer, 2 stuats vs 2 Pumas... Close battle stuarts won... barley...  Against 1 P4 lost.  Against shreks, Lost. 

2 Stags Vs 1 sShrek Squad, Won, Almost lost 1 Stag, He rnan into red cover, and still got 2 shots off while 2 stags fired. 

[Killer344]

It was changed because it was overlapping with the Stag, it's kinda silly to have 2 AI vehicles instead of 1 AI and 1 AT.

[gamesguy2]

Anti Vehicle referencing Light vehicle killing power? 

Did you use the stuart at all before the proposed the change?  I did, Ran 5 in my most recent company, And against PE as Wind will attest, I ripped his Inf Hts, ACs, Maurders to shreds.  So how much more Anti vehicle do you need? 

I ran an arty company with three stuarts, so yes I know how they used to work.

Stuart gun was on par with the M8 gun against vehicles, that is not good "anti-vehicle".   The stuart used to get 2x dmg bonus vs most PE vehicles, but when the armor types were changed to make them less vulnerable to small arms stuart lost that bonus and was no better than the M8 at killing vehicles.

Ever use canister shot, I mean really try to use it?   Because if you have not then you don;t understand the ability. 

No it was not used to vet hunt or grief except by certain assholes in the community, Thats like saying AB or Commandos should not be able to drop in the enemy side of the map because they could grief retreating troops....

I used canister when the opposing force grouped 2 or more units together and tried rushing positions, the mere sight of a stuart scares off attackers into a mad dash to cover breaking the infantry immediately, causing the AT to come up closer to cover them and stalling the quick advance. 

Or they could hit your stuart with two shreks and kill them.   And yes I used canister.  It was far too lopsided an ability.  No vehicle should be able to nearly insta-gib a squad with the click of a button but be terrible when the ability is on cool down.  It's just bad gameplay and bad balance.  

The stuart was no where near broken or in need of a change.

Considering the leader board shows around 5-10 stuarts i know there was not a lot of people using them, and no one really tested them to see how they were.  So why the Change?  There was no out cry to change them, There was no basis for saying " This is broke" IT was just changed because it was thought " Hey, This unit just needs to change"  When the problem was the Staghound in most circumstances was a better option... 

There was no outcry to change them because no one used them.  There is no outcry to change the churchill MKIV either, and it was a hideously underpowered unit no one used because they had better options like the stag and the MKVI.

I gained a ton of vet on those stuarts... but 2 maurder shots they die, they are fragile and not as fast but have decent range ans can hold their  own at times... With a CCt they get real good. 

I will try the new ones in a 1v1 with someone and post my thoughts, but with no solid reasoning behind a change was just disapointing.

We gave the reasoning behind the change.  The stag is the anti-infantry vehicle for brits, the stuart is the anti-vehicle one.   Exactly like the upgunned puma/puma, hotchkiss/AC, etc.

[Masacree]

It was changed because it was overlapping with the Stag, it's kinda silly to have 2 AI vehicles instead of 1 AI and 1 AT.

qft

[CrazyWR]

interesting, thats exactly what you did to the t17, you changed it to make it entirely AI, just like the m8.

[puddin]

interesting, thats exactly what you did to the t17, you changed it to make it entirely AI, just like the m8.

M8 is not entirely AI, it's a jack of all trades utility vehicle that can engage vehicles and infantry as well as plant a mine.

Amazing how thats how the stuart acted. 

To me your just trying to create Mirror units to the Wher.  Up gunned puma = Stuart.  Why? 

I just played a 1v1 against computer and there nothing challenging or fun... No abilities to use...

Its stale.  Maybe you want it more balanced, I call it stale.

The Stuart had great purpose, Hit and run, and could still hold its own.

And when the armor changed of the PE... It ws because THEY DIED TO QUICKLY... So why are you giving a vehicle the ability to go back to killing them qicker again nullifying the change so its unbalence vS brits and not balenced VS Americans? 

Also a Stuart.... A unit thats not known for its staying power in combat,... you want fighting vehicles... 

Oh i got it... So what your sayign is that the stuart is the Brit M-10 Mixed with the upgunned Puma, Completly throw away.  Thats the way it seems. 

Why not take away the stag main gun, just give it the MG, and make it 6 pop cap.  Might as well.