Armor zooks

[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

[Smokaz]

Jesus.

[skaffa]

is this the game we just played on radar ?

[CafeMilani]

HILARIOUS how mountainman calls in more and more pumas to counter your zook rifles 

[Two]

What else could he call out tho grens wouldnt hit in the smoke and the flamer + bar woulda owned them, pumas have the greatest chance to hit since even when missing they can hit.

SE doctrine is the only one out that can reliably counter this.

[CafeMilani]

[shockcoil]

epic epic pic

[Unkn0wn]

Tiger would totally own bazooka blobs.

[Smokaz]

There's too many to list for infantry and only one (in a radius near vehicles) to list for armour.
You're the one trying to proof something is wrong, it's your responsibility to back up your claims.

As long as you don't do that this discussion ain't going anywhere.

Okay, let me update you. This is part of why I feel like I feel about zooks.

Zooks. Thats all armor gets. And its all they need if they wanna spam expendable, annoying zook rifles out the ass. Infantry actually get meaningful upgrades and abilities that promote using other stuff than just sucide rifles with grenades. Armor doesnt, and they want mobile AT support. 57mm isn't very mobile. There's no explanation or synergy for zooks in the doctrine, it was just added. There's no way in hell you'd be able to spend all your munis on your armor unless you run tons and tons of ATG's, and whats the point of playing armor if you can't even fight the german tanks with your buffed tanks?

Specialist equipment for inf (LOL) is a t2. Zook for rifles on armor, is a T1.

On the lol side:

Infantry gets bonuses for being close to halftracks and bigger armor/vehicles. -15% damage, -25% supression

Wait.. why does infantry get this? Lol.

An as for your tiger.. please. Tigers dont own anything other than a 1 way ticket to hell. :d

[Unkn0wn]

An as for your tiger.. please. Tigers dont own anything other than a 1 way ticket to hell. :d

Tigers do good against bazookas and will rip apart blobs thanks to their superb splash damage.

[Tymathee]

There's too many to list for infantry and only one (in a radius near vehicles) to list for armour.
You're the one trying to proof something is wrong, it's your responsibility to back up your claims.

As long as you don't do that this discussion ain't going anywhere.

Okay, let me update you. This is part of why I feel like I feel about zooks.

Zooks. Thats all armor gets. And its all they need if they wanna spam expendable, annoying zook rifles out the ass. Infantry actually get meaningful upgrades and abilities that promote using other stuff than just sucide rifles with grenades. Armor doesnt, and they want mobile AT support. 57mm isn't very mobile. There's no explanation or synergy for zooks in the doctrine, it was just added. There's no way in hell you'd be able to spend all your munis on your armor unless you run tons and tons of ATG's, and whats the point of playing armor if you can't even fight the german tanks with your buffed tanks?

Specialist equipment for inf (LOL) is a t2. Zook for rifles on armor, is a T1.

On the lol side:

Infantry gets bonuses for being close to halftracks and bigger armor/vehicles. -15% damage, -25% supression

Wait.. why does infantry get this? Lol.

An as for your tiger.. please. Tigers dont own anything other than a 1 way ticket to hell. :d

Infantry get it to promote more synergy with vehicles. Armor gets accuracy bonuses, infantry get defensive bonuses.

Also, when thinking of rifle zooks, its kinda Op but at the same time, all axis docs get mobile AT in terms of schrecks, brits have piats and then the allies had rr's for airborne and zooks for infantry on rangers. having zooks for armor is a "realistic" thing cuz infantry with armor platoons would have mobile AT with them in case of flanking armor.  

specialized equpment is a t2 cuz of being able ot give bars to rangers (which i see no one use btw) but in a ways , i think zooks should be a T2 for armor as well because of how good it seems to make them.

[Smokaz]

An as for your tiger.. please. Tigers dont own anything other than a 1 way ticket to hell. :d

Tigers do good against bazookas and will rip apart blobs thanks to their superb splash damage.

If you are fielding a tiger to counter a few zook rifles.. well. Guess what ? The armor player is going to have his own units capable of neutering the tiger. A vet 2 sticky behind a building, a hellcat in ambush.

Also, tiger accuracy vs mortar smoke.. fun fun fun.

[Unkn0wn]

If it's only a few zook rifles there's no problem, but clearly you are spamming more than 'just a few zook rifles'.

[Smokaz]

Yeah, because there's nothing else worthwhile to get. When you are running armor without zooks, you are basically pigeon-holed into getting some 57mms, a few sticky rifles + support weps. Which are far far less cost-effective than suicide rifles shooting that zook until the last guy drops and having no heal to return to.

It was a genuine trademark of armor that it had no handheld AT, it destroyed enemy armor using it's TD's and its 57mms + eventual vet 2 rifles it had by slowly grinding some rifles up.

[Pak88mm]

i spam zook rifles in armor co. why not? its better than spamming bars.

[CafeMilani]

There's too many to list for infantry and only one (in a radius near vehicles) to list for armour.
You're the one trying to proof something is wrong, it's your responsibility to back up your claims.

As long as you don't do that this discussion ain't going anywhere.

Okay, let me update you. This is part of why I feel like I feel about zooks.

Zooks. Thats all armor gets. And its all they need if they wanna spam expendable, annoying zook rifles out the ass. Infantry actually get meaningful upgrades and abilities that promote using other stuff than just sucide rifles with grenades. Armor doesnt, and they want mobile AT support. 57mm isn't very mobile. There's no explanation or synergy for zooks in the doctrine, it was just added. There's no way in hell you'd be able to spend all your munis on your armor unless you run tons and tons of ATG's, and whats the point of playing armor if you can't even fight the german tanks with your buffed tanks?

Specialist equipment for inf (LOL) is a t2. Zook for rifles on armor, is a T1.

On the lol side:

Infantry gets bonuses for being close to halftracks and bigger armor/vehicles. -15% damage, -25% supression

Wait.. why does infantry get this? Lol.

An as for your tiger.. please. Tigers dont own anything other than a 1 way ticket to hell. :d

Infantry get it to promote more synergy with vehicles. Armor gets accuracy bonuses, infantry get defensive bonuses.

Also, when thinking of rifle zooks, its kinda Op but at the same time, all axis docs get mobile AT in terms of schrecks, brits have piats and then the allies had rr's for airborne and zooks for infantry on rangers. having zooks for armor is a "realistic" thing cuz infantry with armor platoons would have mobile AT with them in case of flanking armor.  

specialized equpment is a t2 cuz of being able ot give bars to rangers (which i see no one use btw) but in a ways , i think zooks should be a T2 for armor as well because of how good it seems to make them.

no, infantry gets it because lionel made this doctrine.

[lionel23]

Infantry are the primary users of bazookas, why shouldn't they get riflemen zooks?  You can either run a bunch of rangers (btw that's the T1 'cheap' access to bazookas, while riflemen bazooka option is the T2 as it allows for a larger number of squads with it on the field while rangers as a T1 has fewer squads but double-packed) or riflemen to support a US Infantry Company who uses tank reapers.

Zooks are a flanking weapon pretty much, with very little chance of actually going through the front armor of any tank, especially if it's skirted.  Armor Company has just a basic bazooka, while Infantry Tank Reapers get the Mk2 bazooka which much, much improved stats.  And honestly if TR wasn't there, I wouldn't be fielding bazookas at all and going Rifle Training or something.

I have to agree with bazookas in armor doctrine cause they really need it to be mobile (being a vehicle based company) while Infantry are foot sloggers, and are carrying around those damn slow-ass 57mm TR AP round ATGs to cover their rangers/riflemen.

[Two]

IMO infantry doctrine buffs shouldnt affect riflemen zookas.

[lionel23]

Why not?  They're infantry, and they carry bazookas (which is a T2 unlock).  If it didn't, there would be no reason to ever use riflemen and Tank Reapers (other than the vet 2 stickies).

[CrazyWR]

its kinda sad, smokaz is turning into aloha

[wittman420]

Hes just speaking the truth dawg