Airborne and Airborne Rifles

[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

[Mysthalin]

Because it would destroy freedom of choise?

And yes, 20 vet 3 tank reaper rangers would just get raped by any infantry-based build, on top of costing two arms in PPs.

[CafeMilani]

Because it would destroy freedom of choise?

lol. stupid spammer

[gamesguy2]

even if is terrible (which i doubt because 20 vet3 tank reaper rangers simply cant be that terrible) you shouldnt be able to have a company like this. its stupid. there should be a hardcap on all doctrinal elite infantry units (rangers, AB, falls, storms) just like there is a hardcap on jagds and KTs. i dont see a reason why it shouldnt be like this tbh

20 vet 3 tank reaper rangers would get face raped by anyone with significant anti-infantry.  Movable ISTs, omniscience ostwinds, or just plain old LMG grens.

Not to mention it costs a retarded amount of PPs and takes up all your munitions and manpower, so you literally cannot afford anything else except maybe few shermans with no repair upgrade.

[CafeMilani]

even if its only 8 or 10 rangers. its stupid.
ostwind is a bad option vs tankreaper vet3 zooks tbh..

they are still elite. i actually thought u want to reduce spamming?
hardcap of 4-6 is ok imo, not need for more

[LeoPhone]

i doubt people can get enough PP anyway for TR unlock + all those  rangers.

they would either have no advantages/other doctrines or play 24 hours a day.

didnt wars become shorter in the future? this also adds in.

[Sach]

even if its only 8 or 10 rangers. its stupid.
ostwind is a bad option vs tankreaper vet3 zooks tbh..

they are still elite. i actually thought u want to reduce spamming?
hardcap of 4-6 is ok imo, not need for more

ostwinds at max range with a motorbike or omniscience.

If it can counter raid assault AB it can sure as hell counter rangers.

[Dragon2008]

Simple answer is no.

Reasons:

1# they are elite units
2# you will encourage spamming
3# you will encourage more blobing
4# If airborne get a pool decrease then other people r gonna ask y can't storms or some other kind of elite unit get a pool decrease.
5# Airborne arnt basic infantry (thats wat u av riflemen squads for).
6# It will mess if not destroy game balance.

[CafeMilani]

nice

[Smokaz]

Hardcaps are limiting, but it sure as hell must be limiting to a majority of EIRR players having to constantly face the doctrine spam of the t4's..

its not a bad arguement that elite infantry should be limited like heavy tanks, its a age old discussion.. on one corner a single squad of airborne never have the impact of a KT/jagd, but what impact could you not say a 100% ab company has..?

[Mysthalin]

hardcap of 4-6 is ok imo, not need for more

That's your opinion, nothing more - and people have the right to disagree without being called "stupid spammers".
If a person feels the need for more units of the same kind - he should be allowed to get them. If balance is done well, then spamming a unit should not yield any better results than if the units were being used in smaller numbers. If anything - the law of diminishing returns should kick in and each subsequent unit of the same type should reap lesser benefits. And in the case of rangers - this law definitely kicks in.

1# they are elite units

Not a reason - because they're elite units, they cost more. That's the main limit to the unit.

2# you will encourage spamming

Who determines what is spam and what isn't? You? To others it's a themed company to have larger amounts of airborne, whereas they see 5 P4s as ungodly spam. Are they right? Question of perception.

3# you will encourage more blobing

Perhaps I can agree with you there - yet airborne are still expensive units. Using them in blobs when they have nothing but grenades is simply stupid.

4# If airborne get a pool decrease then other people r gonna ask y can't storms or some other kind of elite unit get a pool decrease.

Airborne cost 4 pool. Storms/falls cost 3. It's also pretty much a non-argument : the pool values of one faction do not affect the pool values of another.

5# Airborne arnt basic infantry (thats wat u av riflemen squads for).

You're restating 1# in different words.

6# It will mess if not destroy game balance.

Your opinion, not a reason.
If anything, the current fast-paced and low-support-weapon metagame of EiRR, as well as the growing use in combined tank and infantry arms means that spamming grenade/satchel airborne is extremely ineffective. Me, Elitegren and a few other seasoned EIR players have actually tried utilising pure airborne companies lately. We have come to the conclusion it is one of the worst strategies to take at the moment, with AB riflemen + BARs being a far superior choice.

[CrazyWR]

even if is terrible (which i doubt because 20 vet3 tank reaper rangers simply cant be that terrible) you shouldnt be able to have a company like this. its stupid. there should be a hardcap on all doctrinal elite infantry units (rangers, AB, falls, storms) just like there is a hardcap on jagds and KTs. i dont see a reason why it shouldnt be like this tbh

Come off it aloha...I played Lionel at least 8 times when he was running his rangerspam, and brn4me at least 3 times...they both failed epically vs the proper counters...but during the battles when they were up against my teammates who weren't prepared for it, sure, they were very effective.  Like all companies, it depends on what the enemy brings out to counter.  Rangerspam just happens to be much easier to counter than balanced companies...


People should be able to build their companies as they wish, hardcaps on anything other than heavies/superheavies is silly...

[CafeMilani]

even if is terrible (which i doubt because 20 vet3 tank reaper rangers simply cant be that terrible) you shouldnt be able to have a company like this. its stupid. there should be a hardcap on all doctrinal elite infantry units (rangers, AB, falls, storms) just like there is a hardcap on jagds and KTs. i dont see a reason why it shouldnt be like this tbh

Come off it aloha...I played Lionel at least 8 times when he was running his rangerspam, and brn4me at least 3 times...they both failed epically vs the proper counter spam...but during the battles when they were up against my teammates who weren't prepared for it, sure, they were very effective.  Like all companies, it depends on what the enemy brings out to counter.  Rangerspam just happens to be much easier to counter than balanced companies...


People should be able to build their companies as they wish, hardcaps on anything other than heavies/superheavies is silly...

fixed. ppl shouldnt be able to spam like lionel, mystalin etc does it. u can also say: gameplay>realism  or even gameplay>balance in this case 

[Mysthalin]

How is it good for gameplay when everyone has the exact same fucking company?

There's such a thing as combined arms/balanced company spam - but it's not spamming a unit. It's when people keep bitching at you for not playing like they want you to play, and cover it up by whining about how your company is spammy, when it in fact just features less support weapons than theirs.

[CrazyWR]

Really?  I had 3 total p4ists, and 1 hummel and some vanilla pgs with incendiaries...not really spam...just the proper things to use vs ranger spam...


And I agree with Myst completely...its boring when you play the same company over and over again.  More people should be creative like brn's company was at the end before the reset w/ rangerspam and 5 howitzers and dual infantry t3s to buff those 2 particular units, instead of TR zook spam or carbine spam w/ atgs, or w/e...sure, its spammy, but its creative and fun to play with/interesting to play against.

[CafeMilani]

How is it good for gameplay when everyone has the exact same fucking company?

all u do/can is spamming is what you want me to tell or what? fuck its getting annoying again
spamming is not what eir should be about. thats my opinion and i think its the right opinion.
no need for feeble arguments like yours


30volks with fausts and nades + 8+ stugs isnt combined arms spam or however u call it.
or 35 rifles + 5 officers + 7 ATGs
or 8 50mm HTs with whatever unit u found out is most effective when spammed

BS

[CrazyWR]

So tell me aloha, what should a proper company look like exactly? 3 of every possible unit? 2? Where's the limit that you would set?  I just disagree people should be limited in their builds.  Its fun to see what new creative companies people come up with, not playing the same type of company every single game...

[Mysthalin]

all u do/can is spamming is what you want me to tell or what? fuck its getting annoying again

Flamebait + putting words in my mouth. Surely you can do better than that.

I can use balanced companies, of course - and I have. In fact, most my brittish companies are fairly "balanced" in the most general of senses - and I think my overall W/L ratio is best on my brits. It's just that I find it boring to use "balanced" companies.

spamming is not what eir should be about. thats my opinion and i think its the right opinion.

A person thinking his opinion is the right one? Impossible.
You should base your opinion more than on just catchy phrases.
There's a difference between spam in the bluntest meaning of the word and themed companies.

no need for feeble arguments like yours

My argument's backed up - yours is just a pushy opinion and an ad-hominem.

[CafeMilani]

no your argument only looks like backed up but if you think about them a minute u see its a feeble argument.

[Mysthalin]

no your argument only looks like backed up but if you think about them a minute u see its a feeble argument.

So, other than trolling, are you capable of anything?

[CafeMilani]

ha, gotcha