Artekas
Donator
 Posts: 784
|
|
« Reply #80 on: December 15, 2010, 03:09:24 pm » |
|
He said use schrecks or volks, way to take his argument out of context. He never said "you must use volks". And if you don't use schrecks OR volks, you are doing something wrong, because PaKs are supposed to be supported.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| cloud234
|
|
« Reply #81 on: December 15, 2010, 03:12:21 pm » |
|
He said use schrecks or volks, way to take his argument out of context. He never said "you must use volks". And if you don't use schrecks OR volks, you are doing something wrong, because PaKs are supposed to be supported.
I'm under the impression you don't read the entire discussion at all. If you did, you would have known why the schreck + pak is not an effective combination against stags. Fausts + mines were not discussed at all during the entire thread hence the reason I only pointed that out. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Artekas
Donator
Posts: 784
|
|
« Reply #82 on: December 15, 2010, 03:14:37 pm » |
|
I would have known why the schreck + pak combination is not effective against Stags? You say that as if you've proven it as a fact. I have absolutely no trouble dealing with stags with the schreck + pak combination.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Smokaz
Honoured Member
 Posts: 11418
|
|
« Reply #83 on: December 15, 2010, 03:14:42 pm » |
|
Sigh, he lost 2 of his first staghounds (16 pop) vs your 13 pop of AT. Let it go, there's other stuff that needs more attention imo. Stag is ok.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
SlippedHerTheBigOne: big penis puma
SlippedHerTheBigOne: and i have no repairkits
SlippedHerTheBigOne: ( ͡ ͜ʖ ͡)
|
|
|
LeoPhone
Honoured Member
Posts: 0
|
|
« Reply #84 on: December 15, 2010, 03:17:33 pm » |
|
I'm under the impression you don't read the entire discussion at all. If you did, you would have known why the schreck + pak is not an effective combination against stags.
Fausts + mines were not discussed at all during the entire thread hence the reason I only pointed that out.
lol, how can you not beat a stag with pak + schreck? spot the stag with the schreck, the stag will then either try to kite the schreck and get shot by pak -> stag backs off; or it will rush in- > stag gets hit by the schreck and pak(half hp gone) and then either get hit by the pak again and instadie or die a fraction later. this is a teachnoobstrategy discussion not balance. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Mysthalin
Tired King of Stats
Posts: 9028
|
|
« Reply #85 on: December 17, 2010, 04:02:54 pm » |
|
with 450 HP, stag requires 3 pak shots after being hit by a shrek to die, Leo (including cloakshot).
And with canister shot - yeah, it's pretty likely the shrek grens will be dead, which will alow the stag to just circle the pak.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
LeoPhone
Honoured Member
Posts: 0
|
|
« Reply #86 on: December 17, 2010, 04:15:18 pm » |
|
with 450 HP, stag requires 3 pak shots after being hit by a shrek to die, Leo (including cloakshot).
And with canister shot - yeah, it's pretty likely the shrek grens will be dead, which will alow the stag to just circle the pak.
yeah i kno he dies in 4 hits, just ment it will die rly fast. and canister shot is just lame on stag, should be removed. on stuart it still kinda balanced coz it doesnt have any other AI abilities. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| 11on2d6
|
|
« Reply #87 on: December 18, 2010, 02:29:26 am » |
|
I had a pak40 miss 5 shots on a stag in a game this morning... just sayin.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Artekas
Donator
Posts: 784
|
|
« Reply #88 on: December 18, 2010, 02:34:39 am » |
|
And I've had an enemy ATG land four out of five shots on my assault grenadier squad in cover, killing them singlehandedly. Luck can make anything happen, regardless of the extremely low probabilities. It's not really proof of an issue.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| CollectiveSTLS
|
|
« Reply #89 on: December 18, 2010, 05:08:18 am » |
|
yeah i kno he dies in 4 hits, just ment it will die rly fast. and canister shot is just lame on stag, should be removed. on stuart it still kinda balanced coz it doesnt have any other AI abilities.
Yeah that's exactly what i was saying :<. Stags were good when used right before, but canister shot allows them to seriously screw up infantry based AT which is perhaps one of the easiest methods of taking them down and is really expensive. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Artekas
Donator
Posts: 784
|
|
« Reply #90 on: December 18, 2010, 05:14:33 am » |
|
I'm not too sure on what I think about Staghounds with Canister Shot, but do remember they are quite munitions heavy. So even if they are a pain in the ass to fight... at least their cost is at least somewhat representative of it.
I haven't actually seen any Staghounds with canister shot however, so I cannot really gauge their effectiveness and make an argument for or against them.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
TheIcelandicManiac
Resident forum troll. Fucked unkn0wns mom
Posts: 6294
|
|
« Reply #91 on: December 18, 2010, 05:16:38 am » |
|
And I've had an enemy ATG land four out of five shots on my assault grenadier squad in cover, killing them singlehandedly. Luck can make anything happen, regardless of the extremely low probabilities. It's not really proof of an issue.
well i just want to point out to you that if you meet an vet 3 atgun that allso has tankreaper i would not be surprised of that happening due to that when i had it i would get around 10-14 if i microed it well witch i did. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 18, 2010, 05:27:07 am by TheIcelandicManiac »
|
Logged
|
Soon
gj icelandic i am proud of u  Sometimes its like PQ doesnt carrot all.
Work Harder |
|
|
|
|
| Grundwaffe
|
|
« Reply #93 on: December 18, 2010, 08:48:22 am » |
|
Whatevers done, every brit player is using them again.. its effin annoying. bohoo... :L
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
SublimeHauken - Back from the dead - Since 2007'
|
|
|
TheIcelandicManiac
Resident forum troll. Fucked unkn0wns mom
Posts: 6294
|
|
« Reply #94 on: December 18, 2010, 08:49:57 am » |
|
oh happy birthday icelandic  thanks |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| chefarzt
|
|
« Reply #95 on: December 18, 2010, 03:37:48 pm » |
|
Still wonder whos the genius that put the canister on the stag.
Seems a bit overkill.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Tymathee
Donator
Posts: 9741
|
|
« Reply #96 on: December 18, 2010, 04:00:33 pm » |
|
agreed. Should be Stuart only.
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
AmPM
Community Mapper
 Posts: 7978
|
|
« Reply #97 on: December 18, 2010, 04:43:38 pm » |
|
agreed. Should be Stuart only.
No it shouldn't, unless the Puma upgun will be getting an upgrade. Now, if we revert the Stuart gun then ok. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 . . . . . . . . . . . |
|
|
bbsmith
The Brain and Muscle
Posts: 2778
|
|
« Reply #98 on: December 18, 2010, 04:47:06 pm » |
|
Stuart is actually an anti tank vehicle (50mm Puma like) and the Staghound is the anti infantry one.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
prove it and you'll win
I win.
k u win.
|
|
|
| chefarzt
|
|
« Reply #99 on: December 18, 2010, 05:32:02 pm » |
|
So givin the already good anti inf vehicle an additional anti inf finsihing move is good? Or bad ? Or What ?
Could aswell give the canister to the sniper just incase he gets overrun.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
