More basic infantry?

[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

[nugnugx]

keeps wins this thread

/thread

[TheVolskinator]

Put a hardcap on the number of all automatic weapon-type upgrades available to each company. Make it vary for whatever coy you choose; Infantry Coy would be able to equip ~8-10 Riflemen with BARs as opposed to 4-6 in an AB coy (since paratroopers would never want a 26 pound (I have no clue on my metric conversions, sorry all, American ignorance at it's best) garand with a 20-round clip (the BAR; MG42 was around teh same weight). As for keeping 'good faith' in people not to use full-auto weapons, what about giving the option to use mines on infantry units? It would cost more munitions then it does now, and it would solve the woefull lack of mines I see in game after game. I haven't seen Demo besides my own since I joined EiR, just saying. Boosting the pool cost seems effective, but odd IMO. Your army wouldn't shrink or have a smaller reserve of reinforcements because you could afford to equip your best troops with automatic weaponry. Maybe boost teh cost, or just add a hardcap to LMG42s, BARs, Brens, Stens, (Grease Guns and MP40s aren't so horridly OP or game changing, I doubt adding a hardcap would change a thing about them as they're rare as-is), maybe even G43s and Panzershrecks/Bazookas if it becomes so much of an issue.

[lionel23]

I'm sorry Volks but that's a stupid idea.  The reason MP40s and Greaseguns don't seem too OP is because of the availability of other upgrade weapons.  Capping SMGs or BARs like you suggest would leave a standard rifle player with 8/30 squads of riflemen capable of stopping those MP40s, who would then walk all over basic infantry which everyone knows is shit.  Bazookas shouldn't be hard capped either due to the fact they suck horribly and ever since their TR nerf they aren't exactly great against LV.. so a major LV spammer would run over a ranger company (hell, one loses many, many rangers trying to take on tigers or stummels due to their nasty splash effect).

If anything I think the US basic infantry needs to be made tougher to be on par with other basic infantry to serve as better mainline infantry.  I use strictly grenadiers, commandoes, and KCH for all my other companies with no problem, occassionally I'll use Volks but for remanning only.

Now I would like to see the option to get more weapon choices for ALL infantry though.. Rangers and Riflemen with non-suppression bars, or mixed kits like Grens can buy 2 MP44s for a semi assault squad, or the fragile volks able to get an LMG at a bit higher premium due to them being better served in support of grenadiers (sitting in the back/in cover with their gun), things like that.

[Mysthalin]

A hardcap on absolutely anything infers that there is something FUNDAMENTALLY wrong with the pricing a unit has recieved. It is the most retarded form of ignoring Goodheart's Law ever concieved by man, and anyone who ever proposes a hardcap again should smash their heads at the nearest wall until they start bleeding. Assuming they actually have enough mental capacity to determine what a wall is, of course.

In this particular instance - considering that machineguns can suppress and kill far larger amounts of units for a much lower (munitions) price at the expense of being less mobile - it can hardly be inferred that BARs, LMGs, FGs and high-tier SMGs are in any way undervalued.

[Uglysori]

Bazookas shouldn't be hard capped either due to the fact they suck horribly and ever since their TR nerf they aren't exactly great against LV.. so a major LV spammer would run over a ranger company (hell, one loses many, many rangers trying to take on tigers or stummels due to their nasty splash effect).

What possible light vehicles are axis spamming the zook is incapable of killing with TR on the ranger platform?  Pumas, Armored Cars, Inf HTs?  With a pair of dbl zook rangers and doing around 86 dmg per zook shot u should have more than enough firepower to alpha strike any LV.  If its Stummel spam, it's not like they are charging through your atg lines circle strafing your AT and 90 fuel per is not an insignificant amt for a PE player.  If he has that many Stummels then he is seriously lacking in AT unless relying solely on tankbusters.

[BigDick]

i think lionels rangerblobs got raped by 50 range stummel  because of poor play and poor company design

l2use m10, ATGs

[TheIcelandicManiac]

TBH the strummel is quite bullshit with its acc and rate of fire for it can rape blobs better than an GMC and its quite fast.

[PonySlaystation]

Interesting... "logging in to buy more stummels"

[8thRifleRegiment]

how about people stop QQ about stummel, it has lower health then the gmc and anything can kill it, just l2 circfel strafe them, they have like a 2seconde firring prep time you can just circle strafe with a jeep even, its not hard, if stummel ennoys you, bring 1 m8 which is about the same price, circle strafe the stummel and bring up support for your m8 to counter your enemies support on his stummel

[RikiRude]

In regards of more core infantry to the OP, I agree kind of.

Right now the best part about WM is this, you have volks and you have grens. PG has it with luft troops as well, but this is what you get, a cheap easily killed unit that works best for recrewing, then you have a tougher more expensive unit that is great for fighting other units, even their upgrades help show this as well. You kind of have this with brits, sappers arent too great for recrewing because you only get one recrew.

But it would be great if US had a 4 man infantry unit that was worthy of 260mp. Like if you took rangers, made them 250mp, and took away their fireup, or something to that extent. or made luft available to all PE doctrines.


But it would be great to have a cheap (under 200mp) 5-6 man squad used to recrew, then a more expensive (240-260) 4-5 man squad that you would use to fight infantry.

[8thRifleRegiment]

changeing the basic infantry would mess up the entire game is it totally un-nessesary. leave it as it. how did this even come up as a problem? allthough i could see the advantage, maybe giving more manpower to doctrines but leaving the munitions and fuel the same so you could have more vanilla stuff but same amount of upgarded stuff

[TheIcelandicManiac]

Having luft inf for all comps would be really nice for TH but SE doc allready has the PanzerPioneers so it would break the specialness of it all but TBH TH really needs some other unit than an 240mp 120 mun MP44 squad or an 215 Man Gren squad

[Poppi]

i think the inf doctrine is missing their inf specialty.

Expecting to see combat engineers or assault inf.

Something more than just rangers.

[AmPM]

Why would they need more assault infantry just because its a infantry company?

[TheIcelandicManiac]

RIFLEMEN FLAMERS!!!

[RoyalHants]

RIFLEMEN FLAMERS!!!

WITH KCH HEALTH AND MOVING TRIAGE BUFF ON THEM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[TheVolskinator]

You guys troll everything, dont you?





















Try suggesting some genius fix yourselves then, instead of picking everyone elses apart ^^. Largest waste of space is people quoting something they dont like and then writing a long drawl about how stupid that person absolutely has to be to ever think of suggesting something.

[RoyalHants]

See my sig

[TheIcelandicManiac]

yea an really nice typo you got yourself right there.

[RoyalHants]

FAIL, meh imma keep iit.