nugnugx
Donator
 Posts: 4051
|
|
« on: July 28, 2011, 03:04:46 am » |
|
Anyone is using the boys AT from armour t2 on rifleman ? I think the one zooka was better for them.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| BigDick
|
|
« Reply #1 on: July 28, 2011, 03:09:12 am » |
|
i use them when playing PE and switch bars and AP rounds for the boysAT
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
3rdCondor
Donator
Posts: 1536
|
|
« Reply #2 on: September 14, 2011, 03:40:03 pm » |
|
This weapon needs to be buffed tbh
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
No tits, but i will bake a cake then eat it in honour of Sir Condor The 3rd
fuck the pgren rifle, fucking dogshit weapon
My beautiful black pussy won
|
|
|
| puddin
|
|
« Reply #3 on: September 14, 2011, 04:14:46 pm » |
|
Its awesome VS PE and Light vehicles... But is just shit against anythign else even with Rear shots on it...
It does OK, for a lower price it would be perfect but 90mu is just slightly to high
I tried a blob of 6 squads and while It did kill a scout car in a single salvo, it bouced off ostwind armor from the front and Stuh and Stug armor.
B asically, its great if you face PF withoujt panthers, Sucks vs all else, Even has trouble with tichkisses
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Puddin' spamtmi cant really blame smokaz i mean playing against puddin is like trying to fight off breast cancer. You might win and do it and be a bad ass but you'll feel sick and mutilated forever.
Puddin' spamtm is soulcrushing... what's hard to understand about that?
|
|
|
RikiRude
Donator
Posts: 4376
|
|
« Reply #4 on: September 14, 2011, 04:33:09 pm » |
|
It really is not versatile at all, I do the same, buy some when I'm against PE, other than that never use them.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 Killer344: "Repent: sory no joke i just had savage diorea" ... or a fat ass cock sucking churchill being stupid |
|
|
| EliteGren
|
|
« Reply #5 on: September 14, 2011, 10:18:01 pm » |
|
These are awesome at taking out paks
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
i prefer to no u
Don't knock it til uve tried it bitchface, this isn't anything like salads version. Besides u said a semois conversion would never work, now look that's the most played map, ohgodwhy.jpg r u map lead
 |
|
|
| marda145
|
|
« Reply #6 on: September 15, 2011, 07:35:44 am » |
|
These are awesome at taking out paks
if awesome means 9 shots...ok they need a damage buff seriously, penetration is ok but damage is crap for its high price... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| smurfORnot
|
|
« Reply #7 on: September 15, 2011, 07:44:20 am » |
|
how come not so long ago every one was spamming them vs PE,now they are barely used?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| marda145
|
|
« Reply #8 on: September 15, 2011, 07:50:37 am » |
|
how come not so long ago every one was spamming them vs PE,now they are barely used?
Because people realized they aren´t cost worth.. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| puddin
|
|
« Reply #9 on: September 15, 2011, 10:07:30 am » |
|
one stug or a p4ist and they become useless, pair them with the sticy and its 150 mu on riflemen in pure at that can only really handle light vehicles.... if that.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
RikiRude
Donator
Posts: 4376
|
|
« Reply #10 on: September 15, 2011, 11:30:08 am » |
|
it kind of sucks any buff you give them to make them worth their cost will make them over the top vs PE, so the only option is a price decrease.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Hicks58
Development
 Posts: 5343
|
|
« Reply #11 on: September 15, 2011, 11:35:26 am » |
|
it kind of sucks any buff you give them to make them worth their cost will make them over the top vs PE, so the only option is a price decrease.
So, why not buff them against medium armour specifically? For example, a 20%-40% damage increase against PIV armour. They can do some damage if they can get on the flanks, and retain their current level of usefulness against most of PE without skull-fucking the entire faction in the process. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I mean I know Obama was the first one in EiR to get a card. and tbfh the Race card is pretty OP. but Romney has the K.K.K., those guys seem to camo anywhere. So OP units from both sides.
At the end of the day, however, stormtroopers finally got the anal invasion with a cactus they have richly deserved for years.
|
|
|
Tymathee
Donator
Posts: 9741
|
|
« Reply #12 on: September 15, 2011, 02:06:29 pm » |
|
it kind of sucks any buff you give them to make them worth their cost will make them over the top vs PE, so the only option is a price decrease.
dmg, pen and acc can be buffed vs certain armors, not all around. |
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
LeoPhone
Honoured Member
 Posts: 0
|
|
« Reply #13 on: September 15, 2011, 02:23:06 pm » |
|
ok. boys needs to be buffed vs marder armor. it never penetrates the geschutzwagen.
could also give it different collision type so it doesn't phase trough pumas.
tbh its fine that it doesn't do shit to tanks. its still a powerful weapon vs light vehicles and support weapons. price can be tweaked. but it should be able to kill marders.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
RikiRude
Donator
Posts: 4376
|
|
« Reply #14 on: September 15, 2011, 02:40:26 pm » |
|
^ ahh, all of the above posts make sense, would be a step in the right direction.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| Solo Wing Pixy
|
|
« Reply #15 on: September 15, 2011, 02:58:56 pm » |
|
Ooops wrong thread
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Airborne Division
300th Paratrooper Battalion
Captain SoloWingPixy88
|
|
|
Tymathee
Donator
Posts: 9741
|
|
« Reply #16 on: September 15, 2011, 04:19:08 pm » |
|
ok. boys needs to be buffed vs marder armor. it never penetrates the geschutzwagen.
could also give it different collision type so it doesn't phase trough pumas.
tbh its fine that it doesn't do shit to tanks. its still a powerful weapon vs light vehicles and support weapons. price can be tweaked. but it should be able to kill marders.
agreed. marders and g-wagons need to die vs boys at, especially considering they do a good job vs hotchkiss. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
3rdCondor
Donator
Posts: 1536
|
|
« Reply #17 on: September 15, 2011, 06:26:02 pm » |
|
lower cost to 60 tbh
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| spinn72
|
|
« Reply #18 on: September 15, 2011, 06:27:01 pm » |
|
lower cost to 60 tbh
or 50.. or 45.. even if they were free, I wouldn't use them. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
3rdCondor
Donator
Posts: 1536
|
|
« Reply #19 on: September 15, 2011, 08:03:21 pm » |
|
They seriously need to be cheaper or maybe even equal to stickies.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
