Home
Forum
Search
Login
Register
Account
Welcome,
Guest
. Please
login
or
register
.
Did you miss your
activation email?
November 08, 2024, 06:20:46 am
1 Hour
1 Day
1 Week
1 Month
Forever
Login with username, password and session length
Resources
Leaderboards
Unit Price Lists
Map List
Launcher status:
Players in chat: 2
Battles in progress:
Battles waiting:
Download the mod from Steam
Join our Discord server
Recent posts
LS-DREAMS DOWNLOAD GOLDBE...
by
thinhdqt1291
[
Yesterday
at 02:30:18 pm]
Испытайте зах...
by
Fatimaciz
[November 06, 2024, 03:32:19 pm]
RINDEX YANDEX DISK RINDEX...
by
JRodriguez17
[November 06, 2024, 05:29:25 am]
Hello, New guy in the mod
by
JRodriguez17
[November 06, 2024, 05:28:38 am]
Please dont open this th...
by
Olazaika1
[November 01, 2024, 12:46:37 pm]
Required age ratings for ...
by
Unkn0wn
[October 05, 2024, 07:29:20 am]
50 minutes cap victory
by
Olazaika1
[September 05, 2024, 01:54:13 pm]
Feedback
by
Olazaika1
[July 16, 2024, 11:30:34 pm]
Anyone here still alive?
by
Olazaika1
[June 22, 2024, 06:49:40 am]
very glad to be signing u...
by
Olazaika1
[March 08, 2024, 12:13:38 am]
Awards
2007
Mod of the Year
Editor's Choice
2008
Most Innovative Multiplayer
Nominee
Want to help promote Europe In Ruins? It's as easy as clicking here once a day!
Why?
COH: Europe In Ruins
>
Forum
>
EIR Main Forums
>
Balance & Design
>
Allied AT.
Pages:
1
2
3
[
4
]
5
6
Go Down
Print
Author
Topic: Allied AT. (Read 29636 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Mysthalin
Tired King of Stats
Posts: 9028
Re: Allied AT.
«
Reply #60 on:
March 23, 2012, 11:50:30 am »
Quote from: CrazyWR on March 22, 2012, 06:57:28 pm
we miss you
I know.
Logged
Tymathee
Donator
Posts: 9741
Re: Allied AT.
«
Reply #61 on:
March 23, 2012, 11:52:24 am »
Quote from: Mysthalin on March 23, 2012, 11:50:30 am
I know.
who are you again?
Logged
Quote from: nikomas on October 04, 2012, 09:26:33 pm
"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.
tank130
Sugar Daddy
Posts: 8889
Re: Allied AT.
«
Reply #62 on:
March 23, 2012, 02:31:16 pm »
The discussion is Allied at. Please keep it on topic or it gets locked.
Logged
Quote
Geez, while Wind was banned I forgot that he is, in fact, totally insufferable
Quote from: Hicks58 on June 05, 2013, 02:14:06 pm
I'm not going to lie Tig, 9/10 times you open your mouth, I'm overwhelmed with the urge to put my foot in it.
aeroblade56
Development
Posts: 3871
Re: Allied AT.
«
Reply #63 on:
April 02, 2012, 07:39:15 pm »
Back on topic, thank you tank as i said before. For armor doctrine it is a bit harder for them to fend off PE units in the early game that is untill you get the T2 unlocks. or advantages for fuel and provide greyhounds for soupport.
As Airborne have handheld AT and Infantry has handheld AT in the first T1 i do not see why armored should not have it?. All of axis have Schreks without paying a Doctrine of course they can pay a doctrine for 2 schreks. But that is fair. i think it puts Armored players in the early stages of company development at a certain disadvantage that every other doctrine in every faction does not have. All brits have piats.
Logged
Quote from: Hicks58 on January 08, 2016, 05:47:37 pm
You are welcome to your opinion.
You are also welcome to be wrong.
Poppi
EIR Veteran
Posts: 1080
Re: Allied AT.
«
Reply #64 on:
April 03, 2012, 12:30:40 am »
Quote from: aeroblade56 on April 02, 2012, 07:39:15 pm
Back on topic, thank you tank as i said before. For armor doctrine it is a bit harder for them to fend off PE units in the early game that is untill you get the T2 unlocks. or advantages for fuel and provide greyhounds for soupport.
As Airborne have handheld AT and Infantry has handheld AT in the first T1 i do not see why armored should not have it?. All of axis have Schreks without paying a Doctrine of course they can pay a doctrine for 2 schreks. But that is fair. i think it puts Armored players in the early stages of company development at a certain disadvantage that every other doctrine in every faction does not have. All brits have piats.
well im not going to agree with the armor needs AT doc upgrade.
Rangers are barely AT. As most AT tactics goes inf and armor are the same... 57mm. So i think any MU restriction or ATG cost inrease puts a HUGE strain for US options.
But i do agree that early doc skills suck for armor. (Mobility exception). BTW i like the T4s for armor. Very unique.
Logged
aeroblade56
Development
Posts: 3871
Re: Allied AT.
«
Reply #65 on:
April 03, 2012, 12:36:44 am »
Quote from: Poppi on April 03, 2012, 12:30:40 am
well im not going to agree with the armor needs AT doc upgrade.
Rangers are barely AT. As most AT tactics goes inf and armor are the same... 57mm. So i think any MU restriction or ATG cost inrease puts a HUGE strain for US options.
But i do agree that early doc skills suck for armor. (Mobility exception). BTW i like the T4s for armor. Very unique.
Ah but Rangers still provide a reasonable counter for PE strafers and the such. does it not? you try having a scout car come at you or a puma and AT phase through it. And when the only other AT you have is considered a greyhound it puts a certain amount of strain on you.
Logged
CrazyWR
EIR Veteran
Posts: 3616
Re: Allied AT.
«
Reply #66 on:
April 03, 2012, 01:00:21 am »
so you would prefer we fill the hole of every doctrine and leave no weaknesses, so that everything is nice and easy? Thats not how it works. There are tradeoffs to picking each doctrine. If a certain doctrine doesn't fit your style of play, or you aren't comfortable with it, play another one, there are 12, no one makes you pick a certain one, I think armor is a fantastic doctrine that can be played in many many different ways, and all extremely viable. I don't think we should be looking to change it, rather I think we should try to emulate that type of doctrine in other doctrines that are either incomplete or subpar.
Logged
Quote from: Ununoctium on September 03, 2009, 07:45:25 am
1. New tactics? it's like JAWS, first one in the water dies
Quote from: jackmccrack on February 09, 2012, 12:47:54 pm
RCA-land where shells fall like raindrops and the Captain is an invincible god
AmPM
Community Mapper
Posts: 7978
Re: Allied AT.
«
Reply #67 on:
April 03, 2012, 01:22:29 am »
Quote from: CrazyWR on April 03, 2012, 01:00:21 am
so you would prefer we fill the hole of every doctrine and leave no weaknesses, so that everything is nice and easy? Thats not how it works. There are tradeoffs to picking each doctrine. If a certain doctrine doesn't fit your style of play, or you aren't comfortable with it, play another one, there are 12, no one makes you pick a certain one, I think armor is a fantastic doctrine that can be played in many many different ways, and all extremely viable. I don't think we should be looking to change it, rather I think we should try to emulate that type of doctrine in other doctrines that are either incomplete or subpar.
Actually, for Blitz, Terror, Defensive, Armor, Infantry, RCA, RE, etc thats exactly how it is....but yea, Allies have plenty of AT options as they are.
Logged
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Spartan_Marine88
EIR Veteran
Posts: 4838
Re: Allied AT.
«
Reply #68 on:
April 03, 2012, 05:55:29 am »
Quote from: CrazyWR on April 03, 2012, 01:00:21 am
so you would prefer we fill the hole of every doctrine and leave no weaknesses, so that everything is nice and easy? Thats not how it works.
If everyone has it nice and easy then no one should have it nice and easy and no one should have a reason to bitch.
Logged
Quote from: Sachaztan on March 24, 2013, 03:49:43 pm
Yes that's me, the special snowflake.
PonySlaystation
EIR Veteran
Posts: 4136
Re: Allied AT.
«
Reply #69 on:
April 03, 2012, 06:02:30 am »
A real Airborne doctrine would be a huge boost to allied AT handheld firepower. Then it wouldn't be a problem that riflemen and rangers have weak and overpriced bazookas that obviously can't replace the role of RRs.
«
Last Edit: April 03, 2012, 06:04:10 am by PonySlaystation
»
Logged
Sharks are not monsters Henley, they are cute, cuddly and misunderstood. They love humans. sometimes they love TOO much. They love people so much that sometimes their kisses separate people into two flailing pieces which are consumed by other sharks in a frenzy of peace and joy.
Ahnungsloser
Donator
Posts: 1447
Re: Allied AT.
«
Reply #70 on:
April 03, 2012, 06:44:25 am »
Quote from: PonySlaystation on April 03, 2012, 06:02:30 am
A real Airborne doctrine would be a huge boost to allied AT handheld firepower. Then it wouldn't be a problem that riflemen and rangers have weak and overpriced bazookas that obviously can't replace the role of RRs.
The Airborne Doctrin actual is a huge AT boost to the allied but if you have less experience with them your brutally lacking in AI. With a small
boost Airborne becomes more useful and you will see it much more on the battlefield.
Logged
9th Armoured Engineers
smurfORnot
EIR Veteran
Posts: 4715
Re: Allied AT.
«
Reply #71 on:
April 03, 2012, 08:52:37 am »
smokaz ab with LMG's were quite effectiv,and biatch to kill!
Logged
Smokaz
Honoured Member
Posts: 11418
Re: Allied AT.
«
Reply #72 on:
April 03, 2012, 08:56:04 am »
Thats because I had WTW MFM and AOD
Logged
SlippedHerTheBigOne: big penis puma
SlippedHerTheBigOne: and i have no repairkits
SlippedHerTheBigOne: ( ͡ ͜ʖ ͡)
Poppi
EIR Veteran
Posts: 1080
Re: Allied AT.
«
Reply #73 on:
April 03, 2012, 12:31:20 pm »
Quote from: CrazyWR on April 03, 2012, 01:00:21 am
so you would prefer we fill the hole of every doctrine and leave no weaknesses, so that everything is nice and easy? Thats not how it works. There are tradeoffs to picking each doctrine. If a certain doctrine doesn't fit your style of play, or you aren't comfortable with it, play another one, there are 12, no one makes you pick a certain one, I think armor is a fantastic doctrine that can be played in many many different ways, and all extremely viable. I don't think we should be looking to change it, rather I think we should try to emulate that type of doctrine in other doctrines that are either incomplete or subpar.
nicely said. i agree with it. Unfortunately i feel some docs fill that role where they are able to fill weaknesses and make everything nice and easy. theres been a lack of assymetric balance in this mod. but then again i hate units that excel at AI and AT.
Logged
Herrpants
EIR Regular
Posts: 43
Re: Allied AT.
«
Reply #74 on:
April 03, 2012, 10:48:48 pm »
sticky bomb is infinetly more useful than fausts and is the primary reason you dont see wehr doing lulzy infantry crushing ala m10, i know what your gonna say tho "Hurr derr herrpants youre an autistic spazz and dont even play this game anymore" but the fact remains that both sticky bomb nd faust do similar damage but oh wait sticky bombs have near 100% chance of engine or track damage? are you sure? thats kind of awesome oh and you always say zook sucks which it does im guessing you want it buffed too? maybe give the amis some sort of anti tank guided missile? and it is as they say roflmanz atgs and hellcats are all youl ever need.
lets discuss other holes in faction rosters!
1. PE has no medium tank ala sherman/p4 (ist doesnt count cus it does squat to tanks)
2. Axis Tds cannot into turret
3. pigs cant fly
4.
??
5. Profit!
Logged
Smokaz
Honoured Member
Posts: 11418
Re: Allied AT.
«
Reply #75 on:
April 03, 2012, 11:17:03 pm »
Allies have no marder, ack.
Logged
CrazyWR
EIR Veteran
Posts: 3616
Re: Allied AT.
«
Reply #76 on:
April 03, 2012, 11:29:10 pm »
should just make everything into one faction and let skill win
Logged
Smokaz
Honoured Member
Posts: 11418
Re: Allied AT.
«
Reply #77 on:
April 03, 2012, 11:35:42 pm »
Quote from: CrazyWR on April 03, 2012, 11:29:10 pm
should just make everything into one faction and let skill win
crazy im just saying its pretty boss to have a 6 pop marder or a 5 pop ht, when the closest thing is as 12 pop firefly
if allies had a vehicle 80gun it would be baller
Logged
Herrpants
EIR Regular
Posts: 43
Re: Allied AT.
«
Reply #78 on:
April 03, 2012, 11:40:22 pm »
dont pretend that the marder is anywhere near as good as the firefly
1. firefly has turret
2. firefly has sherman health (which is good)
3. firefly doesnt need to set up
4. firefly doesnt have wet tissue paper for armor
5. firefly is the only tank thats an actual threat to axis panthers and tigers
6. firefly has cct
Logged
AmPM
Community Mapper
Posts: 7978
Re: Allied AT.
«
Reply #79 on:
April 03, 2012, 11:41:31 pm »
Quote from: Herrpants on April 03, 2012, 11:40:22 pm
dont pretend that the marder is anywhere near as good as the firefly
1. firefly has turret
2. firefly has sherman health (which is good)
3. firefly doesnt need to set up
4. firefly doesnt have wet tissue paper for armor
5. firefly is the only tank thats an actual threat to axis panthers and tigers
6. firefly has cct
FF costs nearly 3 times as much fuel.
Logged
Pages:
1
2
3
[
4
]
5
6
Go Up
Print
Jump to:
Please select a destination:
-----------------------------
News & Introductions
-----------------------------
=> Updates & Announcements
=> EIR Boot Camp
===> In Other Languages
=====> In Chinese
=====> In German
=====> In Spanish
=====> In Polish
=====> In French
=====> In Norwegian
=> New Players
-----------------------------
EIR Main Forums
-----------------------------
=> General Discussion
=> Tactics & Strategy
=> Balance & Design
=> Broadcasts & Replays
=> Projects & Mapping
=> Technical Support
===> Bug Reporting
-----------------------------
General Forums
-----------------------------
=> General Discussion
=> Other Games
TinyPortal v1.0 beta 4 ©
Bloc
Loading...