Smokaz
Honoured Member
 Posts: 11418
|
|
« on: August 07, 2012, 11:59:58 am » |
|
Right now tank hunters has nothing to fight mortar smoke covered infantry. This is a huge defiency that should not exist in any doctrine. It's really easy to abuse this vs tank hunters to the point that tank hunters just have to fall back and have no response.
The mortar ht and the stuka hotchkiss do not suffice. The incendary grenade is not good enough. This is a hole in the doctrine that needs to be fixed.
I would suggest removing the pak36 and replacing it with a upgrade for the scout car or the armor car "infrarot" that allows them to target stuff in smoke with reduced penalty.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
SlippedHerTheBigOne: big penis puma
SlippedHerTheBigOne: and i have no repairkits
SlippedHerTheBigOne: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
|
|
|
| CrazyWR
|
|
« Reply #1 on: August 07, 2012, 12:14:50 pm » |
|
why dont incendiary nades and mortar hts work? I'm confused. Seems to me that killing the mortar is a simple enough procedure.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
1. New tactics? it's like JAWS, first one in the water dies
RCA-land where shells fall like raindrops and the Captain is an invincible god
|
|
|
Smokaz
Honoured Member
Posts: 11418
|
|
« Reply #2 on: August 07, 2012, 12:15:29 pm » |
|
why dont incendiary nades and mortar hts work? I'm confused. Seems to me that killing the mortar is a simple enough procedure.
what when they produce their own smoke (grenades) or offmaps ? smoke effects are usually large and used to force back your vehicles, so being able to pummel 1 position with a mortar ht is not helpful. you need to actually kill them! |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: August 07, 2012, 12:17:45 pm by Smokaz »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| DarkSoldierX
|
|
« Reply #3 on: August 07, 2012, 12:28:11 pm » |
|
Smokaz has a point and I am quite sure I discussed this issue a long time ago.
Tank hunters cant do shit against smoke. Incid nades and mortar are softcounters against smoke. The only hardcounter that exist is the goliath.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
two words
atgs and fireflies
Looks who's butthurt |
|
|
Smokaz
Honoured Member
Posts: 11418
|
|
« Reply #4 on: August 07, 2012, 12:30:54 pm » |
|
There are plenty of discussions on this. But nothing has been done. I hope we can think up something that they can do to improve the situation for next patch.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Tymathee
Donator
 Posts: 9741
|
|
« Reply #5 on: August 07, 2012, 12:43:28 pm » |
|
Seriously, Tank hunters is one of the strongest doctrines, please ffs dont whine smoke of all things lmao
|
|
|
|
|
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 #6 on: August 07, 2012, 01:06:24 pm » |
|
Reduce the amount of smoke available then.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 . . . . . . . . . . . |
|
|
Tymathee
Donator
Posts: 9741
|
|
« Reply #7 on: August 07, 2012, 01:19:36 pm » |
|
Reduce the amount of smoke available then.
Seriously? O noes, less mortar smoke pl0x, smoke is OP! It makes my tank hunters inert, I can't just get away from it, go around it, or push through it, o noes! give me a break. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Smokaz
Honoured Member
Posts: 11418
|
|
« Reply #8 on: August 07, 2012, 01:28:12 pm » |
|
Mortar smoke conceals the IQ of tym! Can't see it!
Well, I guess TH is barred from games with mortar smoke then unless their teammates are overcompensating.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: August 07, 2012, 01:48:32 pm by Smokaz »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| CrazyWR
|
|
« Reply #9 on: August 07, 2012, 01:45:38 pm » |
|
no, tym is right.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
aeroblade56
Development
 Posts: 3871
|
|
« Reply #10 on: August 07, 2012, 01:53:27 pm » |
|
So wait smoke is op because 1 doctrine has trouble with it?. Does this mean sc gets a neff?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
You are welcome to your opinion.
You are also welcome to be wrong.
|
|
|
Smokaz
Honoured Member
Posts: 11418
|
|
« Reply #11 on: August 07, 2012, 01:56:48 pm » |
|
So wait smoke is op because 1 doctrine has trouble with it?. Does this mean sc gets a neff?
no 1 doctrine is UP in one certain way that the other doctrines arent smoke is generally balanced but tank hunters have too much trouble vs it because they dont have doctrinal stuff to help them vs smoke |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
AmPM
Community Mapper
Posts: 7978
|
|
« Reply #12 on: August 07, 2012, 01:58:58 pm » |
|
no 1 doctrine is UP in one certain way that the other doctrines arent
smoke is generally balanced but tank hunters have too much trouble vs it because they dont have doctrinal stuff to help them vs smoke
What about giving TH Flammpanzer III's?  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| EliteGren
|
|
« Reply #13 on: August 07, 2012, 02:14:47 pm » |
|
Flamehetzer or flamehotchkiss tbh
|
|
|
|
|
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
 |
|
|
| NightRain
|
|
« Reply #14 on: August 07, 2012, 02:17:25 pm » |
|
When there is smoke, there'll be airborne. Do send a tank to meet the wall of RRs.
TH is strongest when it is versus armor, it is weakest when it is facing infantry.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Because a forum post should be like a woman's skirt. Long enough to cover the subject material, but short enough to keep things interesting.
 |
|
|
| CrazyWR
|
|
« Reply #15 on: August 07, 2012, 02:27:58 pm » |
|
thats just how it works...use SE if you want to kill things in smoke and be PE.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| NightRain
|
|
« Reply #16 on: August 07, 2012, 02:29:10 pm » |
|
Alright.
I choose a faction only to lose to infantry because I have nothing to fight versus them. Insta loss imminent.
By what logic did you think this one up?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
AmPM
Community Mapper
Posts: 7978
|
|
« Reply #17 on: August 07, 2012, 03:59:59 pm » |
|
thats just how it works...use SE if you want to kill things in smoke and be PE.
Most doctrines do not have an inherent weakness to anything, the last round of doctrine changes made sure of that. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Tymathee
Donator
Posts: 9741
|
|
« Reply #18 on: August 07, 2012, 04:13:20 pm » |
|
Most doctrines do not have an inherent weakness to anything, the last round of doctrine changes made sure of that.
You can't be serious...you're not that stupid ampm I know you aren't. I can't believe the uproar over SMOKE i mean my god this is ridiulous. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| ick312
|
|
« Reply #19 on: August 07, 2012, 04:50:08 pm » |
|
well, i agree with smokaz,
TH's face a very interesting situation if they are confronted with smoke.
suggestions to solve that:
t3 "infrafot scheinwerfer"
- add that certain vehicles can mark targets. so that they are even hit through the smoke
new tank equitment "shrapnell granates"
- the tanks gain the ability to shoot in 120° angle granates (1use)
new t1 unlock (additional to anti tank mines)
- S mines mines with a higher AoE but lower damage
- add flame tanks
BUT in general why not lowering the sight of units in smoke? that would be quite fair. they could advanced but not see where the enemy is moving
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: August 07, 2012, 04:52:50 pm by ick312 »
|
Logged
|
I don't know Wind, that whole 21 virgins thing kinda peaked my interest a little .......
From fucking kids to fucking christ, jesus heartmann. Just stop already you filthy monster, you are only making it worse
|
|
|
|
