New TD (Specifically wolverines) pool in ranger coys

[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

[AmPM]

I think the big issue is that people wanted US stuff buffed, and now it costs appropriate to its ability.

Sadly, this leaves you with 2 pool intensive TD's and elite infantry.

I bet if you make an Infantry Coy focused on Rifles, support and TD's you will have enough.

[aeroblade56]

I think the big issue is that people wanted US stuff buffed, and now it costs appropriate to its ability.

Sadly, this leaves you with 2 pool intensive TD's and elite infantry.

I bet if you make an Infantry Coy focused on Rifles, support and TD's you will have enough.

who the hell wants rifles and TD?? the thing is, okay dats all fun and games untill you come against KCH spammers or elite armor grens yeah man thats real fucking fun.

[nikomas]

Point still stands, if I play falls I can make the entire company out of nothing but falls supported by lufts, actually I did, I think my current fallcoy has 10 or 12 upgraded falls in it. This give little to no pool dissadvantages at all.

But if you play inf then 9 ranger squads is "Overkill"? This is what I don't like, that's all...

And while at it, a shreck stormsquad is 8 or 9 pool, a ranger zooka squad is 7 pool... This is a problem because due to pricing one shrecksquad is 7 pool while an equivilent in price for rangers would be three times that because zooks are pretty damn cheap.

[Tymathee]

who the hell wants rifles and TD?? the thing is, okay dats all fun and games untill you come against KCH spammers or elite armor grens yeah man thats real fucking fun.

Spam is fun!

[RikiRude]

who the hell wants rifles and TD?? the thing is, okay dats all fun and games untill you come against KCH spammers or elite armor grens yeah man thats real fucking fun.

exactly, how come its ok to spam oaks leaves, but not rangers?

[Tymathee]

exactly, how come its ok to spam oaks leaves, but not rangers?

because he believes Oaks leaves > rangers ?

[I2ay]

I want you to try spamming Oak Leaves. Tell me how many you fit in your company without making it stupidly ineffective.

[Tymathee]

I want you to try spamming Oak Leaves. Tell me how many you fit in your company without making it stupidly ineffective.

again, another troll who can't read and understand grammer, one wonders why i bother to get into any type of discussion with any of you since you have no basic understanding of words.

because he believes Oaks leaves > rangers ?

He, not I. I did not state my opinion and it was a question, a straight question.

It's obvious the negativity and sarcasm in your own mind led you to believe I insinuated something else.

[I2ay]

again, another troll who can't read and understand grammer, one wonders why i bother to get into any type of discussion with any of you since you have no basic understanding of words.

Who the hell said I was talking to you Tym? I understand your posts are shitty on a regular basis and almost everyone jumps on you for being retarded, but if you look, RIKIRUDE directly asked why it was okay to spam oak leaves. so if RIKIRUDE asks about spamming oak leaves, why the FUCK would my post refer to you, you egotistical jackass. If you wanna call me a troll have a reason too. Don't just assume that I'm refer to another one of your retarded posts.

[Tymathee]

Who the hell said I was talking to you Tym? I understand your posts are shitty on a regular basis and almost everyone jumps on you for being retarded, but if you look, RIKIRUDE directly asked why it was okay to spam oak leaves. so if RIKIRUDE asks about spamming oak leaves, why the FUCK would my post refer to you, you egotistical jackass. If you wanna call me a troll have a reason too. Don't just assume that I'm refer to another one of your retarded posts.

Cuz you didn't quote the post you're referring to. If you don't quote the direct post OR say the person you're referring to, one will logically assume you are referring to the post above.

[I2ay]

Or they could logically assume that the post responds to the earliest post that it makes SENSE I'd be responding to...

[nikomas]

Oak leaves > Thompson rangers

It's funny really, had vet 2/3 ranger squads vs lower vet KCH, the rangers had 6x thompsons, officers buffs and allied grit, basically, the best you could possibly get, net result? They could fight the KCH on a 1/1 basis, it was a random tossup of who would win, now standard rangers vs 4man? Byebye rangers.

Of course, this is assuming neither side throws grenades, in that case it's down to dodge micro.

[3rdCondor]

Oak leaves should probably just be removed. Kch might need some overall buff to make them more useful and then we might see more usage of them rather than.... 0.

[Tymathee]

Or they could logically assume that the post responds to the earliest post that it makes SENSE I'd be responding to...

oh Iiiiiiii'm sorry i'm not as smart as you to try and link your post to some other post that you didn't directly refer to by name, quote or really even topic since he wasn't the only one that mentioned Oak Leaves.

-_-

[I2ay]

Tym, its not my fault your a dumbass. Nikomas, those 4 Man KCH have EVERY POSSIBLE DOCTRINE BUFF. Thats with the T3 pervitin pills, and the Tier 4 Fanatacsim. They also cost about 260 munitions a pop with pervitin pills, med kits, and assault. They SHOULD beat rangers every time.

[tank130]

Tym and Ray, knock it off and take it to PM's

[RikiRude]

ive made Mid T4 OL spam companies and it's pretty fucking effective. You spam them, a sniper or two, use Gwagons as your main AT, backed by a pak, and I did pretty well with it, I saw other people do even better with it because you just can't kill the OL with out a croc. Pretty fun coy actually, it's just a bit micro intensive using your KCH aggressively, but also knowing when to pull back to keep them alive.

Also you saying that OL should be better than rangers is only in favor of mine and tyms previous statements, because if they are better than they most def should not be more spammable than rangers.

[Dnicee]

more spamble? dude, i can have 4 squads. if i have more i need to throw away alot of mp...

[RikiRude]

more spamble? dude, i can have 4 squads. if i have more i need to throw away alot of mp...

With out sitting on a resource point I was able to make pretty much the same coy I had before if I remember right.

1x Sniper
1x Panther w/ skirts +repairs
1x pak
2x ambulance
2x upgun puma
3x bikes
4x gwagons w/ repairs
6x volks
8x OL with medkit and PPs

with walk while suppressed you dont need assault vs mgs in most cases. I just threw that together just now. main weakness is flames of course, but other than that you can roll most stuff, jeeps wont get close enough to sniper because of sprint and OL kill the jeeps fast. not perfect but it works quite well. also i still had reserve over as well, i think with a mu spot you could run 2x more OL if you got rid of some volks.

[Tymathee]

ive made Mid T4 OL spam companies and it's pretty fucking effective. You spam them, a sniper or two, use Gwagons as your main AT, backed by a pak, and I did pretty well with it, I saw other people do even better with it because you just can't kill the OL with out a croc. Pretty fun coy actually, it's just a bit micro intensive using your KCH aggressively, but also knowing when to pull back to keep them alive.

Also you saying that OL should be better than rangers is only in favor of mine and tyms previous statements, because if they are better than they most def should not be more spammable than rangers.

I tried an OL coy once, i did pretty horribly. They are pretty tough to use, but I generally suck with assault infantry. I did find them exceptionally good vs any infantry 1v1, its just that when you do have them on the field, they become a huge focus.

I would take them 1v1 vs any AI infantry (minus any type of clickable ability)