3v3 Montherme-Issues Shown [V1.3a]

[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

[Demonic Spoon]

Alright. Issues shown

1) Snipers are way too powerful for their popcap. Guarded by schreks they're a complete bitch to take down

2) 40 Popcap is not enough. Still had mass groups of infantry running around. This is not a bad thing, good weapon team use rapes this.

3) StuH armor needs to be looked at. Seriously ,a Sherman should not have that much trouble owning a StuH.

4) I think weapon health should be raised for the HMG. A single lucky schrek hit will blow away an HMG-Bad.  Maybe raise it for HMGs, keep it as-is for mortars.

5) Even with stupid things like the schreks one-shotting HMGs, we completely destroyed them when they had no weapons team support.


It's a good game. At the end, one of them (Chengele I think?) completely ignored his spawn point in favor of fighting up north, and as such I was able to wire/tanktrap him in. I do NOT think this is an issue (contrary to what some of them think). You need to be very negligent to let me completely and totally wire off your spawn point like that. I think it's perfectly acceptable. It's like leaving your base completely undefended in vCoH and allowing me to roll in with tanks and destroy it. Besides, explosives will blow open the wire and TTs .



[attachment deleted by admin]

[drChengele]

1) Both sides have snipers, so I don't see it as a balance problem. Popcap is low as it is.
3) I lost a StuH in two seconds to an AT with AP rounds. The first shot took HALF its hit points. I think it is not problematic. StuH might be anti-infantry, but Sherman shells should still bounce happily if they hit frontal armor all the same.
5) That's not an issue, that's plain bragging, incorrect one at that.

Yes, it was my spawn point. The fact I have "neglected" it is because I went to the other side of the map to help out a teammate. Something that players shouldn't be discouraged from doing. Shoe readily did for you when you were in trouble. I know that one should strike a balance between offense and defense, but there is a limit to what you can do when you have 40 popcap and a 3v3 map to cover.

It is nowhere near comparable to leaving a base undefended, because taking out a base takes a lot of time and effort. You need to devote massive amounts of units with anti-structure abilities, and then devote a minute or two to destroy a base. Wire can be set up in 10 seconds by Engies. What's more, I didn't even have a line of sight to my own spawnpoint so I didn't know that I should spawn Volks to prevent your engies from wiring me in. When an enemy attacks your base, you sure as hell can notice *that*.

Wiring-in is not really an issue. There is not even a way to prevent players from doing this, so it needn't be discussed as an issue. You didn't do anything technically illegal. It goes to show more about your character than about game issues. Not saying you're a bad person. Just saying that I wouldn't have done it. There are limits to what I would do in order to win a game. It is a war game, not a war, and I prefer to give my opponent a fighting chance. To each his own.

[Demonic Spoon]

1) Both sides have snipers, so I don't see it as a balance problem. Popcap is low as it is.

Not a balance issue. A gameplay issue. It's stupid having sniper spam. Popcap issues are irrelevant, as it needs to be raised universally.

3) I lost a StuH in two seconds to an AT with AP rounds. The first shot took HALF its hit points. I think it is not problematic. StuH might be anti-infantry, but Sherman shells should still bounce happily if they hit frontal armor all the same.

I didn't turn on AP rounds until the last shot. Two shots hit the StuH already reducing its health. I only turned on AP rounds the third time because I wanted to be damn sure it wouldn't get away. 90 munitions is honestly too much for that.

5) That's not an issue, that's plain bragging, incorrect one at that.

No it's not. When you had no weapons team support later on, the huge spam of grens and volks you send at us lost pretty solidly. This is not bragging, this is a demonstration that infantry spam is not an issue.

Yes, it was my spawn point. The fact I have "neglected" it is because I went to the other side of the map to help out a teammate. Something that players shouldn't be discouraged from doing. Shoe readily did for you when you were in trouble. I know that one should strike a balance between offense and defense, but there is a limit to what you can do when you have 40 popcap and a 3v3 map to cover.

You don't have to completely ignore your territory to help an ally. Shoe had a good grasp on his territory, as you should have. Once again, I agree the popcap is too low, but that's a separate issue.

It is nowhere near comparable to leaving a base undefended, because taking out a base takes a lot of time and effort. You need to devote massive amounts of units with anti-structure abilities, and then devote a minute or two to destroy a base. Wire can be set up in 10 seconds by Engies. What's more, I didn't even have a line of sight to my own spawnpoint so I didn't know that I should spawn Volks to prevent your engies from wiring me in. When an enemy attacks your base, you sure as hell can notice *that*.

Bullcrap. When you see all the territories near your spawnpoint turn red, you KNOW I am there. You just ignored that. Wire can be set up rapidly (but wire is also very easily destroyed). Tank traps, however, the only think that makes my defense remotely lasting, take a long time, and can still be taken out with schreks or AT guns. Also, it does not take that much to take out a base. You can get like 3 stormsquads to sneak into a base with schreks and down it VERY rapidly. Hell, this doesn't even give you a chance to know they're coming. You KNEW I was closing on your spawnpoint, and you did nothing about it. If you didn't know I was, you should have known.

While I agree that the popcap makes attacking and defending difficult, there still was no reason for you to leave the spawn undefended. Besides, this is an alpha, we're supposed to be testing all this out

Wiring-in is not really an issue. There is not even a way to prevent players from doing this, so it needn't be discussed as an issue. You didn't do anything technically illegal. It goes to show more about your character than about game issues. Not saying you're a bad person. Just saying that I wouldn't have done it. There are limits to what I would do in order to win a game. It is a war game, not a war, and I prefer to give my opponent a fighting chance. To each his own.

If you LET me wire/TT you off like that, I will. It's not unstoppable, it's not even a good tactic normally. You presented me with an opportunity to rape your "base", and I did.

 Besides, even if this was a massive unstoppable exploit (which it is not), it is our duty as ALPHA TESTERS to test this all out, so it can be fixed. I think I am being generous even bringing up the issue on the forums even though I think it is fine.

[DBSights]

Ok, here is what I got from the game:

1) First and foremost, airborne are far too inexpensive.  There was a ridiculous number of them running around.  Additionally, the ability to drop them anywhere made them extremely powerful.  I would recommend a cost increase just based on this ability.

2) Referencing point #3 made by Spoon concerning the StuH.  The StuH was being destroyed by the Sherman when it was alone.  The only reason the StuH was so effective later on was due to the support from grenadier teams.  Therefore, I do not think there is currently a problem with the StuH.

3) Referencing point #4 made by Spoon concerning MG health.  As he stated, it was a lucky shrek that killed one member of his HMG team.  This is a random chance event.  There is no reason to raise the health of HMG teams.

4) Referencing point # 2 made by Spoon concerning raising the pop cap.  It is currently fine.  A higher pop cap would only give rise to a much larger amount of infantry.  Besides, the low pop cap forces the players to make some interesting tactical choices.  Can't have everything at once.

5) Having 10 as the minimum pop for a squad is not ideal.  I propose lowering this value to 5.  If the squad size is lowered, many squads of smaller size will be created instead of just a few, large squads.  This will allow for dynamic mixing or squads during a battle, resulting in a game with more strategic depth.  I especially noticed the constraints of 10 minimum pop cap when i had to summon my reserve squads.  In order to have these squads, i had to spend a large amount on padding to make them equal 10 population.  Perhaps a smaller minimum squad size for certain "reserve only squads" could be a possible compromise.  These squads would be delayed by a set time, but have a lower minimum size. 

Those are my thoughts.  I would also like to say great job on the mod.  I can't wait for the beta to start.

-Sights



PS

A image of the general scores from the game is attached for those that want to see it. GG dudes.

Edit: Sorry, I did not realize it would expand like that. Its a bit big.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[TheDeadlyShoe]

the problem with the stuh is that AT is the only thing that effectively fights it atm.  And its relatively cheap. AND the StuH has always been noted for its ability to sometimes beat AT guns in duels.

The sherman shots bounce, bounce, bounce... even without sideskirts.

This is the second game now where ive had airborne with RRs in awesome spots trying to chase the fuckers down but the shots keep bouncing off the mostly dead tank.

3) Referencing point #4 made by Spoon concerning MG health.  As he stated, it was a lucky shrek that killed one member of his HMG team.  This is a random chance event.  There is no reason to raise the health of HMG teams.

it was far from an isolated event, I saw a LOT of shrek/recoiless rifle kills on the actual weapons that game.   The heavy weapons cost too much to be dying to infantry AT very quickly like that. 

[Jazlizard]

Seriously, the wiring off of the spawn in point was retarded. Your comment about neglect, and leaving it unattended is just plain dumb, one he was actually concentrating on the front lines and 2 he didn't have LOS to it since he had no units. It is NOT like a HQ where you can actually see wtf is going on. That particular spawn-in point is also very vulnerable as it's a very tight area might take 3 seconds to wire and about a total of 3 tank trap to lock up, really not hard.

As said earlier what you did isn't illegal, but I believe it IS an issue that should be looked at, perhaps one should always have LOS to their spawn-in / retreat point? That would HELP the issue although still make it possible unfortunately ideally this should be done away with somehow as there is no point in fighting a battle where your opponent cant call in his troops to send them into battle. The territory might have changed colors, but that doesn't tell you "Hey he's wiring you off" it's a ridiculous 'tactic' and you know it, if not your too stubborn to realize it, if you watch the replay the wire took a good wile to destroy with the squads he brought in and by the time he shot the wire free he was trapped in by your massive amounts of infantry.

That aside the STuH is fine, a Sherman attacked mine from the front and got a shot in and I belive 2 glancing blows before I micro'd it to safety, later on RR Paratroopers tore it a new one, I'm sure an AT gun would have done the same or rear shots from that un-upgunned Sherman would have done it as well.

Honestly Demonic I don't know what your deal is with provoking folks, just the other game we played you commented on how you wiped your ass with one of my teammates, seriously uncalled for.

Anyways, I think infantry spam is still an issue, yes you defeated our infantry spawm but really it was mostly with (gasp!) more infantry spam, yes you had some mortars that helped at times, we also had MG's if you didn't notice, but really there was a crap ton of riflemen and paratroopers out the yang and the RR was tearing up infantry as well, even more so then our supposed shreks were.

I don't blame folks for infantry spam there isn't enough fuel to really make TOO many other types of units, which is probalby the main underlying issue. I just hate that some don't see it as a problem, if we want to acknowledge that the game will be extremely heavy infantry then so be it, but I think it's a bit much atm.

Just my 2 cents.

[TheDeadlyShoe]

The StuH is not fine, i dont think you realize how improbably hard to kill they are in EiR, especially with generous fuel cost. that probably goes for StuGs too but everyone gets StuHs for their pwncannon.

The normal tactic of circling is entirely ineffective in eir owing to wide proliferation of AT and high tank cost...

[DBSights]

it was far from an isolated event, I saw a LOT of shrek/recoiless rifle kills on the actual weapons that game. 

...and I shot a lot of shreks. Its a random event, before you complain about how many hit, think of the nearly 7:1 that missed.

[TheDeadlyShoe]

Go through the replay, watch how many heavy weapons teams got instant killed by the first salvo of AT.

[DBSights]

And understand the miracle of random events.  If it is OP is 10 - 100 games, then its a problem.  In one, its a fluke.

[TheDeadlyShoe]

It's not a fluke, its a result of the heavy weapons hp decrease.

[Demonic Spoon]

1) First and foremost, airborne are far too inexpensive.  There was a ridiculous number of them running around.  Additionally, the ability to drop them anywhere made them extremely powerful.  I would recommend a cost increase just based on this ability.

? They're the most ineffective infantry in the game, and cost an arm and a leg more than volks. Shoe just used them extremely effectively. Besides, they can NOT be reinforced at all. MP40 volks cut through them like butter, as do KCH. In fact, even basic, unupgraded Axis infantry beats them.

2) Referencing point #3 made by Spoon concerning the StuH.  The StuH was being destroyed by the Sherman when it was alone.  The only reason the StuH was so effective later on was due to the support from grenadier teams.  Therefore, I do not think there is currently a problem with the StuH.

Well the thing is ,everything I've seen showed the StuH can reflect Sherman shells to its SIDE armor like paper. I've seen this in many games. My last game in montherme, a STuH took no damage from like 4 shells into its side, before running into schrek squads and raping the Sherman. Same thing in this game, even against the side armor, the StuH was deflecting shells like none other.

3) Referencing point #4 made by Spoon concerning MG health.  As he stated, it was a lucky shrek that killed one member of his HMG team.  This is a random chance event.  There is no reason to raise the health of HMG teams.

No, I am talking about the health of the MG ITSELF. Every single game I've had since the change has been implemented involved RRs, or schreks, or something nailing the MG and blowing it up, instapwning the squad. It's just so easy, it makes schreks a counter to MGs.\

4) Referencing point # 2 made by Spoon concerning raising the pop cap.  It is currently fine.  A higher pop cap would only give rise to a much larger amount of infantry.  Besides, the low pop cap forces the players to make some interesting tactical choices.  Can't have everything at once.

You can't really have a good balanced force right now. You'd get at MAX two extra infantry squads on the field, when you can get four weapon teams squads. I fail to see the issue. It would just make it more viable to use weapons team support. Just because people are inexperienced with the mod and aren't being tactically smart doesn't mean we should dumb down the game. People will learn to deal with a larger number of troops given a bit of experience (I know I am learning micro in EiR very rapidly). All a low popcap does is make the game boring over time.

5) Having 10 as the minimum pop for a squad is not ideal.  I propose lowering this value to 5.  If the squad size is lowered, many squads of smaller size will be created instead of just a few, large squads.  This will allow for dynamic mixing or squads during a battle, resulting in a game with more strategic depth.  I especially noticed the constraints of 10 minimum pop cap when i had to summon my reserve squads.  In order to have these squads, i had to spend a large amount on padding to make them equal 10 population.  Perhaps a smaller minimum squad size for certain "reserve only squads" could be a possible compromise.  These squads would be delayed by a set time, but have a lower minimum size.

erm...no, then you would, for most things, be able to pick and call in individual squads. This is bad...

Besides, weren't you just complaining that a slightly higher popcap would be unmanagable? With, say, half-size squads, you'd be DOUBLING the amount of units you have to control. This would be far worse.

Seriously, the wiring off of the spawn in point was retarded. Your comment about neglect, and leaving it unattended is just plain dumb, one he was actually concentrating on the front lines and 2 he didn't have LOS to it since he had no units. It is NOT like a HQ where you can actually see wtf is going on. That particular spawn-in point is also very vulnerable as it's a very tight area might take 3 seconds to wire and about a total of 3 tank trap to lock up, really not hard.

oh please. He can see the territories on the map turn from blue to red, he should have known I was coming for his spawnpoint. Even without that knowledge, he had no troops anywhere near there, so he should have assumed. It is really hard when you consider that to fully block off the area, I had to set up 6 tanktraps and wire it all off, all while guarding my engineers from the force he SHOULD have coming to rape them (because he knows that I am in control of the territory around his spawn).

As said earlier what you did isn't illegal, but I believe it IS an issue that should be looked at, perhaps one should always have LOS to their spawn-in / retreat point? That would HELP the issue although still make it possible unfortunately ideally this should be done away with somehow as there is no point in fighting a battle where your opponent cant call in his troops to send them into battle. The territory might have changed colors, but that doesn't tell you "Hey he's wiring you off" it's a ridiculous 'tactic' and you know it, if not your too stubborn to realize it, if you watch the replay the wire took a good wile to destroy with the squads he brought in and by the time he shot the wire free he was trapped in by your massive amounts of infantry.

It wouldn't tell you I'm wiring him off...but it would tell him that I'm setting up HMGs and AT guns, or something like that to stop him from bringing in reinforcements. What else could he be thinking when he sees all my fucking troops closing on my spawnpoints? He was being neglectful, his fault, not mine. He didn't take out the wire, it was actually Shoe's satchel that did it.

That aside the STuH is fine, a Sherman attacked mine from the front and got a shot in and I belive 2 glancing blows before I micro'd it to safety, later on RR Paratroopers tore it a new one, I'm sure an AT gun would have done the same or rear shots from that un-upgunned Sherman would have done it as well.

Bullcrap. I saw many shots hit the side, and most of them were deflected.

Honestly Demonic I don't know what your deal is with provoking folks, just the other game we played you commented on how you wiped your ass with one of my teammates, seriously uncalled for.

That was said facetiously, and it was fairly obvious. If he was offended, sorry, but it was definitely not meant that way.

Anyways, I think infantry spam is still an issue, yes you defeated our infantry spawm but really it was mostly with (gasp!) more infantry spam, yes you had some mortars that helped at times, we also had MG's if you didn't notice, but really there was a crap ton of riflemen and paratroopers out the yang and the RR was tearing up infantry as well, even more so then our supposed shreks were.

...Right. So the main composition of our force was infantry. Whoopdedoo, I don't see the issue with that. The MGs and mortars really, REALLY killed a lot.

...and I shot a lot of shreks. Its a random event, before you complain about how many hit, think of the nearly 7:1 that missed.

Not really. Out of 3-4 shot, one hit and it went kaboom. A StuG, earlier, one-shotted my HMG team like this.

This is a result of the MG HP decrease.

[Jazlizard]

I seriously disagree, supported YES a stuh can be a bitch to take out, but unsupported it went down to recoilless paras very quickly. Earlier in the match I had it well supported with engineers backing it up.

The reason people get the STuH and not the STuG is because the STuH is much better vs infantry and the axis rely more on their panzershrecks and in some cases AT guns for AT power. Unless your trying to say that all of the sudden the STuH and STuG have all of the sudden gotten more powerful then vCoH I don't see an issue.

The way EiR is currently setup tanks in general are powerful due to lack of armor all around. I think the issue is Allied don't build as much AT power as they would in vCoH due to the lack of armor presence thus far, now that more is starting to show up tactics need to change. The RR really did chew up my stuh good, I belive an AT shot initially damaged it, but that one did not get away by any means.

Seriously I think it's just the lack of AT power the allies normally bring in EiR that is an issue, the StuH hasn't changed from vCoH (correct me if I'm wrong) and the only complaints in vCoH are it's ability to deystroy buildings which frankly not many are built in EiR anyways.

I think you need to play a few more games and maybe look over your strategies before claiming it's OP you guys did well holding off our 'infantry spam' but apparently the StuH was too much (even though we lost the match and all our StuH's go figure) and the guy with the highest score/kills didn't even have one... hmm

[Demonic Spoon]

I seriously disagree, supported YES a stuh can be a bitch to take out, but unsupported it went down to recoilless paras very quickly. Earlier in the match I had it well supported with engineers backing it up.

Hmm. Maybe the sherman just needs a penetration buff against it then.

The reason people get the STuH and not the STuG is because the STuH is much better vs infantry and the axis rely more on their panzershrecks and in some cases AT guns for AT power. Unless your trying to say that all of the sudden the STuH and STuG have all of the sudden gotten more powerful then vCoH I don't see an issue.

I doubt it. It's just that in vCoH it's pretty easy to get the 76mm upgrade. The thing is, though, this would make 75mm Shermans too powerful against StuGs...hmm..maybe a penetration buff exclusive to the side armor of StuGs and StuHs? Maybe a penetration buff JUST against the StuH? Not sure how to handle this.

The way EiR is currently setup tanks in general are powerful due to lack of armor all around. I think the issue is Allied don't build as much AT power as they would in vCoH due to the lack of armor presence thus far, now that more is starting to show up tactics need to change. The RR really did chew up my stuh good, I belive an AT shot initially damaged it, but that one did not get away by any means.

Indeed, but I still think a tank should have better luck at hitting the side armor .Multiple times I've seen many shots bounce off the side armor of a STuG

Seriously I think it's just the lack of AT power the allies normally bring in EiR that is an issue, the StuH hasn't changed from vCoH (correct me if I'm wrong) and the only complaints in vCoH are it's ability to deystroy buildings which frankly not many are built in EiR anyways.

I think it's the low price.

I think you need to play a few more games and maybe look over your strategies before claiming it's OP you guys did well holding off our 'infantry spam' but apparently the StuH was too much (even though we lost the match and all our StuH's go figure) and the guy with the highest score/kills didn't even have one... hmm

Not really claming it's overpowered. I am simply saying Shermans are not as effective as they should be against them. Their power and armor against anything else is fine. Maybe the Sherman upgrade just needs a price decrease, as 200 munis per sherman is pretty damn steep.

[Jazlizard]

Well I never played allies in EiR, so did not know the sherman was 200 mun to upgrade, that does seem like a lot at first, but I'd have to play it before I commented on it really, tanks and general just seem expensive with the amount of fuel we get, but seeing as panzershrecks cost 125, I can see why the upgun costs 200. Again I'd have to test it really, but seems like it would have solved a lot of issues vs any axis tank really since an upgun sherman can take out a stuh, stug or a lvl 1 panzer IV 1v1.

[Skunker]

Seriously, the wiring off of the spawn in point was retarded. Your comment about neglect, and leaving it unattended is just plain dumb, one he was actually concentrating on the front lines and 2 he didn't have LOS to it since he had no units. It is NOT like a HQ where you can actually see wtf is going on. That particular spawn-in point is also very vulnerable as it's a very tight area might take 3 seconds to wire and about a total of 3 tank trap to lock up, really not hard.

As said earlier what you did isn't illegal, but I believe it IS an issue that should be looked at, perhaps one should always have LOS to their spawn-in / retreat point? That would HELP the issue although still make it possible unfortunately ideally this should be done away with somehow as there is no point in fighting a battle where your opponent cant call in his troops to send them into battle. The territory might have changed colors, but that doesn't tell you "Hey he's wiring you off" it's a ridiculous 'tactic' and you know it, if not your too stubborn to realize it, if you watch the replay the wire took a good wile to destroy with the squads he brought in and by the time he shot the wire free he was trapped in by your massive amounts of infantry.

That aside the STuH is fine, a Sherman attacked mine from the front and got a shot in and I belive 2 glancing blows before I micro'd it to safety, later on RR Paratroopers tore it a new one, I'm sure an AT gun would have done the same or rear shots from that un-upgunned Sherman would have done it as well.

Honestly Demonic I don't know what your deal is with provoking folks, just the other game we played you commented on how you wiped your ass with one of my teammates, seriously uncalled for.

Anyways, I think infantry spam is still an issue, yes you defeated our infantry spawm but really it was mostly with (gasp!) more infantry spam, yes you had some mortars that helped at times, we also had MG's if you didn't notice, but really there was a crap ton of riflemen and paratroopers out the yang and the RR was tearing up infantry as well, even more so then our supposed shreks were.

I don't blame folks for infantry spam there isn't enough fuel to really make TOO many other types of units, which is probalby the main underlying issue. I just hate that some don't see it as a problem, if we want to acknowledge that the game will be extremely heavy infantry then so be it, but I think it's a bit much atm.

Just my 2 cents.

I believe you're completely right here. I've seen games with StuHs and they're fine. When you're halfway across the map, its hard to focus on your spawn, and walling it in is a cheap tactic, especially, as you said with his hordes of infantry keeping him sealed inside. The StuH is an infantry killer, your upgunned shermans were just poorly microed. If you had AT guns, which I'm sure you did, you could take them back to AT guns instead of complaining that your mass RR spam didn't do the job.

Demonic, you truly do do a good job of provoking people, he is correct. It would be wise of you to stop this: it's beta, not a true competition. Most of your arguments here are a whine about things you didn't like. If you didn't get Sherman shells into his StuH, perhaps you should consider purchasing an M10.

[TheDeadlyShoe]

The StuH is an infantry killer, your upgunned shermans were just poorly microed. If you had AT guns, which I'm sure you did, you could take them back to AT guns instead of complaining that your mass RR spam didn't do the job.

...

the whole problem is that you HAVE to run back to the AT guns. The sherman trying to kill a StuH is like a greyhound trying to kill a puma in the release COH.  In every game of EiR what happens so far is that some squad with Pshrecks comes up and i have to pull the sherman way, way back.

circling does not work in eir because of the prevalence of support AT.

[Skunker]

I did watch the game. I watched demonic say that airborne were not effective, when thousands of them seemed to appear from nowhere and surround chengle and sight's soldiers. Even with upgrades, they were completely unable to stop the airborne you sent at them. Ineffective? Yeah, right. The surprise and mass spam of airborne you used in that infantry fight was HIGHLY effective. Chengele is right, airborne are too spammable.

 I watched demonic pull his cheap maneuver and trap his spawn, which was completely low. Saying he could've used an explosive is bs, he had 15 munitions left. That was a cheap tactic, and if he had los in his spawn, he would've seen it beforehand. How the hell is he supposed to know you're going to pull something lame like that just because his territory sectors are falling, all he knows is that you're moving. If anything this replay proves how ridiculously overpowered airborne spam is. The panzerschreks got a few lucky shots, your shermans aren't meant for attacking StuH's, so they didn't fare well, yeah some of those side shots were a little out there, but if it weren't for your lack of anti-tank weaponry, you would've fared well from the start. What are you complaining about anyways? Your airborne spam took care of his StuH, and you all had plenty of guys left over. Your complaints about certain axis overpowered things are absolutely unfounded. And grens are NOT more effective in combat than base airborne spoon and that 20 mp per adds up quite a bit. Chengele did not spam anything, and your comments about "you complaining about spam" were completely unfounded and stupid. Just like most of your other complaints in this thread.

Axis players in this game: More power to you, your StuH's finally put up a hell  of a fight against the bar riflemen, airborne, and ranger spam that seems completely prevalent in allied players' play style. What i see here (you may not see the same thing obviously) is a lot of allied complaints because it was a close game, and they aren't used to people being able to massacre their infantry properly.

Allies: You won, why are you moaning? You abused the airborne as much as i have ever seen in a game, to an extent in which i was even surprised by how many were coming down, despite me knowing that you would spam them. Their recoilless rifles killed more infantry than the gren's schreks did, and they completely arse raped the assault guns. You brought less AT weapons to the fight than you perhaps should've, and that would've taken care of those StuH's. Infantry don't solve all problems you know.  I've seen two AT guns make a StuH look like child's play. Please, there are no imbalance issues here other than the mass spam of airborne, and perhaps snipers being far too cheap. It was well played by both sides, but as said before, the massive amounts of airborne sent down from the skies at cheap prices saved the day. 

Spoon: SO you lost a few squads, took some heat from those StuH's and got that quad banged up a bit. You still made decisive moves that affected chengele very profoundly. Instead of helping your allies out using the troops you had when the StuH's came, you decided to be cheap and wire his spawn for kicks. That's a big map, and when you don't have LOS there, you certainly cannot expect a player to be considering that someone may have blocked his spawn point off. 

Also, if i recall, i saw an axis hmg get completely blown away by recoilless rifles from a drop, and never saw an allied one get utterly raped by schrecks.

LONG POST, i am going to take a breath. Excuse me for being a little pro axis here, but you guys seem to think most of the balance issues lie with us, and none to do with you. Sure the StuH deflected a few rounds that perhaps should've penetrated, yeah the sniper spam may have been a little much, and yes heavy weapons are effective vs. fixed positions, given they have no support. Overall i think a lot of you need to watch the replay again, it was a fairly balanced game, and most of spoons complaints are unreasonable to me. I didn't see chengele in here saying that he needed MG bunkers by his spawn because it could be wired while he was busy microing, I don't think its appropriate for you to say that the StuH should be nerfed because the Sherman can't penetrate it from certain angles.

[TheDeadlyShoe]

 

The panzerschreks got a few lucky shots

this is driving me wild since you guys are obviously missing the point. I'm pretty sure the RRs executed more HMGs than the shreks did.  its completely silly for an infantry mass to charge at HMGs and blow themup (the HMGs.. NOT THE CREWMEN) with their first salvo of **AT fire**.  This is a change I argued for in the first place and having experienced it in game i now think it was inadvised.

our airborne spam took care of his StuH

well, no it didnt. for the most part, the airborne totally failed against the stuhs, just like the shermans. Just like the other games ive played against StuHs!

I dont know whats wrong with the StuH.  i dont know why it seems so overpowered when im fighting it.  but I definitely feel that something is wrong.  The only thing that drives it off is AT guns.

maybe it needs a munitions cost to go with its kill-cannon.

[Skunker]

Your Recoilless Rifles had that StuH running like hell. You EXECUTED it..... hell its main gun was knocked out in mere seconds.