BMBM

Your idea of Fun

281 posts in this topic

4 minutes ago, madrebel said:

drive tanks from the next town back, drop bombs on them, smoke them with mortar shells, or - just give up the town.

why is solo rambo infantry ALWAYS the go to answer? zero historical justification of any kind for infantry literally spotting and stalking tanks in open country. ZERO. infantry almost always waited in ambush positions.

that said, tanks having only the AB as spawn points drastically limits they game viable response. you either spawn in before tanks get into position or you're at their mercy. having some sort of 'near-line' FB like spawn point, being able to spawn from depots, or some other methd would be preferred versus only being able to spawn from the AB.

I tend to agree that sappers are too effective right now.

 

These effects would be mitigated by larger tank columns using more teamwork (scratching each others' backs, etc), and it would be mitigated by Infantry working with tanks.  Right now that sort of thing isn't always even possible numbers-wise, at times.  A lot of perceived issues in-game seem to be rooted in lower player counts, i.e. would not really be issues if we had more players in-game.

 

I am a fan of removing the FBs entirely, replacing them with PPO TOC areas, placed wherever chosen by players, where armor could spawn without preset enemy positions having them in their sights as they spawn in, (at ABs, or current FBs).

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, madrebel said:

drive tanks from the next town back, drop bombs on them, smoke them with mortar shells, or - just give up the town.

why is solo rambo infantry ALWAYS the go to answer? zero historical justification of any kind for infantry literally spotting and stalking tanks in open country. ZERO. infantry almost always waited in ambush positions.

that said, tanks having only the AB as spawn points drastically limits they game viable response. you either spawn in before tanks get into position or you're at their mercy. having some sort of 'near-line' FB like spawn point, being able to spawn from depots, or some other methd would be preferred versus only being able to spawn from the AB.

Ok, your solutions are potential options, but why don't I flip it on it's head?

Why is solo rambo tanking without covering infantry ALWAYS the go to answer? zero historical justification of any kind for lone tanks driving around the countryside and perching themselves on hills without any infantry cover and expecting complete safety from enemy infantry. ZERO. Tanks almost always had infantry accompaniment.

 

Edited by caydel
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, augetout said:

A lot of perceived issues in-game seem to be rooted in lower player counts, i.e. would not really be issues if we had more players in-game.

getting real sick of this answer, it's a generic excuse to shrug off problems.

there's low player counts for a reason, this answer is anti-productive. ya'll gotta admit there are issues, we have tankers confessing the new ToE is the reason they're leaving

so, even less players in game for some unknown reason... why are tankers leaving? it must be cause there's not enough people in game... : /

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

define rambo tanking? your description involved two tanks, presumably working together, at range, and they set themselves up in a superior position.

that's rambo to you?

while i'd agree that solo tanks cruising around isn't historical, tanks advancing without infantry has tons of historical justification. it didn't always work out well for the tanks, but it happened a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, major0noob said:

getting real sick of this answer, it's a generic excuse to shrug off problems.

there's low player counts for a reason, this answer is anti-productive. ya'll gotta admit there are issues, we have tankers confessing the new ToE is the reason they're leaving

so, even less players in game for some unknown reason... why are tankers leaving? it must be cause there's not enough people in game... : /

You keep looking for an argument where none exists, major0noob.  I am certainly not shrugging off problems, and have worked for years to help the game progress in a positive way.  You and I disagree on the ToE being an actual issue, and that's ok---people can disagree.  I believe that if the german side wants to see tanks at a higher percentage of frontline towns, thier first stop should be to talk with the GHC, who places the Panzer Brigades on map.  I also believe that the changes to ToE addressed years-long complaints, from the german side, regarding having to face all Allied tanks at every town they chose to attack.   

What I'm referring to in mentioning player numbers should be self-evident, but I'll try to be more clear:  When Lafayette Federation was at full strength, our tankers had Infantry support and enemy sappers disappeared from being a significant threat to our tanks.  Now, with our numbers low, there are times when we don't have the numbers to detach Infantry to watch over the tanks, and we pay a heavy price from the sappers running around willy nilly.  Thus, are sappers an issue currently?  Sure.  Would they be if my unit was at full strength?  Nope.

 

S!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only 10 sappers with only 2 HEAT charges to sap orgy of matties. This is not historical .

Just get infantry cover which is historical. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, augetout said:

 Would they be if my unit was at full strength?  Nope.

i disagree here. if it takes a team to stop one solo infantry - its a problem. the power balance is skewed towards solo units not based on reality. the cause of this issue isn't the fantasy pixie dust, its the terrain that offers no real impediment to infantry and also, all infantry having binoculars.

make the terrain present real problems and take away binos from at the very least sappers and RPATs and you'll clear up a lot of the remaining issue.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, madrebel said:

i disagree here. if it takes a team to stop one solo infantry - its a problem. the power balance is skewed towards solo units not based on reality. the cause of this issue isn't the fantasy pixie dust, its the terrain that offers no real impediment to infantry and also, all infantry having binoculars.

make the terrain present real problems and take away binos from at the very least sappers and RPATs and you'll clear up a lot of the remaining issue.

Audio is a much bigger factor in tank hunting than binocs usually.  The audio in this game travels way too far, and if it was more realistic those binocs would actually be useful.

 

When I can hear a tank from 1.5km and follow it with pinpoint accuracy just based on the positional audio, that makes tanking almost impossible when faced with a dedicated eRPAT.  

Edited by Capco
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, caydel said:

The other night, I was in Arras

 A nice little fight by the sound of it. Armor well placed doing its job; poor flank protection; an intrepid atg crew. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

idk - maybe. i've never heard a ww2 tank from 1.5km - i've no doubt the attenuation likely needs an audit. i think one of the dev volunteers mentioned finding a math error around the random bullet sounds. perhaps that may be related to attenuation in general? non muffled engines though right? that's not going to be quiet and i'm fine really with audio being what is used to locate. that's more realistic than every single infantry having binos.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back in my army days we could hear the tanks (Centurions) from way farther than that, depending on the lay of the land. Rubber-soled APCs, maybe 1000-1200 m in open terrain. Roaring engines on full tilt and tracks chinking carry far. Idle sounds is another matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, madrebel said:

i disagree here. if it takes a team to stop one solo infantry - its a problem. the power balance is skewed towards solo units not based on reality. the cause of this issue isn't the fantasy pixie dust, its the terrain that offers no real impediment to infantry and also, all infantry having binoculars.

make the terrain present real problems and take away binos from at the very least sappers and RPATs and you'll clear up a lot of the remaining issue.

Everything in this game works better with teamwork being involved.  Feel free to ask any of the solo (rambo-LMGs excluded) EI who think that capturing a guarded depot by themselves is a good idea, then compare their comments to the guys who storm depots (and AB bunkers) together.

 

I would agree that all Infantry having binoculars is something that should be looked at, as it works against the need for teamwork.  I would also agree that terrain improvements/impediments to Infantry will (it's on the list) improve gameplay.  In the example I shared regarding the times when Lafayette Federation was at full strength equaling sappers being non-issues, I probably should have pointed out that at the beginning of attaching Infantry to tanks we went with a 1 Infantry for every tank ratio, but over time, as the threat of sappers went away we were able to task 1 INF with protecting 3 or more tanks, effectively.  In that sense, the teamwork involved, when broken down to its roots, was task-based:  Tanks looking to kill other tanks while other tanks looked to kill or suppress Infantry moving near the objective, Infantry taking ground (or defending ground), and other Infantry protecting tanks by ambushing those foolish enough to think running up to a tank when teamwork was involved was going to work.

 

By the same token, in the days when I saw a line of 88s and tanks sitting on a hill overlooking the town I was helping to defend, I learned fairly quickly that sending Infantry out to deal with them was not going to work.  I was going to have to send CAS, or friendly tanks/atgs after them, if I was going to displace them from that hill.  It's always about teamwork beating solo players.

 

So, if the game eliminates Binos, skilled sappers will still be able to kill tanks provided they are not working as a team.  If the terrain was totally revamped, skilled sappers would still be able to get out early, set themselves up in hide positions, and kill tanks, again provided they are not working as a team.  If, however, teamwork is involved, sappers disappear from the threat list, except in towns, where they will remain deadly (as they should be in urban environments) to tanks.

 

S!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, augetout said:

You keep looking for an argument where none exists, major0noob.  I am certainly not shrugging off problems, and have worked for years to help the game progress in a positive way.  You and I disagree on the ToE being an actual issue, and that's ok---people can disagree.  I believe that if the german side wants to see tanks at a higher percentage of frontline towns, thier first stop should be to talk with the GHC, who places the Panzer Brigades on map.  I also believe that the changes to ToE addressed years-long complaints, from the german side, regarding having to face all Allied tanks at every town they chose to attack.   

What I'm referring to in mentioning player numbers should be self-evident, but I'll try to be more clear:  When Lafayette Federation was at full strength, our tankers had Infantry support and enemy sappers disappeared from being a significant threat to our tanks.  Now, with our numbers low, there are times when we don't have the numbers to detach Infantry to watch over the tanks, and we pay a heavy price from the sappers running around willy nilly.  Thus, are sappers an issue currently?  Sure.  Would they be if my unit was at full strength?  Nope.

 

S!

isnt it always the case... there's nothing to argue about cause there's nothing wrong.

do you seriously think axis tankers are happy with the 14 matties and no tanks in inf flags?

 

madrebel gets it

33 minutes ago, madrebel said:

if it takes a team to stop one solo infantry - its a problem. the power balance is skewed towards solo units not based on reality.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, augetout said:

Everything in this game works better with teamwork being involved.  Feel free to ask any of the solo (rambo-LMGs excluded) EI who think that capturing a guarded depot by themselves is a good idea, then compare their comments to the guys who storm depots (and AB bunkers) together.

 

I would agree that all Infantry having binoculars is something that should be looked at, as it works against the need for teamwork.  I would also agree that terrain improvements/impediments to Infantry will (it's on the list) improve gameplay.  In the example I shared regarding the times when Lafayette Federation was at full strength equaling sappers being non-issues, I probably should have pointed out that at the beginning of attaching Infantry to tanks we went with a 1 Infantry for every tank ratio, but over time, as the threat of sappers went away we were able to task 1 INF with protecting 3 or more tanks, effectively.  In that sense, the teamwork involved, when broken down to its roots, was task-based:  Tanks looking to kill other tanks while other tanks looked to kill or suppress Infantry moving near the objective, Infantry taking ground (or defending ground), and other Infantry protecting tanks by ambushing those foolish enough to think running up to a tank when teamwork was involved was going to work.

 

By the same token, in the days when I saw a line of 88s and tanks sitting on a hill overlooking the town I was helping to defend, I learned fairly quickly that sending Infantry out to deal with them was not going to work.  I was going to have to send CAS, or friendly tanks/atgs after them, if I was going to displace them from that hill.  It's always about teamwork beating solo players.

 

So, if the game eliminates Binos, skilled sappers will still be able to kill tanks provided they are not working as a team.  If the terrain was totally revamped, skilled sappers would still be able to get out early, set themselves up in hide positions, and kill tanks, again provided they are not working as a team.  If, however, teamwork is involved, sappers disappear from the threat list, except in towns, where they will remain deadly (as they should be in urban environments) to tanks.

 

S!

i agree, at some point you stop trying to design solo skill out of the game as you'll never keep up. we're a long way for there though. solo infantry have been gifted fake weapons to deal with 'the dreaded tank threat' that to be fair - when we had a lot more players having 40 tanks roll into a town was a giant "wait wtf ..." moment. both sides rolled tank columns so this isn't a 'side exclusive' thing but due to the fixed spawn mechanics, you couldn't really respond to that threat.

having a better dynamic/mobile spawn system really is what's needed to combat that. if faced with an obscene threat, falling back should be the right choice. falling back to the FB 2KM back though never really felt right despite how good 'un-owned' town fights have been at times over the years. IMO there should be an intermediary 'FB' - really for both attacking and defending and it should hinge on area capture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, augetout said:

Everything in this game works better with teamwork being involved.  Feel free to ask any of the solo (rambo-LMGs excluded) EI who think that capturing a guarded depot by themselves is a good idea, then compare their comments to the guys who storm depots (and AB bunkers) together.

was one in the 3min FMS days, the guys using teamwork failed. lonewolfs ninjaing were the only ones that made it
the guys using teamwork failed consistently to lonewolf rambos and stopped playing

 

the game is drifting towards ramboing by forcing "failure. without teamwork". it turns into pure and simple failure to function

HC is a good example, we all know it's essential to have teamwork and leadership in it. without, it just fails

 

you guys touting teamwork and leadership are always ignoring the lack of teamwork and leadership needed to counter it. the 3min FMS is the epitome of ignorance to this fact

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, major0noob said:

isnt it always the case... there's nothing to argue about cause there's nothing wrong.

do you seriously think axis tankers are happy with the 14 matties and no tanks in inf flags?

 

madrebel gets it

 

Please refrain from putting words in my mouth.  It won't help you make your case, @major0noob and it distracts from the task of making positive changes to the game.  Did you enjoy when the IIIH was added to the game?  I didn't, as the IIIH didn't arrive in Panzer units until well after the battle of France was over----at the time, I didn't accept that the in-game timeframe should progress as the campaign(s) kept going, and instead saw it as another dagger in the back of the Allied side.  I wasn't wrong, but I wasn't right, either.  It was a dagger in the back of the Allied side---it killed morale and chased many an Allied tanker out of the game.  By the same token, over time the game added Allied equipment that also arrived after the historical Battle of France was over, and the IIIH, while still (to me) a constant reminder of bad times for the Allies, lessened in importance.

 

I don't believe you or madrebel are wrong, or right.  Taking Madrebel's statement that "if it takes a team to stop one solo infantry-its a problem..." as an example, let's follow the logic a bit:  Does it really take a team to beat 1 solo sapper?  Reading my statements you could reach that conclusion, and I do believe that teamwork should beat solo players 99 out of 100 times, but at its root what I'm saying is that in order to beat solo sappers someone has to be tasked with paying attention to solo sappers.  It doesn't take a TEAM to beat solo sappers, but it does take someone focused on the threat they bring (which we agree is too powerful at the moment even as we might disagree as to the why).  That isn't any different than folks ingame realizing that the LMG that is holding the AB bunker is not going to be taken out by a rifleman, as in cqb the rifle is no match for an LMG---so we send LMGs or SMGs of our own in there, right?  No different with sappers.  Our tanks are not good at defending themselves from sappers, solo or otherwise, thus we need to task someone else to help.  I had great success tasking Infantry (rifles, even) with focusing on killing sappers.  Others might have other ways, and that's fine.

 

S!

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, madrebel said:

i agree, at some point you stop trying to design solo skill out of the game as you'll never keep up. we're a long way for there though. solo infantry have been gifted fake weapons to deal with 'the dreaded tank threat' that to be fair - when we had a lot more players having 40 tanks roll into a town was a giant "wait wtf ..." moment. both sides rolled tank columns so this isn't a 'side exclusive' thing but due to the fixed spawn mechanics, you couldn't really respond to that threat.

having a better dynamic/mobile spawn system really is what's needed to combat that. if faced with an obscene threat, falling back should be the right choice. falling back to the FB 2KM back though never really felt right despite how good 'un-owned' town fights have been at times over the years. IMO there should be an intermediary 'FB' - really for both attacking and defending and it should hinge on area capture.

As I mention frequently, I am in favor of getting rid of FBs completely, and replacing them with PPOs placed by players, wherever their hearts desire (within the confines of decorum, i.e. not 3 towns behind the lines).  These PPO TOC areas would act as FBs, and would be brigade-specific (actually I've toyed with the idea of breaking it down to the regimental level so as to allow even more flexibility for player choices of deployment).

 

Leaving some room for solo skill is a necessary evil, I agree.  A lot of folks just really like the idea of being 'the hero'.  I prefer being part of a team that does well but I realize there's enough room in this game for both viewpoints.  I hated seeing those 40 enemy tanks, but damn, they were a sight to behold, and I couldn't help but be struck with awe whenever it happened.

 

S!

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, augetout said:

I also believe that the changes to ToE addressed years-long complaints, from the german side, regarding having to face all Allied tanks at every town they chose to attack.

30 minutes ago, major0noob said:

do you seriously think axis tankers are happy with the 14 matties and no tanks in inf flags?

...

Edited by major0noob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not sappers, RPATS

 

the ATR's with one HEAT charge were ok, even from the inf-FRU

RPATS outkill tigers and S76's while only having 1/4 of their supply

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will tell you what is not fun for me , playing the way I want to play, and having someone say, no play this way . Game killer for me ,  Also I have 2 accounts , while I may be sniping , and there are no targets, I will use my 2nd account to cap .  My 1st campain on my return I picked allies, and sure enough it was dismal .  2nd war axis , lot of crap talk , not to me , but general stuff from a side that is losing . 3rd war im axis, and we are winning ,and a lot of " do it my way crap ":( and this talk came from the side that's winning .  From 2001 to when I stopped almost 3 years ago , axis side was great , no one [censored]ed at me for sniping .  When a AO is announced to be a mole , I set up a sniper , which takes time and if I don't die , im not going to change my guy when you decide its not a mole anymore. 

  Most of the time on a regular AO I will cap , Im the 3rd highest capper , so I change it up to sniper, and get flak . If I want to keep playing this game I may just hit the Y key . :(

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you so much Tatonka!!  Sometimes I turn off my chat, so I can concentrate on pickin em off..:)  You keep on doing what ya do best, my friend! 

Win with class, Lose with Dignity, Fight with Honor!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, major0noob said:

as one of the few tankers in the forums, we never wanted repair beyond tracks and maybe crew replacement.

even then, we never cared enough to argue for it.

 

our #1 concern has always been the RPATS ramboing around willy-nilly

that's a lie... repair tracks has been an issue since 2005 when I started playing the game and the same with lack of feedback like your gun is disable or you can't replace a crewman.

 

Honestly the ones who complain about rpats for me were just bad tankers, old players who did not properly use they commander for greater SA.

I played with FRUs and 15+ RPATs list and single handily cleaned them and for me spawning an ATG from FMS has had a more negative impact on tanking that RPATs ever had, worst this starts and tier 0.. Also now players value more RPATs units which make them less common and more sneaky on the battlefield before I could camp them until they were out this no longer happens.

Edited by pbveteran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm,

Disallow sapper and ATS from spawning at any MS?

Allow armor to spawn at CPs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, madrebel said:

non muffled engines though right?

Mostly not, because tank designers knew that if the enemy could hear you they could be ready for you.

Sherman had one or more mufflers depending on type. Matilda II had two mufflers, one for each engine. Tiger I had two mufflers, as did Panther and Tiger II. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, matamor said:

Only 10 sappers with only 2 HEAT charges to sap orgy of matties. This is not historical .

And of course, the most non-historical aspect is that there were no weapons like "HEAT sapper charges" in the 1940 French army or the 1940-45 British army, and nothing nearly as effective as the currently modeled weapon in the German army until T2.5.

CRS has told us innumerable times that "sapper charges are simplified representations of things that infantry could do to tanks", like smearing mud on vision blocks, or wedging logs into running gear, or dumping five gallons of gas over the engine and igniting it. OK, maybe that's believable at times, but now we're back to the sappers being way too effective and way too fast...because chasing a moving tank across a field to stick a large log in its running gear just isn't realistic.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.