RANGERS DOMİNATES ALL GAME! You build tanks hah idiot we have bazookas! Wait are you building infantry haha idiot we have flamethrowers and anti inf rifles we delete all infantry instantly! Are you thinking about bombing us haha idiot we can RUN FOR FUCKS SAKE THEY DODGE BOMBİNG WİTH RUNNİNG WHATTA FUCK İS THAT UNİT EVEN MGS CANT EVEN SUP THEM DO SOMETHİNG!!!!!

+1

Skill issue. Not a rangers issue.

Weapon drops are randomized. If the enemy is spamming rangers (extremely expensive both MP and Pop), and manages to spam weapon crates to get all the right tools to fight you. And if a couple of ranger squads manages to shut down your diverse army (MGs, tanks, indirects, and infantry). Then it's really a skill issue.

GamwiseSamgee wrote:

Skill issue. Not a rangers issue.

Weapon drops are randomized. If the enemy is spamming rangers (extremely expensive both MP and Pop), and manages to spam weapon crates to get all the right tools to fight you. And if a couple of ranger squads manages to shut down your diverse army (MGs, tanks, indirects, and infantry). Then it's really a skill issue.

I manage to deal with rangers just fine for the most part and while I wouldn't particularly call them OP saying that it is a skill issue is like admitting they are OP. The game is supposed to be playable for all skill levels and I can see how rangers and their mechanics are absolute cancer to deal with for a less experienced player. Just like the camo doctrine is easy to deal with for a decent player but hard to deal with for a less experienced player (though that one at least requires some skill to use). Also, let's not exaggerate with them being oh so expensive. Yes, they are expensive, but not extremely. With logistics they are cheaper to reinforce then guastatori while being harder to kill and having way more firepower as well as being able to deal with everything. They kill you logistically if you braindead blob them...

SEPH_27 wrote:

GamwiseSamgee wrote:

Skill issue. Not a rangers issue.

Weapon drops are randomized. If the enemy is spamming rangers (extremely expensive both MP and Pop), and manages to spam weapon crates to get all the right tools to fight you. And if a couple of ranger squads manages to shut down your diverse army (MGs, tanks, indirects, and infantry). Then it's really a skill issue.

I manage to deal with rangers just fine for the most part and while I wouldn't particularly call them OP saying that it is a skill issue is like admitting they are OP. The game is supposed to be playable for all skill levels and I can see how rangers and their mechanics are absolute cancer to deal with for a less experienced player. Just like the camo doctrine is easy to deal with for a decent player but hard to deal with for a less experienced player (though that one at least requires some skill to use). Also, let's not exaggerate with them being oh so expensive. Yes, they are expensive, but not extremely. With logistics they are cheaper to reinforce then guastatori while being harder to kill and having way more firepower as well as being able to deal with everything. They kill you logistically if you braindead blob them...

Logistics makes them less expensive, and playing rangers forces you to go for the Infantry supp center. You see rangers, you pretty much know what you're going against for the rest of the game.

It's a 14 pop squad.

It is a skill issue.
If I am playing faction A, and I'm spamming tank destroyers against some elite infantry, and then complain about said infantry being OP, then it's a skill issue.

The low quality bait post from the OP is just that. A bait post. Rangers are good in lower ranks because in lower ranks, people don't know how to position MGs, they don't know how to use tanks. They don't know how to flank. They play with one hand only.

Same as how people that don't know how to build or position an AA unit, will complain how aircrafts are OP...

I personally think it's fine to bring some interesting dynamic to the game with this expensive high dps, tanking infantry. 

Can we just reduce the movement speed just a little bit or reduce it depending on how many or what type weapon they carried? This would not only give Axis player a chance to supress them easier, but also encourage US player to choose and use Designated Assault Position.

Buffing the Wirbelwind DPS or removing the ammo cost of the suppressing ability is also a viable option imo, because the Wirbelwind is just too bad in the current patch.

GamwiseSamgee wrote:

SEPH_27 wrote:

GamwiseSamgee wrote:

Skill issue. Not a rangers issue.

Weapon drops are randomized. If the enemy is spamming rangers (extremely expensive both MP and Pop), and manages to spam weapon crates to get all the right tools to fight you. And if a couple of ranger squads manages to shut down your diverse army (MGs, tanks, indirects, and infantry). Then it's really a skill issue.

I manage to deal with rangers just fine for the most part and while I wouldn't particularly call them OP saying that it is a skill issue is like admitting they are OP. The game is supposed to be playable for all skill levels and I can see how rangers and their mechanics are absolute cancer to deal with for a less experienced player. Just like the camo doctrine is easy to deal with for a decent player but hard to deal with for a less experienced player (though that one at least requires some skill to use). Also, let's not exaggerate with them being oh so expensive. Yes, they are expensive, but not extremely. With logistics they are cheaper to reinforce then guastatori while being harder to kill and having way more firepower as well as being able to deal with everything. They kill you logistically if you braindead blob them...

Logistics makes them less expensive, and playing rangers forces you to go for the Infantry supp center. You see rangers, you pretty much know what you're going against for the rest of the game.

It's a 14 pop squad.

It is a skill issue.
If I am playing faction A, and I'm spamming tank destroyers against some elite infantry, and then complain about said infantry being OP, then it's a skill issue.

The low quality bait post from the OP is just that. A bait post. Rangers are good in lower ranks because in lower ranks, people don't know how to position MGs, they don't know how to use tanks. They don't know how to flank. They play with one hand only.

Same as how people that don't know how to build or position an AA unit, will complain how aircrafts are OP...

Agree, but I do find it's super difficult to comeback when fight ranger in a 2v2, 3v3 or 4v4 match. You need to be super careful to not make mistake. And maintain pressure, keep applying MP bleed. 

But some experienced ranger players will constantly retreat in bad engagement, keep testing your defence and drain my MP. I feel sometimes the risk they took is too small, especially with the help of forward medical center or captain's retreat point.

Itadakimasu wrote:

GamwiseSamgee wrote:

SEPH_27 wrote:

GamwiseSamgee wrote:

Skill issue. Not a rangers issue.

Weapon drops are randomized. If the enemy is spamming rangers (extremely expensive both MP and Pop), and manages to spam weapon crates to get all the right tools to fight you. And if a couple of ranger squads manages to shut down your diverse army (MGs, tanks, indirects, and infantry). Then it's really a skill issue.

I manage to deal with rangers just fine for the most part and while I wouldn't particularly call them OP saying that it is a skill issue is like admitting they are OP. The game is supposed to be playable for all skill levels and I can see how rangers and their mechanics are absolute cancer to deal with for a less experienced player. Just like the camo doctrine is easy to deal with for a decent player but hard to deal with for a less experienced player (though that one at least requires some skill to use). Also, let's not exaggerate with them being oh so expensive. Yes, they are expensive, but not extremely. With logistics they are cheaper to reinforce then guastatori while being harder to kill and having way more firepower as well as being able to deal with everything. They kill you logistically if you braindead blob them...

Logistics makes them less expensive, and playing rangers forces you to go for the Infantry supp center. You see rangers, you pretty much know what you're going against for the rest of the game.

It's a 14 pop squad.

It is a skill issue.
If I am playing faction A, and I'm spamming tank destroyers against some elite infantry, and then complain about said infantry being OP, then it's a skill issue.

The low quality bait post from the OP is just that. A bait post. Rangers are good in lower ranks because in lower ranks, people don't know how to position MGs, they don't know how to use tanks. They don't know how to flank. They play with one hand only.

Same as how people that don't know how to build or position an AA unit, will complain how aircrafts are OP...

Agree, but I do find it's super difficult to comeback when fight ranger in a 2v2, 3v3 or 4v4 match. You need to be super careful to not make mistake. And maintain pressure, keep applying MP bleed. 

But some experienced ranger players will constantly retreat in bad engagement, keep testing your defence and drain my MP. I feel sometimes the risk they took is too small, especially with the help of forward medical center or captain's retreat point.

And if they retreat, you get valuable territory.

Rangers won't train your MP if he's retreating. If he's testing your defences and retreating, he's losing... a lot. If rangers were 7 Pop, sure, you could spam enough of them to be able to constantly apply pressure. But at 14 a piece. Good luck

They are mostly balanced but Cover to Cover could probably be looked at (especially stacking with new Designate Assault Position).  I also wouldn't be opposed to limiting the Promote Rifles to Rangers being limited to base zone - it's pretty stupid that Rifles just suddenly majorly increase their DPS at the click of a button and get a cheesy wipe as a result.  

EtherealDragon wrote:

They are mostly balanced but Cover to Cover could probably be looked at (especially stacking with new Designate Assault Position).  I also wouldn't be opposed to limiting the Promote Rifles to Rangers being limited to base zone - it's pretty stupid that Rifles just suddenly majorly increase their DPS at the click of a button and get a cheesy wipe as a result.  

These are probably good changes. The "upgrade anywhere" is immersion breaking as well.

Regarding cover to cover and DAP. It's not uncommon for a unit to have timed abilities which suppress one counter to them (eg suppression for MGs). But they should be lower cost, but also much lower value. You pay a bit of muni, to be a bit more resilient for a bit of time. Not the "I run through a hailstorm of bullets".

The core idea of rangers is great. The execution is well done. Just some doodads that need ironing out. The designate AP is a silly skill anyway.
I can't imagine general saying "These here gents, is a magical area full of magical wonders. Go ahead and run through it at your heart's content".

DAP should have a different design. Maybe rework DAP bonuses into:
1) Lower weapon cooldown for infantry

2) 15% faster movement in/out of combat inside the area

3) Vehicles gain 15% faster reload and 10% higher acceleration

And match the price for those buffs, and enlarge the AOE.

They are incredibly powerful. I do get they have counters, and people state "skill issue". I would say in games with players of = skill, the match up GREATLY favors the rangers as they outclass everything.  The counters take more APM, skill, weapon placement at a significantly higher level than the rangers take. 

++++++

jokebook wrote:

They are incredibly powerful. I do get they have counters, and people state "skill issue". I would say in games with players of = skill, the match up GREATLY favors the rangers as they outclass everything.  The counters take more APM, skill, weapon placement at a significantly higher level than the rangers take. 

Thank you for talking sense, sadly samwise has lost its wits. I will have a laugh when a 6-man squad equal to rangers pops up on Axis' side and makes the game an APM nightmare to enjoy because you have to hard counter terminator units far & wide like it's a tournament.

GamwiseSamgee wrote:

SEPH_27 wrote:

GamwiseSamgee wrote:

Skill issue. Not a rangers issue.

Weapon drops are randomized. If the enemy is spamming rangers (extremely expensive both MP and Pop), and manages to spam weapon crates to get all the right tools to fight you. And if a couple of ranger squads manages to shut down your diverse army (MGs, tanks, indirects, and infantry). Then it's really a skill issue.

I manage to deal with rangers just fine for the most part and while I wouldn't particularly call them OP saying that it is a skill issue is like admitting they are OP. The game is supposed to be playable for all skill levels and I can see how rangers and their mechanics are absolute cancer to deal with for a less experienced player. Just like the camo doctrine is easy to deal with for a decent player but hard to deal with for a less experienced player (though that one at least requires some skill to use). Also, let's not exaggerate with them being oh so expensive. Yes, they are expensive, but not extremely. With logistics they are cheaper to reinforce then guastatori while being harder to kill and having way more firepower as well as being able to deal with everything. They kill you logistically if you braindead blob them...

Logistics makes them less expensive, and playing rangers forces you to go for the Infantry supp center. You see rangers, you pretty much know what you're going against for the rest of the game.

It's a 14 pop squad.

It is a skill issue.
If I am playing faction A, and I'm spamming tank destroyers against some elite infantry, and then complain about said infantry being OP, then it's a skill issue.

The low quality bait post from the OP is just that. A bait post. Rangers are good in lower ranks because in lower ranks, people don't know how to position MGs, they don't know how to use tanks. They don't know how to flank. They play with one hand only.

Same as how people that don't know how to build or position an AA unit, will complain how aircrafts are OP...

Totally agree, but I would love to remove that Rifle Vet applied to Rangers... Less weapon (6 being dope af) slots making a Vet 1, 2 weapons slot that increase of 1, each time they gain veterancy, also removing that shooting on the move stupidity for all factions !