Why is this allowed? Satchel (all game modes)

#1
4 months ago
eonfigureeonfigure Posts: 468
edited July 8 in Balance Feedback

Penals have had the ability to render axis light vehicles (and light armor for that matter) pointless, insignificant, and ineffective with their atomic sticky satchel. This has been going on for some time now. I thought when i saw it in the patch notes it was a joke. Ya know, An actual early april fool's joke back in the day. Yet here we still are. The trolling and favoritism continues.

Let me very simply put this in perspective, for everyone...........................If axis troops had a panzerfaust, that could one-shot allied light vehicals and tanks, I'm almost certain the coh2 servers would be in flames, allied fanboys would have literally destroyed them via fire. There's just no way that they would let that fly in this game.
Yet, when it comes to "Vs Axis".................sure, why not?

Now to further add how ridiculously overpowered this ability is...(Yes, notice i used the term "overpowered" not broken. This ability is not broken at all. Quite the opposite, it is extremely effective. :) but i digress)...Take note that this ability costs 45 munitions. That 45 munis, cancels out long build times, Manpower, and fuel. Unlike most mines which only moderately damage most light vehicles. Except tellers, but yet still with mines, you have a chance to detect them. Once this thing is attached, its just absolute doom. When you think about it, the timer is basically aesthetic. All from a durable squad, that can handle most enemy infantry effectively from all ranges, and have anti-tank upgrades.

Solution: remove it's auto-tracking ability. This thing was meant to destroy bunkers, not tanks.

Riddle: Why is something that powerful allowed?
Answer: The wrong people in charge, abusing their power.

«134

Comments

  • #2
    4 months ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,469
    edited July 8

    Yes, indeed, why anti tank weapons are allowed to destroy armor.

    I guess we'll never know.

    You messed up so badly its not even funny.
    Knowing what units are capable of is 50% of skill, you have failed by driving light vehicle to anti tank squad and allowed them to use hardest to use AT nade.

    Terrible plays is not the same as "bad balance" and there is nothing wrong with AT penals.

    You messed up, that is all.

    (protip: axis DOES have something that one shots ALL allied light vehicles, I'll let you figure out what is that alone)

  • #3
    4 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,463
    Satchel is a necessary evil. The PTRS doesn't have the firepower of other AT. It's not going to half health a light like the others meaning it's worth risking the push so they can't shoot. The satchel means you can't push them. Keep your distance and support your armour and it'll be fine
  • #4
    4 months ago
    gydh56gydh56 Posts: 71

    The best way to avoid a satchel is to not go near a squad of penals with vehicles; you must kite them. If you do get satcheled, sometimes it is possible to run up to the penals and take down as many models as possible in the explosion.

  • #5
    4 months ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 3,927
    My only problem with Satchels is they instant engine crit mediums - which is counter to the entire basis of the change we made to snares in the first place way back when.

    Additionally - I don't like that Penals come out dominating the AI field and then transition in to the most effective snare in the game. It makes them a one unit wonder that you can spam for map dominance against infantry, but then flip the AT switch on one or two squads and be pretty much completely covered from light vehicles until you get out your own.

    So - what can be done? Well fuck all really. Penals are unfortunately just designed with all the years of knowledge we've gained, losing most of their weaknesses in some degree or another while making only minor compromises in terms of their durability and firepower. If you tone down their AI strength they become useless as AI inf. If you tone down their AT any more than you do by giving them PTRS, they become useless as AT infantry. I suppose you could alter their durability and lower the reinforce cost to make them less prone to standing about in fields - but then I'm of the opinion that ALL infantry is too forgiving and durable in terms of RA anyway so you'd just be unfairly kneecapping the Penals.

    Incidentally, as a matter of principal I also dont like that we made another unit with an AT weapon also snare, but they're just PTRS so fuck it I'm only railing on it as a poor design choice rather than an actual balance issue.
  • #6
    4 months ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,469

    @Lazarus said:
    My only problem with Satchels is they instant engine crit mediums - which is counter to the entire basis of the change we made to snares in the first place way back when.

    Additionally - I don't like that Penals come out dominating the AI field and then transition in to the most effective snare in the game. It makes them a one unit wonder that you can spam for map dominance against infantry, but then flip the AT switch on one or two squads and be pretty much completely covered from light vehicles until you get out your own.

    So - what can be done? Well fuck all really. Penals are unfortunately just designed with all the years of knowledge we've gained, losing most of their weaknesses in some degree or another while making only minor compromises in terms of their durability and firepower. If you tone down their AI strength they become useless as AI inf. If you tone down their AT any more than you do by giving them PTRS, they become useless as AT infantry. I suppose you could alter their durability and lower the reinforce cost to make them less prone to standing about in fields - but then I'm of the opinion that ALL infantry is too forgiving and durable in terms of RA anyway so you'd just be unfairly kneecapping the Penals.

    Incidentally, as a matter of principal I also dont like that we made another unit with an AT weapon also snare, but they're just PTRS so fuck it I'm only railing on it as a poor design choice rather than an actual balance issue.

    Penals are much more transparent, they have lower range, longer animation, much higher dmg on satchel and at satchel can kill the squad as well if vehicle stays near them.

    The satchel also does meet the requierment of engine damage at 75% or less health of vehicle.

    Its also mandatory to engine crit because of what thedarkarmadillo already said.

    AT penals are completely harmless, unless you dive into them, which is the very reason they have at satchel.

  • #7
    4 months ago
    HingieHingie Posts: 1,966

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    Satchel is a necessary evil. The PTRS doesn't have the firepower of other AT. It's not going to half health a light like the others meaning it's worth risking the push so they can't shoot. The satchel means you can't push them. Keep your distance and support your armour and it'll be fine

    Thats no reason for the Snare to do 320 damage. Remove the Satchel when upgrading to AT, replace it with AT grenades.

  • #8
    4 months ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,469
    edited July 10

    @Hingie said:

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    Satchel is a necessary evil. The PTRS doesn't have the firepower of other AT. It's not going to half health a light like the others meaning it's worth risking the push so they can't shoot. The satchel means you can't push them. Keep your distance and support your armour and it'll be fine

    Thats no reason for the Snare to do 320 damage. Remove the Satchel when upgrading to AT, replace it with AT grenades.

    1) That's exactly the reason which was stated when they were introduced.
    2) Its 240 damage.
    3) AT nades would not prevent tanks from rushing them and pushing them over, unless you want PTRS to have twice the penetration and shreck ability to do 360 no scopes insta shots, price needs to be justified.
    4) You can also learn to play and don't dive your tanks against weakest AT squad in game with actual deterrent to try to run them over.

  • #9
    4 months ago
    HingieHingie Posts: 1,966
    edited July 10

    @Katitof said:
    1) That's exactly the reason which was stated when they were introduced.
    2) Its 240 damage.
    3) AT nades would not prevent tanks from rushing them and pushing them over, unless you want PTRS to have twice the penetration and shreck ability to do 360 no scopes insta shots, price needs to be justified.
    4) You can also learn to play and don't dive your tanks against weakest AT squad in game with actual deterrent to try to run them over.

    1) I dont think thats the reason they were introduced. More a combination of too much creativity and bias by the disappointing balance team.
    2) My bad
    3)Last time I checked, Armadillo was talking about light vehicles, not tanks. A single Faust wont snare an undamaged tank, either. Not to meniton the squads on the Axis side who have At done enjoy the luxury of also having a snare, unlike the Allies. If Penals are to have both, somethings gotta give. And if they cant snare a full HP tank by themselves without support then boo fucking hoo, go cry me a river. Again, Schreck squads dont even get snares.
    4) Right. Sure thing mate. Im sure its a good thing the 300 MP AT/AI Hybrid can by itself alone dictate the engagement range by merit of being there.

  • #10
    4 months ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,671
    edited July 10

    Satchel charges have 340. They have a damage penalty vs vehicles lowering their damage to 240.

    Penal battalion are simply badly design and that is why the have received nerfs in almost every patch since their change

  • #11
    4 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,463
    @hingie I've said before penal are over performing. I think they need to have an MP reduction and have start with Mosins and upgrade to SVTs or Ptrs. The satchel won't be a problem if it's not a transition from God like AI. There needs to be a choice.
  • #12
    4 months ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… At TenagraPosts: 2,082
    edited July 10
    > @eonfigure said:
    > If axis troops had a panzerfaust, that could one-shot allied light vehicals and tanks, I'm almost certain the coh2 servers would be in flames, allied fanboys would have literally destroyed them via fire.

    How about having a mine that one shots:

    Su76
    T70
    AEC
    Stuart
    And anything lighter

    But let me guess. I drive over a teller and "i should've had a sweeper" or that's "skill by the axis player". But you PARKING your luchs next to an AT squad and lose it, relics bias is to blame of course. What else could it be.

    When are people going to figure out that accusing relic of being biased just points out your own bias? Relic has demonstrated a smattering of terrible ideas for all factions in this game.
  • #13
    4 months ago
    eonfigureeonfigure Posts: 468
    edited July 10

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    Satchel is a necessary evil. The PTRS doesn't have the firepower of other AT. It's not going to half health a light like the others meaning it's worth risking the push so they can't shoot. The satchel means you can't push them. Keep your distance and support your armour and it'll be fine

    One-shoting a vehicle with mobile, durable infantry, and Pen damage from AT rifles are two different subjects. Of course PTRS rifles wont insta-kill a vehicle, and rightly so. However a satchel charge can, and with added splash damage to nearby units. We all know how big and powerful that explosion is. All for a very low cost, on a faction that really doesn't rely heavily on munitions.

    It's not if you can accomplish it (tactics) It's: "Should you have that much power?" They answered no. Remember that patch change, and i quote. "Can no longer be targeted in base sectors" Referring to air support and whatnot. It's not a matter of whether or not you can pull it off, the player just shouldn't have that much power. The same applies here.

    @Lazarus said:
    My only problem with Satchels is they instant engine crit mediums - which is counter to the entire basis of the change we made to snares in the first place way back when.

    It seems we forget a lot of things, fortunately we have those who give friendly reminders. This ability blatantly goes against what this system is trying to attain. From insta-killing units. So many patches on spreading out inf. Spreading out arty Barrages. Increasing health bars on units so they don't get one-shot. But yet, this is allowed...
    The tulip rockets went through their filtering system so that they weren't to potent. This simply deserves the same treatment.

  • #14
    4 months ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,469

    @eonfigure said:

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    Satchel is a necessary evil. The PTRS doesn't have the firepower of other AT. It's not going to half health a light like the others meaning it's worth risking the push so they can't shoot. The satchel means you can't push them. Keep your distance and support your armour and it'll be fine

    One-shoting a vehicle with mobile, durable infantry, and Pen damage from AT rifles are two different subjects. Of course PTRS rifles wont insta-kill a vehicle, and rightly so. However a satchel charge can, and with added splash damage to nearby units. We all know how big and powerful that explosion is. All for a very low cost, on a faction that really doesn't rely heavily on munitions.

    That infantry is as mobile as any other infantry in game.
    240 dmg vs 400 hp is hardly one shotting either.
    Soviets are also pretty damn muni reliant as of last 2 patches as everything got muni increase, oorah, ppsh, molos, SU-76 barrage, penal ptrs, all of that got increased muni cost, so soviets being muni light is a meme of the past.

    It's not if you can accomplish it (tactics) It's: "Should you have that much power?" They answered no. Remember that patch change, and i quote. "Can no longer be targeted in base sectors" Referring to air support and whatnot. It's not a matter of whether or not you can pull it off, the player just shouldn't have that much power. The same applies here.

    So don't give that player that "power" by literally ramming your vehicle into shortest range, longest animation AT throwable in game?

    @Lazarus said:
    My only problem with Satchels is they instant engine crit mediums - which is counter to the entire basis of the change we made to snares in the first place way back when.

    It seems we forget a lot of things, fortunately we have those who give friendly reminders. This ability blatantly goes against what this system is trying to attain. From insta-killing units. So many patches on spreading out inf. Spreading out arty Barrages. Increasing health bars on units so they don't get one-shot. But yet, this is allowed...
    The tulip rockets went through their filtering system so that they weren't to potent. This simply deserves the same treatment.

    Again, penal satchel works as it does specifically because PTRS lacks alpha strike of literally any other handheld AT weapon as well as penetration damage.
    That means you could simply drive close and keep pushing them effortlessly, because they need ages before they take a shot, contrary to 360 no scope shrecks.

    If penals couldn't engine crit mediums, they would be completely useless as AT squad and its 300mp squad with 70 muni upgrade that does absolutely nothing to tanks on its own(unless you drive rear first often).

    There is a very solid balance reason for satchel damage, you may ignore it, but it won't make that reason any less important and certainly won't make it go away.

    Tulip case was something completely different and incomparable, apples to oranges.
    You, for whatever reason, attempted to compare 60 range instakill of medium vehicle to shortest range and most obvious "at nade". That won't work and will only make you look silly.

  • #15
    4 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,463
    @eonfigure it's a matter of letting it happen, not that it can happen. It's as damn near to getting nuked by a proper satchel. The intention is VERY clear with the satchel, as clear as an oorah Molitor. There's no other reason to try and bayonet a tank with an AT rifle. The satchel is there for a good reason. Else the PTRS would be the worst weapon in the game bar none. If you didn't have to change your tactics when they get their AT package what's the bloody point? Weaken your AI so you can deal 40 damage to a luchs then retreat because it's smooshinh the tits out of you? The PTRS package is a detterant, it's sole job is to make armour think twice about running rampant and it does it well. It's not going to solo tanks, it's not going to knock 1/3 of a tanks health away in the 1/5 of a second it got in range either.
  • #16
    4 months ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… At TenagraPosts: 2,082
    > @eonfigure said:
    > One-shoting a vehicle with mobile, durable infantry, and Pen damage from AT rifles are two different subjects.

    You know what else is mobile? The luchs. Don't leave it standing still so AT squads with a short range snare can walk straight up to it.
  • #17
    4 months ago
    eonfigureeonfigure Posts: 468
    edited July 11

    @thedarkarmadillo I agree with you said about the PTRS; even so if they reach critical mass say 3 or 4 squads, (which is common) they become a serious threat. However the AT rifles arent in question...It's merely an addition to the problem. If it was the main problem, guards would be brought into the fold, and they deserve their own post...

    But it's simply the damage causes by the satchel. Which auto-tracks. Furthermore, it has versatility, you have don't have to use it only against tanks. In this aspect, looked from afar, it's simply a super AT-nade/bomb.

    When you combine that with PTRS's you get a lot more than a deterrent my friend.

    Poor design is the problem here. Penals didnt need a ten fold upgrade just because they didnt shine. They were respectable all range units with a bunker/building buster. Now they have that, plus a sticky nuke, plus AT guns. If that's not greedy i don't know what is.

    And i respect your views highly dark, i dont want to see penals struck at the kneecaps as laz put, there are some honorable players who have used penals to great effect before they were super buffed. That satchel alone is worth their cost and weight in gold. Their size and durability is most potent. The design teams just to look humbly at what they've created and ask themselves, is what they've done right?

  • #18
    4 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,463
    @eonfigure I'm flattered you think so highly of me. I agree at critical mass penal are nasty business, but that can be said about almost any unit really- actually that's a big issue I've had with the game for a long time... I remember pgrens that had Shreks that had tank AOE, we all remember Shrek volks, super snappers, ptrs cons... The list goes on. But fundamentally I feel a PTRS unit NEEDS a strong deterant for pushing, I disagree that the satchel is the problem (however I feel the standard satchel shield be removed when upgraded). I was very vocal in the need for penal adjustment, performed tests myself with the PTRS and how it fit in compared to other AT. But I feel the execution was botched and I genuinely HATE playing against the Soviet because it's boring penal spam. But It's not the AT package, it's the AT package being a natural progression instead of a choice. It's the strong AI into acceptable AT and AI.

    Basicly the problems I see with the AT satchel is the Soviet munitions economy--where other factions have many munitions sinks to keep up to snuff the Soviet don't. They have either cons who will never have the chance to be up to snuff of penal who are well above that without a munitions cost. Meaning there is little stopping the ability to exploit pathing with over 100 mu to kill a tank because there's dick all else to do with it.
    You said yourself the critical mass is an issue, that wouldn't be possible with forcing the player to pay munitions instead of manpower for the AI punch they have vanilla. It's all connected.

    So to summarize:
    -upgrade paths to encourage diversity and present a munitions sink
    -normal satchel exclusive to no path again to promote diversity.
    -slight price increase for AT satchel possibly to make it more of a decision

    I think those changes would put penal in line.
  • #19
    4 months ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… At TenagraPosts: 2,082
    @eonfigure If 3-4 at penals being a problem for you is "common", let's see a replay of that instead of a gif of a luchs being handled poorly. That's 900-1200mp and 180-240 muni on the worst AT squad in the game.

    You wanna talk about a cheesy soviet snare, talk about ptrs cons on tank hunter. The at nade assault is incredibly strong and the squad can camo to make using it even easier. Cheaper squad, and more durable than penals with vet.
  • #20
    4 months ago
    HingieHingie Posts: 1,966
    This is not about the tank hunter doctrinal abilities. It's about Penals and their OP explosives bundle.

    @thedarkarmadillo choice would be a start. I'm still skeptical as to why PTRS Penals would need the satchel instead of simply be given AT grenades like any other faction but it would be a welcome change. I don't think it will happen though. I think they'll rather nerf Hull down some more by making it permanent or make Wehr-built barbed wire self-combustible.
  • #21
    4 months ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,469
    edited July 11

    @Hingie said:
    @thedarkarmadillo choice would be a start. I'm still skeptical as to why PTRS Penals would need the satchel instead of simply be given AT grenades like any other faction but it would be a welcome change.

    That's because you deliberately choose to completely ignore the arguments on why its there and why it can't and won't go, unless you want penals to be given lend lease bazookas instead of PTRS.

  • #22
    4 months ago
    HingieHingie Posts: 1,966
    edited July 11

    @Katitof said:
    That's because you deliberately choose to completely ignore the arguments on why its there and why it can't and won't go, unless you want penals to be given lend lease bazookas instead of PTRS.

    If youd bother to provide some reasonable argument I'd consider considering them. But as you chose to only repeat the same dross ad nauseam I refuse to subject myself to this kind of intellectual self-flagellation.
    Also, I was talking to Armadillo, whose perspective I may not always agree with, whose insight I value much higher than yours, though. Although admittedly, thats also not very hard.

  • #23
    4 months ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,469

    I've given you reason given to us by modders after months of extensive testing.

    As for 2nd part, I can relate - I know full well it might be more productive to talk to a brick wall then you, but somehow I still do.

    Its not really a rocket science.

    The argument is (again) deterrent for tanks to close in and push penals, because PTRS is nowhere near as effective as any other handheld AT weapon and its impossible for it to deal enough damage on approach for AT nade to work and do its job, its not relevant if that AT nade would be on penals themselves or on cons, it still would not work with low PTRS damage and penetration, therefore a deterrent was needed that would warrant that med armor would not go on pushing penals easily and we ended up with AT satchel.

    I know these reasons are as effective against you as PTRS against front of P4, but it won't change the fact that is why AT satchel is here to stay and why its mandatory for unit to function.

  • #24
    4 months ago
    HingieHingie Posts: 1,966
    edited July 11

    The balance cronies are the same people who amongst other things, for whatever reason, decided to nerf Hull Down, likely one of the least used abilities in the game, so their opinion has almost as little worth to me as does yours. With the sad difference they have been given some power to shape the patches which are yet perhaps to come.

    As for the rest, thank you for providing a perfect demonstration what I meant with dross ad nauseam.

    I have stated my position on the argument, you have mentioned yours. I dont think well reach a compromise here. Hence, other input might be beneficial.

  • #25
    4 months ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… At TenagraPosts: 2,082
    > @Hingie said:
    > This is not about the tank hunter doctrinal abilities. It's about Penals and their OP explosives bundle.

    I'm well aware. The AT satchel is not overpowered. Con AT nade assault on the other hand is absolutely too strong. I am pointing that out... Look up videos of the AT nade assault against Panthers.

    Please explain how you can get around the point that the satchel is easily avoidable? It's the most expensive snare with the shortest range, and it's only available after you sacrifice AI in favor of the worst handheld AT weapon in the game. Hence why i bring up AT cons. Same weapon, better snare, can camo so that snare is easier to use...etc.
  • #26
    4 months ago
    HingieHingie Posts: 1,966
    edited July 11

    @SkysTheLimit What I meant with that is that, while youre right that Tank Hunter nades barrage might have issues all its own, this is not the place to discuss them. This thread is about Penals and satchels not about the tank hunter doctrine. Penals exist independently of the doctrine and as such the doctrine has little to no relevance to the discussion here at hand.

    You sacrifice AI on a squad with superb AI nerfing it down to good AI. The difference is not negligible, but Penals even with PTRSs are potent versus infantry. They are not an AT squad. They are an AI/AT hybrid. They after the upgrade perform better at AI than upschrecked PGs do for less MP and lower tech. That is indeed one part of the problem, generally you dont have to chose, you just upgrade and expand the squads operational capabilities instead of specializing them.

  • #27
    4 months ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… At TenagraPosts: 2,082
    edited July 11
    @Hingie They definitely don't lose AI as hard as pgrens or zook riflemen. And being 6 men certainly helps them hang in longer despite reduced dps.

    That said my only point you didn't acknowledge there is the one this all comes down to for me, and that is the fact that the penal snare is very avoidable and very expensive. It's strong, but they have to be up your *** to use it.

    That's why Im bringing up the AT nade assault. I don't see it as off topic, I'm using it for comp/contrast. The stealth is the real kicker cause it negates the chance for you to react, whereas reaction time is the reason the satchel is fine for me.
  • #28
    4 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,463
    @hingie at rifles aren't a threat like the AT of other factions. There's no burst damage so blitzing up to them means you are pretty well safe if they didn't have the satchel and if it wasn't there they would be made dead weight when mediums hit the field which is bad design. They would be as helpless as when okw truck pushing was a thing. They need the threat of damage and snare to stop from being walked over, the biggest issue imo is that they don't open themselves up to infantry enough for that luxury.
  • #29
    4 months ago
    eonfigureeonfigure Posts: 468

    That's also the issue. The PTRS should and shouldn't be brought into this.

    1. It is effective, even though people say it isn't. No one is going to leave a tank in front of 1 or 2 PTRS squads. The tank will always lose. Namely if it's a medium or lighter. Even a heavy will suffer heavy damage. (Side note, people seem to forget that though most tanks are shooting back, their DPS doesnt match the PTRS squad. The PTRS squad does more damage to the tank, than the tank does to the squad)
    2. No one has addressed or wants to come to the realization that this is a SUPER AT-NADE. With multi-fuctional abilities.
    3. The soviets already have a auto-locking snare. (please do not make it seem like this is a helpless crutch for the soviets)
    4. The satchel is a VERY powerful ability. Even destroying Mediums at near the half health point. Yes MEDIUM TANKS.

    The soivets have AT guns, the soviets have mines, the soviets have a SPAMMABLE hand-held AT guns. The brits and USF have similar abilities and they do just fine without this abomination of an ability.

    The soviets are not helpless. Penals are DURABLE and have very respectable AI default guns. I brought this to attention because of its absurdity. I am not trying point out something so far-fetched that it is dismissive.

    Again, I dare you...DARE YOU to test realm and ponder on what would happen if the axis troops had such an ability. It would absolutely not fly. Yet it is allowed on the opposite faction through a failed patch.

  • #30
    4 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,463
    If the Axis had at rifles they would need something of similar design.
  • #31
    4 months ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… At TenagraPosts: 2,082
    edited July 12
    > @eonfigure said:
    > Again, I dare you...DARE YOU to test realm and ponder on what would happen if the axis troops had such an ability. It would absolutely not fly. Yet it is allowed on the opposite faction through a failed patch.

    How are you continuing to refuse to acknowledge the teller mine? The soviet AT satchel does 240 damage, and requires an AT squad to WALK up point blank to a unit that can DRIVE. The teller mine does 400 damage, and can actually one-shot lights, requires a second unit just to spot it.

    Most of the claims you made to start this thread were completely incorrect. You started out saying it could one-shot light tanks, you were corrected, and now you're complaining that it can kill mediums at "near the half health point".

    I "dare" you, to show us a better clip/replay than that gif that displays nothing but a poorly micro'd luchs. If you move your tank he has to move with you if he wants to satchel and he can't fire the ptrs....
«134
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

  • © SEGA. SEGA, the SEGA logo, Relic Entertainment, the Relic Entertainment logo, Company of Heroes and the Company of Heroes logo are either trademarks or registered trademarks of SEGA Holdings Co., Ltd. or its affiliates. All rights reserved. SEGA is registered in the US Patent and Trademark Office. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.