Fall Balance Preview Feedback

11012141516

Comments

  • #332
    1 year ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,721
    edited August 2017

    @Katitof said:
    StuG III was spammed to hell and back to counter all allied armor, SU-76 doesn't have that kind of presence in late game.

    If Su-76 does not have presence in the late game, then it does not need so much more penetration than Stug III.

  • #333
    1 year ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,587
    edited August 2017

    @Vipper said:

    @Katitof said:
    StuG III was spammed to hell and back to counter all allied armor, SU-76 doesn't have that kind of presence in late game.

    If Su-76 does not have presence in the late game, then it does not need so much more penetration than Stug III.

    If a mid game unit does not impact late game balance, then that unit does not need changes.
    Its common sense, you want to nerf stuff for the sake of nerfing it in retaliation to stug nerf with complete disregard if the unit in question actually is an issue at all.

    StuG spam is an issue, SU-76 not.

  • #334
    1 year ago
    LagoLago Posts: 13

    Call-In Unit Changes

    UI
    How do you intend on communicating the call-in price changes to the player? Presently the patch doesn't: when you meet the requirements the price drops. There's no prior indication of when or what that drop will be within the game itself. While I appreciate the desire to leave localisation changes to the very end so you aren't undoing your own edits this is a critical piece of information and adding the techs at which units discount and how much they'll discount to the already excessive pool of information players have to memorise from the internet would be a blow to the game's accessibility.

    Heavy and Support Units
    Do the vast majority of these units need to be call-ins at all? Many of the units under the price premium are one-on-the-field-at-once heavies, mediums that are more powerful than their tech equivalents or very specialised units. They're all already fairly pricey for being call ins and especially for the heavy units the price premium is a effective lock to tech anyway. Could you not simply do what was done with the T-34/85? Put them in the relevant tech buildings at CP0 and price them competitively against the non-docs based on their relative merits and specialisations as a unit rather than as a call-in.

    Shock Call-Ins
    There are a few units that the T-34/85 method might not suit that because their present role is as a tech jumping shock "panic" unit. Unaffected by the price premium are the Puma and StuG-E which are excellent examples of this sort of call in. The M10 in Armor Company serves a similar role: it's a weak tank destroyer that can come out ahead of time when you desperately need that AT. The price premium prevents the spamming of M10s without tech but it also makes the panic M10 a very questionable choice. For the M10 perhaps it'd be more appropriate to apply a different penalty for not having the Major. An obscenely long cooldown without the Major or a limit to one M10 on the field at once without the Major would prevent M10 spam without tech while avoiding crippling the M10's panic unit utility.

    The other units that wouldn't like being building units are the Flammpanzer and the Ostwind. The Ostwind might just manage in OKW T4 because it's so cheap but the Flammpanzer is in a sorry state wherever you put it: what does it have that a Luchs doesn't?

    Greyhound
    Given edits to call ins are within scope is there anything you can do about the Greyhound? Its current CP3 call in means it's never available when it's actually useful: turning it into a unit that gets added to tech buildings (either Lieutenant, Captain or put it in T0 and have it unlock when you've teched any officer) like the T-34/85 and M4E8 would do it a lot of good.

  • #335
    1 year ago
    The only reason SU tech to tier 4 is not having any medium in tier 3.
    Su76 is much more cost effiecient than su85...

    Recent call in meta made tier 4 disappear just like OST tier 4, with people relying on sherman call in and su76 massed as tank destroyers.
  • #336
    1 year ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,268
    edited August 2017
    > @Reichsgarde said:
    > Go to 15:10 and see how insanely quickly it sets up the 50 cal and have a very wide angle of fire. Plus, it has the Sprint ability. If this isn't OP, then I don't know what is.

    It's not OP, you need to consider how much later the .50 arrives to the game than all other MGs. It's locked behind a 50 fuel tier while costing the same as the Vickers.

    Only the mg34 arrives similarly late, and it's much cheaper and requires zero decision to unlock. Choosing MGs as the US means no AT guns unless you double up on tech.
  • #337
    1 year ago

    the 50cal is like the old maxim and on steroids. It actually has an even faster setup and packup time than the old maxim, suppresses faster and has a wider arc. In fact its time to suppress is just as good as the mg42 until the 42 gets vet 2. The 50 cal has the shortest burst duration making it very difficult for infantry to react in time to get away from the arc of fire whereas the mg42 has the longest burst duration and requires the enemy inf the stay under fire for the full burst in order to get supressed (until vet 2.) The only reason why 50cals aren't nerfed is because of timing, and the fact that riflemen are great hence mgs for USF are completely optional. I find the 50 cals becoming a problem as more 1v1 players opt for lt instead of capt and some get more than one 50cal.

  • #338
    1 year ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,268
    edited August 2017
    @1ncendiary_Rounds You do not need infantry to stand in fire for the entire burst of the MG42. I see my 42s suppress before the end of 1 burst with regularity. It's high ROF distributes it's suppression very quickly.

    Also having a longer burst duration as an MG is better not worse so I have no clue what you're talking about there. How quickly a squad drops is far more impacted by ROF than burst duration, and the 42 has phenomenal ROF. The .50 drops quickly cause it has great suppression.
  • #339
    1 year ago

    @SkysTheLimit said:
    @1ncendiary_Rounds You do not need infantry to stand in fire for the entire burst of the MG42. I see my 42s suppress before the end of 1 burst with regularity. It's high ROF distributes it's suppression very quickly.

    Also having a longer burst duration as an MG is better not worse so I have no clue what you're talking about there. How quickly a squad drops is far more impacted by ROF than burst duration, and the 42 has phenomenal ROF. The .50 drops quickly cause it has great suppression.

    at vet 0,1 mg42 requires infantry to stand in its arc for the entire burst. And if that burst is longer than the 50 cal's burst, it means that the mg42 takes longer to suppress since the 50cal actually can supress a squad before the end of its first burst. That's all I'm saying. Vet 2 noticeably shortens the amount of time the 42 needs to suppress a squad.

  • #340
    1 year ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,721
    edited August 2017

    Soviet.
    Penal battalions.
    You are continuing to nerf the unit but without addressing its primary problem, the units is simply too good for its time frame.

    KV-1
    Fix veterancy bonuses a "defensive tank" does not offensive bonuses but defensive ones. For instance the extra HP could come via veterancy and not a flat out buff.

    Vet 1 ability is also should scale with veterancy start weaker and gradually become better.

    In addition leaving KV-1 as the only MBT without tech requirements, lowering the pop of B4, the lowering the penetration of the stug III, and other things opens the road for "Counterattack commander" to dominated Soviet meta.

    Centaur
    Penalties for firing vs Light cover reverted
    There is no reason for this unit to completely ignore light cover if the standard 0.5 accuracy is too much simply replace it with 10%-20% received damage.

  • #341
    1 year ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,268
    edited August 2017
    > @1ncendiary_Rounds said:
    > at vet 0,1 mg42 requires infantry to stand in its arc for the entire burst.

    Yeah and I'm saying this isn't true. Squads drop before the end of a vanilla 42s burst plenty, I see that all the time. It's amazing ROF allows for that even though it's actual suppression value is lower than the .50s.
  • #342
    1 year ago

    @SkysTheLimit said:
    > @1ncendiary_Rounds said:
    > at vet 0,1 mg42 requires infantry to stand in its arc for the entire burst.

    Yeah and I'm saying this isn't true. Squads drop before the end of a vanilla 42s burst plenty, I see that all the time. It's amazing ROF allows for that even though it's actual suppression value is lower than the .50s.

    Feel free to disagree. Have you taken note of the vet on the 42 when they get suppressed before the end of the burst? At vet 2 it takes roughly half a burst. At vet 0,1 it takes a full burst and if the enemy inf is running through a lot of light cover (eg. craters) it takes more than one burst.

  • #343
    1 year ago
    RiCERiCE Posts: 1,588

    @Katitof said:
    StuG spam is an issue, SU-76 not.

    Thats why every soviet player is playing Penal spam -> broken DSHk -> SU76 spam.

    The cheapest tank destroyer can penetrate panthers easily, affordable in larger numbers and oh... btw it can destroy any axis structure from 2 sectors further.

    If a StuG could fart a mortar shell from 80 range, then we could talk about an issue.

  • #344
    1 year ago
    PhoebusPhoebus Posts: 1

    The change made to Sherman Firefly is totally nonsense, compare to Jackson. Sherman Firefly earn a position in the game because of its main gun's precision and range. But now you guys halve its precision but not giving the tank extra speed and armor. It makes the tank impossible to hunt down axis tank. At long range, it miss. At short range, the tank armor couldn't stand a few hit. Remember, this is the only reliable AT in late any game as UKF lack of AT grenade for normal infantry section and reliable infantry AT weapon like Panzerschreck. Axis tank like Panther can flank UKF AT with its speed, make a few hit and retreat safely. If you guys remain the change made to Firefly, why don't just delete this unit? It's useless anyway.

  • #345
    1 year ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,268
    edited August 2017

    @1ncendiary_Rounds said:
    Feel free to disagree. Have you taken note of the vet on the 42 when they get suppressed before the end of the burst? At vet 2 it takes roughly half a burst. At vet 0,1 it takes a full burst and if the enemy inf is running through a lot of light cover (eg. craters) it takes more than one burst.

    I will, and I know what its vet bonuses are. It suppresses plenty quickly and its absolutely faster than 1 full burst in the open. Maybe 1 burst with some light cover, but if there's more than 1 squad they'll be even more likely to drop since both the .50 and 42 have the best AOE suppression in the game. Even the Dshk has lower AOE supp. radius than those 2, its just monstrous for other reasons.

    Their suppression performance is nowhere near as different as you are suggesting, the mobility is the biggest difference and the 50s dps is better too. None of these things are problem given how much later it arrives, and at least its still a 4-man crew just like the 42. OKW getting their smoke can only help this further.

  • #346
    1 year ago
    Bring back the game too its roots, and it was in a more realistic and historical way. Now some paranoids will say history isn't important for a game. But please, then go playing DoW and delete CoH and stop posting.

    StuG is the German T34. This was their "spam" tank.

    Make the game realistic, then balance it.
  • #347
    1 year ago
    oRi0noRi0n Posts: 63

    @SkysTheLimit said:

    @Reichsgarde said:
    It simply does not make any sense for these half-tracks to remain stationary in one location for the entire duration of the game.

    Why? That removes any punishment for placing them aggressively. The meta for OWK needs to be moved away from relying on their trucks, not towards it.

    The cheesiest part of their meta is how much the rely on their FRP and Flak HQ (coming from a 2v2 perspective). Using them aggressively has a risk and reward, and tough break if you picked a bad spot.

    My issue with this is the fact that it's the tier 1 tech building, the only FRP, AND stationary. It's the combination of those things that's the problem. If it's going to be the tier 1 building, it has to be viable to build it early. If it's going to be the FRP, it has to be viable to build it forward. If it's going to be both of those things AND stationary, it has to be viable to do both of those things at once. Choosing to secure your tier 1 tech should not mean you have NO OPPORTUNITY to have any FRP for the ENTIRE GAME. Choosing to have the FRP (especially when you're forced to choose it super early without good knowledge of where you're really going to want it for the majority of the game) should not force you to place your tier 1 tech access in an exceptionally vulnerable state.

    Currently the ability to get the FRP quickly is the only thing that really saves the Battlegroup HQ from an early attack involving HMGs. OKW do not start with HMGs or any sort of suppression counter. If your opponent finds your Battlegroup HQ relatively early and attacks with HMGs, you get suppressed without the FRP tech, the Battlegroup HQ is dead. You have no way to escape the suppression without retreating, and retreating to your base leaves the HQ defenseless. Neither can you set up your own HMGs in advance to keep your opponent from just walking up with their infantry and deploying their HMGs.

    If it wasn't for the loss of tech I would agree with you. I like the tech being tied to the HQs. It's a huge part of how the faction plays, and creates the possibility for dramatic swings in the game when the HQs are established or destroyed. I'm fully in favor of delaying FRP, but we have to do something to offset the increased vulnerability of the early game TECH in the early game.

    My suggestion to have them mobile wasn't anything that would facilitate cheese imo. The tech and FRP would only be available with the truck deployed. It would still take just as long to deploy it does to construct now. You wouldn't be able to just instantly pack them to retreat if you saw someone attacking (I'd leave it up to relic to determine the appropriate packing time), and the truck would still be super squishy when driving around. Moving the HQ is not something you would WANT to do. It would just give you the flexibility to build Tier 1 in your base initially for the tech access, then move it forward later when you're actually READY to establish the FRP (after a second HQ is built). I really don't see it getting moved more than once or twice in a game.

  • #348
    1 year ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,268
    edited August 2017
    @oRi0n The FRP is an unfair advantage the EFAs are missing out on, especially to have it so early. You seem to want to move the FRP in the very opposite direction it's going, and most of the community agrees the FRP is too potent in the live version.

    I want FRPs removed completely so I really don't want an early and mobile FRP. If you talk about removing the retreat part and just allowing forward reinforcement, now I'm more okay with the idea of packing up hqs. I don't think the US should have it either but at least theirs requires 2 units to have the retreat and healing/reinforcement, one of which is super fragile.
  • #349
    1 year ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited August 2017
    Unfair advantage ?
    So what ? We are gonna give usf, okw and ukf respectively a m5, a sfk.250 and a 20 fuel reinforcement upgrade for bren carrier ?

    Frp are just a good target zone for heavy and rocket artillery.....

    IF the balance team agenda is to completely remove frp by simply making it NON VIABLE as we can see with the over the top nonsense cooldown (that is basically telling "i hate this thing"), because a paid target zone for enemy arty is automatically an "unfair advantage" as mr.smith says...than ALL factions should have a nondoc reinforce halftrack, or no faction should be able to reinforce from those.

    The balance team simply telling "we want to completely remove frp" rather than putting some smokescreen here and there with cooldown and stuff (lol) would have been nice...
  • #350
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,779
    I would gladly give WFA a halftrack if it meant they couldnt retreat at every inconvenience and not be penalised for it.

    The fact that you can hit a volks blob with propaganda arty in a team game and have them return before the duration is up is what robs the game of tactical depth, Similarily with yanks and brits
  • #351
    1 year ago
    oRi0noRi0n Posts: 63

    @SkysTheLimit said:
    @oRi0n The FRP is an unfair advantage the EFAs are missing out on, especially to have it so early. You seem to want to move the FRP in the very opposite direction it's going, and most of the community agrees the FRP is too potent in the live version.

    I want FRPs removed completely so I really don't want an early and mobile FRP. If you talk about removing the retreat part and just allowing forward reinforcement, now I'm more okay with the idea of packing up hqs. I don't think the US should have it either but at least theirs requires 2 units to have the retreat and healing/reinforcement, one of which is super fragile.

    Did you read my post? I have no clue where you're getting "early" or "mobile" FRP from my suggestion. You make it sound like I requested the Battlegroup HQ come out with FRP already researched, have the durability of a king tiger, and the mobility of a kublewagon.

    I specifically stated that NONE of its function should work unless its stationary. And that it should take considerable time to pack/deploy the HQ (deploying taking just as long as initial construction - which is a pretty long time). You're probably going to move that ONCE, MAYBE twice in a game. It would be a ridiculously slow process, and if anyone caught you packing it they'd be able to almost instantly obliterate the super squishy little truck once the packing was complete.

    I'm not advocating that it move the opposite direction of the patch AT ALL. I'm saying KEEP THE DELAY. REQUIRE A SECOND HQ TO BE SET UP FOR THE FRP RESEARCH TO BE AVAILABLE. Just make the HQ movable (albeit VERY slowly and with considerable risk) so the TECH doesn't have to be stupidly vulnerable early on without the benefits or protection the FRP ability provides. When that HQ is killed, OKW can no longer build support guns or half tracks. And it costs 300 mp and 40 fuel to replace it (not counting the 300 mp for the FRP research once it's built). Plus the time and distraction of having to do it again. Oh, and there's a cooldown on how frequently the trucks can be called in, so having to build it again may well delay another tech building.

    All I want is to not be FORCED to risk my tier 1 tech building in a vulnerable position for a not-insignificant period of game time just so I can have the option of upgrading it to a FRP later on. If they get rid of ALL FRP for ALL FACTIONS, then fine. But so long as other factions have functional FRP ability (even delayed) that DOESN'T require them to risk their tier 1 tech, why should OKW have to not only risk having the FIRST tech building near the front, but do it with absolutely no ability to counter enemy suppression until after the second truck is built?

  • #352
    1 year ago

    @SkysTheLimit said:

    @1ncendiary_Rounds said:
    Feel free to disagree. Have you taken note of the vet on the 42 when they get suppressed before the end of the burst? At vet 2 it takes roughly half a burst. At vet 0,1 it takes a full burst and if the enemy inf is running through a lot of light cover (eg. craters) it takes more than one burst.

    I will, and I know what its vet bonuses are. It suppresses plenty quickly and its absolutely faster than 1 full burst in the open. Maybe 1 burst with some light cover, but if there's more than 1 squad they'll be even more likely to drop since both the .50 and 42 have the best AOE suppression in the game. Even the Dshk has lower AOE supp. radius than those 2, its just monstrous for other reasons.

    Their suppression performance is nowhere near as different as you are suggesting, the mobility is the biggest difference and the 50s dps is better too. None of these things are problem given how much later it arrives, and at least its still a 4-man crew just like the 42. OKW getting their smoke can only help this further.

    You're using the word "AOE" in front of supression. I'm not. Yes the 42 has the best AOE suppression but that works only if the enemy decides to bunch up. Against a single squad, I'd take a DSHK over the 42 anyday. Insta-supress, turns on a dime, insane damage, 6man. Sure the arc of a 42 is better but many times even if two squads run within its arc, it still can't suppress them both due to needing a long burst to suppress the first squad and then taking plenty of time to rotate the mg to the other side to try to suppress the second squad. The 42 cannot afford to pack up at all unlike the 50 cal with sprint and dshk. BTW in not asking for a 50 cal nerf. I'm just saying that the 50cal is deceptively potent. Though the dshk can use a nerf.

  • #353
    1 year ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,268
    edited August 2017

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    I would gladly give WFA a halftrack if it meant they couldnt retreat at every inconvenience and not be penalised for it.

    Yup, pretty much this. Also its not like the Battlegroup HQ would be useless as a forward healing/reinforcement point without an FRP. You can still put it outside your HQ sector and get use out of it, or assist teammates in team games.

    @1ncendiary_Rounds said:
    BTW in not asking for a 50 cal nerf. I'm just saying that the 50cal is deceptively potent. Though the dshk can use a nerf.

    My mistake there I was assuming you where. No argument on the Dshk, not only is it powerful by itself but it also functions as an early version of call-in abuse. It supplements a tech choice allowing penal spam alongside MGs; two things usually separated by Soviet tech AND it just so happens the Dshk is pretty much the old Maxim on steroids. That's pretty much a long way of saying there are a variety of things about it that could be nerfed.

  • #354
    1 year ago

    that hard nerf to penals

    Bravo. Now OKW will once again curbstomp soviets, and that's before they get obers!

    Backpedaling on guards

    TOLD YOU

    DShka

    A giant nerf without a cost reduction for a call-in mg? Really?

    Also what happened to the community-proposed changes to Wehrmacht supply drops? Soviet supply planes somehow fly over the enemy base but wehrmacht gets a secure flight over their base?

  • #355
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,779
    > @For the rest of his life said:
    > Also what happened to the community-proposed changes to Wehrmacht supply drops? Soviet supply planes somehow fly over the enemy base but wehrmacht gets a secure flight over their base?

    If you cant defend an airplane flying over the entire map starting at the enemies base against some of the earliest AA and pintle mounts on everything then SURELY the ost cant defend the point with the best MG in the game from t0 or self sighting pop free mg bunkers! Jeeze

    Whats next? Complaining that the even if you push the ost off halfway through the ability they still get a bunch of resources but if they shoot down your plane all you get is a kamakazi pilot in your base sector?
  • #356
    1 year ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,017

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    > @For the rest of his life said:
    > Also what happened to the community-proposed changes to Wehrmacht supply drops? Soviet supply planes somehow fly over the enemy base but wehrmacht gets a secure flight over their base?

    If you cant defend an airplane flying over the entire map starting at the enemies base against some of the earliest AA and pintle mounts on everything then SURELY the ost cant defend the point with the best MG in the game from t0 or self sighting pop free mg bunkers! Jeeze

    Whats next? Complaining that the even if you push the ost off halfway through the ability they still get a bunch of resources but if they shoot down your plane all you get is a kamakazi pilot in your base sector?

    I mean, everyone agrees OKW base AA is stupid, but Osts supply drops aren't that secure (go Rifle Company and drop phosphorous on it. Watch Ost try and figure out how to deal with that while you mow them down with REs)

  • #357
    1 year ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited August 2017
    Given that the kubel armor has been nerfed, and the unit won't be a soft counter to m3, are mods gonna restore the wbp volks panzerfaust ?

    I can see dodge and m3 bwcoming more prominent in the fbp mod matches.

    Goddam raketen either miss or it's circle trolled as volks can't slow lights down with faust.

    And 30 muni for a simple snare is an economy killer anyway in a faction that needs 30 muni everytime the enemy garrison a building.
  • #358
    1 year ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,587

    @SAY_MY_NAME said:
    Given that the kubel armor has been nerfed, and the unit won't be a soft counter to m3, are mods gonna restore the wbp volks panzerfaust ?

    Kubel soft counter to M3? In what world? M3 always hardcountered kubel, nothing changes here.
    Kubel was support platform for volks who did poorly on their own - they don't do poorly for a long time now, which means kubel is redundant in its current role and was adapted to scouting/capping instead.

    I can see dodge and m3 bwcoming more prominent in the fbp mod matches.

    That's assumption or first hand experience?
    Dodge is also in a doctrine that was nerfed to the ground, I don't remember when was last time I've seen US player having it in loudout, not to mention used actual unit.

    Goddam raketen either miss or it's circle trolled as volks can't slow lights down with faust.

    And what that M3 is going to do while circling puppchen with volks shooting at it, when loaded with anything that gets FOTM accuracy penalty?

    Its still much healthier situation then complete denial of light vehicle play at all we had up until now.

    And 30 muni for a simple snare is an economy killer anyway in a faction that needs 30 muni everytime the enemy garrison a building.

    If you decide to not build anything of tier structures that is.
    No faction can counter garrisons without investing into a side upgrade which costs muni or tech structure and specific unit, you have flamers, but they usually go on 2nd builder as you need mine sweeper.

    Get Leig or lucks to counter garrisons.

  • #359
    1 year ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited August 2017
    @Katitof
    I can see /=/ foresee
    M3 is meta against okw...and kubel could soft counter it as bullet spoonge and dps adder while volks targeted it.

    Okw struggled against lights rush before WBP, when panzerfaust was restored to grenadiers one

    No "complete denial" was one.
    Players didn't feel the need for yoloing halftracks and lights at 2 cm's from enemy infantry like 20 hours players and....otherwise they were punished.
    The fact that WBP faust situation is IDENTICAL to live OST one makes your assuption even more nonsense.
    Ost isn't exactly know for shutting down any vehicle play....

    Penalty or not, penals on the halftrack decrew new squishy raketen fairly easy, and even in live..are you actually playing the mod ?
    Halftracks doesn't need to keep moving, just make half a circle as the raketen turn.
    More than that...usually 1 hit of raketen isn't enough to kill m3..

    How much matches do you have as okw ?
    Bet you didn't play A SINGLE TIME.
    If you did you would know that isg DOESN'T counter garrison, as the splash damage is nonexistant, making the unit ineffective.
    Same for luchs, it isn't a counter to garrison.
    AND FLAMETHROWER FOR STURM IS DOCTRINAL LOL.
    The only single counter is flame nade or stuka, that is 100 fuel...

    Can you actually play all factions before making such assuptions or "giving advices" ?

    If kubel was nerfed because giving an hard time to USF than okw should either get a proper tier 0 at snare as light counter like OST.
  • #360
    1 year ago
    le12role12ro Posts: 2,284 mod
    (moderator input) let's not attack other community members for their player card, shall we? It is pointless and only distracts from the topic.
  • #361
    1 year ago

    Revert the brit mortar target size it just is rediculous.

    This update is totally flawed as a boffors will always be near a mortar pit thus denying infantry from getting near it.

    Just absurd and needs its usual target size , I mean look at the size of the thing for gods sake.

This discussion has been closed.

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.