[WF Factions][All]Forward Retreat Points

13»

Comments

  • #62
    1 year ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,595
    edited September 2017

    @SAY_MY_NAME said:
    @Katitof
    So you want to affirm that grens rifle doesn't scale through veterancy ?
    That's bs, a grenadier model has 2 to 6 dps, that increase with veterancy.

    I never said that.
    If you had basic reading comprehension, you'd knew and understood that I said brens provide much lower DPS increase at effective range then LMGs and that tommies scale worse offensively.

    That's all I've said.

    It's in average HALF of an lmg 42, and the dps difference in close range differs of less than a point.
    Same for volks, stg are overglorified garands with a ridicolous 1.9/8 dps, all the models contribute to it.
    Stop pretending veterancy applies only to upgrades.

    DPS difference at close range is completely irrelevant when talking about two long range squads with long range weapon upgrades.

    I've never said base weapons don't scale, you did just now in your rumbling.
    Stop lashing out, start reading and understanding.

    What you're saying here is pulled out of your rear completely and has nothing to do with what I've said.

    That's enough, we don't want t1000 has last penal model.

    Of course, 100 manpower and 10 fuel is relevant, the fact that rifle needs 150 mp and 15 fuel for grenades instead is not worth noting, barely a coincidence.
    Truth is penals don't cost any more fuel than rifles, IS and volks do, cost less techong instead...

    You're not able to tell teching from side costs.
    That's a fact.

    And I.stead I specifically quoted only 2 doctrines because those are the only viable in competitive play (especially advanced tactics), and those are.
    Cons are viable, penals are just braindead easy to use.
    It's not cons play that needs buff, it's penals that need to be nerfed, like FBP was going to do.

    Cons and shock have no problem, but why not use an anti everything mainline that gets powerful weapons from start and forget about cover and moving accuracy penalties ?

    Provide replays, twitch streams or yt casts then.
    If cons are as competitive as you say they are, you surely won't have problems finding one or two from this patch.

    Hell, go play a game yourself with them, win it against equal opponent in 1v1 and post it here as a definitive proof.

  • #63
    1 year ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited September 2017
    > @Katitof ha detto:
    > @SAY_MY_NAME said:
    > @Katitof
    > So you want to affirm that grens rifle doesn't scale through veterancy ?
    > That's bs, a grenadier model has 2 to 6 dps, that increase with veterancy.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > I never said that.
    > If you had basic reading comprehension, you'd knew and understood that I said brens provide much lower DPS increase at effective range then LMGs and that tommies scale worse offensively.
    >
    > That's all I've said.
    >
    > It's in average HALF of an lmg 42, and the dps difference in close range differs of less than a point.
    > Same for volks, stg are overglorified garands with a ridicolous 1.9/8 dps, all the models contribute to it.
    > Stop pretending veterancy applies only to upgrades.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > DPS difference at close range is completely irrelevant when talking about two long range squads with long range weapon upgrades.
    >
    > I've never said base weapons don't scale, you did just now in your rumbling.
    > Stop lashing out, start reading and understanding.
    >
    > What you're saying here is pulled out of your rear completely and has nothing to do with what I've said.
    >
    > That's enough, we don't want t1000 has last penal model.
    >
    > Of course, 100 manpower and 10 fuel is relevant, the fact that rifle needs 150 mp and 15 fuel for grenades instead is not worth noting, barely a coincidence.
    > Truth is penals don't cost any more fuel than rifles, IS and volks do, cost less techong instead...
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > You're not able to tell teching from side costs.
    > That's a fact.
    >
    > And I.stead I specifically quoted only 2 doctrines because those are the only viable in competitive play (especially advanced tactics), and those are.
    > Cons are viable, penals are just braindead easy to use.
    > It's not cons play that needs buff, it's penals that need to be nerfed, like FBP was going to do.
    >
    > Cons and shock have no problem, but why not use an anti everything mainline that gets powerful weapons from start and forget about cover and moving accuracy penalties ?
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Provide replays, twitch streams or yt casts then.
    > If cons are as competitive as you say they are, you surely won't have problems finding one or two from this patch.
    >
    > Hell, go play a game yourself with them, win it against equal opponent in 1v1 and post it here as a definitive proof.



    Cons build, winning.

    But obiviously some people prefer easy penal builds...



    Don't worry bro, it's since march I only go tier 2 and cons so I can sleep at night.
    Not a single penal match since than.

    Then if you know it stop your bullshit propaganda, every model contribution of dps is critical

    I didn't only post close range, a kar98k has half dps of a lmg42 at half range, that's considerable.
    Stop cherrypicking stuff you like.

    And no, it's clear that grens and penals lack of side teching is because of first tier building...i'm getting tired of this s****
  • #64
    1 year ago
    le12role12ro Posts: 2,297 mod
    edited September 2017

    Heh, I recall that game. It's actually triple flamer engineer builds + mining everything winning engagements, double cons were just there to keep caps. I wouldn't call this a conscripts game - the engineers achieving vet2 early game were clearly the MOVs. I think even Imperial commented on the great use of engineers in that cast.

  • #65
    1 year ago
    SAY_MY_NAMESAY_MY_NA… Posts: 257
    edited September 2017
    @le12ro

    Engies did a lot of damage, yet cons pulled their weight with field presence and numbers and garrisoning buildings. Anyway a ppsh doctrine would have made cons more viable as damage dealer in a non city mao, where flmaethrowers aren't that potent). I fail to see the "soviets are doomed without penals". Cons ppsh are perfectly viable, they just need non doc upgrade traded with an addition of 10 mp starting price and 2 per model. Each player decide how to use muni, but penals buils are definetly not the only build viable as soviets.
  • #66
    1 year ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,268
    edited September 2017

    @SAY_MY_NAME said:
    Engies did a lot of damage, yet cons pulled their weight with field presence and numbers and garrisoning buildings.

    Which is what I use rear echelon for when I'm playing US. Not a great statement on behalf of cons. What exactly is the difference between field presence and numbers by the way?

    Not even sure what your point is about cons if you're also suggesting they need a non-doc upgrade. That would seem to be an admission that they suck. They were absolutely fine in the Wher v. Sovs days, now they are horrendously bad compared to WFA infantry, even with the lesser cost. The ppsh upgrade is good, it does not save them from being dog**** as a whole. The molly and AT nade research should be 1 package for 150mp, 25 fuel and the molly throw time needs to be decreased a little (for starters).

  • #67
    1 year ago
    I wouldnt qualify that video as defending the essence of this discussion:
    The wehr player was straight up out matched
    That stars were absolutely the 3 engies (all 3 ending with 3 stars of vet)
    Only 1 gren was upgraded which is as ideal as it gets for conscripts
    Mg play was awful from the wehr player
  • #68
    1 year ago
    @SkysTheLimit
    @thedarkarmadillo

    You guys are missing the fact that: "ppsh doctrine would have made cons more viable as damage dealer in a non city map, where flmaethrowers aren't that potent"

    This video tho shows how cons were meant to be used, cannon fodder with team weapons and flamethrowers.
  • #69
    1 year ago
    Its not a good example because it doesn't really show that at all. They were fighting mostly upgraded grens (the ONLY enemy infantry squad they can take and ONLY when not upgraded) and ass grens in the open. Its ideal for the cons (and even then THEY didnt do that great)
    Putting cons in a build for the purpose of dying doesnt work when they cost the same or marginally less than the enemies squads both of whom lack any additional costs to bringing them to a full kit

    Finally, had that been against an OKW player with volk there would have been no chance at all of using cons.

    If their job is to just occupy space then they need to be made cheaper, if their job is to die they need to be cheaper, if their job is to fight, they need a buff, if there job is to scale they need a weapon or some sort of global (that ISNT "we stripped away your tools so you can buy them back later")

    And finally, i see no reason for penals satchels/AT rifles to not be locked behind said sidetechs, given their current performance
  • #70
    1 year ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,268
    edited September 2017

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    And finally, i see no reason for penals satchels/AT rifles to not be locked behind said sidetechs, given their current performance

    Also I really liked the FBP change that made the AT form of the satchel require the ptrs upgrade. Makes it so axis tanks can actually engage regular Penals like most other AI specialists: head on without much concern. Also lets wher actually use their light vehicles against them.

    They also made the satchel lock on whether or not the tank leaves range before its thrown, but I think it was a fair trade off all things considered.

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.