This patch is going to completely screw the USMC.

User avatar
DeuZerre
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 11125
Joined: Mon 27 Feb 2012 23:17
Location: Universe, Galaxy, Solar System, Earth, Ground, Eurasian Continent, Main Landmass.
Contact:

Re: This patch is going to completely screw the USMC.

Postby DeuZerre » Wed 3 Jul 2013 11:37

stug41 wrote:
DeuZerre wrote:Was mobility changed? Nope.

Now, use the LVPT-7 for armour.


This nerf only serves to discourage smarter gameplay

Waaaait, IF I'm not mistaken, the LAVs are fast glass canons, right? How does making them slightly more fragile discourage smarter gameplay? Now, no more rushing in the open against tanks because one hit kills you. That is smarter gameplay.

and leaves one less viable deck.

If the deck was viable due to the abuse of a single unit, something must be wrong, not necessarily on the game's end.

The risk of losing 55 points easily to very weak guns is now too great. Coupled with the US Army buffs it gives little reason for players who want to enjoy the game to choose USMC over Army. You mock me when you haven't even bothered to click the links to the information you lack, how little integrity have you, shame. Your half-assed logic doesn't justify squat.

And your logic is: OH GAWD, THEY NERFED THE UNIT I USED AND ABUSED, THE UNIT I DID EVERYTHING WITH! OH NOOOOOO.

Thematic decks are for fun, not competitiveness
Image
Marshal honoris causa
FLX wrote:Removing the weaknesses from the divisions leads to all divisions being the same in the long run. We won't proceed like that.

User avatar
REDDQ
General
Posts: 6906
Joined: Thu 12 Apr 2012 03:13
Location: przy stole.
Contact:

Re: This patch is going to completely screw the USMC.

Postby REDDQ » Wed 3 Jul 2013 11:39

LMAO... :lol: is LAV now taking 4x for damage taken?

User avatar
stug41
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue 14 Aug 2012 05:11
Contact:

Re: This patch is going to completely screw the USMC.

Postby stug41 » Wed 3 Jul 2013 11:40

REDDQ wrote:LMAO... :lol: is LAV now taking 4x for damage taken?

Any hit to 1 or 0 armor is a 4* penalty.

User avatar
stug41
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue 14 Aug 2012 05:11
Contact:

Re: This patch is going to completely screw the USMC.

Postby stug41 » Wed 3 Jul 2013 11:43

DeuZerre wrote:
stug41 wrote:
DeuZerre wrote:Was mobility changed? Nope.

Now, use the LVPT-7 for armour.


This nerf only serves to discourage smarter gameplay

Waaaait, IF I'm not mistaken, the LAVs are fast glass canons, right? How does making them slightly more fragile discourage smarter gameplay? Now, no more rushing in the open against tanks because one hit kills you. That is smarter gameplay.

and leaves one less viable deck.

If the deck was viable due to the abuse of a single unit, something must be wrong, not necessarily on the game's end.

The risk of losing 55 points easily to very weak guns is now too great. Coupled with the US Army buffs it gives little reason for players who want to enjoy the game to choose USMC over Army. You mock me when you haven't even bothered to click the links to the information you lack, how little integrity have you, shame. Your half-assed logic doesn't justify squat.

And your logic is: OH GAWD, THEY NERFED THE UNIT I USED AND ABUSED, THE UNIT I DID EVERYTHING WITH! OH NOOOOOO.

Thematic decks are for fun, not competitiveness


You assume too much and know too little. I'm amazed they allow such condescending behavior from a marshal.

Why do you assume I abuse a unit that I may only call a handful in of during an entire game? Why do you assume that I EVER contemplated wasting IFVs in frontal attacks? Are you dense? Take your fallacies and drivel elsewhere.

User avatar
stug41
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue 14 Aug 2012 05:11
Contact:

Re: This patch is going to completely screw the USMC.

Postby stug41 » Wed 3 Jul 2013 11:46

GBNATO wrote:
Actually I did, bitching about the LAV's frontal armor if I recall and how this makes the USMC deck less viable. The USMC is the most viable marine deck in the game BY FAR it is better than certain nations altogether and the reduction of frontal armor by one is not going to change that.


All of the marine decks but this one are poor due to so few units available to them; saying the USMC one is the best is like saying one piece of garbage is the least dirty.

User avatar
DeuZerre
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 11125
Joined: Mon 27 Feb 2012 23:17
Location: Universe, Galaxy, Solar System, Earth, Ground, Eurasian Continent, Main Landmass.
Contact:

Re: This patch is going to completely screw the USMC.

Postby DeuZerre » Wed 3 Jul 2013 11:56

stug41 wrote:Why do you assume I abuse a unit that I may only call a handful in of during an entire game? Why do you assume that I EVER contemplated wasting IFVs in frontal attacks? Are you dense? Take your fallacies and drivel elsewhere.

And I'm the one that condescending? :| You've been plain insulting for the ones that don't agree.

I still don't see how reducing the armour reduces "smart play".
(There's only ONE thing I don't like with that change: It didn't go with a price decrease).
Image
Marshal honoris causa
FLX wrote:Removing the weaknesses from the divisions leads to all divisions being the same in the long run. We won't proceed like that.

User avatar
stug41
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue 14 Aug 2012 05:11
Contact:

Re: This patch is going to completely screw the USMC.

Postby stug41 » Wed 3 Jul 2013 12:05

DeuZerre wrote:
stug41 wrote:Why do you assume I abuse a unit that I may only call a handful in of during an entire game? Why do you assume that I EVER contemplated wasting IFVs in frontal attacks? Are you dense? Take your fallacies and drivel elsewhere.

And I'm the one that condescending? :| You've been plain insulting for the ones that don't agree.

I still don't see how reducing the armour reduces "smart play".
(There's only ONE thing I don't like with that change: It didn't go with a price decrease).

I provided all the relevent information of where I stand, you pull out a strawman to parody me, if that isn't fallacious and insulting then I guess I don't know what is.
As stated in one of the linked posts; if the LAV is to be nerfed it needs a price decrease. It is now going to be too expensive an asset to risk in a greater number of situations. Risking assets is one of the main factors in why the average player here resorts to the less risky and more predictable attritional warfare. Nerfing units that are not designed for attritional warfare discourages taking risks and thus contributes to one of the biggest problems so many are complaining about.
As already stated this nerf doesn't even address the problem which is overuse, or 'abuse', of the LAV is still possible. My solution solved that problem.

User avatar
DeuZerre
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 11125
Joined: Mon 27 Feb 2012 23:17
Location: Universe, Galaxy, Solar System, Earth, Ground, Eurasian Continent, Main Landmass.
Contact:

Re: This patch is going to completely screw the USMC.

Postby DeuZerre » Wed 3 Jul 2013 12:10

Let's leave it at that; I have no will to keep this up after this message:

Bomber: You haven't tried it. Try it before saying it's ridiculous. More bombs would be cool, but they won't add loadouts where you end up with "wing-bending" weight.

LAV: -1 armour hurts it if it gets shot at, thus promotes smart use of them. If you need IFVs that can take damage, take the LVPT that are great transports, often underrated. They're NATO's BMP-1D, with a coat of armour. LAV getting a slight price decrease would be good, but that suggestion seems to have been lost in the way.
Image
Marshal honoris causa
FLX wrote:Removing the weaknesses from the divisions leads to all divisions being the same in the long run. We won't proceed like that.

User avatar
stug41
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue 14 Aug 2012 05:11
Contact:

Re: This patch is going to completely screw the USMC.

Postby stug41 » Wed 3 Jul 2013 12:17

I'm glad all the small-bomb bombers will be useful now. They were nowhere near "wing bending" weight though, the A-6 not even half typical load, stop exxagurating.

If this unjustified nerf is to remain there must be a price decrease, especially when one looks at the armor of other vehicles that shouldn't be any better.

Yet the problem of the 'abuse' remains inexplicably avoided.
Last edited by stug41 on Wed 3 Jul 2013 12:18, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
chrisnz
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 991
Joined: Sat 15 Sep 2012 09:18
Contact:

Re: This patch is going to completely screw the USMC.

Postby chrisnz » Wed 3 Jul 2013 12:18

so those new t-72m1ms eh 18ap from east germany :twisted:
"I ask her is it true and she sais like a horse shoe."

Return to “Wargame : AirLand Battle”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests