Anyone else getting more and more put off The Pacific by engineer built AA and continual air strikes? Or any other campaign for that matter.
Start of every battle, almost immediately “enemy bombers approaching”. There is almost always a set of red blobs on the map. And AA guns continually mowing down whole squads from every single point - especially as buildings offer little protection on the Pacific.
Air strikes should be less frequent per match, not just limited per player and there should be a larger window before they can be called at the start. Allow artillery sooner sure, but not air strikes.
AA guns should be buffed against planes (help deal with bombing runs) but nerfed against infantry - that’s not what they’re for after all. Maybe also easier to kill by infantry.
well it is meta… AA are only good thing japanese have. their tanks are shit, planes in pacific are shit, their smg are shit, their semi autos are shit. i would say bolties are ok, but i hate their iron sight so i will say shit
US has better tanks, better smg, better SA and their iron sights are better on bolties. so people spam AA to deal with US.
You are aware that air strikes do cripple the teams ability to call artillery fire. So instead of artillery every 30 seconds or so you get nothing for ~3 minutes and then an air strike. Sure it affects a larger area but it’s also easy to avoid, every bomber drops a single bomb.
AA shooting infantry, sure sucks, but there’s no avoiding it, unless you let them only damage planes. But they aren’t an issue in the Pacific campaign. One hit with the anti tank rifle and AA is gone for good.
I much prefer Japanese sights - Springfield has always been my least favourite weapon. But Japanese SMG are awesome with those huge mags. Vehicles both sides aren’t great (which is fine by me) - but Japan’s tank with effectively 7 assaulters, basically gives you a fifth infantry squad!
The balance I don’t think is bad - I play both with about 65-70% win rate - the air strikes and AA on both sides drives me mad. It’s just no fun.
In fairness I hadn’t considered that air strikes also blocked artillery - but I’d still rather artillery I think. At least that has to be placed more specifically rather than just throw it near the objective and wipe out almost every player or rally point that isn’t under cover.
Also - AT rifle - if there a spot to hit it to destroy? That would be handy to know - I tried that once or twice but reverted to just sniping the user instead.
I’d be fine with just removing the ability to call in strategic bomber support. It takes too long, I don’t think you can use normal artillery while friendly bombers are inbound until after the bombs fall, you can’t adjust the ingress/egress direction. Normal arty support has much more utility and can be called much more frequently, works faster, and is better targeted
The currently universal quad-mount german AAA gun we can build wouldn’t be very effective at shooting down higher-altitude strategic bombers anyway, so I can’t agree there. Nerfed against infantry? also no, 20mm API or HEFI is going to shred humans. Easier to kill? They’re already one-shot destroyed by the anti-tank rifles, or can be marked and mortared, or killed by tanks, and have limited depression. The spam is a bit of a problem, but it’s solvable with a little knowledge, intent, and skill.
False
true
not universally true. The SBD is pretty good, and the A6M2 is beastly as a fighter.
Their SMGs are arguably better than they should be, 8mm Nambu IRL is pretty shit, but otherwise this point stands
Eh. Neither the Hei or the Otsu suck on their own, but they’re not as good as the Johnson, though the Hei does have better/more precise sights than the Garand
You know what? Agreed. The Japanese barleycorn sights are fucking awful, but the rifles wouldn’t be as shit if they weren’t treating 6.5 Arisaka as somehow inferior at these distances to .30-06, fuck 6.5x50 Arisaka Type 38 approaches the capabilities of 6.5 Creedmoor, and no one’s gonna say a torso shot from that isn’t lethal at 300m
Hell yes!
For the other campaigns, at least for Germany, they coul ditch the Flakvierling 38 for the Flak 38. One barrel instead of 4, no big damn gun shield. Dunno what you’d give the Russians that would be effective against planes but not OP against infantry, tho.
Fair enough from a realism point of view yes they would mow down infantry - but were they ever used that way? Just think they could be harder to place/take longer to build. Maybe even similar to rallies - keep them further from objectives.
I’ll definitely try the AT rifle though - I don’t seem to have been able to destroy one that way so far, and yeah sniping works if they aren’t already firing in your direction.
Like the ideas about faction specific ones too - that would be cool!
that is premium vehicle and shouldnt be looked at same as normal campaign progression.
personal preference… kar98k sights are best for me. japanese have worst sights for me (well on bolties). for smg worst sights go to US.
when you play with german and soviet smg, japanese smg just suck.
there is honey moon period for japan cause lots of good players play it. equipment wise allies have advantage.
for air strikes… i am not fan of them either… specially cause rally points cant be placed in secure position close to cap for lots of caps.
you can either aim for crew, or you can aim for ammo rack for one hit kill (you need to know location of ammo rack, you can check it with xray in main menu).
i should have put CAS is shit… anyways people dont take fighters unless they have extra vehicle slots unlocked
not really a problem. gun dispersion is about the same and that is only stat that matters. hei has slightly better dispersion, while otsu has slightly worse. but garand has 8 bullets that come great in short-mid range engagements, while japanese SA have 5. so overall garand>hei/otsu
Sure, the garand is better because higher damage=harder hits at range and +3 rounds, but that doesn’t mean the Hei/Otsu are bad.
Honestly, this was my biggest concern before the campaign released. All, all of the Japanese WW2 semi-auto rifles were low-or-no production prototype copies of the Pedersen or the Garand. I think instead of the Hei/Otsu, they could have given Japan the Hei (same level as m1 carbine), the japanese pedersen (instead of type99, eliminate type 38 carbine, make type 38 the starter rifle, type 99 level 2, Japanese pedersen compares favorably with Garand) and the Type 4 Garand (7.7mm, ten rounds, comparable to johnson rifle)
Honestly, Airstiking is one of the only ways at times to hold back a push when I’m defending.
There might be an equipment advantage for the US at times but so long as you have a good Japanese team you will usually prevail.
I dont have the Otsu yet. I would have preferred the Pederson copy in the tech tree for the higher capacity, or the Hei given a 10rd vs 5 rd mag but I still manage okay.
I won’t get in a tank though. The terrain (For Japanese at least) is tough to get to the point and they are paper paper thin. Easily killed once sighted, and driving one I’m more of a detriment to my team.
I do enjoy the Katanas, they are fun to sneak in a flank Bonzai Charge and do some limb reductions.
The only other real disappointment is the lunge mine effectiveness (i.e very situational for something that kills a trooper of mine everytime).
It would help if you could actually shoot down the airstrike planes, as I’m pretty sure it was intended. They even shoot back if you attack them. But you can empty a whole plane worth of ammo into their engines and they still keep going. There’s something wrong with their damage model.
Hei/Otsu are both tied for worst semi rifle in the game. Both of them have even less damage than the armaguerra, the previous worst. Worst falloff dmg. Lowest magazine capacity. There is no reason to go for them as things are now, I guarantee you will be more deadly with a non upgraded starter rifle, unless you make headshots every time, in which case they are the same.
Their damage is also bracketed in a way so they will always need at least 2 shots to down a player with vitality, even if he is in melee range. This means he has a chance to fire back. It also means your measly 5 bullets (2 to down, 1 to kill) is only enough to kill a single soldier with vitality. Imagine how that will feel once people level their troops up a bit.
