The heavy bombardment and heavy machine guns added to this version make it difficult for the attackers to survive, many strategic points without cover are difficult to attack, spawn points are simply destroyed in this case because of heavy bombardment.
In my experience, I only win 2 out of 10 attacks.
Usually the attacking team has to kill a lot more enemies than the defending team, especially vehicles, and the defense’s unlimited tanks and planes are outrageous.
This situation should be improved, many times the offensive team will have too many people quit because the situation is not favorable, resulting in the attack is sure to fail.
Heavy bombing should not be added to the campaign except for Stalingrad because there are too many places without cover.
The manpower balance of both sides should be changed, infinite manpower will only make the balance wrong.
I will say the heavy bombardment favors the attackers more. Defender need to stay in the strategic zone to prevent enemy from capturing. But heavy bombardment will force defender to leave, or they will get killed, attacker can use this opportunity to attack. When defender using heavy bombardment against attacker, attacker can simply avoid it, they are not forced to stay in any place.
By the way, the Normandy balance was such a failure, I don’t understand why the Hellcats were added. The ratio of armor and firepower is much higher than speed. For the US army, a tank that can fight the Tiger and Panther is necessary, because even if the air force is more powerful, an anti-aircraft gun can make the aircraft attack much less effective.
Comparison of winning rate:
In many of those games, the Americans withdrew, or their win rate would have been further reduced.
You’re ignoring that not all defenders need to be at the strategic point, only if there’s no one on the offensive side at the strategic point. However, the attackers have to enter strategic points to capture them, which leaves them exposed in or near strategic points without cover, and thus more advantageous to the defenders
The heavy bombardment covers a lot of area, defender won’t be able to be near the point, it provides opportunity for attacker to get to the point. Moreover, the bombers need some time to arrive, for the defender they are more likely to miss the target because you can’t predict where enemy is when bombers arrive.
Unless you have a good team as defense, attackers almost always have the advantage.
No way sir. Defense = easy mode.
I’d argue that if the teams are equally good and focused, then defense has always the advantage.
The game mode is backwards. Defenders should have less tickets then attackers, but balance it out by having advantageous positions and ability to built various fortifications.
The bomber runs definitely favor the attackers’ side. They absolutely decimate fortifications and are extremely difficult to take down. That needs to be addressed first and foremost.
I play on console, and honestly the defenders are still losing about 75% of fights. The HMG is devastating for both sides. The biggest issue with it is that sandbags are destroyed almost instantly by them.
If you are having issues on offense, I highly suggest you start making use of smoke covers. Smoke grenades, smoke mortars, smoke strikes from RO, and smoke tank grenades and shells are all options. If you can block the HMG’s line of sight, you are USUALLY in the clear.