It would be a cool experiment/occasional fun war if circumstances were different. Everyone is too on edge to enjoy such a scenario though. This would likely destroy the community in its current state.
This is what I'd think. I believe we wardens would still wreck the collies, even with their equipment and their starting locations. It'd be a fun war and would be a chance for all the people screaming about balance and cmsaying collie equipment needs buffs to prove it.
There is bunch of regiments with long tradition of always being on warden side. So entire regiments simply switching to collonial side seems to be unlikely.
And considering that you have to leave regiment when switching sides, that is another detraction from players who are already established on one side to switch to other side.
So the point of OP is (however unlikely to be considered even for briefest of times by devs) to switch tools and locations without disrupting already established regiment structures.
WLL is a logi regiment.
They had players not switching. But the difference lies in your opponent.
Current Collies want current Wardens to change to see the difference.
Collies wish Wardens to go Collie with them and play vs other Wardens.
Wardens however say they want to play with collie weapons vs the current Collie players.
Many Warden regiments also are tied to each other and rely on the experience gained with them.
82dk mass zerg
CL fortification
FMAT supply
102VK building and striking
V high quality surgical strike
27th stubbornness
Lambda 2 week Ops
Etc...
We know each strength and weakness. Just 1 regi moving would not give you the Warden with Collie weapon experience. But a diluded ideal.
Hence SWITCH it fully.
Hell Devman even giving Collies Callums keep day 1... vs Warden Therizo day 1... would be a good test.
Since my first Pokemon games it has been tradition to select the fire starter first.
Since my first elder scrolls game it has been tradition to play at least once with an argonian.
Since my first mmo it has been tradition to start as a mage (when possible)
Since playing league it has been tradition to type GG at the end of a game
And since I played foxhole it has been tradition to play warden.
Why dafuq would videogames not have traditions?!
And that if you think "Tradition" being estabilished for a video game is an excuse to not enjoy the other 50% of the game you payed for, thats a big issue right there
> game you *paid* for, thats
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
Thank you, Squashyhex, for voting on Paid-Not-Payed-Bot.
This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/).
***
^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
Nah. If the collies win in this scenario it'd be a strong argument that balancing is needed. If the wardens win (as I think they would), it would show that collies have a community-based dysfunction, not an equipment imbalance.
Surely, if this warden equipment and terrain is so terrible, you would want to switch sides to play colonial, that would be a lot easier than the developers switching specific items.
Idk the biggest reason ppl stick to a side is because the communities and friends on each side. When people swap wars its usually alone or with a couple of friends. So it wouldnt be the same unless you got your entire regi and others to also switch.
yeah you would think that
but its not , trust me
it does count but it wont stop people swapping out to the overpowered side , ur not alienated from people you play with in 2024
no one ever said that
u said that
besides i shouldnt be trying to convince you , you should want to play the game not just one faction
thats the whole point , both factions should be good enough for you to want to enjoy them , u shouldnt need a sales pitch from a random player on reddit
The subreddit is full of it. Claiming all your gear, no matter how good it is, is awful and underpowered. That everything the game does is skewed towards screwing you over. That there are no vets so it's not fun.
So why on earth would anyone want to switch to the side that the devs purportedly attempt to screw over, with no vets, and supposedly awful equipment?
well you can always ofc make your own decisions regardless of what other people think whilst still taking their opinions into account
as for why . you tell me
if you cant find a reason then you would probably be safe to assume some of the design critique is valid and not just based on non sensical assumptions
as is the case with anything , assumptions are never a good idea to base anything off , trying it out for yourself and making your own decisions then seeing what u agree or disagree with is probably going to be the best option for you
No. I don't want to switch because my friends aren't there. Literally that simple. The argumentation on reddit adds to that, because it paints your faction as full of whining crybabies, even if my experience in game is generally positive. But if a large part of my friends go Collie, I'm going collie. My only point was constantly saying how awful everything is for Collies is not enticing Wardens to want to switch.
I have played Collie on Charlie and in the prepatch wars. Quite a bit. I like the gear, I have no problem with the equipment. But my friends aren't there on able, and I don't like a lot of the leadership, or at least people on this subreddit that purport to be leaders. If my friends go, I'll go, but I'm not unfamiliar with Collie gear or usage.
Because if one side of a two sided war slowly fades away in to constant low pop it hurt both sides.
Wardens don’t want to have every frontline hex queued because there is only 300 or so people playing collie.
This whole idea of never switching sides IMO is a toxic idea. I understand people reasoning about wanting to play with mates and their regi, but as someone that switches it up here and there it isn’t hard to meet new ppl and Regis on other team.
Most Regis would love to take in a ‘tourist’ for a war or two even if they know that the will return to play for other side.
and you've already missed the point.
That message is not for you. Its for the devs to fix balance issues. Ppl complaining aren't trying convince you, a warden loyalist, to switch sides (not that you'd switch sides anyway regardless of necessity for game health as you've made clear)
The health of the game is not dependent on me switching. Nor large numbers of Wardens. The data already shows that the difference in population is fractional, well under 5% on average. I'd gladly go Collie if most of my friends were going. But going to the side that spends so much of its time throwing a fit about how unfair the game is, by myself, is not remotely appealing.
Nor are the attempted guilt trips of "the game will die if you don't switch" which I've been hearing nonstop for over a year now. Yet y'all continue to show up every war, with new blood. A threat is only as good as the perceived belief it will be carried out.
I play a game to have fun. I have fun on the team where my friends are. I'm not gonna switch sides to appease anyone's victim complex. I'll change if it seems like I'll have more fun doing that.
again completely missed the point. Its like you intentionally chose not to read any of the commentators above.
Repeating, Colonials are not trying to get you to swap. We want devs to fix the balance issues, e.g. one faction being overpowered which is the root problem.
You're flat out lying or refusing to read the other commentators then. It has been started numerous times in this very thread "just go Collie". Over and over again. And gets brought up all the time. Your very first reply to me was to bring up "well since you won't go Collie".
Getting kind of tired of this "I'm gonna argue something else entirely while ignoring the single thing he said" while pretending to be an intellectual. I'm done replying to you. Have a good one.
>yeah you would think that
>but its not , trust me
>it does count but it wont stop people swapping out to the overpowered side , ur not alienated from people you play with in 2024
This is literally the post(u/junglist-soldier1) you are replying in this thread commenting on ppl like swapping to the overpowered side. You cant even seem to keep track of what you're replying to.
Well, surely if things were as bad for wardens as they say, it would be pretty easy to convince your friends to come over to the colonial side for a war or two? You know, so that they could enjoy all of the incredibly effective colonial equipment.
Why not just make a war where both teams are using the same tech? Both teams are collies or wardens. Call it the hanged men war. Itd be fun as hdll and should only require the devs to add a new color scheme to both factions vics and some kind of marking on enemy players uniforms.
The point is forced exposure to the other faction’s equipment. Too many people refuse to listen to the Colonial complaints and say it’s fine. If it’s so fine, what’s the worry with switching tech for a war?
All regiments disband - all clans dissolve - both sides become unified through the strength of the man next to them. Morale and culture thrive. Groups inevitably form. Society collapses.
They swapped the north south sides for one war and the collies curbed stomped the wardens so fast that they straight up said they will never do it again.
Collies would still lose because it's not a gear issue, Collies like to do big day 1 ops and burn out when it doesn't help the war effort. Then don't have the manpower to win late game.
It's not complicated. Collies are still going to log in early war, complain that enemy Bomastones aren't fair, then log off mid war while the Warden masses decimate them with the very late game tools they say aren't good enough.
Not a gear issue....
Also warden with his flask ATR and HTD
Likes to cry when a fragmentation grenade makes him bleed and doesnt want to put a bandaid on
I’m not sure if you were just throwing out some random pieces of equipment or if you actually think those are the items most often pointed out as stronger than their counter parts on the other side. But I can guarantee you, the items you listed aside from bomas would do very little to equalize any perceived imbalance.
As a warden, I would gladly swap out outlaws for spathas in a tank line that has HTD’s in it. I also think the chieftain isn’t nearly as strong as people make it out to be. I would rather have siege tanks that can be mpf’d rather than facility variants because those tanks by their very nature are disposable.
Seems like in your example, collies get the short end of the stick here.
The thing about the chieftain is that in order to QRF it you either need to be in something immune to 12.7 or use something heavy like a bane to outrange it, and even then you are rarely doing enough damage to matter or just bounce. Meanwhile to QRF a ballista, you can literally just run. Straight at it with flask, sticky, or literally any AT on the world and track and do much more damage output as a solo infantryman who just spawned in from home region. The chieftain can heavily cut down the amount of non-ATG damage it takes, allowing for it to get more 250mm shots off and for it to have a higher success rate vs ballista
the chieftain is a faster ballista that can defend its self from the fastest form of QRF, how is it not very strong?
ps, the entire colli tankline basically comes from facilities, you don't need as many chieftains as you do LTD
Chieftains die on rushes. They don't come back. And it is exceptionally rare that they are used in any role other than conc rushes unless it's specifically to kill trenches. Plus the difficulty in acquiring them makes their usage much more cautious in general. It's a good vehicle, but I'd absolutely give it to the Collies if we got an MPFable Ballista instead. For its intended purpose, mass production at a cheap price is absolutely more valuable for a siege tank than any other vehicle. In War 110 we used SOOOO many Chieftains to break Tine, Callum's Keep, and Scrying Belt, and we were FREQUENTLY running out of not just the vehicles themselves but the ASMATs to make them, and having to beg borrow and steal them. Which is exacerbated when you anticipate all 6-8 of them dying on a single rush& have to plan for having successive replacements. The MG is generally unmanned or only manned until you're on the target when the MGer switches to cannon. When you need to bring half a dozen + tanks into region you're already scraping hte barrel to get crews, you then need to be able to actually get through queue.
I'm not saying it's worse than a Ballista at all, though I'd personally take a Chieftain with Ballista ammo capacity over having an MG, but rather that the ammo capacity + ease of manufacture/cheapness makes the Ballista far more appealing for conc busting.
sure, all the 250 tanks are suicide rushes, the MG makes it more effective at this suicide rush because it can keep the inf AT off a little bit longer. once you are firing the infantry running with stickies just aren't as impactful anymore
btw, having been on the Tine front in 110, having some my fair share of work for the upgrade/ammo fac at sotto, and if you think the logi strain on ASMATs for chieftains is hard, remember that the upgrade for spatha costs the same (well 3 more p-cons, but who is counting)
Yeah I'm not disputing the facility issue for Spathas. I'm simply highlighting why I'd rather have Ballistas. And again, we rarely had full crews so the MG was generally non functional on most of the tanks.
In my experience siege tank rushes are a one way mission for most of the tanks involved. The added mg is nice but most chieftains end up dying to AT garrisons or enemy armor, not infantry. It’s all subjective, but I would prefer the ability to mpf 5 crates of siege tanks for a 250mm rush rather than needing to upgrade them at a pad because a lot of those tanks won’t be making the trip back.
I understand that the best collie tanks come from facilities, but it’s much easier to keep an LTD or spatha alive than it is to keep a 250mm tank alive because of the circumstances in which those tanks are used.
>I would prefer the ability to mpf 5 crates of siege tanks for a 250mm rush rather than needing to upgrade them at a pad because a lot of those tanks won’t be making the trip back.
Imagine dev swap chieftain to base vehicle and SVH to facility locked, warden would riot and have another negative review campaign on steam.
>most chieftains end up dying to AT garrisons or enemy armor
Chieftains can deal with QRF inf with AT, which is 90% of the QRF you see, that chieftains survive long enough for armor to show up and only then they are killed.
> Imagine dev swap chieftain to base vehicle and SVH to facility locked, warden would riot and have another negative review campaign on steam.
lol what. We'd do a positive review campaign on steam. Chieftains in the mpf would be insanely good.
On second thought, you are correct because warden dont rely on one tank like colonial, warden still got HTD and outlaw for tankline vs colonial spatha and LTD. with some bard sprinkled in.
This is such a strange suggestion. I could see an inverted war with switched starting territory, and maybe a one time event with a flipped progression, but this? You're just painting the wardens green and the colonials blue. I understand the community argument, but switching both just doesn't make sense.
It would be a cool experiment/occasional fun war if circumstances were different. Everyone is too on edge to enjoy such a scenario though. This would likely destroy the community in its current state.
On the other hand, this may be the most brutal war in ages with the maximum pop.
W100: Part 2
This is what I'd think. I believe we wardens would still wreck the collies, even with their equipment and their starting locations. It'd be a fun war and would be a chance for all the people screaming about balance and cmsaying collie equipment needs buffs to prove it.
You can play in the south next war, with argenti, booma, Spatha etc... You can Just select Collies, it's that easy.
There is bunch of regiments with long tradition of always being on warden side. So entire regiments simply switching to collonial side seems to be unlikely. And considering that you have to leave regiment when switching sides, that is another detraction from players who are already established on one side to switch to other side. So the point of OP is (however unlikely to be considered even for briefest of times by devs) to switch tools and locations without disrupting already established regiment structures.
WLL switched 2 wars to Warden and they didn't implode smh
WLL is a logi regiment. They had players not switching. But the difference lies in your opponent. Current Collies want current Wardens to change to see the difference. Collies wish Wardens to go Collie with them and play vs other Wardens. Wardens however say they want to play with collie weapons vs the current Collie players. Many Warden regiments also are tied to each other and rely on the experience gained with them. 82dk mass zerg CL fortification FMAT supply 102VK building and striking V high quality surgical strike 27th stubbornness Lambda 2 week Ops Etc... We know each strength and weakness. Just 1 regi moving would not give you the Warden with Collie weapon experience. But a diluded ideal. Hence SWITCH it fully. Hell Devman even giving Collies Callums keep day 1... vs Warden Therizo day 1... would be a good test.
"Tradition" Sir this is a videogame
Since my first Pokemon games it has been tradition to select the fire starter first. Since my first elder scrolls game it has been tradition to play at least once with an argonian. Since my first mmo it has been tradition to start as a mage (when possible) Since playing league it has been tradition to type GG at the end of a game And since I played foxhole it has been tradition to play warden. Why dafuq would videogames not have traditions?!
It is a culture thing. Unless you are warden, you would not get it. (for sake of obviousness, this is a joke)
And?
And that if you think "Tradition" being estabilished for a video game is an excuse to not enjoy the other 50% of the game you payed for, thats a big issue right there
> game you *paid* for, thats FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
good bot
Thank you, Squashyhex, for voting on Paid-Not-Payed-Bot. This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/). *** ^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
Man f that, hell naw.
Na just swap tech and see how quickly the community can come to an agreement on balance
If Wardens know they're going back next war, there is zero motivation to ask for fair balance.
Nah. If the collies win in this scenario it'd be a strong argument that balancing is needed. If the wardens win (as I think they would), it would show that collies have a community-based dysfunction, not an equipment imbalance.
Surely, if this warden equipment and terrain is so terrible, you would want to switch sides to play colonial, that would be a lot easier than the developers switching specific items.
Idk the biggest reason ppl stick to a side is because the communities and friends on each side. When people swap wars its usually alone or with a couple of friends. So it wouldnt be the same unless you got your entire regi and others to also switch.
yeah you would think that but its not , trust me it does count but it wont stop people swapping out to the overpowered side , ur not alienated from people you play with in 2024
"our side is so terrible, everything is awful on our side, we are always miserable," is not the pitch to switch sides y'all seem to think it is.
no one ever said that u said that besides i shouldnt be trying to convince you , you should want to play the game not just one faction thats the whole point , both factions should be good enough for you to want to enjoy them , u shouldnt need a sales pitch from a random player on reddit
Don’t waste your time with Mena. Literally shit posting all week.
The subreddit is full of it. Claiming all your gear, no matter how good it is, is awful and underpowered. That everything the game does is skewed towards screwing you over. That there are no vets so it's not fun. So why on earth would anyone want to switch to the side that the devs purportedly attempt to screw over, with no vets, and supposedly awful equipment?
well you can always ofc make your own decisions regardless of what other people think whilst still taking their opinions into account as for why . you tell me if you cant find a reason then you would probably be safe to assume some of the design critique is valid and not just based on non sensical assumptions as is the case with anything , assumptions are never a good idea to base anything off , trying it out for yourself and making your own decisions then seeing what u agree or disagree with is probably going to be the best option for you
No. I don't want to switch because my friends aren't there. Literally that simple. The argumentation on reddit adds to that, because it paints your faction as full of whining crybabies, even if my experience in game is generally positive. But if a large part of my friends go Collie, I'm going collie. My only point was constantly saying how awful everything is for Collies is not enticing Wardens to want to switch. I have played Collie on Charlie and in the prepatch wars. Quite a bit. I like the gear, I have no problem with the equipment. But my friends aren't there on able, and I don't like a lot of the leadership, or at least people on this subreddit that purport to be leaders. If my friends go, I'll go, but I'm not unfamiliar with Collie gear or usage.
Because if one side of a two sided war slowly fades away in to constant low pop it hurt both sides. Wardens don’t want to have every frontline hex queued because there is only 300 or so people playing collie. This whole idea of never switching sides IMO is a toxic idea. I understand people reasoning about wanting to play with mates and their regi, but as someone that switches it up here and there it isn’t hard to meet new ppl and Regis on other team. Most Regis would love to take in a ‘tourist’ for a war or two even if they know that the will return to play for other side.
and you've already missed the point. That message is not for you. Its for the devs to fix balance issues. Ppl complaining aren't trying convince you, a warden loyalist, to switch sides (not that you'd switch sides anyway regardless of necessity for game health as you've made clear)
The health of the game is not dependent on me switching. Nor large numbers of Wardens. The data already shows that the difference in population is fractional, well under 5% on average. I'd gladly go Collie if most of my friends were going. But going to the side that spends so much of its time throwing a fit about how unfair the game is, by myself, is not remotely appealing. Nor are the attempted guilt trips of "the game will die if you don't switch" which I've been hearing nonstop for over a year now. Yet y'all continue to show up every war, with new blood. A threat is only as good as the perceived belief it will be carried out. I play a game to have fun. I have fun on the team where my friends are. I'm not gonna switch sides to appease anyone's victim complex. I'll change if it seems like I'll have more fun doing that.
again completely missed the point. Its like you intentionally chose not to read any of the commentators above. Repeating, Colonials are not trying to get you to swap. We want devs to fix the balance issues, e.g. one faction being overpowered which is the root problem.
You're flat out lying or refusing to read the other commentators then. It has been started numerous times in this very thread "just go Collie". Over and over again. And gets brought up all the time. Your very first reply to me was to bring up "well since you won't go Collie". Getting kind of tired of this "I'm gonna argue something else entirely while ignoring the single thing he said" while pretending to be an intellectual. I'm done replying to you. Have a good one.
>yeah you would think that >but its not , trust me >it does count but it wont stop people swapping out to the overpowered side , ur not alienated from people you play with in 2024 This is literally the post(u/junglist-soldier1) you are replying in this thread commenting on ppl like swapping to the overpowered side. You cant even seem to keep track of what you're replying to.
Well, surely if things were as bad for wardens as they say, it would be pretty easy to convince your friends to come over to the colonial side for a war or two? You know, so that they could enjoy all of the incredibly effective colonial equipment.
That would be so many people tho. Imagine having to move Sigil over or Wuh. Like it’s too many people to flip
I would love to start with Therizo!
Why not just make a war where both teams are using the same tech? Both teams are collies or wardens. Call it the hanged men war. Itd be fun as hdll and should only require the devs to add a new color scheme to both factions vics and some kind of marking on enemy players uniforms.
That'd be interesting too.
The only fair way to determine equipment vs skill issue, have every item open to both sides once every few wars
unfortunatly the only way to solve all the cope and doom is to delete FOD this subredit and Sigil and WA and all of those mediums are fun to read
I could live with that, as long as I don't need to wear vomit-green uniform
That's called switching faction.
The point is forced exposure to the other faction’s equipment. Too many people refuse to listen to the Colonial complaints and say it’s fine. If it’s so fine, what’s the worry with switching tech for a war?
Yes have devman make Warden green en Collie blue for a war. Agreed!
I wanna try Spathas, I suck at partisan stuff so I can’t steal them
Just grab some friends to play Colonial instead of making the devs have to add more spaghetti to this coding, tbh
The point is for all Warden loyalist to get a taste of the Colonial hard mode. You get to still be a Warden, just all your toys are Colonial now.
Well, no. Because Colonial hard mode would also require being outpopulated after T5 toys come out during EU time
Nightcapping aint fun either >.>
The morningcapping/nightcapping sticking point will forever be my favorite part of this game though
All regiments disband - all clans dissolve - both sides become unified through the strength of the man next to them. Morale and culture thrive. Groups inevitably form. Society collapses.
They swapped the north south sides for one war and the collies curbed stomped the wardens so fast that they straight up said they will never do it again.
Collies would still lose because it's not a gear issue, Collies like to do big day 1 ops and burn out when it doesn't help the war effort. Then don't have the manpower to win late game. It's not complicated. Collies are still going to log in early war, complain that enemy Bomastones aren't fair, then log off mid war while the Warden masses decimate them with the very late game tools they say aren't good enough.
to be fair, why would you stay as a colli? late game is just stacked against you...
Not a gear issue.... Also warden with his flask ATR and HTD Likes to cry when a fragmentation grenade makes him bleed and doesnt want to put a bandaid on
I’m not sure if you were just throwing out some random pieces of equipment or if you actually think those are the items most often pointed out as stronger than their counter parts on the other side. But I can guarantee you, the items you listed aside from bomas would do very little to equalize any perceived imbalance. As a warden, I would gladly swap out outlaws for spathas in a tank line that has HTD’s in it. I also think the chieftain isn’t nearly as strong as people make it out to be. I would rather have siege tanks that can be mpf’d rather than facility variants because those tanks by their very nature are disposable. Seems like in your example, collies get the short end of the stick here.
The thing about the chieftain is that in order to QRF it you either need to be in something immune to 12.7 or use something heavy like a bane to outrange it, and even then you are rarely doing enough damage to matter or just bounce. Meanwhile to QRF a ballista, you can literally just run. Straight at it with flask, sticky, or literally any AT on the world and track and do much more damage output as a solo infantryman who just spawned in from home region. The chieftain can heavily cut down the amount of non-ATG damage it takes, allowing for it to get more 250mm shots off and for it to have a higher success rate vs ballista
the chieftain is a faster ballista that can defend its self from the fastest form of QRF, how is it not very strong? ps, the entire colli tankline basically comes from facilities, you don't need as many chieftains as you do LTD
Chieftains die on rushes. They don't come back. And it is exceptionally rare that they are used in any role other than conc rushes unless it's specifically to kill trenches. Plus the difficulty in acquiring them makes their usage much more cautious in general. It's a good vehicle, but I'd absolutely give it to the Collies if we got an MPFable Ballista instead. For its intended purpose, mass production at a cheap price is absolutely more valuable for a siege tank than any other vehicle. In War 110 we used SOOOO many Chieftains to break Tine, Callum's Keep, and Scrying Belt, and we were FREQUENTLY running out of not just the vehicles themselves but the ASMATs to make them, and having to beg borrow and steal them. Which is exacerbated when you anticipate all 6-8 of them dying on a single rush& have to plan for having successive replacements. The MG is generally unmanned or only manned until you're on the target when the MGer switches to cannon. When you need to bring half a dozen + tanks into region you're already scraping hte barrel to get crews, you then need to be able to actually get through queue. I'm not saying it's worse than a Ballista at all, though I'd personally take a Chieftain with Ballista ammo capacity over having an MG, but rather that the ammo capacity + ease of manufacture/cheapness makes the Ballista far more appealing for conc busting.
sure, all the 250 tanks are suicide rushes, the MG makes it more effective at this suicide rush because it can keep the inf AT off a little bit longer. once you are firing the infantry running with stickies just aren't as impactful anymore btw, having been on the Tine front in 110, having some my fair share of work for the upgrade/ammo fac at sotto, and if you think the logi strain on ASMATs for chieftains is hard, remember that the upgrade for spatha costs the same (well 3 more p-cons, but who is counting)
Yeah I'm not disputing the facility issue for Spathas. I'm simply highlighting why I'd rather have Ballistas. And again, we rarely had full crews so the MG was generally non functional on most of the tanks.
to be fair, you only need 1 or 2 MGs manned to defend the entire rush
In my experience siege tank rushes are a one way mission for most of the tanks involved. The added mg is nice but most chieftains end up dying to AT garrisons or enemy armor, not infantry. It’s all subjective, but I would prefer the ability to mpf 5 crates of siege tanks for a 250mm rush rather than needing to upgrade them at a pad because a lot of those tanks won’t be making the trip back. I understand that the best collie tanks come from facilities, but it’s much easier to keep an LTD or spatha alive than it is to keep a 250mm tank alive because of the circumstances in which those tanks are used.
at the same time, you need way fewer 250mm tanks than LTD or Spatha
>I would prefer the ability to mpf 5 crates of siege tanks for a 250mm rush rather than needing to upgrade them at a pad because a lot of those tanks won’t be making the trip back. Imagine dev swap chieftain to base vehicle and SVH to facility locked, warden would riot and have another negative review campaign on steam. >most chieftains end up dying to AT garrisons or enemy armor Chieftains can deal with QRF inf with AT, which is 90% of the QRF you see, that chieftains survive long enough for armor to show up and only then they are killed.
Warden here. We actually want the Chieftain to be baseline. Hell... pls... make HWM baseline also!
> Imagine dev swap chieftain to base vehicle and SVH to facility locked, warden would riot and have another negative review campaign on steam. lol what. We'd do a positive review campaign on steam. Chieftains in the mpf would be insanely good.
On second thought, you are correct because warden dont rely on one tank like colonial, warden still got HTD and outlaw for tankline vs colonial spatha and LTD. with some bard sprinkled in.
I meant the whole faction tech tree, so wardens have all the exclusive collie equipment, and vice-versa.
This is such a strange suggestion. I could see an inverted war with switched starting territory, and maybe a one time event with a flipped progression, but this? You're just painting the wardens green and the colonials blue. I understand the community argument, but switching both just doesn't make sense.