Doctasm

That would be a lovely mod. Childress' suggestions for movement speed options would help with mobility. Deployment and pack-up times could use shortening still. I am not up on historical usage for ATG's per combatant country in WW2, but from a game standpoint, ATG's are troubled. It would be nice if some sort of rework occurred.

I don't know if my lack of presence on the forums would make my two cents any less credible or give me the appearance of an ass, but since I've started playing CMBN, two things stood out the most to me as questionable decisions. The first being rocket-propelled AT's inability to fire indoors. Obviously, this is no longer an issue. The second is the function of AT guns. They are in a unique position from a gameplay standpoint. They hit like trucks if its the right gun for the job but absolutely critical tactical placement of a gun that will, more often than not, stay stationary until it dies or the battle ends. Even in longer 1:30 or 2:00 battles, the time required to relocate and ready AT guns is not viable unless you are defending in depth (and even that is iffy because splurging on a tank could be a better choice). Is the extremely large buff AT guns receive if move speed increased and pack-up/deploy times reduced too much? Not necessarily. The AA guns added into CMBN got me thinking. Aside from the difference in effective target choice, AA guns and AT guns are static (AA guns are truly static but AT guns are not far off). Both are pretty worthless choices in attacks or meeting engagements to me. Indeed, I don't recall any players using them in QB AAR's I have read, but that could just be my selective memory working hard. So, let's say AT guns become faster in every department except fire rate. In a wonderful world, we'll say they can tactically withdraw from their gun and return to it shortly thereafter too. They have become poor man's tanks. With decent mobility and set-up times, they can fire a few shots and displace. This dramatically alters the flow of battle and for the better in my opinion. At range, an army without tanks fighting one with tanks is at quite a disadvantage, and they should be. Again, the tactical placement of AT guns will determine your success, but what is the point of spending all that time checking fields of fire and protection if your crew will get mortared in a few minutes of revealing themselves? Even worse, when your opponent is aware of your position and creatively kill you with area fire at range, what was the point? An AT gun that can constantly change positions will keep an enemy on their toes and make up-to-date recon even more important. There is the likely possibility that this buff to AT guns will make them obnoxious, but at present, AT guns aren't quite there yet. This is an extremely difficult game and everything has a high skill cap. AT guns are in a league of their own. That's a bitch thing to say and paints me as an unskilled player, but AT guns seem far too niche. Yes, they can really piss on a player when they're undetected. Once you have recon though, it's just a barrage away from being a thing of the past. Woo, first post is a rant.