Well, seeing as the detpacks are being replaced by satchels in .65, the engineer will essentially be your "Tank Hunter" class, just with a wrench and some mines. the Pfaust is supposed to be upped a little as well.. so it shouldn't be so useless. Carrying 2? Well, kinda sounds cool.. but I don't know how it would work gameplay-wise.
But, looking at your class layout again, it seems to make more sense now. The Russain and German engineers would have to have the Geballte Ladung and the RPG 43 grenades... which just wouldn't look right. They belong more to an AT class than engineer, and it would be too much to give them to the regular AT class (knife, pistol, rifle, PFaust, Geballte Ladung...) yea, that's too much equipment.
Heck, I dunno, the loss of the engineer would hurt. his repair ability, while unrealistic, is quite vital to the game IMO.
SilenT AssassiNI like the idea
i also like the idea, i doubt the devs will put it in but its still cool :)
AequitasThe Russain and German engineers would have to have the Geballte Ladung and the RPG 43 grenades... which just wouldn't look right.
That's why I'm saying that it would be more realistic to have a tank hunter class and get rid of the engineer, plus the tank hunter class' weapons (while they take more skill to use) are more powerful than a bazooka or AT rifle so it gives a bonus to those with the patience to use them.
i agree, more useful and more abundant AT would be great.....but i really dont care, its a great game either way......and i'd still suck at it! :p
but, for early british maps, before the PIAT was created, i believe the Boys AT rifle was the brit's sorry excuse for an AT rifle. in general, i would LOVE to see some more AT rifles.....like the ruskie's rifle. i believe the US had an AT rifle-grenade, but i'm not sure.....might upset the balance a bit too, unless other countries DID have it.
and i have to say, the reason i first got FH was the new (more realistic) guns. so keep the unique, rare, or otherwise unknown and uncredited weapons a'commin'!
Well, the US' rifle grenade, while HE, did have limited AT abilities, but I'm guessing that it was more in the PTO than ETO due to the fact that Japan's tanks had hardly any armor.
ManiKTell me what you think.
No, besides Stachel Charges shouldnt damage tanks. Their more realistic replacements for ex-pacs.
The why bother posting at all... :vikki:
I always thought it would be cool if they had a tanker class similar to the pilot class. The tanker would get the wrench, a knife, a pistol, and a SMG with 1 clip. I always thought that would be a good idea, but maybe I played too much steel panthers back in the day. :)
DriverNo, besides Stachel Charges shouldnt damage tanks. Their more realistic replacements for ex-pacs.
Tell that to the Finns that blew up even KV tanks with satchels :naughty: Although with different kind of satchels, but still just HE charges. A 2kg satchel was enough to take out a T-26 when used properly.
But in-game, the effectiveness of the satchels against tanks should indeed be limited in any case, since it's way too easy to sneak up on tanks compared to real life.