I think its pretty dumb to expect the game to bend over backwards so an objectively terrible vehicle like the Nashorn is artificially made better.
If the only way you have fun is to play the Nashorn then I feel bad for you because its gonna be a rough time. What is it that makes the Nashorn fun anyway?
The only thing nashorn can’t fight back against are planes
and high explosive rounds, and rat vehicles that can flank it, and artillery
For artillery, someone needs to get close.
For other vehicles there is always something You can do, like bomber can prepare for a fighter ;)
Artillery doesnt need to be that close, and what is a Nashorn going to do against an M18 Hellcat that can drive circles around it up close or slap it with HE from any angle it chooses? Heck you can side pen a Nashorn with the 50cal
Obvious that a Nashorn won’t do anything against CAS in general in a 1 vs 1 scenario with both having either bad or perfect conditions. It’s not the correct vehicle class to fight them…Plus this is going soo off topic, nothing related to “Skill with SPAA effects the CAS problem”.
I see nobody even complains about Nashorn getting killed by other ground units? so Nashorn facing an M18 is the same as facing an air unit? stupid analogy bro
Alright I know this is challenging for you but just because I was using an analogy before to compare the shooting down incompetent pilots with a tank destroyer to shooting down incompetent pilots sniffing the back of a bomber doesnt mean everything is an analogy.
In this case I’m not making an analogy. ULQ was saying the Nashorn can fight back against anything that isnt a plane, and I am saying it can’t fight back against an M18 Hellcat that knows what its doing. That isnt an analogy, its a just a statement.
You know, when It comes to playing nashorn prime thing is not allow anything get that close. Not to mention that HE against M18 is really good. Like aiming at the commander and destroying the whole tank ;)
Unfortunately for the Nashorn its very easy to get close to it. Especially when you use main gun smoke rounds to blind it first.
If You allow that, that is an issue of You playing the vehicle wrong.
This is not a topic about how to play nashorn.
Actually its an issue of the Nashorn being terrible and easily countered by a wide array of things. A Nashorn player of equal skill to his opponents will always struggle, and even one of higher skill will struggle most of the time.
You’re the one who brought up the Nashorn first.
In context of showing that when it comes to ground units it can’t do anything to the air unit.
I can even show You the video of the situation that I’m talking about.
That is just merely an example he has to make since you can’t seem to grasp the concept of fighting on equal terms, he can make examples for 700 other ground vehicles how they have no chance against air units, but all of them have a fighting chance against other ground vehicles, but when you put them against the air unit, their chance drastically go down as low as 0, understand? Do you like to get killed by things your vehicle has no counter? You can deny all you want but you play it off as if getting killed by M18 compared to a bomber is equal, which they are not.
There is a reason why nobody even complains about their ground vehicles getting killed by other ground vehicles, at least not the same frequency as anti-CAS thread, my tiger 1 would be happy to be killed by your M18 5 times in a row because that would be entirely my fault since I could kill it, but it isn’t the same when a Lancaster comes and drop bomb on me is as if I can do any better to prevent this kind of death lol
tbf there are complaints - in context of horrible map design that turns battlefields into corner to corner CQC.
But that’s a separate issue.
Coincidentally though, that separate issue solves the “I need CAS because I can’t frontally pen X” (imagine if we had maps that gave you the gameplay depth and decision making to let you avoid having to frontally pen X to win. . . say, through flanking or existence of objectives that applied pressure elsewhere)
gee, whats this fuzz about? yall ever thought about just not playing a game? the solution is right there!
but it is now
there is no objectively correct opinion unless objectively validated, but your opinion is objectively baseless while i have experience with the issue that im talking about.
if you had experience and disagreed, then i would take what youre saying into consideration. i dont disagree with people just because they say something different
and on the other hand, this opinion is objectively bad
definitely sounds like you dont have a conflict of interests, being against TO as a CAS player…
we can stop with this worthless back-and-forth, its not helping anyone
you cant comprehend this is a videogame? and that there is no reason to die to someone playing god?
how hard is it to add TO, so that you can actually play against tanks in your tank?
genuinely who the fuck cares about tactical viability in a videogame
i couldnt come up with something this nonsensical in a dream lmfao
right, and CAS makes this much better doesnt it
You don’t play the Nashorn or have the verhicle in your garage.
Why would you expect an open top tank destroyer to be able to do anything against a plane barring the pilot being dumb enough to approach from the front within firing angles?
I’ve said multiple times its a sitting duck. What I can’t understand is why you or anyone else expects it to be anything more than that against a plane? You say there’s nothing you can do but ignore the fact that you chose to play the vehicle in the first place. You chose to play the sitting duck and now you’re getting mad when that choice has consequences and demanding the game change so your poor choice has less consequences. It’s asinine.
I’d still want the dynamic experience CAS provides.
Its a combined arms vehicle combat game and you’re saying no one should care about tactical viability?
All this says is that you have no real answer for my argument so you’re attacking me instead of it. That is called Ad Hominem and it is a logical fallacy. That is to say its illogical. You are objectively not being logical.
Of course not, its terrible and not worth my time.
I don’t think anyone likes getting killed by anything else. Arguably its worse when its something you could counter because its harder to say “oh well nothing I could have done” and move on. Thats part of why revenge bombing is such a common thing.
In my experience on the other side of this conflict, the Lanc and its big bomb are less fun than a striker or fighter bomber. It does have the potential for big multi kills but that relies on the enemy team grouping up and your team scouting them/pointing them out, or you getting lucky and noticing them from bombing height, which is easier on snowy/desert maps. Either way its still a big slow plane with poor defensive guns, and you get one shot before you have to return to the air field. At that BR for the British I’d rather keep playing my TOG II or spawn in a fighter and run CAP most of the time.
It is a PvP game, it should be fair and balanced