Thanks for the cast 🥰 4th Can is very fun to play the mix between Canadians and US troops makes it very interesting. It can be a Maverick deck but yeah you maybe have to play it « Balverick ». This is what I did.
Hi. Great game. I love how konig plays mobility. And how farid uses smoke and advance. Both are very skilled players. Both players had Maverick income so who gets better trades wins. Cheers🎉
That felt like Koenig had a plan on how to win and stuck to it. He knew that Farid would be aggressive and aimed to capture the flag on the hill then dig in and allow Farid to wear away his forces attacking, then win in C phase based on his better trades
It's hard to translate strengths and weaknesses of SMG into strategy game indeed, so it's always kind of going by the "feel". I agree MP40 should get slight buff though. IRL it's biggest strength was accuracy and almost zero recoil even in long bursts (the buffer and bolt construction ensured the recoil to be almost completely absorbed), so I was thinking maybe it could get buff to accuracy and cooldown so that it's damage output is more reliable (less influenced by RNG) and burst time lasting longer together with higher suppression, simulating the ability to shoot long bursts without loss in accuracy. So the MP40-armed squads would have like less "alpha damage" but gain effectiveness in longer firefights, as well as having higher suppression. Thompson and PPSh on the other hand could get higher damage output, but more dependent on RNG and not retaining as much damage in later phases where reloading and cooldown happens (portraying their higher RoF output but less accuracy and higher recoil affecting soldiers' aiming).
Also just checked SMG stats in spreadsheet. Okay, MP40 is DEFINITELY very underpowered. Eugen didn't portray it's "strengths and weaknesses" but only the weaknesses lol. No wonder German CQC suffers so much, it's almost ridiculous with how bad it is in game while it was one of top WWII SMGs, and was in many ways better than Thompson which eats it alive in game
@@czwarty7878 Reminds me of an allied propaganda video saying German weapons arent nearly as good as ours and they test fired one of their weapons and then showed the German weapons such as the freaking MG42 lol
I think it has everything to do with the balance of the game and the weapons doctrines of soviets and germans. Since this game was made to represent eastern front in summer of 1944 germans vs soviets, they had to take the road of balancing their weapons like every other game. And it usually goes like this : germans have waaay better mgs, same rifles, germans have way worse smg than soviets. So germans are camping with op machineguns, while soviets are charging meathwaves of op smg guys. In every ww2 game i played, fps, rts, ppsh41 was better than mp40, and mg42 was better than dp28. You probably dont have a problem with the fact that mg42 hmg has the highest accuracy out of all hmgs, and the biggest rof, making it a killing machine. Or how mg42 is the best squad mg... Also im not a gun expert, but iirc from forgotten weapons, mp40 was a nothing smg, nothing too good or special about it. Ppsh41 was based off of suomi which was great, and it had some trouble with magazines. But he didnt talk too highly off of ppsh41 as well Its just how it works, something is on the top, something is at the bottom of the competitive list. In the smg hierarchy, mp40 and sten are at the bottom, because they belong to complete factions with a lot of good units in all tabs, while the smgs of the factions that need some oof factor like fins, italians, romanians, hungarians get something special about their smgs That doesnt mean that i think mp40 should be terrible, if it happens that a squad with 2 ppsh41 (gvardiya) beats a 5 men team with mp40, then we would have a balancing problem, but i dont thing thid happens, so mp40 should probably stay like this
@@helpinghelper4151 But even if MP40 was buffed the Soviets would still have stronger CQC so that point is null. I'm not saying MP40 should be buffed to PPSh level, but I can tackle it now just hypothetically - even if, Soviets would still win by mere numbers of their stronger SMG squads that Germans simply lack numerically. I'm speaking of balance right now, and the balance is way out of whack, but against the MP40. Also even going by this logic of portrayal of certain doctrines and tactics, current stats skew portrayal of Jager Divisions, which were supposed to be strong CQC divisions with similar approach to Soviet divisions, yet bad balance of MP40 makes Jagers very weak units, weaker than standard infantry. I myself am firearms collector for 10 years now and huge nerd on WWII weapons since forever and I can tell you there's consensus on MP40 being one of top WWII SMGs out there, both by historians and guys who collect full-auto submachine guns. Only Beretta M38 is unquestionably superior to it (and has deserved portrayal in game due to that), and MP40 holds second place ex-aequo with PPSh (one could also bring up Lanchester as runner up to MAB38, but it's very rare in WWII and it's legendary status is more from exquisite worksmanship and finish of weapon than it's firepower, but it's still very good tho). The recoil reducing system it has gives it ability to shoot long bursts while keeping high accuracy, unlike other SMGs, as well as it's high ergonomics and compact size make MP40 superior both as service weapon as well as in combat. Rate of fire is very useful in close quarters, but MP40 design knowingly sacrifices it to make up for it with superior precision and ability of firing off long bursts accurately. So in the end it's at least as good as all other SMGs, and in some ways even better. All good SMGs of WWII do similar thing, just approaching it from different way, and it's just not good for neither balance nor realism portrayal for only rate of fire to be taken as basis on whether a weapon is good in game or not. As for MG42, sorry I don't mean to be rude but the way you bring it up shows you don't know how these weapons work. MG42's strengths and advantages over other WWII machine guns is not the rate of fire. If it was only for that then AN/M2, MG15 and Vickers K would be just as good, but they weren't, not even close. MG34 and MG42 were so beyond the curve on WWII MGs because of their belt-feeding mechanism, low mass, quick-changeable barrel (MAJOR thing for MGs and too often not understood), high accuracy and variety of ammunition types optimised for it, as well as ergonomics allowing to be operated by single gunner and optimisation for hip-fire. For HMG version also the tripod, which with other tripods shares only the name; it has advanced adjustments for elevations and setting up beating zone, as well as floating design which removes recoil from gun so you can basically fire off entire belt in one place without the gun moving. And finally the optic, a multiplier of precision of fire that no other MG has and didn't get close to up until late 2000s. With all these advantages existing the rate of fire can basically be taken in the end as almost irrelevant.
People have such MG42 boners lmao, rate of fire isn't the be-all-end-all of MGs. There's the reason the British favoured the Bren over the Vickers K for the LMG role, and a reason the MG3 lowered the rate of fire from the MG42. There's a reason no rifle calibre machine gun has matched the rate of fire of the MG42. Because you hit pretty major diminishing returns with lead down range, and end up just spunking all your ammunition up the wall. In game German LMGs overperform. It's kinda okay because it works for game balance, but please don't take this game as a realistic idea of WW2 squad performance.
I don’t understand how eugen did SMG stats, it feels like they set a standard just to ignore it. Ppsh41 - smallest caliber/ fastest muzzle velocity = equals low dmg / high accuracy. Mp40 larger caliber/ slower muzzle velocity = higher dmg / lower acc. Thompson smg - largest caliber / slowest muzzle velocity = highest dmg AND accuracy……I’m lost.
Yeah it's hard to translate SMG strengths and weaknesses into strategy game so it all goes "by feel". Accuracy for weapons in strategy games is more like "reliability" of weapons' effectiveness, reducing or increasing weapon's RNG dependency. I think MP40 should have highest accuracy as due to it's almost zero recoil and ability to shoot very long bursts with no loss in precision it is very reliable in it's effect, you won't get thrown off the target by recoil etc. While Thompson and PPSh have higher RoF but also higher recoil and less precision, so they can potentially have higher damage output, but it should have lower accuracy to make it more dependant on RNG.
I was talking about just this in another video. It's like how they hvae all the stens modelled as the sten mk 2. Which while it was by far the most common, was not the one used the most in combat. That would be the mk 5. The sten mk 5 is more akin to the italian berreta. the sten mk 2 is equivalent to the american grease gun. you can also talk about the mp 41(42 maybe I can't remember. It's an mp40 with a wooden stock) which likewise was just... better... The weird thing is the ppsh really was not an easy weapon to aim right. And I don't mean how it has an insane rate of fire, I mean the ejection port was straight upwards so most people held it at an angle or had the hands burnt lmao. The mp 40 had a very controllable rate of fire just a slow round as you said. And the sten mk 5 would have had a hire rate of fire but combined with the wooden stock and the cartridge was a pretty solid weapon. How would we balance it? I've no fucking clue. The game is kinda scuffed in how it does smgs in this game.
@@lonurad1259 Grease Gun is way better than Sten, there's no comparison. Grease Gun is at least reliable and somewhat accurate, while Sten jams all the time and can't hit shit beyond 50m, Sten mkII has literally no advantages other than costing nothing to make lol Sten MkV can be comparable to Grease Gun tho, it's actually produced to some standards and actually works somewhat reliably and shoots straight, but still has shit magazines which are most problematic part of this weapon
@@czwarty7878 Where do you learn your history? Lmao. The grease gun was neither more reliable or accurate than a sten. Of which comparing a sten mk 5 to a grease gun is just inherently wrong lmao. One was actually made for combat and the other was made just to give to tank crews or enineers or people who weren't meant to see the frontline, same as the sten mk 2.
@@lonurad1259 Oh, I don't know, maybe 10 years of experience being a firearm owner and more than that handling various WWII SMGs on firing ranges, having first-hand experience with them? But I guess it can't compare to "learning your history" from internet and youtube so, oh well.
I believe you are referring to me saying "solid" and that means that a unit is good but not amazing. So its a reliable unit is good but isn't crazy strong either
91 is a weak div. No tanks in A and no AT to replace them. The gerlich is actually quite bad. 40pts is a similar price to the pak38 and the pak38 is so much better. Only things it has for it is raider. If the div had a card of pak38, it would be playable. Without it, it gets bullied by light armor in A too much.
4th canadian is such an underwhelming division. Lets see whats wrong with it: 1) recon is quite a good tab 2) infantry - too few and too expensive slots, which is how its supposed to be i guess, because its armored, but like you said, your best infantry comes in C phase, thats disgusting, why cant kangaroo rifles come in B and C and US rifles in C...having both assault pios and engineers is good. 3)tanks, you have all you need, shermans, fireflies, light tanks, but dude, slots are just way too expensive for an armored division 4) support - its bad, no 2km HE till C phase... 5)aa is fine, nothing special 6)arty is decent, good mortars, spg, long tom, 1 off-map 7) air tab is just terrible, not a single good card, maybe typhoon fighter, but that doesnt cut it these days. No AT planes, fighter bomber typhoon is too expensive and 1/2/4 availability. HE rocket typhoon is a joke, it losses like 100km/h speed for couple of rockets and its too expensive. Really wish they made tank slots cheaper and let kangaroos come in B
Typhoons are one of the best planes in the game dude. They are in no way overpriced for their combination of speed, toughness, and firepower. 6 Slots of 1-2 Deck points for Armor is plenty, especially with the Recce Shermans in the Recon tab. The division is fine. Atkpowers complaints about the infantry in C phase are overstated. Basic commonwealth Infantry and halftracks have worked fine for Commonwealth Armored Divisions like Pancerna and CIAGB since their introduction. 4th Canadian has very similar tools, but gets the benefit of improved infantry in C. Its only real hole is the lack of 2kHE until C, but it also has excellent air and artillery tabs to keep that manageable. There are also just plenty of games and maps where lack of 2kHE really isn't a dealbreaker.
@@BlitkriegsAndCoffee you are mistaken about planes, there is no AT planes of any kind, typhoon is just a fighter, a great fighter, but no payload. Rocket typhoon is trash, 150 pts for 2/4/6 rocket plane that goes 500km/h instead of over 600km/h fighter typhoon. And fighter bomber typhoon is 155pts for 1/2/4 card is not a good card. And heavy bomber b25 or b26 whichever it is at 1/2/4 is ok i guess. Its a barely workable air tab, i just take a fighter in A and heavy bomber in B, its not GD and LSSAH lvls of trash, but its not good, nothing to be excited about...
@@helpinghelper4151 AT planes are a luxury, not a necessity. Especially in a division loaded with 17 pounders, achilles, and fireflies. Everything loses speed as its payload increases, and everything with a powerful weapon loadout gets limited availability. The Typhoons you listed have good speed, good toughness, and drop enough HE to threaten multiple squad wipes. Go spend some time with some of the weaker Soviet or German air tabs where your planes are largely in the 350-450kph range with bad resilience dropping 2x100kg bombs , and you will quickly learn to appreciate just how good the Western Divs have it when it comes to air power.
@@BlitkriegsAndCoffee thats true, soviet air except il2 and heavy bombers is kinda terrible, but i still won't tolerate or put in a deck a 1/2/4 fighter bomber or rocket planes that lose all agility and speed for shitty rockets and 150 points.
Thanks for the cast 🥰
4th Can is very fun to play the mix between Canadians and US troops makes it very interesting.
It can be a Maverick deck but yeah you maybe have to play it « Balverick ». This is what I did.
Very nice match, lots of fun!
Hi. Great game. I love how konig plays mobility. And how farid uses smoke and advance. Both are very skilled players. Both players had Maverick income so who gets better trades wins. Cheers🎉
Thanks for watching!
That felt like Koenig had a plan on how to win and stuck to it. He knew that Farid would be aggressive and aimed to capture the flag on the hill then dig in and allow Farid to wear away his forces attacking, then win in C phase based on his better trades
Was exactly my plan 😮🥹
YEah he played quite well!
4th Canadian is going to be an interesting exercise in seeing how far multiple cards of Recce Shermans can take a division.
HAHA
It's hard to translate strengths and weaknesses of SMG into strategy game indeed, so it's always kind of going by the "feel".
I agree MP40 should get slight buff though. IRL it's biggest strength was accuracy and almost zero recoil even in long bursts (the buffer and bolt construction ensured the recoil to be almost completely absorbed), so I was thinking maybe it could get buff to accuracy and cooldown so that it's damage output is more reliable (less influenced by RNG) and burst time lasting longer together with higher suppression, simulating the ability to shoot long bursts without loss in accuracy.
So the MP40-armed squads would have like less "alpha damage" but gain effectiveness in longer firefights, as well as having higher suppression.
Thompson and PPSh on the other hand could get higher damage output, but more dependent on RNG and not retaining as much damage in later phases where reloading and cooldown happens (portraying their higher RoF output but less accuracy and higher recoil affecting soldiers' aiming).
Also just checked SMG stats in spreadsheet. Okay, MP40 is DEFINITELY very underpowered. Eugen didn't portray it's "strengths and weaknesses" but only the weaknesses lol. No wonder German CQC suffers so much, it's almost ridiculous with how bad it is in game while it was one of top WWII SMGs, and was in many ways better than Thompson which eats it alive in game
@@czwarty7878 Reminds me of an allied propaganda video saying German weapons arent nearly as good as ours and they test fired one of their weapons and then showed the German weapons such as the freaking MG42 lol
I think it has everything to do with the balance of the game and the weapons doctrines of soviets and germans. Since this game was made to represent eastern front in summer of 1944 germans vs soviets, they had to take the road of balancing their weapons like every other game. And it usually goes like this : germans have waaay better mgs, same rifles, germans have way worse smg than soviets. So germans are camping with op machineguns, while soviets are charging meathwaves of op smg guys. In every ww2 game i played, fps, rts, ppsh41 was better than mp40, and mg42 was better than dp28.
You probably dont have a problem with the fact that mg42 hmg has the highest accuracy out of all hmgs, and the biggest rof, making it a killing machine. Or how mg42 is the best squad mg...
Also im not a gun expert, but iirc from forgotten weapons, mp40 was a nothing smg, nothing too good or special about it. Ppsh41 was based off of suomi which was great, and it had some trouble with magazines. But he didnt talk too highly off of ppsh41 as well
Its just how it works, something is on the top, something is at the bottom of the competitive list. In the smg hierarchy, mp40 and sten are at the bottom, because they belong to complete factions with a lot of good units in all tabs, while the smgs of the factions that need some oof factor like fins, italians, romanians, hungarians get something special about their smgs
That doesnt mean that i think mp40 should be terrible, if it happens that a squad with 2 ppsh41 (gvardiya) beats a 5 men team with mp40, then we would have a balancing problem, but i dont thing thid happens, so mp40 should probably stay like this
@@helpinghelper4151 But even if MP40 was buffed the Soviets would still have stronger CQC so that point is null. I'm not saying MP40 should be buffed to PPSh level, but I can tackle it now just hypothetically - even if, Soviets would still win by mere numbers of their stronger SMG squads that Germans simply lack numerically. I'm speaking of balance right now, and the balance is way out of whack, but against the MP40.
Also even going by this logic of portrayal of certain doctrines and tactics, current stats skew portrayal of Jager Divisions, which were supposed to be strong CQC divisions with similar approach to Soviet divisions, yet bad balance of MP40 makes Jagers very weak units, weaker than standard infantry.
I myself am firearms collector for 10 years now and huge nerd on WWII weapons since forever and I can tell you there's consensus on MP40 being one of top WWII SMGs out there, both by historians and guys who collect full-auto submachine guns. Only Beretta M38 is unquestionably superior to it (and has deserved portrayal in game due to that), and MP40 holds second place ex-aequo with PPSh (one could also bring up Lanchester as runner up to MAB38, but it's very rare in WWII and it's legendary status is more from exquisite worksmanship and finish of weapon than it's firepower, but it's still very good tho).
The recoil reducing system it has gives it ability to shoot long bursts while keeping high accuracy, unlike other SMGs, as well as it's high ergonomics and compact size make MP40 superior both as service weapon as well as in combat. Rate of fire is very useful in close quarters, but MP40 design knowingly sacrifices it to make up for it with superior precision and ability of firing off long bursts accurately. So in the end it's at least as good as all other SMGs, and in some ways even better. All good SMGs of WWII do similar thing, just approaching it from different way, and it's just not good for neither balance nor realism portrayal for only rate of fire to be taken as basis on whether a weapon is good in game or not.
As for MG42, sorry I don't mean to be rude but the way you bring it up shows you don't know how these weapons work. MG42's strengths and advantages over other WWII machine guns is not the rate of fire.
If it was only for that then AN/M2, MG15 and Vickers K would be just as good, but they weren't, not even close.
MG34 and MG42 were so beyond the curve on WWII MGs because of their belt-feeding mechanism, low mass, quick-changeable barrel (MAJOR thing for MGs and too often not understood), high accuracy and variety of ammunition types optimised for it, as well as ergonomics allowing to be operated by single gunner and optimisation for hip-fire. For HMG version also the tripod, which with other tripods shares only the name; it has advanced adjustments for elevations and setting up beating zone, as well as floating design which removes recoil from gun so you can basically fire off entire belt in one place without the gun moving.
And finally the optic, a multiplier of precision of fire that no other MG has and didn't get close to up until late 2000s.
With all these advantages existing the rate of fire can basically be taken in the end as almost irrelevant.
People have such MG42 boners lmao, rate of fire isn't the be-all-end-all of MGs.
There's the reason the British favoured the Bren over the Vickers K for the LMG role, and a reason the MG3 lowered the rate of fire from the MG42. There's a reason no rifle calibre machine gun has matched the rate of fire of the MG42. Because you hit pretty major diminishing returns with lead down range, and end up just spunking all your ammunition up the wall.
In game German LMGs overperform. It's kinda okay because it works for game balance, but please don't take this game as a realistic idea of WW2 squad performance.
S in S.A.R probably stands for Saskatchewan considering it’s a Canadian unit and not a British one
It's for "South Alberta Regiment". They were the reconnaisance force in there and were the actual units who closed the Falaise pocket
Thank you!
I don’t understand how eugen did SMG stats, it feels like they set a standard just to ignore it. Ppsh41 - smallest caliber/ fastest muzzle velocity = equals low dmg / high accuracy. Mp40 larger caliber/ slower muzzle velocity = higher dmg / lower acc. Thompson smg - largest caliber / slowest muzzle velocity = highest dmg AND accuracy……I’m lost.
Yeah it's hard to translate SMG strengths and weaknesses into strategy game so it all goes "by feel".
Accuracy for weapons in strategy games is more like "reliability" of weapons' effectiveness, reducing or increasing weapon's RNG dependency. I think MP40 should have highest accuracy as due to it's almost zero recoil and ability to shoot very long bursts with no loss in precision it is very reliable in it's effect, you won't get thrown off the target by recoil etc. While Thompson and PPSh have higher RoF but also higher recoil and less precision, so they can potentially have higher damage output, but it should have lower accuracy to make it more dependant on RNG.
I was talking about just this in another video. It's like how they hvae all the stens modelled as the sten mk 2. Which while it was by far the most common, was not the one used the most in combat. That would be the mk 5. The sten mk 5 is more akin to the italian berreta. the sten mk 2 is equivalent to the american grease gun. you can also talk about the mp 41(42 maybe I can't remember. It's an mp40 with a wooden stock) which likewise was just... better...
The weird thing is the ppsh really was not an easy weapon to aim right. And I don't mean how it has an insane rate of fire, I mean the ejection port was straight upwards so most people held it at an angle or had the hands burnt lmao. The mp 40 had a very controllable rate of fire just a slow round as you said. And the sten mk 5 would have had a hire rate of fire but combined with the wooden stock and the cartridge was a pretty solid weapon.
How would we balance it? I've no fucking clue. The game is kinda scuffed in how it does smgs in this game.
@@lonurad1259 Grease Gun is way better than Sten, there's no comparison. Grease Gun is at least reliable and somewhat accurate, while Sten jams all the time and can't hit shit beyond 50m, Sten mkII has literally no advantages other than costing nothing to make lol
Sten MkV can be comparable to Grease Gun tho, it's actually produced to some standards and actually works somewhat reliably and shoots straight, but still has shit magazines which are most problematic part of this weapon
@@czwarty7878 Where do you learn your history? Lmao. The grease gun was neither more reliable or accurate than a sten. Of which comparing a sten mk 5 to a grease gun is just inherently wrong lmao. One was actually made for combat and the other was made just to give to tank crews or enineers or people who weren't meant to see the frontline, same as the sten mk 2.
@@lonurad1259 Oh, I don't know, maybe 10 years of experience being a firearm owner and more than that handling various WWII SMGs on firing ranges, having first-hand experience with them?
But I guess it can't compare to "learning your history" from internet and youtube so, oh well.
Wanna ask you, when you say "salad" in terms of units - what does it mean? I'm not from an english speaking country even close.
I believe you are referring to me saying "solid" and that means that a unit is good but not amazing. So its a reliable unit is good but isn't crazy strong either
@@atkpwrgaming thx! Yes, sry for my english missheard, it's "solid" for sure.
Koenig not bring truck supply
he brought them with the b-phase 17pdrs
They were with the 17 pdrs
Is Farid a good bad player, or a bad good player?
Hes a good player, very aggressive which was hurt with the reason patch
91 is a weak div. No tanks in A and no AT to replace them. The gerlich is actually quite bad. 40pts is a similar price to the pak38 and the pak38 is so much better. Only things it has for it is raider. If the div had a card of pak38, it would be playable. Without it, it gets bullied by light armor in A too much.
Yeah, I am trying to love it but I am finding it to be quite a struggle
4th canadian is such an underwhelming division. Lets see whats wrong with it:
1) recon is quite a good tab
2) infantry - too few and too expensive slots, which is how its supposed to be i guess, because its armored, but like you said, your best infantry comes in C phase, thats disgusting, why cant kangaroo rifles come in B and C and US rifles in C...having both assault pios and engineers is good.
3)tanks, you have all you need, shermans, fireflies, light tanks, but dude, slots are just way too expensive for an armored division
4) support - its bad, no 2km HE till C phase...
5)aa is fine, nothing special
6)arty is decent, good mortars, spg, long tom, 1 off-map
7) air tab is just terrible, not a single good card, maybe typhoon fighter, but that doesnt cut it these days. No AT planes, fighter bomber typhoon is too expensive and 1/2/4 availability. HE rocket typhoon is a joke, it losses like 100km/h speed for couple of rockets and its too expensive.
Really wish they made tank slots cheaper and let kangaroos come in B
Typhoons are one of the best planes in the game dude. They are in no way overpriced for their combination of speed, toughness, and firepower. 6 Slots of 1-2 Deck points for Armor is plenty, especially with the Recce Shermans in the Recon tab.
The division is fine. Atkpowers complaints about the infantry in C phase are overstated. Basic commonwealth Infantry and halftracks have worked fine for Commonwealth Armored Divisions like Pancerna and CIAGB since their introduction. 4th Canadian has very similar tools, but gets the benefit of improved infantry in C. Its only real hole is the lack of 2kHE until C, but it also has excellent air and artillery tabs to keep that manageable. There are also just plenty of games and maps where lack of 2kHE really isn't a dealbreaker.
@@BlitkriegsAndCoffee you are mistaken about planes, there is no AT planes of any kind, typhoon is just a fighter, a great fighter, but no payload. Rocket typhoon is trash, 150 pts for 2/4/6 rocket plane that goes 500km/h instead of over 600km/h fighter typhoon. And fighter bomber typhoon is 155pts for 1/2/4 card is not a good card. And heavy bomber b25 or b26 whichever it is at 1/2/4 is ok i guess. Its a barely workable air tab, i just take a fighter in A and heavy bomber in B, its not GD and LSSAH lvls of trash, but its not good, nothing to be excited about...
@@helpinghelper4151 AT planes are a luxury, not a necessity. Especially in a division loaded with 17 pounders, achilles, and fireflies.
Everything loses speed as its payload increases, and everything with a powerful weapon loadout gets limited availability. The Typhoons you listed have good speed, good toughness, and drop enough HE to threaten multiple squad wipes.
Go spend some time with some of the weaker Soviet or German air tabs where your planes are largely in the 350-450kph range with bad resilience dropping 2x100kg bombs , and you will quickly learn to appreciate just how good the Western Divs have it when it comes to air power.
@@BlitkriegsAndCoffee thats true, soviet air except il2 and heavy bombers is kinda terrible, but i still won't tolerate or put in a deck a 1/2/4 fighter bomber or rocket planes that lose all agility and speed for shitty rockets and 150 points.
I would pick 3rd Canadian over it most of the time I think